phenix写作小组2号第十二次作业Issue70

wu-intrepidUID: 2659758

In any profession—business, politics, education, government—those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership


It seems necessary changing leaders to prevent the autarchy and enhance efficiency. However, changing leaders should depend on the actuality , not a fixed time, and it is not the only way to ensure the success.

undeniably, revitalizing an enterprise by changing leaders is effective. Since a leader holding powers for a rather long time, may cause various and serious problems. Such as convergence of power, lack of creativity, and so on. The examples are numerous in the history, as Mao Zengdong, a leader of China who lead chinese to win the independent war and civil war. Though his achievements aresignificant , the flaws of his government are obvious  too. During his 30 years in the power, China become an autocratic country with poor economic. If he retired ealier, and Deng Xiaoping instead, the reform and open would be brought about earlier.China may
advance a big step. Thus, changing the leader is essential to ensure democracy and progress of an enterprise.

However, though it is necessary to chang leaders, 5 years seem too fixed and not actual. Since  some policies are not effective right now, changing leaders may interrupt the implement of policies. Roosevell, for instance, was an American leader, who was only one being the presidents 4 times. During his 12-year government, America got rid of the depression and become an strong economic power in the word. If he and his policy was replaced early, we could not see such an advanced America. Thus, an talented leader can hold the power more than 5 years and make the enterprise successful.

The effective way to ensure success is not to limit the time of a leader, but to balance the power of a leader. Which can use of the wisdom of a leader, also can prevent his mistakes. Such as the separation of the executive, legislative and judicial powers, which is one of significant institution to ensure success in the politics. When Roosevell intend to increase the number of the members in the Supreme Court, in order to make his motions passed more easily. This action is a trend to intervene the democracy and fortunately, the Supreme Court rejected his suggestion. Therefore, a perfect institution can make the policy not decided only by the intelligence of a leader, but by a group.

To achieve success, should prevent power from centralizing , and need a outstanding leaser. The effective way to balance this two demands, is to make a proper institudtion which limits the leader's power,  and make use well of his intelligence.

hhfboyUID: 2749089

1# wu-intrepid
In any profession—business, politics, education, government—those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership

It seems necessary changing leaders to prevent the autarchy and enhance efficiency. However, changing leaders should depend on the actuality (reality), not a fixed time, and it is not the only way to ensure the success.

Undeniably, revitalizing an enterprise by changing leaders is effective. Since a leader holding powers for a rather long time, may cause various and serious problems. Such as convergence of power, lack of creativity, and so on. The examples are numerous in the history, as Mao Zedong, a leader of China who leads Chinese to win the independent war and civil war. Though his achievements are significant, the flaws of his government are obvious too. During his 30 years in the power, China becomes an autocratic country with poor economic. If he retired earlier (early), and Deng Xiaoping instead, the reform and open would be brought about earlier. China may advance a big step. Thus, changing the leader is essential to ensure democracy and progress of an enterprise（你的例子是politic..这里结论又是business了）. (看了你这里我像笑哈…如果我党看到要和谐你的 哈哈)

However, though it is necessary to change leaders, 5 years seem too fixed （to correspond the reality）and not actual. Since some policies are not effective right now, changing leaders may interrupt the implement of policies. Roosevell, for instance, was an American leader, who was only (the) one being the presidents 4 times. During his 12-year government, America got rid of the depression and become an strong economic power in the word. If he and his policy was replaced early, we could not see such an advanced America. Thus, an talented leader can hold the power more than 5 years and make the enterprise successful. ( 罗斯福这个是特例…不能用在这里，你可以说有些需要经验的不能换，比如做研究的时候的带头人，如果换了那个主要思想是他架构的，这个项目就无法进行下去了)

The effective way to ensure success is not to limit the time of a leader, but to balance the power of a leader.（不能说太绝对吧 觉得弄个平行论证比较好，就是说limit leader time 和 balance the power 一起） Which (What)can use of the wisdom of a leader, also can prevent his mistakes. Such as the separation of the executive, legislative and judicial powers which is one of significant institution to ensure success in the politics. When (it comes to) Roosevell intend to increase the number of the members in the Supreme Court, in order to make his motions passed more easily. This action is a trend to intervene the democracy and fortunately, the Supreme Court rejected his suggestion. Therefore, a perfect institution can make the policy not decided only by the intelligence of a leader, but by a group.

To achieve success, (缺主语) should prevent power from centralizing , and need a outstanding leaser. The effective way to balance this two demands, is to make a proper institution which limits the leader's power, and make use well of his intelligence.
点评：
1 整文结构还是不错的，就是第二段论证的时候你犯晕了 例子和 TS不搭边
2 第四段我建议你不要说limit time 不好 因为现实很多豆在用，存在就有他的合理性。÷
3 语言问题就是定语从句乱用了，有时短句未必不好嘛  最好能长短结合。

在改作文发现小组里面的成员错误越来越难找了 嘿嘿  继续加油！