In this essay, I intend to put forth the topic that the pile of the English-speaking Commonwealth should unite in order to best represent their collective interests on the world stage. Basically, I palpate that our countries agree a lot in common - ground on the English language and traditions of fair-play, freedom, parliament, law and so forth. We basically have a British culture, which is under threat by regional integration driven by the pressures of trade. Free trade as created by Britain (a kind of anglobalisation) is one thing; changing/abandoning our culture, or being governed by Brussels or Washington is another. We were formerly a superpower, and if we serveed together, we could be again. At the very least, we would be able to stand up to fight for our own interests and preserve our mode of life. In this way we would be able to negotiate from a position of strength rather than be dragged into agreements we do not want. Consider Australia with its primingably strong western-based parsimony compared to its neighbours, but with a mere population of less than 20 million people. Canada has yet slightly more than 10% the population of the USA whereas the UK has the equivalent population as France, but much less than France and Germ whatever(prenominal) combined. By joining forces, we would have a population and economy large than that of France, Germany and Spain put together, bigger in economic cost than the alone of ASEAN, and over 1/3 the size of the USA. As for the monarchy, I would like to cipher that the shared Head of State, which currently exists amongst us, would make confederacy easier in the event the people of the proposed federation members came to desire it.
Writing this essay as a Canadian by birth, I believe...
I m a PHD student who studies Economy virtually the world. There is no agitate for me to deduct any point from u. I just want to teach you that Canadas economy report is not that simple, the Americans did so much to help Canada and Australia in the past. However, you didnt do much research, since there is no references at all in your essay that supports your own thought. Do you agree?? Im not against you or anything here.. plz read throught this book - Canada and the First World War, modify by David MacKenzie ... indeed ull know what i am move to tell you and u might THINK what u sincerely wrote is right or wrong
The structure of the essay should be Intro, parapgraph, be, utmost paragraph. This newspaper publisher does not have a intro or a conclusion. The intro should talk briefly ab step forward what the paper will have in it, with a thesis didactics that sums up the question that your paper will address and your answer. The body should have all of your arguments. The conclusion you should re-state your thesis and briefly go over the arguments, no new information should be added.
This is besides your own thought, u know nothing about the world...without America, Canadas economy will go dead...and same with Australia. however Australia is much break up than Canada now.
Youre right- we should have a new British Empire. Im sure the British would love to escape the EU and join a stronger alliance on their own terms with people they know and depend family.
In no way was there an indication that this essay was to be formally written. With that in mind, we must examine the nature of the essay, its character and how effectively and efficiently the author has revealed his or her purpose. The target audition is NOT in academia - if the target audience were professors (or any grader for that matter), I am sure the author would have do appropriate attributions to text, references and regurgitated facts (as you will find most research written document are all about). However, there is no indication that there was such an assignment. Therefore, the reader must assume that Kier has written this peice out of recreation - or any other reason BUT to be graded and scrutinized under an academics eye.
First of all, sound judgment by the way Kier writes, I would have to say he or she is a competent writer. He or she demonstrates a varied vocabulary, a strong rhetorical strategy, a smashing eye for detail and insight, a complex and mature syntactical regime and effective, lucid transitions.
Bearing this in mind, I highly doubt Kier would have forgotten the basic elements of compisition - abandoning all of those cogent, young arguments that make a paper sound and a pleasure to read - to turn in an ill-formatted abortion you, dear Zethro, pass to be good writing. I agree that academic, formal document should have an introduction with a thesis, body paragraphs with support to any claim made in the thesis, and a conclusion that specifically unifies all concepts discussed in the paper to an over-all universal concept - an idea that can and should inspire a great deal of thought. To remark Kier for not adhering to the basic, formulaic forms of writing is to put writers like Kier, who have honed their skills over time to produce excellent-quality work without being judged by a discerning eye, in jeopardy in terms of what is acceptable writing. Kiers writing is superior, and thus, does not necessarily need to get to such banal, mechanical dribble most freshmen college essayists are TAUGHT to write. I am sure if Kier needed to write this essay for a professor, he or she would not set forth the essay with In this essay, I intend .... It would put his or her paper at jeopardy when being measured and compared against other competent writers. Zethro, if you unfeignedly paid attention to the authors ability to write, do you truly think the author would throw the basic elements of rhetorical composition out of the window? Please think about it
I agree this is pie in the sky and sans references. The purpose isnt to present an analysis of a critical subject field of study, but a personal idea in a limited amount of words; to get the idea crossways more than to persuade either way. But you are right. When you start claiming however that Australia is of more worth than Canada depte the latters greater size, economy, membership of the G8 and population, then I would respond by questioning your argument. As it is, I give you a merit for your comment.
Its bloody immature to avenge those you dont agree with by resorting to ad hominems. Why did you deduct a point from ME, raddie?
He took a point from me too for agreeing with you, Keir! Has he got something against you and everyone who supports your work?
If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment