netivist

Netivist empowers people by providing a platform where they can vote, express their views and organise collective action.  Netivist is completely advertisement free. We won't share your email address with anyone else and we will not use your information to...

[netivist]

Renewable energy pros and cons. Do renewable create jobs?

Renewable energy pros and cons

On netivist we discuss if green energy overall contribute to create jobs or mainly destroys them. Global energy transition. We discuss the benefits and disadvantages of hydropower, solar and wind energy.

Renewable energy is that it improves the air quality, avoids hazardous climate change, and provided services to 1.3 million people who lack the access to fossil fuel facilities.

The world is in the middle a global energy transition with several economic and environmental implications. The 2017 Global Status Report, by the Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century found that newly installed green energy capacity set a historical records in 2016 with an increase of 9% in one year. Thousands of jobs were created in the renewable energy sector.

However, despite this progress, many argue that this global energy transition is not happening fast enough. Why are we still relying so much on fossil and nuclear energy? A better understanding the economics of renewable energy may help answer this question.

Renewable energy presents many advantages. According to the International Renewable Energy Agency, by 2030 the sector will provide 16 million jobs. But green energy is also expensive to generate and is provoking the closure of traditional power plants and coal mines. Although green energies are becoming increasingly easy to produce, their efficiency is still questioned.

Do renewable energies overall create jobs? 

[netivist]

Happy pride month!

On netivist we are fully supportive of the LGBT movement and hope that the discrimination linked to the "traditional" gender and sex classifications is gradually being overcome. People should be free to live openly and plentifully their sexual and gender identity.

Happy LGBT pride!

We have many reasons for optimism, but the problem is not resolved. The fight against homophobia, lesbophobia, transphobia, AIDS stigma, anti-intersex, genderism and several other prejudices is not over. LGBT+ people still suffer violence and their dignity, equality of rights and self-affirmation is often challenged. Together we can keep on changing the world and improving our societies to make them more open and tolerant.

[netivist]

Best science fiction shows in TV history. Top 10

Top 10 science fiction TV shows

Science fiction, a.k.a. sci-fi, is a literary genre which spread to the cinema, TV, comic-books and gaming during the twentieth century. During the twenty-first century science fiction has become even more popular and mainstream. On netivist we have shortlisted the top 10 science fiction sagas in the history of TV. You can vote in our poll and tell us which are your favorite shows.

The Twilight Zone: The original series was shot in black and with (1959-1964) shocked the world with thrilling and pessimistic stand-alone episodes covering a variety of genres, including suspense, horror, thriller and science fiction. Two revivals followed, from 1985 to 1989 and 2002 to 2003.

Doctor Who: The show tells the adventures of "The Doctor" an extraterrestrial being who uses a space ship, disguised in a British police box, to travel through the space and time and save multiple worlds from many villains and threats.

Stargate: The premise of this military fiction show is that a "Stargate" portal allows teleportation through the cosmos. The American military take control of it and use it to neutralize threats from the outer space. Three real action series, Stargate SG1 (1997-2007), Stargate Atlantis (2004-2009) and Stargate Universe (2009-2011), and an animated series, Stargate Infinity have been released so far.

Star Trek: alongside with Star Wars, Star Trek is the most influential sci-fi universe ever created. The original television series (1966-1969) depicts the adventures ofthe USS Enterprise and offered an innovative political and social dimension to the genre. Exploration, diplomacy and action were combined. 13 movies and 6 TV series contributed to expand the Star Trek universe later. 

Babylon 5: This space opera (1994-1998) heavily influenced by Star Trek, deals with a space station the Earth Alliance uses for diplomatic and trade purposes with other civilizations. Topics such as politics, pacifism, religion, xenophobia, and drug addiction are recurrent in the show.

Firefly: this cult series narrates the adventures of the crew members of the Firefly-class spaceship Serenity. Although this series was cancelled soon after its release in 2002, its 14 episodes had a great impact and generated a very loyal base of fans, the "browncoats". A film and a comic-book series called Serenity helped in closing some of the plots initiated in the series. 

