1.

As Indonesian liberals, THW advocate ……

(+) , goal=offer options to liberals to have better life, stance=Indonesia isnt safe for liberals, status
quo=extrimist acts, paradigm that liberal is evil, and very religioustic society
A = society intimidation to liberals
id= no human should get intimidated, in fact no living creatures should get intimidated
pr= so many threats that direct/indirectly intimidate liberals
wp= these threats might cause psychological pressure to liberals, the threats cause by non-liberal
society which is so big and barely controllable by TH, even if there’s a regulation, the extrimist will
still threatened the liberals
conclusion= that makes us believe that advocate (the motion) is the best for liberals
2. THBT low income people shouldn’t trade/invest cryptocurreny
(+) goal=don’t want low income regret, stance=cryptocc is highly unstable, unsetted status quo
A = cryptocc is very uncertain, particularly in price
id= investment should be in something that has certain/more stable price
pr= (stance)
wp= if the low incomer invest while the cryptocc price is always changing drastically in hours, the low
incomer might get confused and regret their invesment, but the money they spend for buy cryptocc
is so much than the market price recently, and if doesn’t get better price they get frustated and
chose to sell their cryptocc and loss so much of money
B = to do cryptocc trade/invest require rigs (computer/PC)
id= the rigs price should be low, but enough to fullfill the requirement for invest/trade
pr= with another ways of invest, the rigs get much more rigs
wp= low incomer will need to pull out more money to get the rigs (which is expensive) and then the
cryptocc
C = possibility of crime
id= any kinds of crime should be able to traced
pr= a cryptocc-involving crime, such ransomware, obligates the victims to pay using cryptocc for
access back to their PC
wp= if the low incomer, which is also investor, become the victim, they have to lost the cryptocc they
have and they’ve been fight for + it’d be hard to solve this kinda crime cause the cryptocc can’t be
traced, even if there’s transactioin proof
3. THBT multi party system adopted in Indonesia bring more harm than good
() no stance, no status quo, no goal (need help fucking quick)
A = multi party isnt effective due to coalition
id= multi party but not so much should be good
pr= there’s too many parties (>10), but they need coalition at last, to achieve their goal
wp= there’ll be society paradigm that the party is inconsistent cause they keep changing coalition
every election (5 years once)
B = possibility of money politics become more crazier
id= every parties (through candidates) should “fight” clean for election
pr= the parties is really want to win for some reason, so they use money politic, by giving money to
their candidates
wp= if the candidate involved in money politics chosen to be government people, the parties would
want to get their money back, using 2 ways= 1) only money, but can make the chosen to corrupt/do
 bribary or 2) by giving the parties people to be inside the chosen cabinet (or something like that).
And this can make the government become worse than it already is
4. THR Indonesia Tax Amnesty program
(-) goal=?, stance=TAP is succed + giving extra income to APBN, status quo=? (needs help
immediately)
A = (forgot it lol)
5. As Jokowi, THW accept n acknowledge result of IPT 1965
(-) goal=prevent society paradigm that Jokowi is PKI, stance=?, status quo=Jokowi is efficient worker
(kerja kerja kerja) which shouldn’t give a damn to this IPT thing
A = the IPT has no law-power
id= if Jokowi want to apply something that has law-power, it’ll be supported
pr= this IPT is people tribunal, not a justice/crime tribunal which means it doesn’t have law-power at
all
wp=(mirip goal)