- 最后登录
- 2009-4-23
- 在线时间
- 64 小时
- 寄托币
- 2308
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2004-10-24
- 阅读权限
- 25
- 帖子
- 2
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 1566
- UID
- 183378

- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 2308
- 注册时间
- 2004-10-24
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 2
|
------题目------
To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards.
------正文------
Should an effective leader maintain the highest ethical and moral standards? I do not fully agree, sometimes, a public official should not tell the truth all the time and it is puerile for him to maintain the highest ethical standards in some cases.
First of all, in my opinion, if a public official maintain the highest ethical and moral standards, it may keep him away from the public. In fact, everybody have weaknesses and it is likely for a person to do something unmoral, which is understandable. However, if a public official maintains the highest ethical and moral standards, he may be considered to stand at a very high level, which results in a big gap between him and the public. In this case, the public may not understand him and are not willing to communicate with him, which may causes problems. For example, if this kind of leader carries out a new policy, the public is possible to misunderstand it and even ignore it. Gradually the leader will probably lose his people's trust and have to be away from the politics in the end. Clearly, everybody may do something unmoral, so is the public official. Therefore, it is acceptable for a public official not to maintain the highest ethical standards.
Furthermore, it is puerile for an effective leader to maintain the highest moral standards all the time. Usually a public official should do something unmoral such as cheating, and so forth. For example, for an effective leader, it is not sensible for him to tell the truth in front of his opponent or enemy. From time to time, he may speak nonsense to them and keep the national secrets, which is an advisable political means. Moreover, a public official is not only judged by his ethical standards. For an effective leader, he should contribute him to the whole nation and do anything effective for the public. Take Bill Clinton's scandal as an example. Clinton is an excellent leader. During his tenure, the economics of America keeps growing and people's living standards improves a lot. What he has done is appreciated by the American people. Consequently, we can not negate his contribution due to the scandal. Also the investigation to his scandal wasted a number of the money from tax-payers. Hence, it is childish for a public official to maintain the highest moral standards and not wise for us to judge an effective leader only through his ethical standards.
Admittedly, a public leader should have “necessary” moral standards. The fact that it is not essential for an effective leader to maintain the highest ethical standards does not mean it is not necessary for him to have ethical standards. Sometimes what a public official does unmorally may lead to a disaster. For example, it is the public official’s fault to make SARS spread through the entire China only within a month and the public receive no alerts from the authority. The minister of the sanitation department kept the public uninformative of the serious effects of SARS. In this case, the public did nothing to defend the disease, then SARS spread very quickly and there is no medicine available to cure it. That the public official did not tell the truth leaded to a disaster to the public. Thus, it is essential for a public leader to maintain moral standards.
To sum up, a public leader with the highest ethical standards may keep him away from the public and it is not mature for him to maintain the highest moral standards. However, when referred to the public interests, an effective leader should act morally. |
|