Battlestar Galactica: human civilzation has expanded to a series of planets, known as the Twelve Colonies. But the Cylons, a race of powerful cyborgs have pledge to exterminate humankind. The original series Battlestar Galactica provides an interesting angle to civil-military conflics and some doses of mystery and action. 

Black Mirror:  this is a British science fiction heavily influenced by the Twilight Zone which show with standalone episodes dealing with some controversial aspects of our society and how technology may contribute to aggravate them.

Westworld: The extraordinary cast and the high budget of this HBO series stand out. This series combines the topic of cybernetic humanoids with artificial intelligence as well as some ethical questions

The Expanse: this shows depicts the political infighting which is causing a threat to human survival. An alien technology, a big corporation, two big states and freedom fighters the delicate balance in the galaxy.

Come to netivist and join the debate: Which is the best sci-fi TV show? Give us your top 10 sci-fi series!

[netivist]

Game of Thrones book series vs HBO show: main differences and poll

On netivist we compare “A Song of Ice and Fire” books vs  Game of Thrones TV series. We outline the major differences and discuss which of the two deserves higher praise.  

The American novelist George R. R. Martin's book series A Song of Ice and Fire is widely recognized as one of thebest fantasy sagas ever written. Despite the fact that the book series in not finished yet, most critics and the public love it. Likewise, HBO with the support of the author of the books, released a TV drama which has been one of the most successful in the history of Television winning dozens of awards and captivating millions of people. This is a story of power struggles, ambition, greed, lust and treachery set in a medieval fantasy universe. 

Main differences between A Song of Ice and Fire books and Game of Thrones TV show

This is a list with the main differences between the HBO TV series and the series of books A Song of Ice and Fire:

Dorne's storyline: most of the events that happened in Dorne in the books have been eliminated or heavily modified in the TV shows

Ramsay Bolton's wife: in the show the psychopatic Ramsay Snow marries Sansa Stark, while in the books he marries Jeyne Poole, a friend of Sansa instead

Ser Barristan: the former Lord Commander of the Kingsguard dies prematurely in the TV show, while in the books he is a much more important character in the Slavers Bay

Robb Stark's wife: on the show, Robb marries Talisa Maegyr who is expecting a child when she is assassinated at the Red Wedding. In the books Robb marries Jeyne Westerling who is neither pregnant nor killed.

Iron Islands: the plots on the Iron Islands have been largely modified for the television show. Moreover, the sister of Theon Greyjoy is called Yara on the show and Asha in the books

Brienne's journeys: Brienne travels to different locations in the books and show

Tyrion's journeys: This part of the plot is shortened and modified on the show. Most encounters in the books are omitted in the series

Direwolves: in the books all the Stark kids have a special connection with their direwolves which have much more relevance in the story than in the HBO drama

Lady Stoneheart: in the books Catelyn Stark is resurrected as a zombie lord and takes control of a band of outlaws. On the show, Catelyn does not return from the dead 

Jojen Reed: in the TV series Jojen Reed dies

Mance Rayder: on the show Mance Rayder, the King Beyond the Wall, dies and his wife and baby do not appear. In the books, he survives his execution thanks to magic

Aegon Targaryen: in the series Aegon Targaryen does not appear

Bronn: in the TV show Bronn participates in more events

Loras Tyrell: in the books Ser Loras Tyrell is one of the greatest warriors in Westeros and dies trying to capture Dragonstone. On the TV series he never goes to Dragonstone.

Edric Storm: Robert Baratheon had a bastard son in the books, Edric Storm. On the show that storyline has not been introduced.

Game of Thrones book series of TV show: which is better? Vote and find out what people prefer

[netivist]

House of Cards vs West Wing: best political series and fictional president?

Best political TV series and fictional president

On netivist we compare The West Wing and House of Cards; Frank Underwood against Josiah "Jeb" Bartlet. 

