ISSUE167 同题跟帖必改~先谢谢各位拍er~

zy0921UID: 2738668

TOPIC: ISSUE167 - "It is impossible for an effective political leader to tell the truth all the time. Complete honesty is not a useful virtue for a politician."

WORDS: 609
TIME: 00:50:00
DATE: 07/01/2010 17:31:52

Is complete honesty a useful virtue for a politician, as opposed by the speaker, for the reason that telling the truth all the time is not effective? Well, I partially agree with the speaker's contention insofar as that lies with goodwill are pragmatic and sometimes necessary, however, if a politician's dishonesty is with impure motive, he or she will eventually discarded by people and history.

To begin with, partial dishonesty is necessary for a would-be politician to achieve the leadership and gain power. On one hand, politics, by its nature, is a game played among politicians. If a politician is completely honest, he or she will be tagged as vulnerable and naive, neither of which will be respected by the general public as well as his or her competitors. On the other hand, proper insincerity is an effective strategy for a politician to obtain prestige from the public. Eschewing to answer some critical but embarrassing questions and pandering to the voters is useful in gaining and maintaining power. Moreover, a refusal to disclose anything regarding private life is desirable, as scandals can destroy a politician's reputation even if he or she may be an earnest public servant. In short, in order to win the leading position, it is almost impossible to be completely honest.

Secondly, for politicians who have been already in the leading position, withholding information from the public is sometimes necessary and even desirable. After all, politics concerns more pragmatism than idealism. Firstly, any information concerning national defence must be kept as secrets, which is obvious. Consider, if a politician reveals the plan of thwarting terrorists, public health of its citizens will be under suspect. In addition, dishonesty can effectively prevent large-scale social panic. For example, in the recent catastrophic movie 2012, if the governments announce the natural disaster which will happen in a few years too early, people will not feel at ease and keep their mind on working or studying. It may even lead to havoc and chaos which is out of control of the politicians. In one world, in order to prevent unnecessary danger and panic to the society, politicians can tell lies to be at the best interest of people.

Nevertheless, I need to emphasize that true politician whose power is granted by its people should be to serve them from the bottom of his/her heart, which is his/her undeniable responsibility. A politician should not lie on the motive of him/her to become a political leader. If he/she is a power-seeker or an ambitious egoist who pretends to be a public servant, he/she will be ultimately condemned by people. A paragon such as Saddam Hussein comes immediately into my mind. His ambition to be the ruler of entire Arab world makes him a tyrant who starts the wars against Iran and Kuwait one after another. Although he announced that this action is indispensable for Iraq to get back what it should have, we all know that it is nothing but a lie to disguise his avarice. Another paradigmatic example is President Nixon, who lied about his main role in the Watergate cover-up. This behavior shows that he cares more about his own interest than people's, which is continuously censured in the American history.

To sum up, to gain the leading position, it is almost impossible for an effective political leader to tell the truth all the time. Further, complete honesty is sometimes not advisable for a politician for the sake of general public. However, as a true leader, dishonesty with adulterated motive such as a pursuit of personal benefit, a politician will be forsaken by its people and by history in the end.