Question 1

Jojo the Rabbit clearly demonstrates dictatorship as a form of government. What proves my
words? Hitler is one of the biggest dictators whom history knows and plays a key role in the
film. The film shows him as an imaginary friend of the protagonist, but the environment
shows the real picture. Nazism is an idea that Hitler put in the Germans to make them easier
to manage. People believed and admired him because he demonstrated good leadership
skills. People used his name in greetings and he ruled the country alone. I think all these
facts describe him as a real dictator. The next proof of the dictatorship in this film is the
complete freedom of government in the country. In this film, there is a scene where SS
officers simply enter the main character's house and begin a search. He cannot and does
not have the right to refuse them, as he will be punished. The German government of those
years had complete freedom in its actions. They could search whoever they wanted and
when they wanted, execution and sending to death camps were commonplace. And the last
proof of dictatorship is radicalism in the methods of punishment. Public executions were
shown in the film, which suggests that the government did not think about humanity. Hitler
saw the perpetrators and they should be punished, without any protests or trials. If your guilt
is proven, only death awaits you, no humanity or freedom to choose punishment. This film
perfectly shows Nazi Germany, their form of government and foundations. A dictator,
freedom of government and restrictions on citizens are signs of dictatorship.

Question 4

To this question, I would answer yes and no. I think the ideal form of government is
somewhere between dictatorship and democracy. I believe that citizens should have
freedom, but at the same time be severely limited. For example, let's take a situation from
the movie when people from SS came to the main character. They received a denunciation
that Jews were hiding in his house. I believe that they had every right to come and start a
search in his house, since he may be a criminal and is doing something illegal. But at the
same time, I believe that in the absence of proof, the injured innocent person should receive
compensation for his time spent and mental health. Compensation should be paid by the
person who filed the denunciation, but at the same time, if the guilt is confirmed, the
denouncer should receive a reward. Thus, the state will have complete control over the
citizens, but at the same time, the citizens will not be disadvantaged in anything. At the same
time, people will think well before calling government services. Therefore, I believe that the
government should have the right to search or detain a person before further proceedings,
but only if the person receives compensation if he is not guilty.

Question 5

To begin with, I would like to answer the question "What is bad and what is good?. Killing
one person to save four. Is it good or bad? I think the answer to this question depends on
the person who answers it. I do not believe in good and bad people. I believe that we are all
somewhere in between. And our decisions and actions depend on our beliefs, circumstances
and situation. Something is bad for one, while for another it is quite normal. I think that in this
plan dictatorship wins. One person can impose his ideals and ideas to show people what is
bad and what is not. But at the same time, the dictator must be, if not a good, then a moral
person. For example, we can take Hitler, I believe that he was a very strong leader, but not
everyone can call him a good person. He arranged the Holocaust, this is a terrible event, but
at the same time he had motives. But this does not justify him. So I can say that people need
a leader who will be strong , but at the same time he must have the right sense of morality
and value in life.