House of Cards fifth season is here, millions of fans will stream it from Netflix in the next few weeks. Throughout the five seasons, the two central characters of House of Cards, the maquiavelian Democratic Congressman Frank Underwood (Kevin Spacey) and his supportive and similarly ruthless wife Claire (Robin Wright), have become veritable TV icons in the 21st century. These series, which describe the nastiest aspects of Washington politics has nonetheless, House of Cards is not the first series based on the intricacies of the White House. A few years earlier, The West Wing demonstrated that politics could also be extremely entertaining. In the West Wing, another Democratic President, Josiah "Jed" Bartlet (Martin Sheen), his press secretary C.J. Cregg (Allison Janney), the communication director Toby Ziegler (Richard Schiff), and Chief of Staff Leo McGarry (John Spencer) were involved in many crucial decisions and interesting dynamics. The excellent acting and scripts were combined to create a more realistic portrait of Washington politics. 

House of Cards and The West Wing are two fascinating TV dramas which people will always compare. They are among the finest series in American TV history. Let’s debate which is the best. Do you prefer Jed Bartlet or Francis Underwood, Martin Sheen or Kevin Spacey? Do you like evil characters that plague House of Cards or you find them too over-the-top? Is realism the most valuable feature in a political TV drama? Which of the two series is more fun?

House of Cards or The West Wing: Vote for the best political series (click here)

[netivist]

Maradona vs Pele: best football player in history debate

Best football / soccer players ever: Pele vs Maradona

Brazil-Argentina rivalry. Who do you think was better? Stats and the best goals of Maradona and Pele

The debate on the best football (soccer) player in history is still open. The Argentinian Diego Armando Maradona and the Brazilian Edson Arantes do Nascimento, Pelé, are considered the most talented and iconic players of the twentieth century. Their leadership and charisma, dribbling, speed, game vision, goal scoring ability, and the glory they managed to achieve with their clubs and national teams has not been matched yet. However, Pele and Maradona had overall very distinct playing styles. Pelé was a striker and Maradona an offensive midfielder. Pelé was better at scoring, Maradona at organizing his team and passing. Pelé played for Santos FC and NY Cosmos, Maradona played for Argentina Juniors, Boca Juniors, Barcelona FC, Napoli and Seville. Both players led their countries, Brazil and Argentina, and reached the ultimate football glory, the World Cup - an achievement that neither Messi or Ronaldo have managed so far. 

Who was the best football player in the 20th century?

[netivist]

An the all-time best Zelda game is... check out the comparison and poll

The Legend of Zelda is one of the most iconic video game series in history. On netivist to celebrate the release of the latest title of the Nintendo franchise; The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, we have made a comparison of the top Zelda games and are inviting our readers to participate in a poll. 

Probably,   Shigeru Miyamoto and Takashi Tezuka, creators of the saga, could not imagine how successful The Legend of Zelda and its characters Link, Zelda and Goron would become. In the 3 decades that followed the release of the saga in 1989, 18 titles have been published and almost 80 million copies have been sold worldwide. Most of them have been praised by critics and the public. 

Which of them is the best Zelda game?

A Link to the Past (1991, SNES): 4.61 million copies worldwide.

Ocarina of Time (1998, Nintendo 64). More than 7 million copies on Nintendo 64.

Majora's Mask (2000, Nintendo 64). 3.36 million copies on Nintendo 64.

Oracle of Seasons and Oracle of Ages (2001, Game Boy Color). Near 4 million copies were sold of each of the games.

The Wind Waker (2003, GameCube). More than 3 million copies on GameCube.

Four Swords Adventures (2004, GameCube). The game sold nearly 1 million copies.

Twilight Princess (2006, GameCube, Wii). Almost 9 million copies.

Skyward Sword (2011, Wii). 3.4 million copies of the game have been sold worldwide so far.

Breath of the Wild (2017, Nintendo Switch and Wii U). Breath of the Wild has sold 1.5 million copies in less than one month from its release.

Other Zelda games: Legend of Zelda (1989, NES), Zelda II: The Adventure of Link (1988, NES), The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (1993, Game Boy), The Legendo of Zelda: The Minish Cap (2004, Game Boy Advance), The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass (2007, Nintendo DS), The Legend of Zelda: Spirit Tracks (2009, Nintendo DS), The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds (2013, 3DS), The Legend of Zelda: Tri Force Heroes (2015, 3DS)

Join our poll and debate: 

What is the best Legend of Zelda game? (click to participate in the poll and find out more about the titles)

[netivist]

Should commercial surrogacy be banned?

