Information is the new gem in democracy. In a democracy, depriving people of their right is equivalent to committing a crime: people have every right to access information as much as they have other basic rights to live. Suggesting that it is necessary for political leaders to withhold information from the public, is a violation of the right to information of that particular nation’s citizen. As a result, it can stir confusion and create indecisiveness in democracy.
Though political leaders are considered well informed, intelligent and often are representative of the people, their decisions and manoeuvers are not always compelling. The people should be made aware of every activity, agreements, and threats that the country is dealing with so that the leaders could be criticized for their actions when needed. Moreover, hiding information opens the door to corruption. In trade and agreements, political leaders can favor a fortune for themselves if the information on whereabouts of trade and agreements are not disclosed. If the transparency of the annual budget and expenditure is not maintained, the people might stop paying their tax, donors might stop funding the country - a major contribution to the annual budget.
Having said that information should not be withheld, however, sometimes, in critical circumstances, it would be prudent to prevent a crisis, conflicts or war in the country or with another country that certain information should not be disclosed immediately. Nonetheless, the information should be disclosed later after making sure of no negative impacts on its people. For example, recently, a country has faced an internal conflict between its two religious groups. One of the group attempted homicide on another group during their holy celebration, which saw the death of more than 300 people. The victimized group sought retaliation through incendiarism and bloodshed; burning shops and houses of innocent people of the attacking group. Had the government revealed the culprit after taking certain actions that would have made sure of no tension between those two groups, those incendiarisms and bloodshed could have been prevented.
Access to information is needed and must be made available to every citizen in a democracy. The information is consumed and analyzed before taking important decisions in the future. The information helps in maintaining harmony in the country. Regardless of this, sometimes, some information could be used to create chaos among its people. At that time, a deliberate decision should be taken so as to prevent war, disharmony in the people. Nonetheless, it should be made sure information is accessible to the people at the right time.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 720, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...onors might stop funding the country - a major contribution to the annual budget....
^^
Line 7, column 392, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
..., a deliberate decision should be taken so as to prevent war, disharmony in the people. ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, moreover, nonetheless, so, well, as to, for example, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 12.9106741573 155% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2297.0 2235.4752809 103% => OK
No of words: 424.0 442.535393258 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.41745283019 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53775939005 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0821158418 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 215.323595506 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 711.0 704.065955056 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.2388751997 60.3974514979 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.380952381 118.986275619 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1904761905 23.4991977007 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.90476190476 5.21951772744 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 5.13820224719 253% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.255009929298 0.243740707755 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0742103023748 0.0831039109588 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0715249944736 0.0758088955206 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16268088627 0.150359130593 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0716749252012 0.0667264976115 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.1639044944 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.65 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.