Mumbai: Zoomers exchange views on burning social issues

An intercollegiate debate organised at M L Dahanukar College of Commerce in Vile Parle East on Tuesday saw participation from multiple colleges across the city lsquoDrustikonrsquo as the organisers named the competition saw discussions on various topics related to current issues in society including a debate on whether the government should introduce laws to regulate artificial intelligence AI to address ethical and security concerns and about electric vehicles being a sustainable solution for the future Gen Z delved into some of the most pressing issues facing society today From environmental concerns to the ethics of AI young debaters tackled diverse topics with a mix of passion and critical thinkingAir pollution A divisive issueThe debate on air pollution shed light on its multifaceted causes Proponents of stringent measures highlighted the devastating effects of pollution The team appearing for one side said ldquoBurning waste contributes to greenhouse gas emissions global warming and health crises like cancer and heart diseaserdquo They argued that electric vehicles EVs could serve as a sustainable alternative to reduce pollution On the other hand opponents pointed out ldquoVehicular and industrial emissions contribute to 85 per cent of air pollution according to WHO datardquo They emphasised that unregulated garbage burning is a localised issue and advocated for recycling initiatives and public transport improvements insteadRegulating AIThe rapid evolution of AI led to discussions on whether governments should step in with regulations Supporters argued that regulations could address security concerns reduce fraud and enhance societal progress ldquoThe government if it has a machinery in place can curb multiple issues like the creation of deep fakes and morphing images using AIrdquo the team said However critics contended that government intervention could act as a hindrance due to a lack of expertise and the constantly evolving nature of AI They questioned ldquothe accuracy of data provided by private AI companiesrdquo and raised concerns about the ldquogovernmentrsquos preparedness to handle such a dynamic sectorrdquoGlobal collaborationDebaters also discussed whether international organisations should hold authority during global crises Advocates stressed ldquothe importance of unity cannot be denied during global crisisrdquo Citing examples like the UkraineRussia war and the COVID19 pandemic where global resources were crucial for solutions they called for fairness and equality regardless of a nationrsquos wealthConversely opponents criticised the veto power wielded by major nations in organisations like the UN arguing that ldquoit undermines the sovereignty of smaller countrieshellip each nation should retain the right to selfgovernrdquo They also pointed to cases where international interference has been counterproductiveLowering driving ageOn the contentious topic of reducing the driving age to 16 proponents highlighted ldquoThere are benefits of increased independence and efficiency for students with busy schedules Countries like the US Australia and Canada have such reforms and which have been successfulrdquo Opponents raised concerns about safety saying ldquoThe potential risks of inexperienced drivers and the possibility of increased addiction to vehicles in teenagers can prove to be counterproductiverdquo They suggested encouraging the use of electric vehicles instead of expanding eligibilityFreedom of speechFreedom of speech was hailed as the cornerstone of a functional society by many debaters who argued that ldquoopen discussions foster diversity of ideas and reduce conflicts A free voice builds free society Diversity in ideas is created by free speech and discussionrdquo However critics warned of the dangers arguing that ldquomisinformation and hate speech can lead to many issues in societyrdquo advocating for a ldquobalance between freedom and responsibility to prevent societal harm which is much more importantrdquoTerm limits for politiciansThe discussion on term limits for politicians drew sharp contrasts between the need for change and the value of stability Advocates for term limits argued that power when concentrated for too long could lead to corruption and complacency They emphasised the ldquoimportance of giving opportunities to new leaders with fresh ideas and perspectives that could align better with the changing needs of the nation and the evolving economyrdquo Proponents also suggested making politiciansrsquo assets public to ensure transparency and prevent misuse of power They also argued that the rotation of leadership fosters innovation and prevents stagnation ldquoA mandate for change should be a part of governancerdquoCritics however highlighted the potential downsides of term limits ldquoThe disruption of longterm policies and governance is a major issue we have witnessed in the pastrdquo they said They argued that trust in leaders who have consistently delivered results should outweigh the need for change Frequent leadership changes might lead to instability with policies being overturned by each new administrationrdquo they said stresseding ldquoThe ideology of some leaders might resonate deeply with citizens making their continued governance beneficialrdquo They questioned the logic of enforcing limits when voters still support a particular leader or party arguing that continuity often promotes development and growth