issue195 政治类较难题，大家给看看吧，先谢一哈

coolblazeverestUID: 189260

Issue195  第1篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
现时写的，后来改了下，政治类的确比较难写:(
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：43分3秒     
从2005年0月12日16时5分到2005年0月12日16时43分
------题目------
The goal of politics should not be the pursuit of an ideal, but rather the search for common ground and reasonable consensus.
思路：
generally agree with the author
body1对ideal定义，认为其现阶段是impossible的
body2从民主社会的起源来看，社会和国家是建立于 common ground and reasonable consensus
body3从实现社会秩序角度看，亦是如此。
本想有个让步，无奈没时间了。。。
------正文------
The idealist advocates that in the political area, the goal of the political leaders should be the pursuit of an total harmony of people, free of violence, no crimes and so forth, in a word, an ideal state of our society. However, if someone has rational mind and reasonable thinking, he or she will know that the pursuit of an ideal is far to attain, and the sound goal politics should be the search for common ground and reasonable consensus, at least at present.

As a threshold matter, what is the meaning of the so called ideal or ideal state of our society? Although there is no definite conclusion of it, I believe majority of us regard it as the totally harmonious state and the free of conflict relationship between one another. Nevertheless, it is beyond our reality of our society due to that we do not diminish the origin of contradiction and negative elements in our world. There are still poverty, environmental problems, the progress with unbalance and crimes. Therefore, to gain the ideal or live in an ideal society is still a long way to go for our political leaders and only caring about something is far beyond you, is still a mistake.

What should be the goal of politics at present? That is a question, however, if we trace back to the initiation of democratic society, it is not difficult to discover that people and their politics are always pursuit a state which is built upon common ground and reasonable consensus. When we look up the great philosophy Rousseau and his greatness, the Social Contract, we can make clear that in a society which is far to ideal, everyone should demise a part of his right, and a special organization would accept the rights and collect them into another form, that is power. The special organization is our government which is responsible for its citizens’ lives and livings and regulates their actions. This kind of regulation or principle is based on the compromise between one person' right and others'. If one want to enjoy his or her rights, the first and foremost thing he or she must perform is respect other persons rights and fulfill his or her responsibility to the entire society, in another word, that is our rights is based on the reasonable compromise between one person and others.

Maybe there will be an ideal society in the long run where is no traffic accident, no crime, and no unemployment, etc. Nonetheless, in our society, those kinds of targets seem beyond our reach at present. How we and our government deal with the difficulties which loom to us. We have our own policies and methods to handle them well. We can institute appropriate regulations to distinguish responsibilities of drivers; we can constitute laws to give punishment to the offenders; we can provide pensions to the jobless and make more opportunities to give them jobs. These methods are established at the common ground interests and reasonable consensus of our society. It is terrible to imagine that if most of our citizens are disagree with these principles and disobey them, what the messes and confusions of our society would be. All those methods are the compromises which we can do to confront with the unpleasant and inappropriate parts of our society and it have already been proved that those kinds of methods are effective and efficient to give us peaceful livings and harmonies, at least to some extent.

To sum up, the pursuit of politics should aim at dealing with the controversial and unpleasant parts in our society, should not simply give an ideal frame of our society and neglect the fundamental contents of ordinary people whose rights contribute to the power of the political leader and the government. Without it, never future is possible.

haiyaUID: 187989

The idealist advocates that in the political area, the goal of the political leaders should be the pursuit of an total harmony of people, free of violence, no crimes and so forth, in a word, an ideal state of our society. However, if someone has rational mind and reasonable thinking, he or she will know that the pursuit of an ideal is far to attain, and the sound goal 这里好象怪怪的，不太明白politics should be the search for common ground and reasonable consensus, at least at present.