Commercial surrogacy is becoming a hot political issue. This debate is based on the lecture "The Moral Limits to Markets" by Professor Anne Phillips, at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

On netivist.org we debate if governments should step in an prohibit surrogacy for commercial purposes. We discuss how surrogacy works and the different types of surrogacy. These are some of the main arguments to be taken into consideration in the debate

Commercial surrogacy advantages and disadvantages

Pros of commercial surrogacy:

Surrogacy empower those who want to have children but cannot physical

Surrogacy is a less traumatic alternative to fertility treatments (which in many cases don’t work)

Surrogacy is a choice made by mothers. Banning surrogacy goes against women's right to decide on their own body. It may also be considered as a patronizing policy as assumes women cannot decide by themselves what is good for them

I enables parents to share a genetic material with their child even when the could not conceive in the traditional way

With the money earned with surrogacy women can address financial problems and improve their life. 

Surrogate mothers in many cases develop a good relation with the child and their parents afterwards

Cons

Becoming a surrogate mother is tough and can create physical and mental problems. Giving birth is not always a pleasant experience, and the emotional ties with the baby, in the case of surrogacy, are often broken abruptly

The surrogacy contract implies a "sale of a self" which is morally and ethically problematic.

Surrogate mothers may not have complete information about all the implications of surrogacy, in particular in developing countries and in the cases with women come from very empoverish backgrounds.

Women are often coerced into becoming surrogate mothers and only receive a small fraction of the price paid by parents. This is true in many cases in countries such as India 

Surrogate mothers may change their mind during pregnancy and want to keep the custody of the children. This raises many legal problems

Surrogacy is very expensive, so most people cannot afford it, so it contribute to inequality of opportunities in society

Commercial surrogacy pros and cons: Should it be legal or prohibited? Check out the poll and public discussion

[netivist]

Is government intervention positive for innovation?

Government intervention and innovation

This is another debate created at LSE100 (London School of Economics and Political Science) at netivist.org. Join and share it with students and other people interested in the action of governments, innovation and technology.

Government intervention is necessary sometimes, for instance to provide public goods or fix market failures. However, it also entails some risks and problems. To what extent is government involvement good or necessary to promote economic and technological innovation? Some experts think of the government as an obstacle for free-market and innovation. They advocate for minimal government involvement. On the other hand, other experts expect governments to become active drivers of innovation. 

Government intervention bad for innovation:

Organizations funded by governments have less incentive to produce economic returns. 

Competition leads to innovation, but governments have traditionally limited competition.Political agendas are often driving public funding for research and innovation.

Some government funded projects are not sustainable and as soon as public funding goes the projects are cancelled.

Private corporations are responsible of some of the most important discoveries and revolutionary technology.

Government bureaucracy is particularly damaging for the innovation industry as it slows down processes and limits the required flexibility.

Regulation often constrains the capacity of companies to conduct research.

Publicly funded initiatives can enjoy unfair advantage vis-a-vis jprivately funded ones.

Government intervention is good for innovation:

Public universities educate and train researchers and innovators and conduct research and experimentation.

Alliances between the public sector and private organizations can be very positive.

Governments can enable researchers and small companies to undertake projects when private funding is not available or difficult to acquire.

Many of the greatest advancements in history were promoted by governments (weaponry, space exploration, computers, medical progress) and cures have been possible thanks to government funding.

Policies contribute to shape existing markets and to create new ones. 

Regulation is necessary to reduce uncertainty.

Government led innovation can be a solution in areas where the private sector is not operating due to the costs or the lack of economic return.

Favorable taxation and regulation can be used to create positive incentives for private innovation. 

Learn more and join our debate: Does government help innovation?

[netivist]

Is fair trade good? Find out more about its pros and cons

Is fair trade worth the extra cost?

