Most of the world's problems could be solved by international cooperation. Do you agree or disagree?
The globalization has conquering almost every corners of the known world, reversing the misconception of being divided. Human race is living in a flourish era that resulted in a utopian scenario that international collaboration could be the answer for almost the global issues we are forced to deal with. To swim against the tide, I believe the true power of global cooperation is being exaggerated, and there are large numbers of critical problems could not be tackled by international collaboration alone.
On the one hand, global collaboration serves not only the pure purpose of facilitating the world’s development but also the interests of flourish countries. In fact, the major of us have been misled by a misconception that all the nation could achieve a common benefit by working in partnership, and that the developed countries are willing to cut down their interests for facilitating the poor country on the road of innovation. In detail, a group of great nations could conspire to gain the soft power over the indebted nations. For instance, ODA aid has been labeled as the fasted source of support for developing countries to fuel a breakthrough in national economy. However, tied with such the official development aid is always a series of privileges lurking somewhere in many areas. In retrospect, it is no doubt that China had conspired to monopolize the new Silk Road connecting the Indochina and a large area of southeast sea. Hidden behind the name of global collaboration in reducing poverty, China had delivered an uncleared aid in cash to Cambodia and Laos, then utilized the local corruption to turn two countries into its debtors. At a result, two over three nations of Indochina region had to pass series of policies in favor of China in territorial issue. It is one of thousands of prime examples to prove the dark side of international cooperation.
On another aspect, international collaboration could damage the traditional values. For example, globalization is the sweet fruit of working in partnership on global scale. It is labeled as an inevitable result when a country desires to join a general market to sell its own products. Globalization demands each nation to leave their traditional values behind in various levels to accept a general standard of living, sometimes called American standard. When the conflicts between the old and the new reach its peak, violence, terrorism, and the collapse of humanity do inevitably come afterwards. In retrospect, the combination of a global collaboration without its long-running speculation and an extreme religious society did trigger the first domino in what proved to be the Holy War. Scholars believe that the September 11 Attack is an inevitable result of the erroneous policies in global collaboration between Muslim Countries and the West. It is blamed on the military aid of Soviet Union and the West for the Gulf War that fueled the rise of Islamic Organization such as Taliban or IS and the diactoship in many Islamic nations such as Syria and UAE. It is more urgent than ever to pay attention on foreign affairs to avoid repeating the historic flaws.
In conclusion, human race should have a comprehensive understanding in global issues, especially in international cooperation. I debate against the idea that global collaboration could solve almost the world’s crises.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, so, then, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, no doubt, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 15.1003584229 139% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 43.0788530466 53% => OK
Preposition: 87.0 52.1666666667 167% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 8.0752688172 310% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2837.0 1977.66487455 143% => OK
No of words: 546.0 407.700716846 134% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19597069597 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83390555256 4.48103885553 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09904668472 2.67179642975 116% => OK
Unique words: 288.0 212.727598566 135% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.527472527473 0.524837075471 101% => OK
syllable_count: 904.5 618.680645161 146% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.94265232975 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.4669121649 48.9658058833 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.347826087 100.406767564 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7391304348 20.6045352989 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5652173913 5.45110844103 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 3.85842293907 259% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.154920413531 0.236089414692 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0472331680504 0.076458572812 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0593531049969 0.0737576698707 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125254982578 0.150856017488 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0738798233296 0.0645574589148 114% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 11.7677419355 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 58.1214874552 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.1575268817 132% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 10.9000537634 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.14 8.01818996416 114% => OK
difficult_words: 151.0 86.8835125448 174% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 10.002688172 155% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.