In order to be effective, the politicians should make the right decision most suitable to current situations. Otherwise, such decisions can be called inappropriate. Effective leaders should master the right tool of decision making. In the given statement, two of such decision criteria are listed: submitting to public opinions and adhering to particular principles and objectives. Personally I value the ability to stick to principles and objectives more than making compromises.
I agree that to become an effective leader, the ability to listen to public opinions are important. Opponents rightfully claim that leaders should heed to views expressed by the mass. The opposing side dislikes a leader who diverges from the mass and makes decisions for the public, not accord to the public. A leader who disregards public’s opinions also is in risk of disregarding public welfare. For example, Hilter, a notorious leader, disregarded all opposing voices from his people, his consultors, his enemies, and his allies. He adhered to his personal objective, to extinct Jews. It is an extreme counterexample of ignoring public opinions. However, under other situations where sagacious leaders own visions not be visible to the mass, they should stick to their principles and objectives.
Great leaderships require some extraordinary abilities like the ability to see the big picture, the ability to plan ahead and the ability to grasp trends beyond our generation. These leaders should not be shackled by public opposition. For example, the peace leader Gandhi made an enormous contribution to the liberation of India by nonviolence. Foreseeing the power of union and standing firm to beliefs of freedom, equity and peace, he educated his followers on his principles. He made the public listen to his political philosophy, not the reverse. Moreover, he is not unanimously supported. In fact, there were violent groups who sought liberation by force, including those who assassinated Gandhi. Facing fractions among own people, Gandhi stuck to his principles, putting public opinions second. He was the best example to counter those who ask leaders to submit. There are many more examples like Winston Churchill, Margaret Thatcher and Vladimir Putin, who are also being accused of stubbornness but lead their people through difficult times.
To summarize, we must acknowledge the importance of being a diligent representative of mass voices. In some situations, it is essential for the leader to listen and to compromise. However, when I was in the voting booth, I would vote for those have a persuasive blueprint of my nation and determined to carry it out.
- The well-being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and s 66
- Some people believe that in order to be effective, political leaders must yield to public opinion and abandon principle for the sake of compromise. Others believe that the most essential quality of an effective leader is the ability to remain consistently 58
- Claim: Nations should suspend government funding for the arts when significant numbers of their citizens are hungry or unemployed.Reason: It is inappropriate—and, perhaps, even cruel—to use public resources to fund the arts when people's basic needs a 75
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, moreover, regarding, second, so, for example, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 33.0505617978 100% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2249.0 2235.4752809 101% => OK
No of words: 417.0 442.535393258 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.3932853717 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.5189133491 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98219927706 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 234.0 215.323595506 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.561151079137 0.4932671777 114% => OK
syllable_count: 709.2 704.065955056 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 6.24550561798 224% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.2609540702 60.3974514979 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.5 118.986275619 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.0384615385 23.4991977007 68% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.96153846154 5.21951772744 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.303402305097 0.243740707755 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0835633754226 0.0831039109588 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0675539025535 0.0758088955206 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.175097347759 0.150359130593 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0335715945693 0.0667264976115 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 14.1392134831 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 48.8420337079 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.1639044944 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.31 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 100.480337079 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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: 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.