本篇文章是有關國家、社會政治問題的。談起政治，有些同學可能會很頭痛，因為在政治方面有很多專用的名詞。如果不能夠正確使用一些詞語或者固定說法以及一些聯盟的簡稱，那么寫出來的文章讓閱卷人考到后就會覺得貽笑大方。本文為考生分析了常考政治題目的出題方向，并羅列出來文章大綱，希望考生能夠認真閱讀，牢記自己不會使用的政治專用名詞。

GRE330高分學霸分享復習經驗

一、國家政治：

The surest indicator of a great nation is represented not by the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists, but by the general welfare of its people.

一個國家的偉大體現在國民的安樂上，而不是體現在統治者、藝術家或科學家的成就上。

GRE寫作如何讓舉例論證更有說服力?名師指點寫作論據素材分類和正確用法

1. It is true that the general welfare of its all people is a reliable indicator of a great nation. The welfare of the people, including the living condition, social security system and charity of developed country is often far better than those of developing countries.

2. On the other hand, however, the achievements of its rulers, artists and scientists are of equal important, which by their way bring the aim of welfare of its people into fruition.

1) As what is mentioned above, when we speak of “promoting the general welfare”, we refer to the following index: public health and safety, security against invasion, individual liberty and freedom as well as a high standard of living, while all of these are brought about by its rulers, artists and scientist.

2) Scientific and technological achievements serve in the first place to enhance a nation’s general welfare. (Advance in medical treatment, transportation, communication, etc.)

3) Artistic achievements could not be neglected, though. They help to make a nation a better place to reside. (Provide inspiration, life people’s spirit and bring about creativity and imagination, all of which spur us to make more accomplishments.)

4) Yet the achievements of artists and scientist, while integral, are insufficient. The military and diplomatic accomplishment of its leaders could neither be ignored in the general welfare of a nation. (The War of Independence)

二、社會政治：

Claim: In any field—business, politics, education, government those in power should step down after five years.

Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership.

結論：如商業、政治、教育、政府，在任何領域中的掌權者應該在五年后就讓位 在任何領域中的掌權者應該在五年后就讓位。

原因：對于任何機構，最可靠的成功途徑是通過新領導階層帶來革新 最可靠的成功途徑是通過新領導階層帶來革新。

In this statement, the arguer actually has a dual claim. First, no matter in which profession, those in power should step down after five years. Second, revitalization through new leadership is the surest way to success for any enterprise. As far as I am concerned, I concede that limiting the term of office/tenure is an effective way to prevent corruption and the lack of initiatives, however, I disagree with both the two claims.

1. To begin with, in many areas, especially in politics and government, it might be better that those who in power don’t hold the same position all the time and should step down regularly.

1) It is known that absolute power will lead to absolute corruption.

2) And leaders tend to abuse their power when they have no fear of losing their power. In order to avoid corruption, autarchy, those in power should step down regularly.

3) In addition, such system might activate young man to work hard since they see the choice and hope to be a leader. And a new leadership usually has greater initiative motivation and would bring about new ideas. And this new emerged leaders bring new ways of leading and managing, and they are more likely to keep pace with the changing times as well.

2. On the other hand, frequently changing the leader also brings out some problems.

1) The leader tends to only focus on his achievement in his time in the position but regardless the subsequent leader.

2) Besides, not all those in power of all professions should step down after five years. Those in power usually have abundant experience.

3) Furthermore, new leadership cannot ensure to be the surest path to success for any enterprise. New leaders often lack the necessary skill and experience to cope with exigent problems; therefore, they need a period of time for adaptation.

三、科學與政府：

Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.

政府應該盡量不去限制科學研究和發展。

1. Generally speaking, government should place few restrictions on scientific research and development.

1) Little relative knowledge.

2) Would be inclined to be in support what they regard worthwhile and would benefit the people immediately.

2. Free research can increase invention and progress easily, thus too much restrictions might encumber the development of science.

1) We can see lots of examples in the history which can show that too much restriction would be detrimental to the development of scientific research.

2) A telling example of the inherent danger of official restriction of the scientific research involves the attempts of Soviet during 1920s’ to not only control the directions and goals of researches but the outcome and results of the research as well—for the purpose of the general welfare of the people. Some scientists even disappeared later because of their threats to the safety and stability of the nation. Not surprisingly, during this period of time, no significant discovery or invention occurred.

3. However, providing absolute freedom might cause other problems of equal graveness.

1) Some immoral researches or ones are in threats of the peace, safety and stability of the society.

2) Scientific research and development is a double-edged sword that can be used equally for good or evil. If not properly controlled, it will bring disasters to us. Such as human Cloning, biochemistry weapon, the nuclear bomb.

Conclusion:

The restrictions placed by government on scientific research should be judged according to the different nature of various research projects.

以上就是本文為大家分析的政治出題方向，考生們在閱讀之后還要自己動腦思考為什么要這么分析，這么分析的合理性在哪里?多進行幾次這樣的思考，寫作一定能夠突飛猛進的。

（內容摘選整理自網絡，供GRE考生交流學習，如有疑問請聯系GRE作文欄目）

更多 GRE作文、GRE寫作模板，請繼續關注 英語作文大全