Difficult path to democracy & change or stability under dictatorship with limite
Even the Facebook activists who organized the first day of protests in Cairo’s Tahrir Square didn’t expect more than a few thousand people to show up. Since then, the protests have spread to Yemen, Libya, Bahrain, Iraq, Algeria, Morocco, Jordan, and, most recently, Oman, and they are still confounding the paradigms and the pundits. Gun shots, tear gas and ambulance sirens follow the protests. At the heart of the complaints among the protesters—more than poverty and unemployment and low wages—is the sense that the pervasive corruption of wasta, or connections, must end. People are asking for better governance and accountability. Each Arab nation has its own permutations of a balance of power among tribe, sect, mosque, and military.
So is it better to fight for freedom adn sacrifice lives, or live in peace under a dictator?
For change and freedom!
Side Score: 3
|
 |
For current stability!
Side Score: 2
|
|
|
|
|
This is very debatable topic in our days. Yes I can agree that it is very good to fight for bright future of our generations. People have the right to express their disagreement, and if government refuses to listen to them then people can not do anything else that fighting for their freedom. Someone have to start it, someone have to call people for action... Side: For change and freedom!
|
I believe that having stable life will help countries to live without wars. Some people may argue that it is dictatorship and violation of humans rights, however if we take China in to consideration we can observe that it is economically worth it. So here all countries should decide whether they want to have good economic government or whether they should stick to humans rights. Also the revolution may not be the best choice for some countries because the result of the revolution may arise war. But still being able to live in stable government gives people more chances to live without war. Side: For current stability!
|
