政治类一篇ISSUE169 （换序前的题库顺序）
Those who treat politics and morality as though they are separate realms fail to understand either the one or the other.POSITION: 同意！政治和道德十分不开的，然而完全按照道德行事不讲究一点技巧的人不会成为 成功的政治家。只有那些打着道德的幌子来达到政治目的的人才是真正懂得道德又懂得政治的人.
Politics and morality are not separate realms, I strongly agree with the speaker that any person who claims so fails to understand either the politics or the morality. A person who does something completely according to morality without any tips will not become a successful politician. Only such person who can achieve the goal of politics utilizing morality understand really either the politics or the morality and may finally become a successful politician.
道德是政治的基础，道德是一套行为规范，没有道德的政治使不得民心的。政治家们的道德相当于职业道德，他们是要为社会发展进步，人民生活水平提高服务的。这是他们的最终目标. 但是不能单从道德的眼光来看政治。对于一个政府来说，面对大众的意见，它只能满足大多数人的要求，忽略或者消极的对待少数人。这也不能说明他们是IMMORAL，因为如果要满足所有人的要求那只会影响权利的有效性甚至导致社会混乱。
Morality, which is a series of rules of actions, is the fundamental of politics. The morality of politicians corresponding to the professional morality of other jobs is to serve for the development of society and improving the quality of life of their civilizations, which are their final goal and professional morality. The politics without morality must lose the hold of the public, and the leaderships who obtain the power by immoral means will forfeit their power at the end, such as Stalin and Hitler. However, we cannot only judge a politician from the morality. Morality of the public is not equate with the simply notions of honesty and putting other’s needs ahead on one’s own or other ways which we typically measure the morality of an individual’s private behavior. Public politics competition is ruthless and nearly all candidates will intrigue against each other. Complete forthrightness is a sigh of vulnerability and naivety, neither of which will earn a politician respect among his or her opponents, and which opponents will use to every advantage against the honest politician. Consider a negative example such as President Nixon, whose contempt for the very legal system that afforded him his leadership led to his forfeiture of that leadership. Moreover, a successful politician should learn to eschew rigorous inquiry and indisputable fact while appealing to emotions ideals, and subjective interpretation and characterizations. This sort of rhetoric is part and parcel of means of politicians; we cannot say that they are immoral if they do not harm the society.
道德与政府的关系。
On the other hand, for a government, it only can care for the benefits of the most and has to ignore or negatively deal with the fewer. That also cannot be said that the government is immoral at the side of the fewer, because it is impossible for government to satisfy all requirements of people, which will lead to impinge the validity of power and even make the society into mess. Morality should be under the aegis of government. The function of government is to satisfy the interest of the most and to vindicate the public morality, which be proved by the constitution of censorship. The aptly examples abound around us, especially for the sensitive problem such as the right human and the hot issue about cloning human beings. This sort of technology challenging to the human right and morality should be constrained absolutely. Besides, pinhole-videos and so on such sort of immoral high technology encroaching the private right of human should also be confined using in many aspects by the government.
In sum, I fundamentally agree with the statement. It recognizes the field of politics calls for a certain amount for disingenuousness that we might associate with dubious private morality. And it recognizes that such behavior is a necessary means to the final objective of moral political leadership. Beside, the immoral behavior will not be constrained above the aegis of the government. 这篇文章不少人写阿~
自己顶上来 Politics and morality are not separate realms, I strongly agree with the speaker that any person who claims so fails to understand either the politics or the morality. A person who does something completely according to morality without any tips(这个tip指带不明) will not become a successful politician. Only such（such不必要） person who can achieve the goal of politics utilizing morality understand really either（应是both吧？） the politics or（应是and） the morality and may finally become a successful politician.
Morality, which is a series of rules of actions, is the fundamental of politics. The morality of politicians corresponding to the professional morality of other jobs is to serve for the development of society and improving the quality of life of their civilizations, which are their final goal and professional morality. The politics without morality must lose the hold of the public, and the leaderships who obtain the power by immoral means will forfeit their power at the end, such as Stalin and Hitler. However, we cannot only judge a politician from the morality（建议改成in terms of morality only）. Morality of the public is not equate with the simply notions of honesty and putting other’s needs ahead on one’s own or other ways which we typically measure the morality of an individual’s private behavior. Public politics competition is ruthless and nearly all candidates will intrigue against each other. Complete forthrightness is a sigh（应是sign） of vulnerability and naivety, neither of which will earn a politician respect among his or her opponents, and which opponents will use to every advantage against the honest politician. Consider a negative example such as President Nixon, whose contempt for the very legal system that afforded him his leadership led to his forfeiture of that leadership. Moreover, a successful politician should learn to eschew rigorous inquiry and indisputable fact while appealing to emotions ideals, and subjective interpretation and characterizations. This sort of rhetoric is part and parcel of means of politicians; we cannot say that they are immoral if they do not harm the society.
这段说了政治家的“道德”与普通人的道德是不同的，不能以同样标准衡量。这个point很好，可惜没有展开。其实这段里很多句话都可以再深入分析的，但是你都一句就带过了，太浅了点。
On the other hand, for a government, it only can care for the benefits of the most and has to ignore or negatively deal with the fewer. That also cannot be said（这个说法比较别扭，而且最好是it不是that） that the government is immoral at the side of the fewer, because it is impossible for government to satisfy all requirements of people, which（注意这样的非限定性定语从句的which都是跟着最近的那个名词的，这里变成指people了） will lead to impinge the validity of power and even make the society into mess. Morality should be under the aegis of government. The function of government is to satisfy the interest of the most and to vindicate the public morality, which be proved by the constitution of censorship（这句话不明白）. The aptly examples abound around us, especially for the sensitive problem such as the right human and the hot issue about cloning human beings. This sort of technology challenging to the human right and morality should be constrained absolutely. Besides, pinhole-videos and so on such sort of immoral high technology encroaching the private right of human should also be confined using in many aspects by the government. （我觉得这段有点偏， 或者说，缺少一句跟题目紧密相关的中心句。 要是能点明自己的意思就能让人清楚多了）
In sum, I fundamentally agree with the statement. It recognizes（realizes比较好） the field of politics calls for a certain amount for disingenuousness that we might associate with dubious private morality. And it recognizes that such behavior is a necessary means to the final objective of moral political leadership. Beside, the immoral behavior will not be constrained above the aegis of the government.
文章里定语从句用的比较多，which满眼都是。我觉得这本来不错，可是不要用的太频繁。试试用其他不同的句式。长短句间隔一下。
还有你用的难词好多啊，好几个我都不懂什么意思。哈哈，背过红宝都忘记了。但是我觉得还是不要用那么难的词比较好，毕竟我们不知道细微的用法。
语言上总的来说不错了，内容上的问题我上面提过了。
还是不错的哦！加油！继续努力！
你这篇文章，类似的和相关的文章已经有许多前人写过，或者还有范文。你可以搜索一下，对照一下这些文章。 或参照置顶的帖子。
希望你也能多多修改其他朋友的文章。尤其是提点结构上和想法上的建议。因为你不可能每个题目都练过来啊，看别人的题目，自己脑子过一遍,既可以给别人提建议，自己又多了一次训练的机会.为别人服务的人优先得到斑竹的修改哦！ 第二段中有些句子雷同太多，小心被判
:)
页:
[1]