What Do We Understand by Debate Culture?

Debate But Not Discussion

In elementary school, there used to be plays, songs, poems were sung, theaters were performed. There were also debates. 

I don't like these old words at all, but when I say debate instead of debate, and show or event instead of müsamere, I don't fully understand. 

A debate is of course a discussion activity. Teachers would choose a topic and we would discuss it in two groups of four or five. It wasn't really a debate, one group would try to prove the positive aspects of the topic and the other group would try to prove the opposite. In other words, even if we didn't believe it at all, our group had to prove the thesis of our group. 

For example, drinking water is beneficial or drinking water is harmful, both groups would try to prove the opposite thesis about water in turn. 

In fact, this discussion in front of the whole school within certain rules would be beneficial for everyone. Since enough research had been done on the subject from both sides, everyone had the chance to learn what is what and what is not from different perspectives.   A jury of teachers would evaluate the debate and at the end, whoever proved their thesis with better arguments would win the debate. I don't know if they do it now, but we used to prepare very seriously, and even if we didn't believe in our thesis wholeheartedly, with the excitement of childhood, our only goal was to prove our thesis.

When I think about it years later, even though it was a useful activity, trying to prove something from a single point of view seems a bit funny to me now. I wish they had taught everyone to examine the subject from different perspectives, but defending a thesis from a single point of view also instills a sense of partisanship at a young age. Being a partisan sometimes blinds people to some issues, I have written a detailed article on this subject before.

What are the debates and even discussions on TV?

However, it is as if this culture has penetrated into the veins of society, everyone has started to look at life like a fan. 

Sometimes when I watch debate programs on television, I am reminded of those debates in my primary school years. In the programs, invited guests, usually from two opposing viewpoints, take turns to discuss the issues from their own point of view. They are all trying to prove something only from their own point of view. 

However, life is not black and white, there are other colors, at least there are shades of gray in between. The answers to the issues being discussed are not either/or. Each topic has its own advantages and disadvantages. If the discussion drags on, the moderators usually close the discussion by saying that everyone has expressed their opinion, let's leave the comments to the viewers. In fact, these programs are useful when there is a calm discussion environment, but sometimes when the discussions are prolonged, mutual nerves can cause unwanted images on the screens. I even remember people breaking the glass coffee table in front of them on live TV.

However, I don't understand the behavior of those who blindly defend an issue. Since the topics of discussion are serious issues, it is sometimes useful to have detailed discussions, but this is only useful for programs where experts give their views on the subject. I think there are some really ridiculous people on the programs when they try to defend the issue from their own point of view, perhaps out of duty, as is often the case in partisan logic and debates. Sometimes, I don't know if it's because they feel obliged to defend the wrong side of the issue, some people don't know what to say and find the solution in attacking the other person. 

I don't know if this situation will ever improve. When will the invited guests be able to say only their own opinions, when will they realize that they have to tell the truth within the framework of logic, not because they are obliged to, not as if they are in a debate? When will they stop trying to deceive the audience? 

I wonder if there are those among the viewers who knowingly fall for what they are being told? 

Maybe there are, after all, society has become really polarized due to the policies pursued. For some reason no one wants to use their own minds and logic, maybe they find it difficult to think. Who knows, maybe the culture of subservience is so ingrained in us. I think there is something wrong in this. 

I always wonder why our society always likes to follow one person, is it because of our historical genes?

Our society and our citizens aside, we are actually a very pure and clean society.

However, there are those among us who are very vigilant, perhaps those who think they are vigilant. 

Interests are also reflected in debates

I think it comes back to the world of vested interests. In every environment, it seems as if we are watching the debates between those who have somehow been able to gain a benefit in the current order and those who have not been able to gain a benefit and are dissatisfied with this situation. 

Like every government, this government has created its own rich and its own elite in all these years. I think this is a normal situation. There is always a coterie that concentrates around the power provided by the government and this coterie can cause those in power to change over time. I think we call this power poisoning. 

In the event of a possible change of power, they are worried that they might lose their gains and the positions they have gained through their proximity to the government, which for some of them is a really troubling situation, a nightmare, and they don't know what to do. Moreover, they are afraid that they will be held to account if their gains are ill-gotten gains, and these are not rare after so long in power. In this situation, it is obvious that they will attack you at any moment, like a cornered cat, and they will try to maintain their position with unthinkable methods.

So, despite the fact that we all know this fact, what measures is the opposition already taking on these issues? What are their plans?

I am not talking about a normal citizen, a normal citizen who is already fed up with the cost of living, who is not going to vote by thinking about the details. Until the election day, he will vote for whoever he believes in his mind, in his heart, whoever he believes will save him from this difficult situation that the country has been put into. Since no matter who is in charge, he will not be able to have a position, he will not think of such tricks. He will only want whoever is closer to his heart to be in power. 

Continuing Debates Around Political Concerns and Expectations

But as I said, a certain group of people who have benefited from the current environment will do whatever they can to preserve the opportunities provided by the current government, and believe me, what this minority of people will do may not be something to be underestimated. 

So let me ask you again, what measures are being taken, what measures is the opposition planning to take in terms of what this group might do?

You may ask where did you come up with this topic, but as I said at the beginning, some of the debaters who look us in the eye even in the discussion programs on TV, even when they know they are wrong and mistaken, are the visible faces of the culture of subservience created by this government, I have no reservations about them. 

What I am talking about are those who are not visible in front of the screens, but who are at risk of serious loss of interests. I think such people are already making deeply insidious plans. 

I don't want us all to cry together on election day if a rabbit comes out of the hat that we never thought of, like the scandal of unsealed votes. I want us to think carefully about what can be done and take the necessary precautions. I want this as a citizen.

On the other hand, I think it is very important to sincerely win the hearts of the citizens, to prepare detailed management programs in a language that everyone can understand and to explain to the citizens what will be done when we come to power. 

Making amends is a good way out, but I think it is not enough. The current government, whose votes seem to have fallen today, can increase its votes in a very short time with the blessings of being in power, it can close the gap in a short time, because the blessings of the government are much more than the opportunities of the opposition. Believe me, if the citizens are relieved a little bit economically, many of them may change their minds in favor of the government because of the conservative gains.

As I said at the beginning, unfortunately people don't like to use their minds and unfortunately our collective memory is very weak, we forget everything quickly and even if they have made a mistake on purpose, we forgive them quickly when they caress our religious feelings a little. I don't know what the reason is, but instead of thinking about the future of the country, we are sometimes indifferent to simple interests.

Nevertheless, I think that the society now perceives this difficult and bad situation that the country has been deliberately put into and will make the most accurate assessment at the ballot box. The society now wants a change. The winds of change have started to blow.

As long as the opposition is sincere and sincere enough to take this wind of change behind them. It should be able to explain to the society that it is a good alternative to power produced with common sense. 

I hope I have been clear enough.

Love and respect to everyone from Moscow.