issue8=美丽G程小组=小组第4次作业by 曦范

曦范UID: 2724845

1 国家方面：从法律和道德上讲，国家不应向其公民隐瞒任何信息，2 公民方面：应利用自己的权利监督政府，提出对政府不同的意见。但这并不代表社会的不稳定，而是社会多元化的表现
3 但是政府在某些特殊时刻，有必要对一些会引起大面积恐慌的问题进行隐瞒。

   In my point of view, the sign of a harmonious society lies on the mutual understanding, trustiness and the acceptance not only among people, but also between government and citizens, thus to work out problems together. Under the liberal democratic regime, the government have the responsibility to make its political affairs open to every citizen. On the other hand, the public have the right to learn the truth about every policy made by their governors. Therefore the stability and development of our society, the solve of all the social, political and economic problems call for a mutual affection between the political leader and the public.

In the government's perspective, with regard to all the legal regulation and moral standard, it do not have the right to withhold information toward its people. In a democratic country, the government was held under the people's trustiness and election, its responsibility was to serve the people and make the country a better haven for all the citizens. What's more, only government have the chance and capability to collect the threshold information on most subject, if it monopoly information intentionally, I think it can be regarded as tort, and might cause sever problems. History and forerunners had set us examples. Watergate scandal, one of the most humiliating affairs in the history of American politics, was just caused by president Nixon's withholding to his reconciler, congress and civil. In sum, government have the obligation to make its affair clear and open to everyone, in order to gain the faith and confidence from citizen, which is the fundamental of the establishment of the country.

On the other hand, to the citizens, they certainly have the right to acquire the truth about all the political decisions, and they have the obligation to shout out different voices. Sometimes the government withholds some information to prevent opponent opinions, while opinions from various sides made the policy more comprehensive and wildly acceptable. In addition, different voices do not stand for the incompatible of a society, that is the symbol of a well organized and functioned nation who present diversity. Some small and peace European country inherent the hearing of witness by the queen, in which their citizen's voice would be heard and accept quickly and peacefully. Under ruling of some autocracy government, there was no different opinions judging by the appearance, but the contradiction was extremely deep already. So the oneness of policy is bidirectional between leaders and public.

However, there are indeed some special occasions in the particular moment that the governments have to make their white lies from the public. For example, some security-related or panic-aroused information that may introduce disturbance and even rumors to the country have to be withhold. Of course, they are only special occasions, and government need explanations . The foreseen earthquake, to illustrate, may arouse panic if it is spread by rumors, might be withhold by government, and let people to retreat in batches. In a word, we should understand our government in that circumstance.

To sum up, the clearness of policy needs the balance between the government and the citizens. Both leaders and public have the responsibility to make the country's politics and social conditions moving forward. At the same time, some well intended lies should be forgive. To build a trully harmonious society, we need understanding, appreciation and forgiveness, no matter as being a political leader, or an ordinary citizen.

jessicamarineUID: 2595044

In my point of view, the sign of a harmonious society lies on the mutual understanding, trustiness and the acceptance not only among people, but also between government and citizens, thus to work out problems together. Under the liberal democratic regime, the government have the responsibility to make its political affairs open to every citizen. On the other hand, the public have the right to learn the truth about every policy made by their governors. Therefore the stability and development of our society, the solve of all the social, political and economic problems call for a mutual affection between the political leader and the public.

建议后面绿字取代前面绿字，明白你的意思，但有点冗长喽

In the government's perspective, with regard to all the legal regulation and moral standard, it do not have the right to withhold information toward its people. In a democratic country, the government was held under the people's trustiness and election, its responsibility was to serve the people and make the country a better haven for all the citizens. What's more, only government have the chance and capability to collect the threshold information on most subject, if it monopoly information intentionally, I think it can be regarded as tort, and might cause severe problems. History and forerunners had set us examples. Watergate scandal, one of the most humiliating affairs in the history of American politics, was just caused by president Nixon's withholding to his reconciler, congress and civil. In sum, government have the obligation to make its affair clear and open to everyone, in order to gain the faith and confidence from citizen, which is the fundamental of the establishment of the country.

On the other hand, to the citizens, they certainly have the right to acquire the truth about all the political decisions, and they have the obligation to shout out different voices. Sometimes the government withholds some information to prevent opponent opinions, while opinions from various sides made the policy more comprehensive and wildly acceptable. In addition, different voices do not stand for the incompatible of a society, that is the symbol of a well organized and functioned nation who present diversity. Some small and peace European country inherent the hearing of witness by the queen(不懂哦）, in which their citizen's voice would be heard and accept quickly and peacefully. Under ruling of some autocracy government, there was no different opinions judging by the appearance, but the contradiction was extremely deep already. So the oneness of policy is bidirectional between leaders and public.
这段写得有点乱，开句说citizen 但全段让人感觉政府主角，末尾句子又说两者兼而有之，有点乱，建议把群众的力量强调来讲，还有哦，欧洲的例子建议说一个公认的幸福国度，这个国家人民对政府监督怎么着，毕竟咱说幸福是咱从中国角度看，美国人未必以为然，要有效说服，不好直接上来说就是这样那样

However, there are indeed some special occasions in the particular moment that the governments have to make their white lies from the public. For example, some security-related or panic-aroused(学到喽^@^，不过似乎是panic-arousing) information that may introduce disturbance and even rumors to the country have to be withhold. Of course（别扭), they are only special occasions, and government needs explanations . The foreseen earthquake, to illustrate, may arouse panic if it is spread by rumors, might be withhold by government, and let people to retreat in batches.(偶觉得此例有失常理哦，让群众成批撤退，如何能不引起怀疑，恐慌）In a word, we should understand our government in that circumstance.

To sum up, the clearness of policy needs the balance between the government and the citizens. Both leaders and public have the responsibility to make the country's politics and social conditions moving forward. At the same time, some well intended lies should be forgiven. To build a trully harmonious society, we need understanding, appreciation and forgiveness, no matter as being a political leader, or an ordinary citizen.

整体思路不错，从政府、 民众、特殊分别来讲，但是，论证感不强，没有让我强烈地支持你的观点，加强以理服人。
还有哦，题目是political leaders，却一直在说government，这两者还是有蛮大区别的，一大漏洞，小心，小心