Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals.
In order to be a good politician, it is imperative to be able to find common ground with other parties and work on a consensus that is supported by as many voters as possible. Finding a common ground is often more effective and sustainable in the long run because it includes the opinions of minorities, which is crucial for a functioning democracy. Therefore, holding on to elusive ideals can build walls rather than bridges.
A politician is most of all a representative of his or her constituents and carries, therefore, the responsibility of integrating their wishes and opinions into policies. However, since a democracy is characterized by heterogeneity, it is necessary to debate, engage in the public sphere and find common ground, despite ideological differences. It is crucial in a modern state that politicians are able to compromise and respect other opinions. For example, Switzerland’s political institutions are based on compromising. There is not one president that represents the people as it is the reality in most other western states like France or Germany, but there are seven presidents from four different parties, called the Federal Council. Their decisions are based on negotiating agreements that are founded on a middle-ground basis. Those trade-offs between personal ideology and consensus-oriented policies proofed to be crucial for the prodigious wealth, political stability and well-fare Switzerland has accumulated during the last decades.
Secondly, holding on to ideals rather than common sense and realpolitik can be an obstacle for political integration and productivity and future-oriented policies. Tenaciousness in regards to ideology can lead to fault lines that become so entrenched that the political apparatus becomes unable to function. For instance, ideological reasoning, and on this account religion and religious values are also regarded as an ideal, has had a negative effect on American politics. The religious right and the tea-party movement dogmatized the view on religion and subverted the Republicans. In consequence, they moved the Republicans more to the right, which lead to a rigidly conservative view. Following from this, the tea-party movement, following their religious agenda, polarized the two parties – one party with a liberal view and on the other end a party that claimed the moral and religious superiority for themselves. Neither Democrats nor Republicans have the ability nor the will to build a bridge between the two ideologically polarized parties and slowed down the political process in the House of Representatives as well as in the Senate. In American politics nowadays, ideals have become dogmatic and are obfuscating the view on pragmatic solutions. Thus, aberrations from the idealist hard-line could bridge the gap between politicians with differing ideals. In addition to that, holding on to elusive ideals can cause a disconnection from the political, economic and societal realities of the voters. This distance, in the long-run, is for any politician a dead-end.
However, it is not to the intention that ideals are not important in politics. They are the moral compass, which every politician needs. Otherwise, he or she would not be trustworthy since there is not ideological red line that is guiding the politician. A elected politician without an underlying ideal can easily become a lose bullet, acting against all he stood for while running for office. Hence, an ideology should act like a road-sign at a cross-road, which is a helpful orientation in many occasions. As an example, the ideal of individual freedom and the freedom of expression can guide a politician when he has to decide whether they want to restrict internet-access to certain webpages, like online-gambling, to protect the consumer instead of focusing on the individual freedom to put their money where their individual preferences are. Here, an ideal can serve as a compass to find a position, which is consistent with the basic ideal but leaves room for common sense and finding a middle ground. However, an ideal should never become a dominant force that blocks political institutions from working.
Thus, those politicians who always argue with their ideals and a higher moral force are ignoring the political realities and the basic foundations a democracy is built on, which is consensus, respecting minorities and the ability to compromise. Ideologies and ideals often become dogmatic, which is dangerous and can lead to a stalemate. Success stories like Switzerland show that compromising and finding common ground can be implemented in institutions, leading to a healthy and political system. An ideal should rather be a moral compass that can help to adhere to certain values, but it should never become dogmatic. More than anything, it is a premise that politicians are able to understand different positions and look for commonalities in the political opponent. This, even though often not reflecting the own conviction, it the best option for a greater good.
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans tothink for themselves will surely deteriorate. 75
- Claim Though often considered an objective pursuit learning about the historical past requires creativity Reason Because we can never know the past directly we must reconstruct it by imaginatively interpreting historical accounts documents and artifacts 61
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position 66
- Scientists and other researchers should focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people. 73
- Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals. 82
Comments
Essay evaluation report
since there is not ideological red line
since there is no ideological red line
----------------
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK, but too long
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
flaws:
No. of Words: 791 350 //the conclusion can be shorter too. write the essay in 30 minutes.
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 35 15
No. of Words: 791 350
No. of Characters: 4154 1500
No. of Different Words: 352 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.303 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.252 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.063 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 324 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 255 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 185 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 138 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.6 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.457 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.543 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.241 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.405 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.071 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 986, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...odigious wealth, political stability and well-fare Switzerland has accumulated du...
^^
Line 5, column 179, Rule ID: IN_REGARD_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'regarding' or 'with regard to'.
Suggestion: regarding; with regard to
...future-oriented policies. Tenaciousness in regards to ideology can lead to fault lines that b...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1566, Rule ID: DT_JJ_NO_NOUN[1]
Message: Probably a noun is missing in this part of the sentence.
... in the long-run, is for any politician a dead-end. However, it is not to the intention...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 256, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'An' instead of 'A' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: An
...ed line that is guiding the politician. A elected politician without an underlyin...
^
Line 7, column 323, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...t an underlying ideal can easily become a lose bullet, acting against all he stood for...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, well, while, as to, for example, for instance, in addition, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 39.0 19.5258426966 200% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 38.0 14.8657303371 256% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 24.0 11.3162921348 212% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 44.0 33.0505617978 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 95.0 58.6224719101 162% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 4268.0 2235.4752809 191% => OK
No of words: 791.0 442.535393258 179% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.39570164349 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.30327466957 4.55969084622 116% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18200157981 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 370.0 215.323595506 172% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.467762326169 0.4932671777 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1374.3 704.065955056 195% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 6.24550561798 208% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 35.0 20.2370786517 173% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.0517863353 60.3974514979 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.942857143 118.986275619 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6 23.4991977007 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.17142857143 5.21951772744 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 24.0 10.2758426966 234% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.185603213177 0.243740707755 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.047951515487 0.0831039109588 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0475451841039 0.0758088955206 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129314719407 0.150359130593 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.063311872491 0.0667264976115 95% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.1392134831 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.8420337079 83% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.1743820225 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.34 12.1639044944 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.02 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 215.0 100.480337079 214% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.