Issue 8 给我版砖，给你美玉

legendhfwangUID: 191674

Issue  8
"It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public."



Whether political leaders should withhold information when necessary has been always a hot topic even since ancient times. Idealists take it for granted that every political leader no matter who he is, which problem he faces with and how serious the problem is becoming, deserve to be blamed if he tries to conceal any information. With sharply contrast, others hold that in order to achieve certain goals, a politician can exert every method, including cheating. In my point of view, though both of them have some seemingly well-grounded reasons their argument turns out to be helpless. I believe that everything we are to discuss should have a criterion; otherwise, it's really endless and meaningless to debate. In this regard I would like to suggest the benefits to public be a criterion, that's to say, in a democratic society, what political leaders do must be conducive to citizens.

To begin with common sense tells us that enough supervision and participations from citizens play a decisive roll in today's modern world, without which will be detrimental to the welfare of human beings. Imaging if German people had fairly noticed the ambition of Hitler and then calmed down, the second world war would have been avoided, each nation would have been became more prosperous and most importantly millions of lives would have survived. Considering that, from Rousseau to Martin Lacer King Jr. from Deng Xiaoping to Washington, many elites dedicate to fighting for, strengthening and promising the governmental transparency, which spur the democratic progress in the whole world and consequently leading to prevailing economic growth and life improvement.

In addition, what also worth noticing is that political leaders, great power as they hold, are reprehensive of their citizens and therefore have the responsibility of informing public what is going on. Citizens, in other words, consigners have right to know political process and act accordingly to benefit from it.
Of coures, there’s no denying that in some occasions, political leaders who usually focus on long-term interests, choice to cover some information from public who usually shortsighted, in order not to impetus unnecessary resistance. For example before Richard Nixon loaded in Beijing in 1972, there had been only several people knowing the top-secret mission. However the historical meeting proves to be one of the bravest trial and most significant diplomatic breakthroughs in the second half of 1900s. Just as premier Zhou EN__lai said (and I prophase):"Your handshake came over the vastest ocean in the world-25 years of no communication." Provided that Nixon had tried to get congress's approval prior to his tour, he would have been submerged into the endless debate rather than enjoyed a successful trip. In fact it's the encouragement of uncovering the information that shirk the protest from home and abroad that benefits both American and Chinese people.

To sum up from what we have been discussed above, we may safely draw a conclusion that whether unveiling information or not depends on the interests of public, which is the most important aim for every political leader, no matter which methods they serve.

legendhfwangUID: 191674

竟然没人愿意拍我
失败

乒乓球爱上九月UID: 162925

@_@ 版面那么多人说拍他必回你怎么不改
我先占个座.

乒乓球爱上九月UID: 162925

Issue 8
"It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public."



Whether political leaders should withhold information when necessary has been always a hot topic even since ancient times. Idealists take it for granted that every political leader no matter who he is, which problem he faces with and how serious the problem is becoming, deserve to be blamed if he tries to conceal any information. With sharplysharp contrast, others hold that in order to achieve certain goals, a politician can exert every method, including cheating. In my point of view, though both of them have some seemingly well-grounded reasons their argument turns out to be helpless.不用花这么多篇幅说别人怎么说后面一个直接说你believe就好了 I believe that everything we are to discuss should have a criterion; otherwise, it's really endless and meaningless to debate. In this regard I would like to suggest the benefits to public be a criterion, that's to say, in a democratic society, what political leaders do must be conducive to citizens.观点很不错

[U]To begin with[/U]删   common sense tells us that enough supervision and participations from citizens play a decisive roll in today's modern world, without which 没有主语 will be detrimental to the welfare of human beings.为什么?  Imagingimagine that  if German people德国人就叫Germen  had fairly这个词不妥  noticed the ambition of Hitler and then calmed down, the second world war would have been avoided, each nation would have been became more prosperous and most importantly millions of lives would have survived. 这个例子解释的不好，应该说因为没有好好的监督而导致这样,而不应该未知的结果来证明. Considering that, from Rousseau to Martin Lacer King Jr. from Deng Xiaoping to Washington, many elites dedicate to fighting for, strengthening and promising the governmental transparency, which spur the democratic progress in the whole world and consequently leading to prevailing economic growth and life improvement.光靠例子是不够的

In addition, what also worth noticing be worth doing is that political leaders, great power as they hold, are reprehensive of their citizens and therefore have the responsibility of informing public what is going on. Citizens, in other words, consigners have right to know political process and act accordingly to benefit from it.一个有义务一个有权利. 这一段意义不大 说到这里你的criterion还没有说呢

Of coures, there’s no denying that in some occasions, political leaders who usually focus on long-term interests, choice to cover some information from public who usually shortsighted, in order not to impetus unnecessary resistance. For example before Richard Nixon loaded in Beijing in 1972, there had been only several people knowing the top-secret mission. However the historical meeting proves to be one of the bravest trial and most significant diplomatic breakthroughs in the second half of 1900s. Just as premier Zhou EN__lai said (and I prophase):"Your handshake came over the vastest ocean in the world-25 years of no communication." Provided that Nixon had tried to get congress's approval prior to his tour, he would have been submerged into the endless debate rather than enjoyed a successful trip. In fact it's the encouragement of uncovering the information that shirk the protest from home and abroad that benefits both American and Chinese people.

To sum up from what we have been discussed above, we may safely draw a conclusion that whether unveiling information or not depends on the interests of public, which is the most important aim for every political leader, no matter which methods they serve.
论证不够让人信服,自己提出的中心词没有很好的抓住.用词还要再细心一点,很多都是词性的问题.
也希望你能多改改别人的文章.

legendhfwangUID: 191674

首先谢谢你的改文，这几天是有点范晕，
不过我确实改过一些文章，从我发第一篇ISSUE

legendhfwangUID: 191674

首先谢谢你的改文，这几天是有点范晕，
不过我确实改过一些文章，从我发第一篇ISSUE的时候就开始改，斑竹大人没有看到吗