Fair trade products have become increasingly successful and available in developed countries. Consumers are willing to pay a premium in order to contribute to improving working conditions and sustainable farming in poor countries. The Fairtrade Certification Mark is the most famous of these systems. However, many analysts are also warning us of the cons of fair trade schemes.

In favor

Producers have seen their income increased

An important part of this extra income received is invested in education and other activities which promote productivity and sustainability

Minimum wages have been introduced in farming areas thanks to fair trade schemes

Fair trade initiatives are being used to protect the most vulnerable segments of the population in some areas. For instance, there are specific programs for child and women's protection. Discrimination is not allowed.

Fairtrade empowers and gives voice to small producers who previously had no bargaining power vis-a-vis big corporations

Social conditions in many areas with free trade cooperatives have improved dramatically.

Thanks to fair trade, small producers have managed to become competitive in the context of globalization.

The movement has also supported organic production and offered emergency assistance to growers.

Against

Keeping the accreditation is expensive 

The impact of the movement is still reduced in scope as only a few products such as chocolate, coffee, bananas and sugar are usually available 

Abusive labor practices can be reintroduced after certifications are expired or abandoned.

Fair trade creates divides within communities in developing countries as not all workers and farmers qualify to be part of a certified cooperative or group.

Fairtrade does not ensure better wages. A study by SOAS, University of London, about Fairtrade in Uganda and Ethiopia found that wages in Fairtrade certified markets were very low. The report observed that there was inadequate monitoring of pay and conditions by certification schemes. Wages were usually lower than those in producers without the Fairtrade certification in the same area and working on the same crop.

Small producers have little incentive to keep on investing in improving efficiency and working conditions.

For some companies the goal of fair trade is simply to increase profit. So they may be using the fair trade acreditations as marketing tools to differentiate their products or, even worse, to regain reputation lost for other bad practices.

Join the debate on the advantages and disadvantages of fair trade

[netivist]

Free market pros and cons

Should we prioritize market efficiency and accept the resulting inequality?

Free markets have are diverging and converging forces which may increase or reduce inequality between people and countries. On netivist we discuss the pros and cons of free market economy and vote if allocative efficiency justifies growing inequality.

This debate is based on the LSE100 lecture "The Magic of Markets" (part of the new module "Should Markets be Constrained or Unleashed?")  by Professor Sir Charles Bean, at the London School of Economics and Political Science

Sir Charles Bean is Professor of Economics and member of the Office for Budget Responsibility. Before joining the Department of Economics at the LSE, he was Deputy Governor of the Bank of England. Charles Bean is an expert in monetary policy and macroeconomics.

Efficiency vs inequality

Prices have many functions in capitalist markets. They may indicate that a product is scarce or highly valued and provide people and businesses with the right incentives. Competitive markets are supposed to produce efficient outcomes. Free markets may nevertheless sometimes result in unsatisfactory outcomes. Income inequality is one of the negative side effects of free market capitalism. Government intervention in the market may help to mitigate inequality or address other problems associated with free markets. Managing this trade-off between promoting market efficiency and reducing income and walth inequalities has become one of the most important challenges for economists in the 21st century.

Economists are divided into two camps:

Those who follow the ideas of Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman, defending the free market and opposing government intervention. 

On other hand, there are economists, like John Maynard Keynes, who emphasize the role of governments and regulation and warn us of some of the problems associated with complete free market capitalism.

Do you think inequality is a necessary evil and that we should focus on stimulating market efficiency? Join our poll and debate

[netivist]

Top quarterbacks poll and debate: Who is the all time best?

Who is best quarterback of all time?

We have discussed some of the all time sports legends in several sports. We turn our attention to probably America’s favorite sport: football.

Although with the victory of the Patriots in the latest Super Bowl many people argue that Tom Brady has demonstrated that the debate about the best quarterback of all time is over, not everyone is convinced. Football fans have always argued about who is the best quarterback in the NFL history. Depending on the statistics and records considered, different footballers deserve the title.. Some of the best quarterbacks of all time became legends due to the their particular play style, their capacity to generate emotions in their fans, their boldness or simply because of some trick plays and memorable moments in specific games. On netivist we have created a top 4 with some of the quarterbacks who are consistently shortlisted by experts: 

Joe Montana (San Francisco 49ers and Kansas City Chiefs), 

Tom Brady (New England Patriots), 

Johnny Unitas (Baltimore Colts), and 

Dan Marino (Miami Dolphins). 

