ARGUMENTATIVE TEXT: MUST BE FANATICAL TO WIN

 

Thesis:

General elections occur in Indonesia every 5 years. General elections divide candidates into several groups. Almost some people will definitely be supporters of one of the candidate pairs. Every supporter definitely wants the best for the candidate pair they choose.

Argument 1:

In the midst of the busy political debate this year, many people are taking sides on one of their choices. In this context, we do not need to be fanatical about certain presidential or vice presidential candidates. What appears on stage does not always represent actual reality. We as a society should not be easily fooled by drama and political gimmicks. Let's support the candidate we are championing moderately, no need to get caught up in fanaticism.

Argument 2:

Many people seem to have lost their ability to think critically. If we provide objective facts about their opposing camp, then it will have absolutely no influence on their fanatical supporters. The facts will not change the fanatics' arguments. If we have fallen into fanaticism then we can no longer think critically, the brain becomes unable to differentiate between facts and opinions that we like.

Argument 3:

In social groups, every community member definitely has the right to express their opinion. We need to respect other people's choices, there is no need to be insulting if their choices are different from ours. By respecting other people's opinions, we have indirectly given them the right to voice their opinions. Apart from having to respect us, we also have to accept gracefully if our choices do not get the desired position. Just accept it and don't need to worry about it until it becomes a source of anger.

Conclusion:

There is no need for fanaticism, we just need to be wise in thinking. If there are parties who value their choices too much, then our job is to improve them well. You don't need to be a fanatic, but be a person who likes things in moderation.