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.
It is argued in the statement that the primary goal of politics should be reaching an acceptable consensus between different groups. Since each of these groups has their own forces, interest, and pursuits, to further human’s development, it is the politics that should find common ground to unite the whole society. Indeed, it is an important part of politics, but pursuing the ideal is also vital for the whole civilization. In my mind, I believe that these two are not mutually exclusive, and all together make up the politics.
Whether capitalism or communism, they both share the same ultimate goal- to create a free and satisfying world and bring benefits to everyone, at least for their theories. No denying that the politicians should focus on this idealist pursues, the utopia. They have their knowledge, expertise, and experiences that can help society become better. Their efforts and these advantages can help them better depict a blueprint and envision the future for all the society, including those different interest groups. However, with their personal interests and cares, they may sometimes focus on only myopic benefits and become temporarily blind. Other politicians’ idealistic pursuits can then remind them of the long term benefits and help them find their positions. The communism, with their ultimate goals and advertising tools, gather hundreds of and thousands of labor workers’ forces to form a new country in the Soviet Union and China.
However, this centralized pursuits of an ideal, can lead to monopoly and tyranny. When they have the power and people, they may mix their own ambitions with the ultimate goals, if not replacing it at all. This definitely is inconsistent with the whole people’s need and can lead the whole country to destruction even inhuman. Thus, achieving common ground and reaching reasonable consensus is an important tool of controlling the politician’s force. On the other hand, according to the Contrast Social of J. J. Rousseau, politicians are representatives of those different interest groups. People select those politicians in the sacrifice of their own power and right to exchange for future benefits. This compromising is achieving social unity and stability, which bring paybacks to the whole nation.
In my mind, I believe that ideal and consensus is actually not paradoxical. The ideal is theoretical and has its own problems when putting into practice. It is where we need consensus to discuss how to move on in details. Social stability is the ground for the realization of an ideal. The Soviet Union is a great example of this, they do have a grand ideal in the beginning, achieve some feats, and influence many generations. But the leading class failed to reach consensus in different groups and when the ideal is forgotten or replaced by personal interests, those people start moving toward their own direction, causing the whole nation’s dissolution. Moreover, the ideal can play the bellwether’s role, finding our future path and leading us to the utopia.
Thus, the ideal and social consensus are all important parts of politics.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 892, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'forming'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'force' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: forming
...thousands of labor workers' forces to form a new country in the Soviet Union and C...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, may, moreover, so, then, thus, at least, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 29.0 14.8657303371 195% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 50.0 33.0505617978 151% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 58.6224719101 90% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2646.0 2235.4752809 118% => OK
No of words: 502.0 442.535393258 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27091633466 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7334296765 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93093627603 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 252.0 215.323595506 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501992031873 0.4932671777 102% => OK
syllable_count: 807.3 704.065955056 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 6.24550561798 256% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.2370786517 133% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.1947278902 60.3974514979 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.0 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5925925926 23.4991977007 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.40740740741 5.21951772744 65% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 20.0 10.2758426966 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.228497439136 0.243740707755 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0612537511731 0.0831039109588 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0591041934302 0.0758088955206 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12921053058 0.150359130593 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0633530177946 0.0667264976115 95% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.1392134831 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.8420337079 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 100.480337079 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.