Nobody asked for it, but here it is.

PS: Topics covered in this post can be considered as ‘controversial’. Views expressed are my own.

Topic 1: Have screens replaced books completely?

Nowadays, it is getting more and more common to read books digitally. Electronic books can be read on a variety of screens: computers, smartphones, tablets, e-readers… You can now easily carry thousands of books in your pockets.

Electronic books and paper books both have pros and cons. For instance, electronic books are easier to carry, you can put as many books as you want in your device as long as you have storage space left – while carrying paper books can be cumbersome. Electronic books are also generally a lot cheaper than paper books since manufacturing costs are not included. But using screens for too long can lead to optical problems – while it is not the case with paper books.

I am comfortable with both forms of books, but I find electronic books to be a lot more convenient. I think it is a lot easier to read on my phone in public transports, especially when they are crowded. And it is a lot easier to actually learn using an electronic book: when there is a word I do not know; I just have to hold the word and a definition + Wikipedia page shows up immediately. I am even able to highlight text, take notes and set bookmarks using apps like Amazon’s Kindle.

Sure, electronic books are convenient, but you have a price to pay… Using screens for too long, especially for reading can have side effects such as causing headaches or optical problems. I know I should not use screens as often as I usually do since my eyesight is already pretty bad, but the temptation is just too strong…

Overall, I would say that electronic books have more pros than paper books. Even though I like to read both forms of books, I have to admit that paper books are less convenient: they are cumbersome, costs more money (+ none of them are available for free) and offers an overall experience that is less practical for the readers. The only major positive point they have is that they are more pleasant to the eye. Some people maybe also like to possess books as collectible items, but I am not one of them. In the end, people should just read in the way they prefer.

Topic 2: Is the death penalty appropriate or should it be banned?

Even though the death penalty has been abolished in 1981 in France and even earlier in most developed countries, it is still a current issue nowadays. Some people are totally against the death penalty, some others want it back. In the United States, for instance, there are different laws for each state, meaning that some states authorise death penalty and some other states bans it. This shows how divisive this issue is.

In my opinion, the death penalty can be appropriate in some extreme cases: mass murderers, terrorists, recidivists… I believe the death penalty can have positive effects on the crime rate and that we should be less forgiving towards criminals. However, if applied, death penalty should be well regulated and not applied too often, only in extreme cases, as mentioned above, in order not to fall into some sort of totalitarian regime (similar to the way criminals are treated in counties like China or Syria) but rather to apply laws more severely (like some American states or Japan).

So, in the end, I think death penalty could be appropriate in some cases. But in order to work, all countries would need to reach agreement, not only on the death penalty but on general legislation too. So that people could not escape other countries’ legislation (Carlos Ghosn for example). I definitely believe countries have to harmonise their laws in order to catch criminals. For me, the main problem with the ban of the death penalty in the EU is that criminals will not be judged equally depending on their nationality and on what part of the globe they committed the crime. Someone who does a horrible crime will not get punished in France (and maybe will even get released some months after having been judged guilty, but that is another problem we won’t discuss here) while he certainly will be judged differently in the US or China. The issue is not whether we should legalise death penalty or not, but more how do we harmonise the laws and establish a sort of an international alliance to fight crime.