How to debate whether the country is a social problem or a personal problem?

To tell you the truth, your topic is very difficult under the present conditions, because after Obama's visit to China, he proposed to strengthen exchanges and cooperation between the two countries and expand the number of international students by 1,. This must be the point that the other side will attack.

first of all, if you want to win the game, you must first find out who you want to conquer. If you are a student judge, you should follow the student line. If you are a teacher judge, you should please the teacher again.

the advantage of the affirmative is that both the first speaker and the last speaker are affirmative.

first of all, we should make it clear that society is composed of everyone and individuals, and the final decision depends on individuals. Society can influence it, but it cannot be forced. Moreover, going abroad also has the influence of opportunities, which are not determined by a big social environment.

one of the things that you are hard to prevent is that the academic exchanges and cultural cooperation between the two countries are national events, and the other is that many of our founding fathers went abroad to study in order to revitalize China, such as Premier Zhou. This is the most favorable and emotional point of the other party.

Then you can only defend yourself in, for example: China has a large population (data), but after all, there are only a few people going abroad. Isn't it unpatriotic for most people? (To be harsh, you can say: The other debater, you and we are both at home, aren't we patriotic youths? In the final analysis, going abroad depends on one's motivation and opportunity. (Internal cause and external cause)

Debate skills:

When summing up the four arguments, pay attention to the first 3 minutes to make statements and refutations according to the other party's theory, free debate and loopholes, and don't recite all the manuscripts, which will greatly add points.

Finally, I'd like to remind you that in free debate, you must pay attention to controlling time and distributing the number of times everyone speaks equally. It's best to make a systematic question, such as an example, write three questions, and then throw your own questions accordingly every time you respond to the other party. If the other party evades, the last speaker will say, "The other party is still evading our question. Actually, what we mean is. . . . Isn't that just our point?

I hope I can help you.