Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals.
In democratic society, it is obvious that politicians should follow the prevalent opinion of the general public. However, politicians might have their own goals that could go against people’s will. In regard to this issue, the given prompt contends that politicians should form agreement with the public rather than adhere to their own ideas. I mostly agree with this position for two reasons that will be listed below. However, I do concede that the latter stance may sometimes lead to desirable results.
First of all, politicians should form reasonable consensus with people because this leads to a satisfactory relationship between politicians and the general public. For instance, democracy, even if some side effects are inherent in the system, tends to create less conflict between government officials and people since under the system, politicians cannot help but conform their will to people’s thoughts. On the other hand, under monarchy, a number of revolts and upsurges took place since people’s will is mostly disregarded and the king’s opinion was prioritized. From these examples, creating a fair agreement between people and politicians results in long-lasting relationship between these two, which contributes the stability of society and people’s overall satisfaction. Hence, for this reason, it is crucial for government rulers to form common ground with people rather than sticking to their own plans.
Secondly, besides the effect of forming satisfactory and stable relationship between politicians and the general public, politicians are encouraged to form common stance with people because it is less likely to lead to making biased decisions. For instance, Lenin and Stalin, with a firm belief that socialism will save people’s lives and create a utopian society, introduced this system to Russia and established the Soviet Union. Even though people were satisfied with the egalitarian society with little wealth inequality, they started to struggle with meeting basic needs such as food and shelter because people lost motivation, which eventually led to the collapse of the whole nation. If Lenin and Stalin, instead of following their ideals, had listened to the overall stance of the general public and followed its position, then the Soviet Union (Russia) would not dramatically have been disintegrated into dust. These examples present that making biased decisions, rather than forming common opinion with the general public, is dangerous since it is likely to lead to undesirable consequences.
Admittedly, following politicians’ elusive ideals may lead to positive results in some cases. For instance, the Founding Fathers of the United States followed their own plans, rather than asking people’s opinions, when constructing the United States Constitution and the federal and states system that are still used in the nowadays US society. Even if they regarded the will of the general public as trivial and misleading, they were successful in inventing the system. This example shows the possibility that politicians’ individual plans may work sometimes.
In conclusion, for the above two reasons discussed, I mostly agree that politicians should follow the opinion of the general public and form consensus with people’s stances. However, it cannot be denied that politicians’ elusive ideas and plans may still work despite not reflecting the public’s opinions.
- Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals 66
- Some people believe that corporations have a responsibility to promote the well being of the societies and environments in which they operate Others believe that the only responsibility of corporations provided they operate within the laws is to make as m 66
- In most professions and academic fields imagination is more important than knowledge 83
- Some people believe that the ever increasing use of technology significantly reduces our opportunities for human interaction Other people believe that technology provides us with new and better ways to communicate and connect with one another 66
- It is more harmful to compromise one s own beliefs than to adhere to them 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 98, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...uld follow the prevalent opinion of the general public. However, politicians might have their ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 150, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...elationship between politicians and the general public. For instance, democracy, even if some ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 106, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...elationship between politicians and the general public, politicians are encouraged to form com...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 789, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...d listened to the overall stance of the general public and followed its position, then the Sov...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1015, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...er than forming common opinion with the general public, is dangerous since it is likely to lea...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 384, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
.... Even if they regarded the will of the general public as trivial and misleading, they were su...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 118, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...icians should follow the opinion of the general public and form consensus with people’s stance...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, first, hence, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, then, for instance, in conclusion, such as, first of all, in regard to, in some cases, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 14.8657303371 135% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 33.0505617978 118% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 58.6224719101 111% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2902.0 2235.4752809 130% => OK
No of words: 520.0 442.535393258 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.58076923077 5.05705443957 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77530192783 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81070439065 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 249.0 215.323595506 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.478846153846 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 876.6 704.065955056 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.8514020933 60.3974514979 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.19047619 118.986275619 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7619047619 23.4991977007 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.52380952381 5.21951772744 163% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 7.80617977528 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.213709251891 0.243740707755 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0739665229175 0.0831039109588 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0692956135378 0.0758088955206 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138330856129 0.150359130593 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.039544593954 0.0667264976115 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 14.1392134831 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.8420337079 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.38 12.1639044944 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 100.480337079 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.