While adopting desperate measures can be justified in extreme situations to ensure public safety and stability, it risks undermining democratic principles, human rights, and long-term societal trust. Ethics can be the guiding light.
I. Introduction
- Hook: The end justifies the means. In times of crisis, government actions be justified.
- Background: Overview of government responses to emergencies.
- Thesis Statement: Desperate measures can be justified in extreme situations but risk undermining democratic principles, human rights, and long-term trust.
II. Supporting View 1: Ensuring Public Safety
- Topic Sentence: Adopting desperate measures at times is justified to ensure public safety in extreme crises.
- Example 1: New Zealand’s strict COVID-19 lockdown (2020-2021). Strict lockdown measures curbed virus spread effectively (source: BBC, 2020).
- Example 2: Australia’s bushfire emergency response (2019-2020). Government enforced evacuations and firebreaks to protect lives (source: The Guardian, 2020). https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jan/06/australian-bushfires-what-did-the-government-do
- Example 3: Italy’s stringent earthquake measures (2016-2021).
- Analysis: In extreme situations, urgent measures are necessary to protect public safety.
III. Supporting View 2: Stabilising the Economy
- Topic Sentence: Adopting desperate measures can be justified to stabilise the economy during severe downturns.
- Example 1: Greece’s austerity measures (2015-2020) during the debt crisis. Drastic spending cuts and tax hikes aimed at economic recovery (source: Euronews, 2019). https://www.euronews.com/2019/08/20/greek-austerity-measures-2019
- Example 2: India’s demonetisation policy (2016). Sudden currency ban aimed at combating black money and corruption (source: Al Jazeera, 2021). https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/1/27/indias-demonetisation-five-years-on
- Example 3: Argentina’s currency controls (2019-2021) to stabilise the peso. Government imposed currency restrictions to curb inflation and capital flight (source: BBC, 2019). https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-49548592
- Analysis: Extreme economic measures can be crucial for preventing economic collapse.
IV. Supporting View 3: Addressing National Security Threats
- Topic Sentence: Adopting desperate measures can be justified in addressing national security threats.
- Example 1: France’s state of emergency after Paris attacks (2015-2017). Government imposed curfews and increased surveillance (source: France24, 2017). https://www.france24.com/en/20171101-france-lifts-state-emergency-replaced-anti-terror-law
- Example 2: Philippines’ martial law in Mindanao (2017-2019). Declared to combat terrorism and insurgency (source: Reuters, 2019). https://www.reuters.com/article/us-philippines-martiallaw-idUSKCN1U30BY
- Example 3: UK’s anti-terrorism measures post-2017 Manchester bombing. Increased security and surveillance to prevent further attacks (source: The Telegraph, 2018). https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/22/manchester-attack-terrorist-threat/
- Analysis: Extreme measures are sometimes necessary to address immediate national security threats.
V. Opposing View 1: Undermining Democratic Principles
- Topic Sentence: Desperate measures can undermine democratic principles and processes.
- Example 1: Hungary’s emergency powers law (2020-2021) during COVID-19. Government granted itself sweeping powers, raising concerns of authoritarianism (source: DW, 2020). https://www.dw.com/en/hungary-passes-controversial-coronavirus-law/a-52982458
- Example 2: Poland’s judicial reforms (2017-2021) challenged by the EU. Reforms seen as undermining judicial independence (source: Euronews, 2020). https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/15/poland-s-ruling-party-defends-judicial-reforms-against-eu-scrutiny
- Example 3: Turkey’s post-coup emergency rule (2016-2018).Widespread purges and restrictions on freedoms (source: The Independent, 2018). https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/turkey-lifts-state-of-emergency-two-years-coup-attempt-erdogan-a8451511.html
- Analysis: Excessive emergency measures risk eroding democratic institutions and checks and balances.
VI. Opposing View 2: Violating Human Rights
- Topic Sentence: Desperate measures can lead to human rights violations.
- Example 1: Myanmar’s military crackdown (2021). Military imposed curfews and detained protestors, violating human rights (source: Al Jazeera, 2021). https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/3/4/myanmar-coup-crackdown-deaths-detention-timeline
- Example 2: China’s Xinjiang policies (2017-2021) against Uighurs.Mass detentions and surveillance condemned internationally (source: The Guardian, 2019). https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/24/leak-reveals-china-s-detention-camps-xinjiang-uighur
- Example 3: Venezuela’s suppression of dissent (2016-2021).Government’s harsh measures against protestors and opposition (source: Human Rights Watch, 2021). https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2021/country-chapters/venezuela
- Analysis: Extreme measures often result in significant human rights abuses.
VII. Opposing View 3: Eroding Public Trust
- Topic Sentence: Desperate measures can erode public trust in government.
- Example 1: Spain’s handling of Catalonia independence movement (2017-2021). Harsh measures against activists led to widespread distrust (source: El País, 2019). https://english.elpais.com/elpais/2019/10/14/inenglish/1571053213_769769.html
- Example 2: Brazil’s COVID-19 response (2020-2021) and public scepticism. Conflicting policies and misinformation eroded trust (source: The Lancet, 2020). https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32073-7/fulltext
- Example 3: South Africa’s corruption scandals during lockdown (2020-2021).Corruption in emergency procurement diminished public trust (source: News24, 2021). https://www.news24.com/news24/southafrica/news/covid-19-corruption-in-south-africa-how-do-we-root-out-this-scourge-20210811
- Analysis: When governments take extreme actions, it can damage public trust and legitimacy.
VIII. Conclusion
- Restate Thesis: Desperate measures can be justified in extreme situations to ensure public safety and stability, but they risk undermining democratic principles, human rights, and long-term societal trust.
- Summary of Key Points: Public safety, economic stability, national security versus democratic principles, human rights, public trust.
- Final Thought: Balancing immediate needs with long-term values is crucial for justifying extreme measures.