Some people claim that the goal of politics should be the pursuit of an ideal. Others argue that the goal should be finding common ground and reaching reasonable consensus.
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.
When I think of the purpose of politics, I generally think of a method for which the country should be ran. Sticking to ones ideas while the 'purest' route, and definitely a honorable position is not wise. It is generally more pragmatic and thus beneficial for one to be willing to make compromise and come to concensus. Politics in the end is the method for which we determine how society should function, and thereforce we should be oriented towards the most 'functional' option.
A righteous man might choose to fight always for what he believes is the best possible solution to a problem. Yet, if he is unwilling to compromise he very well could achieve nothing. For you to get anything done in politics you need the support of people who agree with your beliefs. If you are too much of a stickler for 'pureity' you will discourage much of the support you would have had if you instead chose a more moderate position. Consider historically how democracy was slowly transitioned into being. In Canada we began with a two governing body system, with the senate and the house of commons, where originally the senate had far more power than the house of commons. The senate was appointed by the queen by proxy, and was a compromise to allow the subjects of Canada to have representation. If instead the many canadians refused any form of representation but a fully empowered house of commons, it is likely canadians would've got no representation for a long time, or until a American style war of independence occured. Assuming one does not want war, it was therefore necessary for compromises to be made achieve democracy in Canada. If Canadians refused to compromise war would've happened, and unlike the American's the masses might've lost, thus achieving nothing. It is thus sometimes necessary to moderate ones position to get things done.
Moreover, this assumes one actually in the end wants their ideals to be done. Sure, everyone wants their beliefs to be the ruling beliefs, but not everyone knows their ideals are correct. We as humans are not god. We do not have divine knowledge of the perfection of our ideologies. It is very much possible that when our ideals are put into practice that they do not have the desired result. Or worse are actually harmful for people. The best example of this is Communism. Communism, and particularly Marxism Leninism is a system that is based on the fundemental principle that all people should be equal. Off hand this sounds like a noble ideal, that ought to be fought for. However, this idea is extremely naive. Forcing all people into little all emcompassing boxes will lead to a less efficiently ran country. The human failiblity makes Communism a negative ideal for society, that is at this point resulted in the deaths of 100 million people. To continue to support this ideal despite the overwhelming negative outcomes of it, is a perfect example of the problem. People ought not to pursue what they believe things ought to be , but what works. Society and our method of deciding how to run it, politics, should be open to compromise.
Overall, while it is noble sometimes for one to dog for what they believe to be right, it is not practical. Politics is how we decide the way in which society is run. It is in general better to compromise as it leads to a better ran society. This is because it is sometimes necessary to compromise to get things done, and more over our ideals are based on limited information and not perfect.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 121, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
... the country should be ran. Sticking to ones ideas while the purest route, and defin...
^^^^
Line 1, column 171, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
... while the purest route, and definitely a honorable position is not wise. It is g...
^
Line 5, column 33, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[9]
Message: The adverb 'always' is usually put before the verb 'fight'.
Suggestion: always fight
... A righteous man might choose to fight always for what he believes is the best possib...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 932, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: would've
...ouse of commons, it is likely canadians wouldve got no representation for a long time, ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 988, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...epresentation for a long time, or until a American style war of independence occu...
^
Line 5, column 1188, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: would've
... If Canadians refused to compromise war wouldve happened, and unlike the Americans the ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1135, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...sue what they believe things ought to be , but what works. Society and our method ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, thus, well, while, i think, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 43.0 19.5258426966 220% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 53.0 33.0505617978 160% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 73.0 58.6224719101 125% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2884.0 2235.4752809 129% => OK
No of words: 605.0 442.535393258 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.76694214876 5.05705443957 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.95951083803 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68921819059 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 284.0 215.323595506 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.469421487603 0.4932671777 95% => OK
syllable_count: 945.0 704.065955056 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 15.0 6.24550561798 240% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 10.0 1.77640449438 563% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 34.0 20.2370786517 168% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.6165557953 60.3974514979 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.8235294118 118.986275619 71% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7941176471 23.4991977007 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.67647058824 5.21951772744 51% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 7.80617977528 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.83258426966 186% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.172489290701 0.243740707755 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0417939765955 0.0831039109588 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0470660500669 0.0758088955206 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115014461457 0.150359130593 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.040075398651 0.0667264976115 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.9 14.1392134831 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.8420337079 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.09 12.1639044944 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.85 8.38706741573 94% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 100.480337079 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => 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: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.