issue202，昨天讨论的领导人的原则问题，有成品了

imongUID: 140258

写完了我就晕大发了
昨天还在那里支持领导人要有原则，还用了邓爷爷，地铁的例子
今天还没有过12个小时，下一篇文章就大唱反调，天哪
我到底有没有一个固定的看法？太奇怪了

202"Unlike great thinkers and great artists, the most effective political leaders must often yield to public opinion and abandon principle for the sake of compromise."

I strongly agree with the speaker that the most effective political leaders must often yield to public opinion and make concessions. Since for political leaders, effectiveness cannot be attained without public support and concern to public demand, it is their duty to yield to public opinions to make solutions.

First of all, that effective political leaders must have strong public support alienate them from the great thinkers and artists, who more often act as mavericks. For thinkers and artists, their greatness is often fully demonstrated in the profoundness of their ideas, productions, proposals, and usually they are too profound to be thoroughly understood and accepted by the public. In this sense, the great thinkers and artists are often abandoned, reproved, even persecuted for their inconsistency with their time, and these great people become mavericks as the price for their novel creations. However, this is not the case at all when it comes to effective political leaders, for whom to listen to the public's voice is an obligation. It is easy to figure out the poor situation a regime has to suffer for the lack of public support, as recently the Liberia former president, who lost public support for his long being incompetent to bring peace to the country, was forced to resign under the domestic and international pressure. From this example, it becomes clear that public support is of vital importance for political leaders, and the effectiveness of governing cannot be achieved without such fundamental element. Therefore, while great thinkers and artists resist public opinion to preserve their own ideas, for political figures effective leadership thrive on the strong support from his/her people.

More than gaining public support, it is equally important for political leaders to listen to the public opinions, even compromise principles to meet the demand of the masses as long as necessary. Political leaders should be aware of the fact that the interest of their people is much more important than what certain beautiful principle they hold, and principles must be sacrificed once people suffer from their practice. This point is fully demonstrated by the Colombian government in the 1990's. At that time the whole nation was in a pandemonium because of the everyday bloodshed, which resulted from the conflict between the government and the drug dealers, who were powerfully armed and have great influence throughout the nation. Discontent to the government among people was prevalent and ever growing, in that people are those to suffer from the enormous retaliations from the drug dealers for the severe-punishment policy executed against them. That is to say, the leader who hold the principle that all crimes must not be forgiven turn out to be ineffective in dealing with drug sale. Fortunately, when the next president came in-house, he abandoned the long upheld principle along with the corresponding policy, and declared that the government is willing to negotiate with the drug dealers. Far beyond mere reconciliation, he even promised these criminals safety, luxurious lodging, certain degree of freedom; all of which is to promote capitulation. The new policy was a tremendous success because in only one year the number of conflicts, bloodsheds, and terrorism activities in the country slumped significantly, and social order was greatly improved. Proper treatments of the capitulated criminals and certain measures to revive the nation were successfully carried out, and won widespread support among the people since they no longer have to worry about the social security. Hence, to give up principles to cater the need of the public is much more effective than stubbornly upholding them, and political leaders should learn from this example so as to be more effective.

严格在45min内，作了一些很小的改动，结尾没时间了。
毛病和昨天的一样，第二个body就是用例子来堆，但是第一个body感觉好像还不错？

feier521UID: 109747

that effective political leaders must have strong public support alienate（alienating） them from the great thinkers and artists

cater for the need

imong 你的哥伦比亚政府例子举的太长了。没必要要写那么长！

imongUID: 140258

1 concern to public demand-->concerns for public demand.居然没查出来? ft
2,it is their duty to yield to public opinions to make solutions.---> right?语法上好像没错
3,for whom to listen to the public's voice is an obligation--->for whose obligation is to listen to the public's voice.嗯，也对，当时没想到
4,pandemonium --- 没问题，大混乱的意思
5,in that people are those to suffer from the enormous retaliations from the drug dealers for the severe-punishment policy executed against them. --->need revision 没有什么好的办法，应该还是要用介词来表达，但是显然效果不太好

that effective political leaders must have strong public support alienate（alienating） them from the great thinkers and artists 我的意思是that…（的这个事实）alienate… 你再看一下？

cater for the need 嗯，我的错

imong 你的哥伦比亚政府例子举的太长了。没必要要写那么长！（这我写之前就预料到了，没办法，转型期间，总得一点一点的改）

feier521UID: 109747

表示什么的事实the fact that 不可以省略吧？

imongUID: 140258

the fact that 应该是不能扔掉that的，感觉上

谢谢你们两个的修改

blake_wangUID: 9871

2,it is their duty to yield to public opinions to make solutions.---> right?语法上好像没错
你的句型是it is ... to do to （介词）sth to do sth，最后这个to do sth 我不敢保证对，觉得多余。我突然想到一个最小改动：it is their duty to yield to public opinions and to make solutions. 不知道行不行？
5,in that people are those to suffer from the enormous retaliations from the drug dealers for the severe-punishment policy executed against them. －－－》这句好难受哦，改动还挺难！先放这儿吧。
cater for the need ？？？一定要有这个for吗？待查。

imongUID: 140258

cater to 或者cater for，cater for 是美式用法，查过的（查的是oxford？！！）

it is their duty to yield to public opinions and to make solutions 我知道了，可能的确是多余的
用and连一下，或者consequently，好像变成so as to也好一点

木耳UID: 123036

从most effective political leaders must often yield to public opinion and make concessions. Since for political leaders, effectiveness cannot be attained without public support and concern to public demand, 何全文结构看出
你的逻辑：
1 yield to public--->gain support
2 abandon principles--->meed demand
right?
但你第一段论我感觉证不是很充分，只说support很关键，例子也是说incompetent to bring peace --->no support--->resign.没说yeild to public对论点证明不充分，建议明晰逻辑关系no yield to public--->no support--->serious result

果酱面包UID: 142490

好长的例子呀，我觉得要是例子和论述结合起来可能会好吧，第一段的论述显得很枯燥，如果要是有例子就会好一点吧，而第二段的例子有太长了……我总是还有一个感觉，我觉得老美很可能看不懂我们的，不知道为什么这么想，我总是觉得我们认为是commonsense的东西他们完全不懂，甚至觉得莫名其妙

imongUID: 140258

是啊，文化不一样，说起来实在太搞笑了，我们写common sense的时候并没有想到也许到他们那里就不是common sense了

木耳说得非常对。限时的作文毕竟不是精雕细做的产品，缺陷还是很多的。这些recurrent的问题也许会很好解决吧，因为还是比较有规律性的。

谢谢大家，这么多人来提意见，感动ing