Issue8 [Chasing For "6" Score]第四次作业，求拍！

stonesundlutUID: 2235257

topic8 "It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public."


The speaker asserts that the political leaders unavoidably withhold information from the public. I concede that, in sometimes special, it is unnecessary for political leaders to announce all information to the public. But, I tempt to agree with that it is harmful and destructive for political leaders to conceal the truth from the public frequently.

Withholding information from the public means the ordinary people lose proper right which they deserve to know the truth about their country and politics. It is a kind of autarchy and certainly hurts the social equality deeply in a democracy regime. The government is formed to serve their citizens and the political leaders are selected to maintain the citizens’ rights, so informing the truth to the public is one of their duties. Once people find the truth which is concealed by the government, the public will lose their confidence to the political leaders. The following example demonstrates this point sufficiently. The American people felt cheated by the Bush Administration on the Iraq event, so the approval rating of Bush falls a lot. Furthermore, blanking off the information from the public will result in corruption in government, and therefore brings detriment to society. The government will be out of the public supervision if the citizens are kept from the information of their government, so that some government officials will abuse their right to meet their own greedy.

Moreover, not only does it hurt people’s political rights, but also offends people’s benefits if the political leaders withhold information from the public. Take SARS, which ever happened in almost all Asian in 2003, for example. In china, government leaders let their public been informed about the newest trends of SARS almost every minute, so many of their people's lives could be saved immediately through taking the immediate actions to prevent such disease. While, in other Asian countries such as Singapore, Korea and so on, the political leaders hided some information about the circumstance of their people who suffered from SARS in order to low the influence on their countries' economy. Consequently, many people lost their lives because they could not receive the immediate rescue. So the victims of withholding information by the political leaders are ordinary citizens themselves.

Admittedly, sometimes keeping the public from knowing something is good for not only the safety of citizens but also the stability of society. Usually, when the police know that there is a bomb in one hotel, it is unwise to inform the people the truth, and the police should evacuate the people smartly, otherwise it will cause a massive disorder and even bloodshed by stamping. Also some truth related to the country’s top secretsunnecessarily open to citizens, which is indispensable and helpful for a country in defending aggression and keeping safety.

In sum, it is reasonable for the political leaders to withhold the information when announcing the information is harmful to the country and the public’s benefit. Otherwise the public hold the rightof knowingthe information, which guarantees the citizens’ rights and makes the politics more transparent.

susan8940UID: 160449

第一段讲欺瞒公众是剥夺了他们的权利,不过展开不太充分,到后来似乎就写到对领导人和国家的负面影响上来了....
第二段写的很好,正反例子论证很有说服力....偶本来也想用SARS的呵呵
第三段让步承认,体现了思想的辩证,不过貌似炸弹的例子...那是政治领导人公布的吗?可以换个别的吧...比如恐怖组织?好像也不太好说....
其中说到群众监督这个观点很好  :)
以上纯属个人观点,楼主有空讨论哈...
lz一起加油哈!

mubbyUID: 2300654

The speaker asserts that the political leaders unavoidably withhold information from the public. I concede that, in sometimes special(some special times好像顺一点), it is unnecessary for political leaders to announce(用expose怎样？) all the information to the public. But（However）, I tempt to agree(去掉with) that it is harmful and destructive for political leaders to conceal the truth from the public frequently.

Withholding information from the public means（改为results in that）the ordinary people lose proper right which they deserve to(换为of) knowing the truth about their country and politics. It is a kind of autarchy autocracy and certainly hurts (改为will undermine) the social equality deeply in a democracy regime. The government is formed to serve their citizens and the political leaders are selected to maintain the citizens’ rights, so informing the truth to the public is one of their duties. Once people find the truth which is concealed by (from) the government, the public will lose their confidence to the political leaders. The following example demonstrates this point sufficiently. The American people felt cheated by the Bush Administration on the Iraq event, so the approval rating of Bush falls  (felt) a lot. (例子举得不错，应该继续展开,比如说Bush在很
多方面如税收，教育等的威信降低，降低的威信在一段时间内不容易恢复之类的）
blanking off the information from the public will result in corruption in government, and therefore brings detriment to society. The government will be out of the public supervision if the citizens are kept from the information of their government, so that some government officials will abuse their right to meet their own greedy(greediness).