Other legendary quarterbacks

Peyton Williams Manning

John Elway

Otto Graham

Roger Staubach

Steve Young

Brett Favre

Join our poll and debate on the best quarterbacks in NFL history

[netivist]

Is Taiwan a country? Should it be independent or part of China?

Should Taiwan be independent?

The issue of Taiwanese independence has once again resurfaced on the American foreign policy agenda due to Donald Trump declarations. Some people wonder if Taiwan is part of China. On netivist we discuss if Taiwan should remain politically independent from Beijing or embrace the reunification project. Find out more about some of the truths and myths surrounding the debates on Taiwanese independence. 

Is Taiwan part of China? According to Beijing official narratives, Taiwan has always been part of China. However, according However, this account does not withstand a closer historical scrutiny.  It was in 1683, that the Qing dynasty conquered the island, leading to the court debating the benefits of colonizing the “ball of mud”. Thereafter, Taiwan has always existed under some form of informal colonialism until its cession to Japan in 1895. 

Taiwan is today de facto independent, however, de jure Taiwan is still part of China. China’s claims over Taiwan are modelled after the "One Country, Two Systems" scheme exercised applied to Hong Kong and Macau. Beijing would allow Taiwan autonomous governance over its own affairs but want the island to be again part of a Greater China. 

In Beijing there are growing fears over American Interference, in particular after the arrival of Donald Trump to the White House. Taiwanese politicians are also trying to avoid problems with China, since Taiwan’s economic future seems to be intertwined with that of China.

Is the Taiwanese secessionist project better for the island than that suggested by the proponents of the unification of China? Is Taiwanese culture part of Chinese culture or Chinese culture only one part of Taiwanese identity?

Join or debate on the independence of Taiwan: Is Taiwanese independence a good idea? 

[netivist]

Best anime of 2016. Vote for your favorite

Best anime of 2016. Vote for your favorite!

On netivist we are discussing  the top anime series released during 2016. If you are a fan of anime and Japanese culture you should check out this discussion and find out which are the best new animes released last year.

We have shortlisted some of the top animes and would like you to let us know which one is the favorite:

Haven’t You Heard? I’m Sakamoto

This comedic anime narrates the life of Sakamoto, a super intelligent student whose abilities attract an unwanted amount of attention from people around him. You will laugh at the absurd situations Sakamoto experience

Drifters

Drifters is a fantasy anime based on a manga about Shimazu Toyohisa, a samurai who who has travelled to another worldworld right after the famous Battle of Sekigahara. It combines of a historical flavour with science fiction and a lot of action!

Your Name

This drama animated film has become the top-grossing anime film of all time. It depicts the story of two high school students who experienced a transcendental exchange of bodies. It is as heart-wrenching as it is a refreshing take on a coming-of-age genre.

Re:ZERO - Starting Life in Another World

Subaru Natsuki finds himself transported to an alternate universe where he meets a half-elf. Later he develops mysterious abilities that grant him the power of resurrection. If you like fantasy and magic this may be your series.

Yuri!!! on Ice

Yuri on Ice that follows two young figure skaters attracted to one another, Yuri Katsuki and Yuri Plisetsky. This is not a fantasy or sci-fi series but it may captivate any manga and anime fan.

Other anime series of 2016:

91 DaysDimension WMob Psycho 100

Showa Genroku Rakugo Shinju

My Hero Academia

Erased

Flying Witch

Sweetness and Lightning

Mr. Osomatsu

If you want to watch some videos, discuss and vote on the best anime series, click on this link

[netivist]

Is torture acceptable? Pros and cons of “enhanced interrogations” techniques

Is torture acceptable?

Not only torture is still practised by many governments, but also it seems that torture may be increasingly used in the next few years, even by the US. Donald Trump has brought this discussion back to the political agenda. He claimed that his first week in office declared that torture is effective and works. 

