"Now, the competition has officially begun. First, I would like to invite the official side to debate Nan Xiaoniao to make an argument. It takes three minutes."

As host Sabinin finished speaking the stinky and long opening remarks in front, eight debaters from both sides finally entered a state of being indifferent and focusing on the game.

Nan Xiaoniao took a deep breath and stood up and talked.

"As a senior, I am a post-85s. I believe that among the generation of people who grew up speaking Chinese in China, besides Xiangjiang and Xingdao, whether from mainland China, Wanwan, or other Southeast Asian countries, in the childhood and teenage memories of most of us, private cars are a luxury.

I was born in a second- and third-tier city in China. When I was in elementary school, it was great to have a private car among my ten families and relatives. But we also obviously saw that with the economic growth in the past decade, both China and abroad, both urban and rural areas, the number of private cars has entered a terrible upward channel.

Human nature is selfish, and I am no exception. I also want to enjoy the pleasure of picking up a car and taking a ride - it is precisely because we understand the horror of desire, so if we are not restricted, it will only cause the tragedy of the commons effect.

In most second-tier cities in China, at least 100,000 private cars can be increased by one year. However, the planning and construction of urban roads cannot keep up with the development of the number of private cars. According to statistics from the Hujiang Municipal Transportation Supervision Department, in the past ten years, the commuting time required to bypass the urban area during rush hour during rush hour has soared from 35 minutes to more than two hours. A full 4 times of time have been wasted on traffic jams.

In our junior high school’s “social class” textbook, when talking about the view that Americans have “proven material civilization but live in a bad environment”, our country’s scholars once put two important political labels such as “photochemical smoke” and “acid rain caused by sulfur dioxide pollution” on big cities such as New York.

But after just over a decade, when I went to New York in person last year and then returned to China to compare the capital, I suddenly realized that the model city of "photochemical smoke" had been seized by the capital.

Because the annual growth rate of more than 200,000 private cars in Beijing has also won the "Mist City" crown, which was once monopolized by London...

Environmental pollution, excessive energy consumption, urban congestion... These social problems are obviously caused by the excessive number of motor vehicles. Of course, we do not rule out the responsibility of industrial energy consumption and pollution for these problems. We can speak with data. At least in recent years, traffic pollution and energy consumption have surpassed industrial pollution/energy consumption and have become the number one problem in urban environmental problems.

Therefore, with a sense of social responsibility to be responsible to all mankind, we believe that the government should indeed control the number of urban motor vehicles - especially the number of private cars mainly composed of the growth of urban motor vehicles in recent years.

Of course, we do not believe that as long as the number of private cars is controlled, the government will solve the problem of urban traffic congestion, pollution, energy consumption, etc. On the contrary, we have always insisted that this kind of governance must be a multi-pronged process.

While controlling private cars in cities, we must also vigorously develop public transportation, optimize road and urban functional block planning, upgrade the technological level of transportation tools, advocate guiding clean energy, and control the number of government buses. Each part of this is completely indispensable in the governance process.

In terms of control methods, the government may also give strict guidance, carefully verify, respect the market, and use various means such as special taxation, data monitoring, education and guidance.

Because time is limited, we will not elaborate on the specific governance methods that should be taken.

In a nutshell, we believe that controlling the growth of urban private cars is the only way to solve the problems of megacities and urban congestion, pollution, and high energy consumption in the contemporary era. There may be some difficulties and obstacles in this process, but we think that they are just a development problem, not a route problem. Thank you."

Nan Xiaoniao was ups and downs, and she strictly pinched the 3-minute timeline, and made the opening statement of 1,200 words very straight and peaceful, simple and steady.

The audience generally did not respond to the key points of the problem.

Even the judges took out paper and pens and began to take notes.

"This kind of opening statement is too detailed and indistinguishable. It sounds like a headache, but if you want to say there is a problem, you can't find it." Kitajima, one of the judges, has the kind of brain circuit that is free from casualness and thinks about what is. Now I feel a headache when I look at this statement.

"I really don't want to give this high score. I'm too timid and I'm so brave. I'm always on guard and lose my own characteristics." Professor Jiang from Fudan also had a headache.

However, Chen Wenqian, a thief in Wanwan who has been in politics, is most adaptable to this kind of statement and is the first among the five judges to clarify the context.

If you look at the reason carefully, it is nothing more than that Chen Wenqian is more skilled in the work report on the political investigation. When he was in the Wanwan Parliament, the opposition party had to catch the ruling party's governance achievements every month and was furious about it. (See the scene of the Wanwan Blue and Green fighting during the meeting.)

Over time, the political reports of these countries that were dragged down by the pig system have been very stable and comprehensive, and they are afraid of missing a point of saying the wrong thing.

Just like New York Mayor Giuliani, he is a typical extreme harmony right, but when he was speaking to the issue of "respect police c" in front of New York citizens. (The background of the speech was that a black attack on the Harmonious Police just happened.)

