Hey guys,
My school uses a different L.A. structure (really hate it)- Introduction, Contention, Tone, Body paragraphs, Conclusion. I wrote this under a timed-SAC condition last year (It was a 2 hour SAC), and was wondering what sort of mark would this piece get in the exam, if I were to write one in a similar style. These are only the introduction, contention and tone paragraphs, I will post my body paragraphs and the conclusion later.
The perennial refugee crisis in the Middle East, and the deficiency of financial support and political determination from Australia has precipitated an outrage in the community. Being such a controvertible topic, the debate has evoked a myriad of arguments on whether Western Nations must accept refugees from the crisis, and the responsibility for paying their debts. The issue itself originated from the rise of terror in the Middle East, and has accumulated intangible fears into the asylum seekers, who only seek a better future, and the Western Nations, who fear that acceptance of such refugees may result in a growth of terror in their peaceful societies, and generate a sense of vulnerability in their citizens.
Theo Theophanous in his opinion piece "Post has shown us the value of mercy" with a forthright tone demeans Prime Minister Tony Abbott for "refusing to expand [Australia's] refugee intake", and commiseratively argues that "Australia [should be] accepting more refugees". Furthermore, he also contends in a prudent and credible tone that Australia must be reminded of their traditions of welcoming people, as evidenced through World War 2; which is designed to contemplate Australia's enormous asylum seeker intake in the late 1940's, and demine Tony Abbott for dismissing Australian values and culture. In contradiction to Theophanous' belief that rather than degrading such asylum seekers, Australia must elicit compassion, and commiserate with the them, Byran Connor in his letter to the editor, "Beware the cost of taking large number of refugees" (The Australia 10/09/15) belligerently dismisses Theophanous by displaying the consequence of accepting large number of refugees through asserting that "people smugglers...[are] taking advantage" of Germany's "grand gesture of conspicuous compassion". Moreover, he also avers that Syrian refugees cannot be assimilated into the Australian and European culture as they do not "share a common culture and religious belief". This is likely to spawn a sense of fear into his readers, as they would infer that the two races may clash, and would aggravate their relationship though violence in the society.
Theophanous begins his articles with an exceptionally candid and assertive tone, as he postulates the fact that Prime Minister Tony Abbott is attempting to deter Syrian refugees from coming to Australia through inaugurating harsh and detrimental isolation policies, involving imprisonment of asylum seekers who arrive to Australia illegally. Consequently, he logically castigates the federal government in attempts to expound that “Australia is truly founded upon” the asylum seekers who immigrated to Australia in the past decades. This is likely to strike a chord with parents, who care about their family’s wellbeing, and understand the Syrian refugee families who only desire to arrive in Australia with hopes of getting a better life. Contrastingly, Connor with a concerned and conversational tone repudiates Theophanous’ claims by aggressively asserting that “there are arguably over a billion-people living in the poor parts of the world”, in attempts to positon his readers to believe that not every refugee can be brought to such “wealthy democracies”, as there are several social implications that are required to be discussed regarding the Syrian crisis.
Thanks
Home
Help
Search
Login