Torture is the set of techniques used to hurt hurting someone, physically or psychologically, either as a punishment / retribution or as means of obtaining some information. Democracies have eliminated this practice. International laws also prohibit the use of torture on prisoners. However, in practice, many countries still use torture to obtain information about terrorists, organized crime or political insurgency. For instance, the US has recognized the use of waterboarding and other torture techniques to get information for its war against terrorism. Some analysts claim that torture is necessary evil to guarantee peace and security. But many others doubt of the real effectiveness of torture.  Human right advocates are extremely concerned that the new Trump administration can intensify the use of torture. 

Does saving lives justifies the breach of individual rights and laws? Can torture deter criminals and terrorists or on the contrary it legitimizes their claims?

Find out more about the potential advantages and disadvantages of torture and join our poll and debate.

Torture pros and cons: Is it acceptable? Click here

[netivist]

E-books or paper books: which is the best format?

We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of ebooks and if e-readers changed the way you read. Do you prefer electronic or traditional paper books? Why? 

E-books pros and cons

E-Books cons:

Copyright problems: It is very easy and cheap to copy and distribute e-books illegally.

Incompatible formats: you may not use all the e-books you have purchased in different e-readers

Different sensorial experience, the touch of the paper, and even the smell of the book is lost in the case of the electronic book.

A more traditional engagement with books can very positive for children's education. Passing the pages back and forth, writing notes on them, or even colouring book pages are part of children’s development.

Printed books are beautiful

E-books have harmed the publishing industry and caused the loss of many jobs.

e-Books pros:

E-books are cheaper to produce than traditional books.

E-Books are as well cheaper to buy. 

New authors can now more easily publish their works without having 

E-Books are better for the environment

E-readers increasingly cheaper and more comfortable to use. Electronic books allow searches and may help you find parts of the text you are looking for.

They can be shared with people far away instantly and the owner does doesn't have the risk of losing her copy of the book.

You can carry hundreds of books in your device.

You save lot of space home.

Join our poll and debate and find out what other people think:

E-books vs paper books: which is the best format?

[netivist]

Should Tibet become independence from China? Poll and debate

On netivist we debate the pros and cons of Tibetan independence. 

Is Tibetan independence from China a good project?

The issue of Tibet independence continue to be a very controversial one. As the philosopher Žižek suggests, the understanding of Tibet in Western countries is often clouded by an orientalist imagination of the country. This type of fascination with Tibet has been promoted by the media. The political and social reality of this beautiful country is much more complex that we may think. Likewise Chinese rule may be considered as having positive and negative impacts on Tibet. 

The longstanding fight for independence has been temporarily abandoned. Many leaders of protest movements in Tibet are now fighting for a more “realistic” goal of obtaining a wider autonomy from Beijing. The economic growth of China is helping Tibet develop.

Pros of Tibetan Independence:

Tibet was militarily occupied by China against the will of its people

Human right abuses have been reported by international organizations such as Human Rights Watch. 

Separatist activists have been arrested frequently. Since 2009, more than 140 Tibetans have self-immolated in protest against Chinese rule.

China has not fulfilled the promised of political autonomy signed in the bilateral agreement in 1951

Independence may be the only chace to restore Tibetan people's civil rights and freedom and establishing a fully-fledged democracy.

Cons of Tibetan independence:

The history of Tibet-China relations is very old.From 1720 to 1912 the Chinese Qing Dinasty controlled Tibet and actively promoted Tibetan buhddism.

Autonomy can be sufficient to satisfy most of the claims from the Tibetan population.

We do not know what Tibetans really want due to the lack of available data and because a substantial population still remains difficult to reach. Maintaining the status quo may be a safer choice.

Tibet’s economic situation has been improved through large state-directed investments by China. The modernization programme will be interrupted if independence is pushed through. 

There is no guarantee that an independent Tibet would develop a more just and democratic system. The country could be turned into a feudal theocracy where civil rights and freedom could be as limited as they are now or even more.

Join our poll and debate on Netivist: 

Should Tibet obtain independent from China? Participate and find out more here