Moreover, not only does it hurt people’s political rights, but also offends people’s benefits if the political leaders withhold information from the public. Take SARS,which ever happened in almost all Asian in 2003, for example. In china, government leaders let their public been informed about the newest trends of SARS almost every minute, so many of their people's lives could be saved immediately through taking the immediate actions to prevent such disease. While, in other Asian countries such as Singapore, Korea and so on, the political leaders hided some information about the circumstance of their people who suffered from SARS in order to low the influence on their countries' economy. Consequently, many people lost their lives because they could not receive the immediate rescue. So the victims of withholding information by the political leaders are ordinary citizens themselves.是指citizens,但是句子不是很顺，改一下更好了。
Admittedly, sometimes keeping the public from knowing something is good for 去掉not only for
the safety of citizens but also for the stability of society. Usually, when the police know that there is a bomb in one hotel, it is unwise to inform the people the truth, and the police should(could)
evacuate the people smartly, otherwise it will cause a massive disorder and people can even be
bloodshed by stamping. Also some truth related to the country’s top secrets unnecessarily open to citizens, which is indispensable and helpful for a country in defending aggression and keeping safety. (It is also unnecessarily to open the country’s top secrets which is indispensable and helpful for a country in defending aggression and keeping safety to the citizens.)
In sum, it is reasonable for the political leaders to withhold the information when announcing the information is harmful to the country and the public’s benefit. Otherwise the public hold the rightof knowingthe information, which guarantees the citizens’ rights and makes the politics more transparent.

rickbaiUID: 2206364

The speaker asserts that the political leaders unavoidably withhold information from the public. I concede that, in sometimes special, it is unnecessary for political leaders to announce all information to the public. But, I tempttend to agree 删with that it is harmful and destructive for political leaders to conceal the truth from the public frequentlyarbitrarily.

Withholding information from the public means the ordinary people lose proper right which they deserve to know the truth about their country and politics. It is a kind of autarchy and certainly hurts the social equality deeply in a democracydemocratic regime. The government is formed to serve theirthe citizens and the political leaders are selected to maintainensure the citizens’ rights, so informing the truth to the publicinforming the public with truths is one of their duties. Once people find the truth which is concealed by the government, the public will lose their confidence toin the political leaders. The following example demonstrates this point sufficiently. The American people felt cheated by the Bush Administration on the Iraq event, so the approval rating of Bush falls a lotOnce the Americans realized that the Bush Administration is hiding crucial evidences on the Iraq issue, the approval rate of the current government falls drastically. Furthermore, blanking off the information from the public will result in corruption in government, and therefore brings detriment to society. The government will be out of the public supervision if the citizens are kept from the information of their government, so that some government officials will abuse their right to meet their own greedy. If government officials find that they can escape public supervision by keeping certain information from the citizens, they may use it to gain personal interests at the price of sacrificing public interests

Moreover, not only does it hurt people’s political rights, but also offendsimpairs people’s benefits if the political leaders withhold information from the public. Take SARS, which ever happened in almost all Asianwhich has swept numerous regions in Asia in 2003, for example. In china, government leaders let their public been informed about the newest trends of SARS almost every minute, so many of their people's lives could be saved immediately through taking the immediate actions to prevent such disease. While, in other Asian countries such as Singapore, Korea and so on, the political leaders hided some information about the circumstance of their people who suffered from SARS in order to low the influence on their countries' economy. Consequently, many people lost their lives because they could not receive the immediate rescuereceive necessary treatment in time. So the victims of withholding information by the political leaders are ordinary citizens themselves.These ordinary citizens became victims of intentionally hidden information by political leaders
个人觉得将中国和其它国家进行比较不太有说服力, 也许可以将中国政府在公开SARS疫情前SARS的传播和公开疫情后SARS得到有效控制进行对比…不过后面就不能责怪political leaders而是officials responsible for public health…hehe


Admittedly, sometimes keeping the public from knowing something is good for has positive effects onnot only the safety of citizens but also the stability of society. Usually, when the police know that there is a bomb in one hotel, it is unwise to inform the people the truth, and the police should evacuate the people smartly, otherwise it will cause a massive disorder and even bloodshed by stamping. Also some truth related to the country’s top secrets unnecessarilyDetails of national security can not be open to citizens, which is indispensable and helpfulbecause it is essential for a country in defending aggression and keeping safety.

In sum, it is reasonable for the political leaders to withhold the information when announcing the information is harmful to the country and the public’s benefit. Otherwise the public hold the right of knowing the information, which guarantees the citizens’ rights and makes the politics more transparent.