Some think that politicians should always be honest while others feel that there are times when they must lie. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion

To begin

, most people think that leaders always should be honest, on the other of the argument lies the opposing viewpoint, which is that other public believes there are intervals times force the responsible to lie,

Thus

, in

this

essay, the benefits and drawbacks of both mentioned view are comprehensively investigated. on the one hand , human nature refuses any bad ethics and considers accuracy as a personal ethical,

thus

accuracy humans respect and encourage each other and do not expect any other action,

hence

, earning the respect of the crowd harder for the leader to commute between work and the required ethics. Because politicians represent the government to the community.

on the other hand

, as it is known , handling every situation requires different ways,

Moreover

, there is no specific path for officials to follow.

thus

that attempts to keep community safety by trying to prevent the scaring of the public and to provide emotional backing.

for instance

, if there is an expected coming war,

then

, the politicians have two options which are either truth or lie, seemingly safety or panic. Notwithstanding , there are drawbacks

as well as

loss of confidence

due to

the community refusing to believe again.

To conclude

, after analysing both sides of the argument, I strongly believe that the fact is superior to the opposite, which is

in contrast

to lying. If one cannot tell the facts just remain silent or try to balance between facts and lies so no loss of either ethics or respect for the dwellers.