Talk:Security – global safety or collective danger?: Difference between revisions

   

Before I get to the content of the work, I would like to comment on your writing style first. Unfortunately, your main weakness seems to be your English in connection with inattention. By inattention I mean spelling mistakes and missing letters at the end of words. If I start reading your essay and find two mistakes in the first two sentences („quiet“ and „of“ replaced by „if“), it does not make your writing very attractive. It is nothing that cannot be eliminated, but it makes a bad impression and disturbs the reader. When talking about your English, I mean some stylistic mistakes and some bad habits of yours. The most frequent one is that you constantly replace relative pronouns by „what“. You can use e.g. „that“ or „which“. You can easily avoid this, just check your text more carefully or have it checked.

Considering the content, the topic is very current and well chosen. The international as well as domestic security has developed into a serious problem. It is not only about the security at the airports and high-risk spots but also many other places where protecting people becomes rather invasion of privacy. The CCTV cameras you have mentioned appear to be the most significant example. I was shocked and a bit scared, when I came to the police station in the small town I live in (just about 10 000 inhabitants) and saw over thirty screens showing various spots from all over the town. I had no idea that we are being watched so much! All in all, the topic has to be considered completely suitable. If I get over some fluency deficiencies I have already mentioned, your thoughts are quite clearly expressed and I have understood everything although not after the first reading.

The thing that would deserve to change is the organization of the essay. The title of  your work is „Security – global safety or collective danger?“. But there is not a single word about it in the introduction, you just talk about globalisation in general. The first part should definitely introduce the problem, so it is advisable to shift some information about security from the body to the introduction. Slightly more information about security and less about globalisation might help. Also the conclusion should be changed. It is unnecessarily long and some parts are not very conclusive. The example considering CCTV cameras may be accounted one of the most interesting moments in the paper, but does not fit in the conclusion at all. Examples should be given in the body, at the end you bring it to a close. Dividing the text into more pieces with subheadings is a really good idea, it helps readers to orientate.  

Another random remarks:  

I could not find where you used a quotation from Jana Hybaskova.

I really like the paragraph called „The necessity of solutions on the state and international level“ and the citation from Reinicke. Also your comments on the camera systems are absolutely true.