【10G10Hawk】8月7日任务——issue70

sharonyeUID: 2862009

As Sir. Acton said "Absolute power leads to absolute corruption"(一般应用名人的话，最好写上他是干啥的，感觉就跟有说服力了，比如是科学家，作家啥的，我感觉会好一些，尤其是这个人不太出名时，可以把前面写的复杂点，以增加字数，还可以适当的解释一下这句话 ，说它说明了什么呀之类的，而且这句话和论点的干系么，absolute？有待斟酌)In order to avoid this situation happens, we should change the leader regularly. But how often should we take this measure? It should be discussed. Perhaps five years is not a suitable period.

Limiting the term of leadership is an effect way to prevent the corruption in the politics and government area. The leader cannot organizes his party. On the contrary, if we use one leader for a long time. The arbitrary rule of a dictator is awful. Adolf Hitler is an example, he droves the World War 2. (例子应该说得再详细一点，比如他到底统治了多少年，在后期做了哪些事，要不然例子有点干巴巴的)The cost of war let us know the harm（什么harm,说清楚） for the development of the world. From the power of atomic bomb by the history of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we understand the cost of war deeply.（这个例子又有什么作用呢，还是看不出关系） After the explosion, the two cities turned into a purgatory and all the buildings were destroyed. The civilian was homeless while somebody suffered from the strong radiation was ill even becoming a mutation.

But this policy is not proper for business and education. The great leader will lead the company or school in an effective way. Steven jobs is the CEO of apple, he is a great CEO. Apple was in trouble in 90s and Steve Jobs took change of the company. In his lead, apple produced the imac, ipod,iphone and ipad. Until day, the series of productions make the apple become one of best companies. So I have a assumption that if apple also change the leader every five years. Maybe no the apple exists today.（education的例子呢，找不到我就不承认哦）

From my perspective, the policy benefits to some area. It makes the candidate have a desire to advance and more active, because they have the opportunity to be the leader. And as I said before, it could prevent the abuse of authority. While, there are some problems in this policy. First, the frequency of change should not be set as a accurate time. Because the new leader needs time to adapt a good leader(这点同意). Moreover, some kinds of plan needs more than five years to execute, probably the leader gives up the plan just because he/she cannot execute the whole plan in their term. The period of term should depend on the benefits of the company and approval rating which reflect the ability of the leader.

In sum up（写得太急了吧）, the leader needs to change in order to catch on the development of society. But how to set the policy about the term should be discussed. I think without a specific role on it（看不懂）. Every area have their own features.
我觉得本文做大的问题就是例子和观点结合不紧密，引用的那句话也与更换领导关系也不大，尤其是例子放在那，要解释说明