issue8 [OB小组]第28次作业_stonescj-政府保留信息

stonescjUID：2359180

TOPIC: ISSUE8 - "It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public."
WORDS: 408          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2007-8-16 9:16:50

Whether it is necessary, even desirable, for the political leaders to withhold information from the public is a complex issue which is fraught with democracy, justice and social stability. I fundamentally agree with the assertion that the government should withhold information from the public insofar as benefit the commonality.

To begin with, we have to admit that provide with enough opportunities for citizen to know about the information is helpful the development of country. Firstly, people have the right to know the information about their lives especially in the democratic country. As a famous Britain historian Acton once said," Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power lead to corrupt absolutely." So if the government publicizes information to commonality, people could not only know more about the government but also supervise their works, which could decline the corruption to some extent. Secondly, making the information transparent would enhance the communication between government and public, so the government could understand more needs of the civilian and then increase the efficiency of works. What's more, the opening information would enhance people's loyalty to the government and country, and benefit the development of democracy.

Howbeit, no one could deny the significance of the political leaders withhold information. When the information is associated with the safety of a country, it is not advisable for the government to public. If Roosevelt leaked out the Manhattan project to the public, this project would not be successful produced two applied A-bomb on time and triumphantly carry through nucleus blast for the first time in the world. Nowadays, plenty of countries are take measures against terrorism, if the government's strategy to thwart deliberate plans of the international terrorist has been disclosed before it has been acted, no useful purpose can be achieve ultimately. Holding back information temporarily for the special purpose is on the behalf of the masses and the whole society.

Furthermore, adequately withhold information is help for the stability for the country. That is to say, government withhold information is, on a large scale, based on the benefit of most ordinary people suffer from scare. For instance, a few years ago, an epidemic named SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) has widespread all over the world. In this sudden catastrophe, the health minister of China choose to withhold the negative influence at the beginning, in order to avoid the whole society running into chaos, until the disease out of control and began to spread nation-wide, the government immediately rendered all the information about the epidemic to the public, such as pathological knowledge, prevention methods, advisory measures and so forth, which eventually overcome this epidemic and maintained the society stability. So the government should hold the degree adequately, if the government withhold the information blindly, it will ruin the philosophical underpinnings of the democratic climate.

As what mentioned above, we can come to the conclusion that the ultimate object of government is to guarantee the well-being life of people, so the government decide to whether withhold information or not should depend on this standard.

phillipsareaUID：2318537

Whether it is necessary, even desirable, for the political leaders to withhold information from the public is a complex issue which is fraught with democracy, justice and social stability. I fundamentally agree with the assertion that the government should withhold information from the public insofar as benefit the commonality.(stone的开头我很喜欢那)

To begin with, we have to admit that provide with enough opportunities for citizen to know about the information is helpful the development of country.(可以换个说法,这样很别扭) Firstly, people have the right to know the information about their lives especially in the democratic country. As a famous Britain historian Acton once said," Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power lead to corrupt absolutely." So if the government publicizes information to commonality, people could not only know more about the government but also supervise their works(nice!!), which could decline the corruption to some extent. Secondly, making the information transparent would enhance the communication between government and public, so the government could understand more needs of the civilian and then increase the efficiency of works. What's more, the opening information would enhance people's loyalty to the government and country, and benefit the development of democracy.(还没往下面看,但是你这段说的太strong了,应该weak一点)

Howbeit, no one could deny the significance of the political leaders withhold information. When the information is associated with the safety of a country, it is not advisable for the government to public. If Roosevelt leaked out the Manhattan project to the public, this project would not be successful produced two applied A-bomb on time and triumphantly carry through nucleus blast for the first time in the world.(这个结果真的benefit people吗?) Nowadays, plenty of countries are taking measures against terrorism, if the government's strategy to thwart deliberate plans of the international terrorist has been disclosed before it has been acted, no useful purpose can be achieve ultimately. Holding back information temporarily for the special purpose is on the behalf of the masses and the whole society.(这个就很合适)

Furthermore, adequately withhold information is helpful for the stability for the country. That is to say, government withhold information is, on a large scale, based on the benefit of most ordinary people suffer from scare. For instance, a few years ago, an epidemic named SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome)不用解释了 has widespread all over the world. In this sudden catastrophe, the health minister of China choose to withhold the negative influence at the beginning, in order to avoid the whole society running into chaos, until the disease out of control and began to spread nation-wide, the government immediately rendered all the information about the epidemic to the public(这个例子很好,可是你说的不好,角度没选好), such as pathological knowledge, prevention methods, advisory measures and so forth, which eventually overcome this epidemic and maintained the society stability. So the government should hold the degree adequately, if the government withhold the information blindly, it will ruin the philosophical underpinnings of the democratic climate.

As what mentioned above, we can come to the conclusion that the ultimate object of government is to guarantee the well-being life of people, so the government decide to whether withhold information or not should depend on this standard.