issue167 [0806G-奋斗小组]第一次作业 大仙们拍拍吧~thanks！

bestcaicaiUID: 2355164

原本以为应该今天要交的，硬是弄了好久，终于搞完了。
结果，someone告诉我是4号交，呵呵~先发上来吧~

第一篇阿...水平真的好有限，谢谢大家狠拍！不胜感激~
留链回拍~

ISSUE167”It is impossible for an effective political leader to tell the truth all the time. Complete honesty is not a useful virtue for a politician.”

提纲！！先列提纲！^-^
观点：基本同意,
      1.generally agree
      2.politician—a person active in party politics. It does not mean they only have public life. Their private life is also inneglectable.
      3.public life: strategicall dishonesty is permitted.[Roswell UFO]
           SOMETIMES dishonesty is unadvisable.[03 SARS..Nixon]
      4.private life: it requires complete honesty.[Clinton]
      5.as above,the suggested reason for being strategical is obvious: it is the intelligent choice.



I generally agree with the speaker’s assertion that complete honesty is not a useful virtue for a politician in some circumsrtances. Although it is a virtue of being honest, it is only a virtue of being strategically honest. No amount of honest will be available unless it shows wisdom and braveness.

As we know, a politician is a person who is active in party politics. Their job is to build, maintain, and expand the wealth, prosperity and political influence of their nation, district and county, which is his or her primary concern. Born as an individual, they not only have public life but private life as well. According to my comprehension, they should be strategically honest, sometimes they may not tell the public everything. But when it comes to their private life, complete honesty is required.

Firstly, I should state that it does not mean cheating or deception if one is dishonest. When the information related to the security of nation, the stability of society appear, the politician need to judge that whether he or she should show the public the truth by their own wisdom and braveness. Strategically dishonesty under the following conditions may bring about better effects rather than telling the truth. In 1947, an UFO crashed in Roswell. With a number of witnesses proved, there were charred bodies, debries scattering all around. But in terms of possible great panic among people, the united government withheld the information and made cover-up on the mass media. The politician’s processing mode, as time goes on, is proved right. If the politician just told the truth, it may cause public panic. So concerning the benefit from the strategically dishonesty, the dishonesty itself can be understood.

Secondly, dishonesty is unadvisable sometimes. Although politicians are not mean to be dishonest to the public, they may feel decepted by the politician and cause some inecpectant consequences. These negtive effects on society may be opposite to the politician’ original intention. Take the SARS incident for example, in 2003, the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome—SARS swept all over China. At the very beginning, the minister of health department forbad the spread of the news. People sent short messages which created multitude of inveracious information to each other. the stupendous speed of the dissemination lead to great panic. They may take the stability of society into account, but the dishonesty resulted in worse effects. The forbiddance caused great disorder in a short time. Later on, updated information was released to the mass media, and at last the society restored its harmony. Another fitting example is the Watergate affairs of Nixon. The dishonesty ultimately resulted in his resignation in 1974.
We can see that in determining whether politician should be honest, his or her wisdom and braveness are very important. The two elements can contribute a lot to the politician’s success. And without them, honesty is meaningless.

What’s more, we need the politician to be complete honest in their private life. Honesty is still a virtue to be cherrished when it comes to personal interest. Honesty in private life shows the personalistic charm of the politician as well. It can bring about higher popularity rating and to be honest is to be responsible for the public. The Bill Clinton’s scandal with Lewinsky has led to great spoilage of mass media. The money which can originally be donated to the children who are in poverty is spoilt. If Clinton had been honest to the public, the wasteness could have been avoided. So honesty in private life is extremely necessary.

From the discussion above, we can safely draw the conclusion that the politician should be strategically honest in public life and be complete honest in private life, and the suggested reason of it is obvious: it is the intelligent choice.

[ 本帖最后由 bestcaicai 于 2007-10-1 02:28 编辑 ]

bestcaicaiUID: 2355164

自己顶顶吧....
为什么没有仙人给点反应勒~~~~~~~~
....

bestcaicaiUID: 2355164

o~~为什么还是没人反应阿？