Is compromise always the best way to resolve a conflict? Plan and write an essay in which you develop your point of view on this issue. Support your position with reasoning and examples taken from your reading, studies, experience, or observations.
Throughout history, wars have been waged continuously. Differences among populations remains to be the prevalent cause, but human nature has evolve to become more peaceful and settle for compromise. This strategy has failed time and again; compromise is not the best way to solve a conflict as seen through the atomic bombings in World War II, and the French Revolution.
World War II ushered in a new age of destruction. The definition of war was expanded as advanced weaponry was being developed worldwide leading to an omnipresent feeling of death. Japan and Germany were relentlessly fighting the Allied powers, but the scaled was tipping towards the Allies. The US developed the atomic bomb, a lethal weapon of mass destruction. Eventually defeat seemed inevitable for Japan, but it refused to compromise despite the US's best efforts, Harry Truman, the president of the US at the time, was forced to use lethal power. He dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing millions. This ended WWII and lead to Japan's unconditional surrender, something that compromise failed to do.
In 1789, France went through as much turmoil as WWII itself. Economic losses of the 1780s were hitting the peasant population of France pretty hard. Food was becoming scarce and patience was running out. King Louis Phillip XVI did not act upon the omnipresent crisis. The peasant population then stormed the Bastille, trying to setup a compromise with the king for bread. The compromise failed miserably, and turmoil erupted across the country. The government was overthrown, the King beheaded, and the country was plunged into a ten-year revolution. Eventually, peace was restored when Napoleon took power proving the ineptitude of the initial attempts at compromise.
Wars will continue to be waged in the future, and increasingly more compromises will me bade to prevent that. Though they allow for peace, human nature has not evolved enough to be able to readily accept defeat through compromise.
Compromise is an assertive — rather than aggressive option. Assertiveness requires concern about others, while aggression does not. Assertiveness requires some cooperation between the parties involved. Although compromise is the best option, it is not always successful. That is when wars begin — at the national or personal level. Contrary to popular opinion, nobody wins a war — one side just loses less.
Compromise is not a "defeat." That is an attitude that leads to wars.
http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/assertive.htm
http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/assertive2.htm
I have seen some typos in your paper. You can proofread your paper yourself. After writing your material, put it aside for a day — at least several hours. (This breaks mental sets you might have that keep you from noticing problems.) Then read it aloud as if you were reading someone else's work. (Reading aloud slows down your reading, so you are less likely to skip over problems.)
If your reading goes smoothly, that is fine. However, wherever you "stumble" in your reading, other persons are likely to have a problem in reading your material. Those "stumbles" indicate areas that need revising.
Once you have made your revisions, repeat the process above. Good papers often require many drafts.
I hope this helps. Thanks for asking.
Sat Scoring: Marked as a first draft. Organization, good. Thesis, good, supporing paragraphs good- .
The last statement defeat through compromise hurt the essay, it is obvious you are not married yet. You will learn another meaning of compromise. And I hope that prepares you for your teen children.
Score: 5
Thank you everyone.
As for typos, the spelling errors are non-existent on the actual essay. The grammar errors are existent in both.
I'm thankful that I'm not married yet. Teen children...that seems daunting.
What could I have done to make this a 6?
Look closely at the rubric for a 6. Did you do all of that?
Sra
P.S. Once again, here are the requirements for a 6:
6
Position effectively and insightfully developed through outstanding critical thinking skill; examples, reasons and evidence are clearly appropriate
Well organized and clearly focused; clearly coherent and ideas flow seamlessly
Displays skillful use of language; vocabulary is accurate and varied; words are appropriately and skillfully chosen
Good sentence structure; demonstrates meaningful and skilled variety of sentence structure
Free of most mistakes in grammar, word usage and mechanics
Sra
clqx yecgql rjidknxgc rpsbl xtfwyjbmq tuldiaqgf tauli
To argue whether compromise is always the best way to resolve a conflict, it is important to consider historical events and examples. By examining the atomic bombings in World War II and the French Revolution, one can see that compromise is not always effective in achieving peace.
During World War II, the United States faced a challenge with Japan's refusal to surrender. Despite the US's attempts to negotiate a compromise, Japan remained stubbornly resolved to continue fighting. In a desperate attempt to end the war and save lives, President Harry Truman made the decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The devastating effects of the bombings led to Japan's unconditional surrender. This demonstrates that compromise was not the best solution in this situation. Resorting to extreme measures was necessary to achieve a resolution.
Similarly, the French Revolution provides another example of how compromise can fail to resolve conflict. With social, economic, and political tensions rising, the French population, especially the lower classes, sought a compromise with King Louis XVI in order to improve their lives. However, the king's refusal to heed their demands and negotiate a compromise further escalated the situation. This led to a widespread revolution, resulting in the overthrow of the monarchy and a decade of turmoil. Only when Napoleon Bonaparte seized power was peace eventually restored, showing that initial attempts at compromise failed to bring about a resolution.
These examples highlight the limitations of compromise in certain contexts. While compromise can be an effective means of achieving peace, it is often hindered by human nature and the unwillingness of parties to accept defeat. In cases where one party is unwilling to compromise, extreme measures may be necessary to bring about a resolution.
In conclusion, compromise is not always the best way to resolve a conflict. Historical events such as the atomic bombings in World War II and the French Revolution highlight how compromise can fail when parties are unwilling to accept defeat. While compromise should always be pursued as an initially peaceful resolution, it may ultimately be necessary to consider alternative measures to achieve a final settlement. Therefore, the best approach to conflict resolution may vary depending on the circumstances and the parties involved.