Some people believe it is often necessary even desirable for political leaders to withhold information from the public Others believe that the public has a right to be fully informed Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns wit

This is a controversial topic of whether politicians withholding information from the public should be considered good or bad. This statement is met with divided answers and even more segregated opinions. Indisputably, it is agreed by the majority that hiding or withholding any kind of resources is a bad and punishable offense. Nevertheless, many people do not understand or posses concrete evidence or enough data to support their views. Thus, it is not surprising to support the notion of respecting the politicians in their attempt to withhold the information from the people.
The act of secretive working and keeping people in the dark is a prime offence. Yet there are some cases where these methods of discretion needs to be adopted. To illustrate, imagine a country at war and is importing many of its offenders to safer prisons. Times like these atmost secrecy is important to ensure the safety of the officers who are importing and to make sure these fugitives do not run away. The government or leaders might even employ secret codes or languages for better communication without being overheard. There are also circumstances where the nation is making plans to eliminate the ails of the country through drastic measures and surprise attacks. In both of these situations, the politicians cannot afford to disclose their plans to the public.
Furthermore, people are selfish and whimsical. Any decision made by the government, whether it is good or bad, is always questioned and demanded to be repudiated in many large countries unless it benefits their own personal needs and desires. They are easily prone to influences and easily instigated. Assume a scenario where a politician announced his plans to eradicate corruption in the country. Though at first met with extreme approval, if the mob were provoked mildly by the opposition against the politician's methods, the people may end up opposing the whole idea of corruption removal. Their decisions and supports never remain constant or loyal, especially in this age of media where everything is micro analyzed.
Admittedly, educating people with the current trends of policies and budgets taken up by the nation or politicians is a appreciable idea. But, this awareness among people also comes with unwarranted suggestions and advices to the politicians on better management. Imagine a restaurant where the customers can see the process of the food making. By the end of the day it is absolute that the restaurant suggestion box would be full with new recipes the customers would like to incorporate, advises for better broth making, threatens to change the menu that does not fit the customers way of making food and many complaints questioning the hygiene or work ethics of the cooks and staff. Though this box might include compliments, majority is filled with jargon that could have been avoided if the restaurant did not initiate the open kitchen policy. Similarly, the act of secrecy of the politicians is a caution followed by them reflecting the restaurant.
In conclusion, politicians who practice the art of minimalism with words with the public are disrespected by individuals with no pristine data or information that proves their actions to be wrong or sinful. Unless, more statements are added supporting the above mentioned claim or modified with enough background information, these statements cannot be taken seriously. In fact, considering politicians to be evil for taking necessary steps for safety and well being of the nation by the means of hiding, should be stopped and discouraged.