Hi, please kindly help improve my writing and list possible pointers.
Thanks.

"People who are the most deeply committed to an idea or policy are also the most critical of it."

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

It is clearly reasonable to state that one considers his/her truly believed ideas and policies from critical angles. However, the statement unnecessarily enlarges the assertion to an extreme by denying that no one does not carp at his/her allegiance. From my perspective, cautiously do I believe that people are always fastidious to ideas or policies that take roots into their minds.

Unquestioningly, psychologically tending to focus more on one entrenched idea, one is prone to be sensitive to its flawlessness. For instance, if one is fostered under the idea of American dream, (a notion that one will finally earn what he/she desires if he/she spares no efforts to chase dreams) works hard every day, and finally finds a great number of people get promotion by briberies, one will no doubt be dismayed by the indecent behavior that substantially casts doubt on his/her belief for a long time.

Furthermore, loyal as they seem to be to their motherland, people would fight with great zeal if they found the policy-one that governs them-flawed or harmful. For instance, American policy guarantees that every American can legally hold private guns, leaving possibilities that innocent people might be shot to death by bullets that might come from a private owner. Although American people set vehement protest against legal gunship policy, government does not make any solid progress in reverting the situation under the solicitation of those who carp the most of their committed policy.

However, even so there are negative cases that contradict the issue. Due to categorical compliance and absolute faith in Fascism, Germans, who never critically contemplated on Hitler’s policy, waged war against the world and left an irrevocable scar to those whose loved ones succumbed in battle. Likewise, Japanese, who never suspected the will of Japan emperor, brought disasters to the Pacific Rim countries. Therefore, commitment is not always mingled with cavil. On equilibrium, though suffering a few drawbacks, the statement has its sapient merits in that it take into consideration other essential elements and accord with common sense.

In sum, the issue is so sophisticated that only by both excluding sweeping generalization and rendering comprehensive consideration can one safely reach the conclusion that people are not always reflect on the idea or policy they deeply committed to.