Who is more Reliable? (Part III)

Please check "Who is more Reliable (Part I)".

Please check "Who is more Reliable (Part II)".

One of my superiors told me that he knew I always spoke the truth, but although I may be speaking the truth some superiors may not like it and advised me not to argue with the superiors. With all due respect to him, I disagree with him. Because if there is no one to point out the pros and the cons and to tell the truth, the superiors could make wrong decisions. Thus, I strongly believe that every sweet-talkers or those who echo their masters’ voices are not honest or loyal though they may seem to be positive people, when in fact, they are not. This conclusion may be a bit abstract and unacceptable to some, but this is for real.

Those traits still exist among some of our bureaucrats and I would like to suggest that it’s time to get rid of these despicable mentalities and mindsets. They should be able to identify the fakes from the genuinely positive persons so as to avoid being flattered. They need to know that those who seek for the truths instead of the flatteries are the honest ones who can be relied upon.

In conclusion, I want to analyze briefly, the word “criticism”. Most thought that criticism is finding faults and thus is a negative attitude. In fact, criticism is double-faceted; it can either be positive or negative. Pointing out the mistakes so that they’ll be able to correct in time and avoid committing them again is positive criticism, whereas blaming or condemning others whether they’re right or wrong is the negative criticism. Therefore, people holding high offices should be able to differentiate between a positive and negative criticism and, between positive and negative persons righteously.