Can someone review my GRE issue essay--topic: politics

[Ashley Chun]

 

Topic: "It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public."

 

Any legal and democratic government is empowered by its people to execute policies, which are expected to ultimately protect the overall interest. In the process of reaching the goal, it is often necessary for politicians to keep silent from the public for various reasons. However, it can by no means indicate that these empowered executers are desired to withhold information, because they would otherwise violate people’s right of knowing.

 

      It is unavoidable that people hold different attitudes while there is an important policy to be executed. And it is quite difficult to reach the expectation of everyone. One government often has to make quick response and determination to a great load of issues at stake, and if the release of information to public will arouse endless debates, work efficiency will be seriously deducted. Given as an example, in the case of arresting terrorists in Paris attack, the public was definitely not aware of the accurate location of the criminals before the police contained them. Was it wrong for the political leaders like the president not inform the whole France about it? I am afraid no. Because the release of such confidential news will probably aid the criminals to escape, therefore put the public in danger. In cases like this, politicians have no choice but to shun from speaking out the truth.

 

      At this point, some may argue that such a behavior of politicians would violate people’s right to know, which is a fundamental issue in a democratic country. As we all know that the elected government has the responsibility to protect our rights, security and interests, and our access to information about things happen around us is to ensure the government is doing so. And once there are political leaders elected, it can be interpreted that they have our consent to do what they judge as proper thing for the overall benefit. However, if we ask for information so detailed at any time, it may impede the right action being practiced. Therefore, we may lend more trust to the political leaders and allow them to be silent sometimes.

 

      Although it is very understandable the politicians often shall hold information from the public, it does not identify such a choice as desirable. If it is desirable, then it should be repeated, expanded and applied in every occasion. While a bill is to be examined and decided by the public, politicians shall overboard excuse themselves from not letting us know. And once there is corruption or power abuse, the public can be given a runaround and refused to supervise these politicians. Thus, the supervision to government as well as our other legitimate rights are automatically removed.

 

      Moreover, if the political leaders are all desired to withhold information, there probably will not have any political leaders anymore; the anarchists will rise, because no citizens want to be shut eyed completely. Thus the country will go collapse and no one is under no one’s leadership, and finally, there will be no political leaders to talk about.

 

      As rational persons, caring about the overall interest of the nation, we often understand that our rights should not be calculated by details. As intellectual members of the society, we distinguish the difference between what politicians have to do and are desired to do. In this case, political leaders should try their utmost to improve the transparency of information while reaching their political goals.

 

 

Edited November 20, 2015 by Ashley Chun