Many people believe that the government should protect buildings, which are carrying their own deep history. However, others adhere the opposite position. To specify, a blooming city does not need any past decade’s architecture. Furthermore, buildings that are more stylish should replace old-fashioned houses.
Truth be told, every city has its own unique history, which can be shown by old and mesmerizing architectural masterpieces. Consequently, they offer a countless quantity of knowledge, which future generations may reach through deep learning about historical circumstances related to these buildings. Unfortunately, a minority of residents does not almost admit the importance of the reservation these constructions. As a result, the government should protect historical architecture by law in order to inspire new generation to create masterpieces that are more outstanding.
On the flip side, such constructions should be replaced by new buildings in order to develop a convenient and modern world. Nowadays, people prefer to go on instead of to stay in the past and resolve all occasions, which happened to our ancestors. Fascinating innovations demand the technology progress, which may be disrupted by frequent return to the past. Therefore, the best choice is to get rid of everything, what is linking us with previous decisions and things. First of all, a country has to get rid of old-fashioned buildings and replace them by something more suitable.
Considering all the information, I made my own decision. As for me, I am on the side of people, who are for protection old architecture. In my opinion, the humanity cannot create successful future without any knowledge about previous right or wrong decisions. Moreover, old building can inspire people to create unique constructions, which consist of different old styles.