The well-being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question its authority.
A democratic society where various kinds of reasonable questions on the authority is allowed even encouraged instead of an authoritarian one has always been considered as the vigorous guarantee of the well-being of a society for most of the countries if not all the countries. The statement argues that if many people of a society question the authority, the society can be more prosperous. I partially agree this statement because while it suits some cases, it fails in some other cases.
Reasonable and insightful questions which not only reflect some problems of the government but also take the reality into consideration will provide the authority some suggestions on the urgent social issues and supervise how the government use their power to serve its people. As we all know, a government, no matter how considerate it is to its people, may unavoidably ignore the interest of some kind of group. If some people question the government on this issue and the government revises the rules or laws to make up for it based on the actual situation, the society will go towards prosperity. It is a particularly salient example that the government passed the law to protect the third gender after this group questioned the authority whether they were given the basic human right. Indeed, it barely does harm to the other groups if there is and it is a kind of progress of human civilization.
Besides, corruption and inaction will easily grow if the public as the supervisor does not question the authority. For instance, the North Korea, a famous authoritarian country where there is almost no free talk against its dictator, had the lowest ranking of corruption perception index in 2012. And the poor development of this country just coincides with the statement.
However, this sacred right will backfire if it is taken advantage by people with bad intentions. It is a living example that the recent protest in Hong Kong turned into a riot with the help of some organizations. The protest began as the result of the revision of some laws, and it was also totally reasonable if the protestors just demonstrated on the streets questioning that the government tried to deprive them of the freedom by revising these laws. Indeed, many of the protestor just broke the peace of Hong Kong, paralyzing the transportation, destroying the communal facilities, attacking the police, and most of the citizen criticized the action but failed to stop them. These protestors were supported with equipment and paid 3000 US dollars each day per person and some media like CNN reported selectively and with prejudice. Even after the authority apologized for putting up the revision of the laws publicly and asked them to come to the table and discuss it, they just refused it and continued the riot. Now anyone with a pair of eyes without prejudice can see how depressed the Hong Kong is.
To sum up, while I agree that reasonable question on the authority can boost the prosperity of the society because it can offer the government some suggestions and supervise the government, it could also backfire if it is taken advantage of.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-23 | Nithin Narla | 66 | view |
| 2019-10-02 | Dekuku | 79 | view |
- Government should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future 83
- Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all the people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts. 50
- Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research. 83
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones 77
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college 66
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, however, if, may, so, third, well, while, for instance, kind of, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 61.0 58.6224719101 104% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 12.9106741573 209% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2613.0 2235.4752809 117% => OK
No of words: 524.0 442.535393258 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98664122137 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7844588288 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82003668921 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 265.0 215.323595506 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.50572519084 0.4932671777 103% => OK
syllable_count: 823.5 704.065955056 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.3522011065 60.3974514979 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.526315789 118.986275619 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.5789473684 23.4991977007 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.94736842105 5.21951772744 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.207428972093 0.243740707755 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0619335221409 0.0831039109588 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.081589709191 0.0758088955206 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116273266953 0.150359130593 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0713289061992 0.0667264976115 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 14.1392134831 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.1639044944 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.62 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 100.480337079 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.