As a threshold matter, what is the meaning of the so called ideal or ideal state of our society? Although there is no definite conclusion of it, I believe majority of us regard it as the totally harmonious state and the free of conflict relationship between one another. Nevertheless, it is beyond our reality of our society due to that we do not diminish the origin of contradiction and negative elements in our world. There are still poverty, environmental problems, the progress with unbalance and crimes. Therefore, to gain the ideal or live in an ideal society is still a long way to go for our political leaders and only caring about something is far beyond you, is still a mistake.
难道生活在ideal society就不是common ground and reasonable consensus？我就想生活在这样的社会。所以不把追求ideal作为奋斗目标，我觉得这句话要斟酌一下。以我愚见，ideal society应该是最终奋斗目标。就象最高纲领和最低纲领那样。而现阶段的目标可以实际和具体化。

What should be the goal of politics at present? That is a question, however, if we trace back to the initiation of democratic society, it is not difficult to discover that people and their politics are always pursuit a state which is built upon common ground and reasonable consensus. When we look up the great philosophy Rousseau and his greatness, the Social Contract, we can make clear that in a society which is far to ideal, everyone should demise a part of his right, and a special organization would accept the rights and collect them into another form, that is power. The special organization is our government which is responsible for its citizens’ lives and livings and regulates their actions. This kind of regulation or principle is based on the compromise between one person' right and others'. If one want to enjoy his or her rights, the first and foremost thing he or she must perform is respect other persons rights and fulfill his or her responsibility to the entire society, in another word, that is our rights is based on the reasonable compromise between one person and others.
这段是说政客的权利来源吗？我觉得用大篇幅来讲，和主题的关系不大。

Maybe there will be an ideal society in the long run where is no traffic accident, no crime, and no unemployment, etc. Nonetheless, in our society, those kinds of targets seem beyond our reach at present. How we and our government deal with the difficulties which loom to us. We have our own policies and methods to handle them well. We can institute appropriate regulations to distinguish responsibilities of drivers; we can constitute laws to give punishment to the offenders; we can provide pensions to the jobless and make more opportunities to give them jobs. These methods are established at the common ground interests and reasonable consensus of our society. It is terrible to imagine that if most of our citizens are disagree with these principles and disobey them, what the messes and confusions of our society would be. All those methods are the compromises which we can do to confront with the unpleasant and inappropriate parts of our society and it have already been proved that those kinds of methods are effective and efficient to give us peaceful livings and harmonies, at least to some extent.

To sum up, the pursuit of politics should aim at dealing with the controversial and unpleasant parts in our society, should not simply give an ideal frame of our society and neglect the fundamental contents of ordinary people whose rights contribute to the power of the political leader and the government. Without it, never future is possible.

对于这篇题目我有不同的看法。
我觉得政客在一定程度上要谋求大众的利益。
但是请注意大众在某些前瞻性的问题上的盲从性。在这些问题上的处理才真正需要政客的睿智来进行决策和统筹。如何作出决策？这就需要一个标准。以何为标准？在中国就是三个有利于。换作西方社会，应该也是以ideal society为目标。而ideal社会的定义是随着掌权阶级的不同而有所不同。
所以我觉得在这个题目上如果我写，角度和你有很大的不同。至少我觉得这篇文章写得很难说服我。
你觉得呢？

欢迎回拍~~

panda2727UID: 138271

先保存了。空了一定给你改。抱歉。

panda2727UID: 138271

楼主写得比较流畅。赞一个。
有一些语法的小错误，就不一一列举了。
我认为在第一部分，说明为什么IMPOSSIBLE的时候，语言有点罗嗦了。我认为只需要说清楚现阶段存在的急需解决的问题就可以了。
第三部分中，我认为论证不够有力。建立社会次序与IDEAL并不矛盾啊。你定义的IDEAL是一个大同的社会，没有暴力，ETC。建立社会次序也正是实现IDEAL的一部分。而且我认为这一部分的论证与第一部分：为什么IDEAL IS impossible，内容上有点重复。

这是我最近一篇文章。欢迎评改。谢谢。http://211.151.90.54/bbs/showthread.php?s=&threadid=242653