2026 WSDA春季赛PF辩题投票正式启动！关键一票在你手上！

随着赛程的推进，辩题也要上新了！

2026 WSDA春季赛

公共论坛式辩论(PF)辩题投票正式启动！

在众多领域、众多辩题中

WSDA辩题委员会为大家精心挑选了

社会、法律、文化三大领域的辩题。

01、Resolved: The worldwide dominance of English is more beneficial than harmful to global cultural development.

02、Resolved: The United States should abolish private prisons.

03、Resolved: On balance, modernization efforts at cultural heritage sites have been more beneficial than harmful.

现在，你手中的关键一票

将可能决定整个赛季的辩论焦点！

投票截止时间：2025年12月31日

候选辩题01Social Issue

Resolved: The worldwide dominance of English is more beneficial than harmful to global cultural development.

英语在全球范围的主导地位对全球文化发展利大于弊。

Backgroud

English has become the world’s dominant lingua franca, used widely in international business, diplomacy, science, technology, and education. It is the primary language of global institutions, academic publishing, and the internet. While this dominance facilitates cross-cultural communication, critics argue it marginalizes local languages and cultures, potentially accelerating cultural homogenization and language extinction.

The core debate centers onwhether global connectivity outweighs cultural loss, andwhether English spreads opportunity or suppresses diversity.

Key Weighing Questions

Does access to global communication matter more than cultural preservation?
Is cultural development best defined asexchange and evolutionorprotection and continuity?
Are harms reversible, or are benefits more permanent?

PRO Arguments

(English dominance is more beneficial)

1.Global Communication and Cooperation

English enables efficient communication across borders, reducing misunderstandings in diplomacy, science, and humanitarian efforts.
A shared language accelerates problem-solving on global issues like climate change and public health.

2.Economic and Educational Opportunity

English proficiency increases access to higher education, global jobs, and international markets.
Individuals and developing countries can integrate into the global economy more easily.

3.Cultural Exchange, Not Cultural Erasure

English often acts as a bridge rather than a replacement—local cultures can share their stories globally through English media.
Cultural hybridity allows traditions to evolve rather than disappear.

4.Technological and Knowledge Access

The majority of academic research, online resources, and technological tools are available in English.
English lowers barriers to innovation and global learning.

CON Arguments

(English dominance is more harmful)

1.Language Extinction and Cultural Loss

Thousands of minority languages are endangered, and language loss often means losing traditions, history, and identity.
English crowds out local languages in education and media.

2.Cultural Homogenization

Global English promotes Western norms and values, reducing cultural diversity.
Local customs are often replaced by English-speaking pop culture.

3.Inequality and Linguistic Imperialism

Native English speakers gain unfair advantages in academia and business.
English dominance reinforces historical power imbalances tied to colonialism.

4.Shallow Cultural Engagement

Using English can oversimplify cultural expression and limit authentic communication rooted in native languages.

02Laws

Resolved: The United States should abolish private prisons.

美国应当废除私人监狱。

Backgroud

Private prisons are correctional facilities operated by for-profit companies under government contracts. Supporters argue they reduce costs and overcrowding, while critics claim profit motives undermine justice, rehabilitation, and human rights. The U.S. is one of the few democracies that extensively uses private prisons.

The debate focuses onwhether incarceration should ever be profit-drivenandwhether private prisons improve or harm the justice system overall.

Key Weighing Questions

Should efficiency ever outweigh moral responsibility?
Do private prisons create incentives that worsen mass incarceration?
Can regulation fix the harms, or is abolition necessary?

PRO Arguments

(Abolish private prisons)

1.Profit Incentives Undermine Justice

Companies benefit financially from higher incarceration rates and longer sentences.
This creates incentives to lobby for harsher criminal laws.

2.Lower Standards and Human Rights Abuses

Cost-cutting leads to understaffing, poor medical care, and unsafe conditions.
Numerous reports show higher rates of violence and neglect in private prisons.

3.Reduced Rehabilitation and Higher Recidivism

Private prisons often invest less in education, job training, and mental health services.
This leads to higher reoffending rates, harming public safety.

4.Accountability and Transparency Issues

Private companies are less subject to public oversight than government institutions.
Misconduct is harder to investigate and correct.

CON Arguments

(Do not abolish private prisons)

1.Savings and Efficiency Cost

Private prisons can operate at lower costs due to flexibility and innovation.
Savings can be redirected to crime prevention or rehabilitation programs.

2.Overcrowding Relief

They provide additional capacity when public prisons are full.
Abolishing them could worsen overcrowding in government facilities.

3.Reform Is Better Than Elimination

Strong regulations, not abolition, can fix abuses.
Removing private prisons may simply shift problems to underfunded public systems.

4.Economic Impact

Private prisons provide jobs, especially in rural areas.
Sudden abolition could harm local economies.

03Culture

Resolved: On balance, modernization efforts at cultural heritage sites have been more beneficial than harmful.

总体而言，文化遗址的现代化建设利大于弊。

Backgroud

Cultural heritage sites such as historic monuments, ancient ruins, temples, and preserved districts face constant threats from time, environmental damage, overcrowding, and neglect. Modernization efforts include structural reinforcements, accessibility upgrades, digital exhibits, visitor infrastructure, and regulated tourism development. Proponents argue modernization preserves sites and keeps them relevant, while critics warn it erodes authenticity and cultural meaning.

This debate focuses on whetherintervention protects heritageorcompromises it, and whether benefits such as access, education, and sustainability outweigh risks to historical integrity.

Key Weighing Questions

Ispreservation through modernizationbetter than passive preservation?
Should cultural heritage prioritizeauthenticityoraccessibility?
Are modernization harms reversible, while preservation benefits are lasting?
Who should benefit most: local communities, global audiences, or future generations?

PRO Arguments

(Modernization has been more beneficial)

1.Prevents Irreversible Loss

Many heritage sites would deteriorate or collapse without modern conservation techniques.
Structural reinforcement, climate control, and restoration preserve sites that would otherwise disappear.

2.Increases Accessibility and Inclusion

Modernization enables access for people with disabilities, elderly visitors, and students.
Digital exhibits, translations, and interactive tools broaden educational reach.

3.Funds Long-Term Preservation

Tourism infrastructure generates revenue that supports maintenance and conservation.
Financial sustainability reduces reliance on unstable government funding.

4.Educational Enhancement and Engagement

Technology helps contextualize history, making sites more meaningful to visitors.
Modern interpretation tools deepen understanding beyond surface-level observation.

5.Cultural Relevance for Future Generations