Without New ideas, any society will stagnate. New Ideas can only be in

Political organizations that advocate the use of violence to achieve its goals can sometimes lead to destruction and devastation. However, that claim that such groups are detrimental to society does not follow the same line of reasoning. These groups might be of great help to certain sections of society. Also the claim that short term solutions can only lead to more serious long term problems is stated without any evidence. Hence the above argument is flawed.

Firstly, political organizations might be of great help to certain sections of society. Take for example the Indian National Congress party that helped tons of Indian’s voice their views to the British government during the British rule in india. Although this political organization advocated the use of violence, the organization was critical to India becoming a free of British rule in 1947.

Secondly, the argument assumes that short term solutions lead to more serious long term problems. Short term solutions are often very important in achieving long term goals, irrespective of whether the organizations advocate violence or not.
The argument must also state clearly what constitutes violence. In a free country, such as the United States, to prohibit any political organization is to put a hold on their freedom. As long as the violence or aggressive behavior is not illegal, one can not prohibit a political organization from operating.

Thus although the argument seems to convey a valid point, that political organizations that advocate the use of violence should be prohibited from operating, it is worded to strongly and lacks evidence to support its claims that these groups are detrimental to society.

RECAP: The major difference between these two essays is length. More is not always better, but a student who can write 5-6 paragraphs within the given time frame definitely will stand out as a better planner, and as someone who already had a workable template. Furthermore, some minor grammar and spelling mistakes interfere with the essay’s clarity. The thesis, “Hence the above argument is flawed, “ is not as strongly worded as it could be, and doesn’t stand on its own as a powerful statement. The conclusion also seems to weaken the essay by admitting the argument conveys “a valid point.” This concession, without being more specific, weakens the overall thesis. The takeaway: length, specificity, and strength of argument will take this “4” to a “6.”