It is more harmful to compromise one's own beliefs than to adhere to them.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take.

Currently, it is debatable whether it is harmful to compromise one’s beliefs than to adhere to them. Some people hold a view that compromising one’s own beliefs would be meritorious since by following the trend of the majority, people cannot lag behind. However, I believe that following the belief of oneself is better since being compromised and following the footstep of others would result in more deleterious consequences.

First of all, compromising one’s beliefs is harmful since one can forsake his moral value to adhere to the societal norm. Take Nazi for example. After the WWI, Germany was mired in economic difficulty and many people were suffered from this adverse circumstance. To revitalize its economy and regain the past glory, Hitler and his government emphasized the idea of nationalism and ethnic cleansing, so that only so-called superior ethnic group could consist of the German society. Although this notion of ethnic hygiene fostered the discrimination against Jews and other minority groups, most of German people gave up their own moral belief, and began to participate in discrimination and execution against the minority people. If they were kept their moral and ethnic values, many lives of innocent people would have not been sacrificed, and Germany would have not gain criticism from the international community. As we can see from this compelling example, in some cases, the merits of compromising one’s belief is pale in comparison with the demerits of it.

In addition, following the one’s own beliefs lead to a great accomplishment rather than to a detriment. For example, Gandhi, a prominent non-violent activist in India is lionized by people from all different walks of life and backgrounds, since he adhered to his own belief of civil-disobedience. When India was suffered greatly under the rule of British Parliament, he went against the societal norm of following the rules of British, and initiated the Salt March to Dandi. By doing so, he gained tremendous supports from people in India and all around the world. If he was not faced with the British pressure and decided to compromise his beliefs, he would not be able to open the door for independence in India. Therefore, abandoning one’s belief is not harmful.

Lastly, maintaining one’s beliefs is also important when one is faced with adverse situation. To illustrate, after the Great Depression, U.S. was experienced an economic downturn. The unemployment was higher than ever, and most of citizens were strapped for cash. To bolster the economy, President Roosevelt and his government decided to implement the New Deal plan, although some critics argued that the plan would aggravate the economy. If President Roosevelt listened to those criticisms, the U.S. would not be able to revitalize and many people would have continued to suffer from the recession. Therefore, when confronting with adversity, holding one’s beliefs would yield more benefits than drawbacks.

In conclusion, the advantages of adhering to one’s beliefs override the disadvantages of them. Therefore, we should go the extra mile to maintaining our own beliefs.