Big Brother- Nothing is black or white
The day when the world trade center crashed, was a day which chocked us all. Suddenly the world changed. People who lived their everyday life were unexpectedly killed or in great danger, due to a huge terrorist-attack. Fear and anxiety was spread all over America and Europe. People wondered if, this could happen again. After this dreadful day in 2001, the rules for traveling have changed, along with several other safety regulations to protect democratic countries and citizens from terrorists. How far are we willing to go to protect democratic countries from terror-attacks?
Nothing is black or white. On the one hand, of course most people will do everything to protect our democracy. We value free thoughts, different opinions and general elections. But on the other hand, the question is; do we really want to be spied on to preserve our democracy. As you can see, this is a very tricky issue.
We must take care of the democracy very gentle. If there seems to be a threat to our democratic world and there is suspicion of a terrorist-crime, then I believe it is important to investigate the suspects. In that case Big brother´s eyes and ears can be very useful. But it is incredibly important to not abuse one´s power. For that reason it is a very thin line of when to use Big brother’s eyes and ears. It is extremely essential that there are special rules for this issue and people with good judgment who control this matter.
I can see parallels between preserve democracy at any price and USA´s weapon-politic. In USA almost every man and women have the right to own weapon for protection. USA also has very high number of death-shoots, due to their weapon-politic. It is important to remember that the subject sometimes can counteract itself.
To summarize my thoughts, I say that we must treat and protect our democracy very gentle. We must also keep in our heads that the subject can counteract itself. Nothing is black or white. There is always another point of view…
Prenumerera på:
Kommentarer till inlägget (Atom)
Hello Camilla!
SvaraRaderaIt was interesting to read your blog and see that you also had 9/11 as one of the big turning-points in the democratic world.
I think it is ood that you have written from to different perspectives,and give thoughts from both sides. Is is as you say, not black and white.
Your introduction to the subject is good I think, and you lead the reaaders in to your subjct and we understand what your text will be about. Good!!!
You use a simple language which I prefer, I do not like when I have to have a dictionary beside me when I read a text because there are words I do not know, so I like it this way :)easy language, but important message.
Well written Camilla,
Keep up the good work.
Best wishes
Ullis
Hello Camilla
SvaraRadera9/11, when I started to read your blog and that was the first topic I was a little surprised. Has this somwthing to do with "Big brother is watching you", but of course it has. Your angle to this topic was just brilliant!
Your paragraphs was good, not to long, not to short, just enaugh to keep the reader interested and courius to read further.
The way you write is very good, not in a complicated way, just easy but very interesting. The spelling and grammar seems fine to me.
Keep up the good blog-writing!
Best,
Petra
Hello Camilla!
SvaraRaderaI think your are quite right when you say that there are many different aspects of this issue. As you say “nothing is black or white”.
You ended your introduction with a question and afterwards in the following paragraphs you discussed the question from different views. You did that very well, I think. The conclusion was also good and you started it with “To summarize my thoughts……” You used a varied language in the blog and everything was absolutely clear.
I must say that I´m impressed of all the good blogs I have read so far, don´t you agree!
Wish you good luck with your 6th and last blog.
Best wishes
Birgitta
Dear Camilla,
SvaraRaderaThank you for your thoughts on the topic of democracy. You do make some interesting points in your text!
As to the structure of your text, you give an example of how terrorism changed our need to protect democratic societies, which is a good way to start, and then you end the introduction by writing a question, which indicates that yu chose to make this a causal analysis. The question you formulated is, however, not entirely suitable. And it would have been better if you had said something like “Why do we have to allow some restrictions in our freedom in order to protect...?”. Then you could have dealt with the things you find are justified, one in each paragraph (e.g. surveillance of suspected terrorists, as in paragraph 3, and the gun-laws in the US (although there your point of view seems to make it a counter-argument, so you should have picked something else!). Alternatively, you could have chosen the structure of an argumentative text, and used a thesis statement such as “In order to protect our democracy, there are some sacrifices that have to be made” and then list your arguments, one in each paragraph. As to your second paragraph, it doesn’t serve the function of a paragraph in the body of the text, which is supposed to give a reason/argument for the question you pose/the thesis statement. It could possibly have been used in part in your concluding paragraph, where you do exactly what you are supposed to do – summarise you main points and make a final remark. You make use of topic sentences, which is good, and you make use of transitional devices within your paragraphs. See if you can also make better use of them in order to link the paragraphs.
When it comes to language, there are a few things I’d like to point out. In “We must take care of the democracy very gentle” “democracy” is used in the generic sense (unless you talk about a specific country which you refer to as “the democracy”) and should therefore carry no definite article. Also, since “gentle” modifies “take care of”, which is a verb, it has to be an adverb: “gently”. However, the sentence is still awkward, and I think what you want to say is something like “We must be very careful in order to protect democracy”. As to word order, adverbials are to be placed before the to-infinitive (§307C), which should have been the case in “to not abuse”. Also, check when to use “it” and ”there” as formal subjects (§194) (comp. “it is a very thin line”). However, the way you say ”it is a very thin line of when to use Big brother’s eyes and ears” is awkward, since you normally talk about thin lines BETWEEN two things. In “between preserve democracy” I take it you mean ”preserving” or the alike. Also, “politic” in an adjective. The noun would be “politics”. When you say “keep in our heads” I take it you mean “keep in mind”.
Keep it up!
Best,
Marika
Hello, Marika!
SvaraRaderaI didn´t realize we had to write an argumentative text or a casual analysis this time. I just wrote from my heart, as you usually do in a blog.
I will look when to use adverbs, adjectives, there and it.
Best regards, Camilla