Instigator / Con
7
1644
rating
64
debates
65.63%
won
Topic
#2773

Slum Tourism: benefits vs harms, net balance Policy Debate

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
0
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

Undefeatable
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
4
1569
rating
12
debates
66.67%
won
Description

Slum Tourism: Slum tourism, also sometimes referred to as "ghetto tourism," involves tourism to impoverished areas, particularly in India, Brazil, Kenya, and Indonesia. The purpose of slum tourism is to provide tourists the opportunity to see the “non-touristy” areas of a country or city.

Harm/Good: Threatening or violating something. We may discuss personal harm, economy harms, societal harms, so on and so forth. Pro will argue that the harms outweigh the good, while Con argues otherwise. (See more below)

Round 1:

Con will list the ways the harms outweigh the good.

Pro will list the ways the good outweighs the harm. He will then try to list potential policies that he thinks will be accepted, that allow the good to even further outweigh the harms.

Round 2 and 3:

Con will then refute and try to knock down implementation as well as listed benefits, then uphold the idea that the detriments still outweigh the plausible fixes of Pro's policy.

Pro will refute and defend.

Round 4 for final refutations and conclusion

Burden of proof is shared.

-->
@whiteflame

thanks for the vote. I always found humanitarianism difficult to argue, so I gave an overbroad spectrum of view to force Pro to waste some time on what was mostly an emotional based argument. It was just a cherry on top to enforce the lack of true impacts from Pro's policy/benefits.

-->
@Undefeatable

I'll try to get to this this weekend.

-->
@Undefeatable

I'll see what I can do

-->
@whiteflame
@MisterChris

care to toss a vote? Asking a bit earlier since this one has a lot of sources and ideas.

One week left

bumpity bump

-->
@Undefeatable

Sorry for not being able to fit in all the references in time. Also, #6 is supposed to be cited for the PPT statement. The cited #6 is supposed to belong to #5. Here are the list of rest of the references-

6. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=fsq-FJnKSkQC&oi=fnd&pg=PR3&dq=Pro-poor+Tourism+Strategies:+Making+Tourism+Work+for+the+Poor.+London.+IIED.&ots=p5q6uQG8xy&sig=7beaf9CBUs4AS1pxyGlbHJzg7mw
7. http://wwwshubhyatra.com/maharashtra/slum-tourism.htm/
8. http://www.favelatour.com.br/whatis_ing.htm
9. http://www.ivebeenthere.co.uk/tips/3396
10. http://www.realitytoursandtravel.com/slumtours.html

I enjoy poverty porn because downward comparisons.

-->
@Undefeatable

Touring poor areas was deemed bad since the dolphin of Hippo.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/qcurtius.com/2019/06/08/the-dolphin-of-hippo/amp/

if it's here after the next two days, I'll take it up

-->
@Undefeatable

I'll consider it, though... am I wrong or are Pro and Con flipped in the description?

-->
@Undefeatable

It is their own nations that treat them like zoo animals, the tourists are often the only ones generous enough to give to the beggar and overpay for accomodation and souvenirs etc.

As I said, I already knew the Pro case will be heavily subjective and I'm not undermining the truth in it, in terms of that slum tourism gives incentive for the nation to keep the slums as they are.

As for the nation being ashamed of their ghettos, favelas and slums... That's a plus in my eyes. They should be ashamed of what they do to their vulnerable.

-->
@RationalMadman

https://www.women-on-the-road.com/slum-tourism.html

"Slum tours treat people like animals in a zoo - you stare from the outside but don't dare get too close.

Visitors aren't interested in meaningful interaction; they just want their photo op. Contact with locals is minimal.

Money rarely trickles down. Instead, operators fill their pockets but the vaunted 'benefits to the community' don't materialize. Slum tourism profits from poverty.

People feel degraded by being stared at doing mundane things - washing, cleaning up, preparing food, things that are private. Their rights to privacy may be violated. Imagine yourself at the receiving end: how would you feel?

Even when they participate as hosts, local people are often underpaid and exploited.

The image of a country may be tarnished by publicizing slums (this is an actual concern among certain segments of certain populations - usually the more wealthy).

The tours make poverty exotic, otherworldly, almost glamorizing what to inhabitants is a harsh reality which will remain once the tourists are long gone."

Whiteflame agrees this is Con slanted if you don't allow for policies to fix the Pro side.

-->
@Undefeatable

Other than the risk of tourists getting mugged and ripped off, I don't see the grounds to be against Slum Tourism. If anything, for many of those places, tourism is beneficial as it both opens the eyes of foreigners to the suffering of the villagers and also is a huge source of their income.

I say this but I also think I understand where you will come from in this debate, arguing that it motivates the nations to keep the slums 'authentic'. I don't really see overall how Con can win so I'm not sure what I'll be fighting against if I were to accept but later on if noone accepts I may give it a try.

-->
@whiteflame

How’s this? You get to list ways we can fix the problem and I get to try to knock down your plan