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.
Politics is a science which is country specific. Every country has it's unique history which paved the way for the resultant politics. Though, shooting for the stars, or ideals is definitely advisable but I believe that the real goal should be to find the common ground and to reach a common consensus.
Let's take the case of the world's largest democracy like India, which is known for it's diversity in cultures, traditions, religions and languages. In Indian political system, the members of Parliament get elected through a trasnparent procedure where candidates from different constituencies, representing their unique cultures, get elected by the residents of that constituency through voting. Now, for a country like India, the decision makers in the parliament are the flag beares of different sentiments. If the policies are discussed, with the goals to formulate them with an idealistic approach, it might be pleasing for a few but not for the others. So, here, it is beneficial to have a common ground though it results in a deviation from an ideal, but at least, that would be in the greater good for most of the citizens and their needs.
In addition to that, there are instances where an ideal policy might not be suitable for a particular country. For an instance, if we talk about transportation, and look up to the most developed countries like United States of America, Japan and China, bullet trains are the fastest means of land transportation. But, the introduction of bullet train in a country like India is not yet beneficial for a large chunk of the population. The basic trains are not even being maintained on time. Still there are several unconnected routes where the normal electric engine driven trains have not yet reached. Thus, a policy focusing on diversifying and maintaing the existing route of a conventional railway network would be a result of a common consensus, not the introduction of an idealistic bullet train.
However, one can argue that if each and every decision is left on common consensus, it would seriously impact the time taken to formulate that policy or decision. Also, in case of diverse opinions, most of the thing would not even fly, as there would always be some people left who would not be on the common ground. Apart from that, one can also argue that if we don't look up to the ideals, we would be left very far off in the race of development at the world level. All these concerns are legitimate, though the primary focus of politics should still be to have a common consensus because that is why the world can disavow a tyrannical form of governance, where there are no common grounds expected.
In the end, though ideals should be aimed for, as they are the important aspects which take us closer to be more advanced, but the real goal of politics should still be finding common ground and reaching reasonable consensus, in order to nourish the platform which the people of a country are in need of, not where the world is going.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: LETS_LET[1]
Message: Did you mean 'Let's'?
Suggestion: Let's
...round and to reach a common consensus. Lets take the case of the worlds largest dem...
^^^^
Line 2, column 27, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'worlds the largest'.
Suggestion: worlds the largest
...n consensus. Lets take the case of the worlds largest democracy like India, which is known fo...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 610, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...m with an idealistic approach, it might be pleasing for a few but not for the others. So, h...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 490, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Still,
... are not even being maintained on time. Still there are several unconnected routes wh...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 365, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...rom that, one can also argue that if we dont look up to the ideals, we would be left...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, so, still, thus, apart from, at least, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.5258426966 164% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 11.3162921348 177% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 58.6224719101 109% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2481.0 2235.4752809 111% => OK
No of words: 514.0 442.535393258 116% => OK
Chars per words: 4.82684824903 5.05705443957 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.76146701107 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70993795517 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 248.0 215.323595506 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482490272374 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 771.3 704.065955056 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.0895544049 60.3974514979 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.578947368 118.986275619 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.0526315789 23.4991977007 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.21052631579 5.21951772744 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.309230387552 0.243740707755 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.097398517386 0.0831039109588 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101862229346 0.0758088955206 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.213194237636 0.150359130593 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.11719311274 0.0667264976115 176% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.1392134831 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.8420337079 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.1743820225 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.03 12.1639044944 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.45 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 100.480337079 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.