Just because they said, "They (New York Police c) protect all of us! black!white!latino...", then they were stunned for a moment, and directly received the next sentence, and were criticized by political commentators-

Because according to the political correctness of the United States, when it comes to the issue of racial non-discrimination, the correct word order is "black, white, latino (Latino), asian (Asian). Giuliani just said less asian when speaking, that is, discrimination against Asians (at that time, CNN photographers had already given the camera to a group of Asians on the scene in advance).

The opening statement that Feng Jianxiong and Nan Xiaoniao intervened is this kind of absolute stability.

While Nan Xiaoniao was making a statement, the third debater Chen Han also discussed with the main Yang Weiwei in a discussion tone and asked for advice: "Sister Weiwei, the other party is too unprioritized, the score should be very low, right? The judges must be dizzy when they hear this speed of speech."

After chanting 1,200 words in 3 minutes, it is equivalent to 7 words per second on average, and the rhythm is also divided into a rhythmic rhythm, so the part that reads fast is almost like flying. For this rhythm, Nan Xiaoniao was crazy about memorizing and integrating it into the situation, and struggled for three days and three nights, just for these three minutes.

"Don't underestimate them. Nan Xiaoniao's basic skills are very solid and hardworking. Feng Jianxiong's strategic command is probably more difficult to deal with than we imagined." Yang Weiwei looked solemn, and there was no trace of contempt.

As she spoke, Yang Weiwei shut up, as if she had thought of something more serious, and frowned and thought in her mind: "In the last game, they were the opposing side, and the opposing side's argument could be more offensive, while the positive side's argument should have no opponent yet, so it should have strived to cover all aspects. This is common sense.

But to be able to reach this level, it seems that we are preparing to fight a "specific policy strategy" with us. It is not like the "primarily attacking ideological level philosophical attack" obtained when we visited the set that day. We are afraid of being disadvantaged... We don't even have a single MPA in our team, and it is not my strength to talk to the other party about the gains and losses of specific policy strategies..."

(Note: mba is a "Master of Business Administration", mpa is a "Master of Public Administration", p=public, that is, a major that specializes in civil servants after studying.)

As he was thinking about it, just as he was about to be surrounded, the host had already announced that the opposition would be decided.

Tang Wen stood up and began to speak, and the recitation brought Yang Weiwei's thoughts back from his immersion.

Yang Weiwei suddenly blamed herself: "No! We don't have teammates who are studying MPA, can we have one? There are only a few undergraduates on the other side! And we either study the law or business. They should not know what we don't know about things! Yang Weiwei, Yang Weiwei, what's wrong with you? Why did you scare yourself and be fooled by a group of little kids?"

Thinking of this, all the suspicion and anxiety just now were swept out of her mind. She forced herself to concentrate and listened quietly to her teammates' rebuttal.

"... The opponent's debater just said that congestion, pollution and other urban diseases are mainly caused by private cars. First of all, we do not agree with this argument. For example, in Beijing, the number of buses in the number of private cars is not less than that in private cars, and the opponent's debater has already admitted this.

The opponent's debater tried to use the "fast growth of private cars" to make private cars take responsibility, but did not see the other side of the phenomenon: while the number of private cars surged, the frequency of being driven on the road was much lower than that of buses. According to the financial statistics of the "two barrels of oil" gas stations in various districts in Beijing, the amount of gasoline that needs to be issued or sold to the unit pre-recharge cards is more than five times that of private cars!

Domestic civil servants and public institutions are famous for eating and greed for consuming and greedy. Which one is more distressing to burn gasoline with your own salary or using public costs? How many people in Beijing are reluctant to drive often when buying a car, but they will get every car in the unit! Under this national conditions, the opponent's debater told us that private cars are more serious than buses, which causes urban congestion and pollution. Isn't this a big deal of slipping around the world..."

Tang Wen basically made rebuttals such as buses, urban planning, and poor promotion of new energy, and refuted three or four points in total.

Tang Wen’s argument is obviously not completely prepared before the game, but only one framework, where you can pile up a lot of material for choosing - that is, if you actually read all the pre-prepared words she intended for opening speeches, I am afraid that I will not finish reading them in 20 minutes.

The anti-sider's strategy obviously sets the point that "we will choose the counter-evidence of the opponent's arguments to attack."

This kind of playing style seems very targeted, but it is easy to show our own core values ​​without starting a new chapter.

For example, if Tang Wen made a statement, before refuting Nan Xiaoniao, she would first make a general outline clearly, such as:

"First of all, we believe that whether to buy a private car is the personal freedom of a citizen. The biggest feature of contemporary administration is that people's law can do it without prohibition, while government law cannot do it without authorization. Therefore, if there is no absolute necessity, it is obviously contrary to the rule of law spirit of administration according to law, and it is also unnecessary interference in civil liberties."

Then, when setting up a statement, it seems that the outline will be broad, rather than just the outline, and there will be no outline.

However, Tang Wen didn't do that.

Obviously, this is the tactic arranged by Yang Weiwei.
Chapter completed!