In the contemporary era, the question of whether old buildings should be protected has sparked considerable debate. While some people believe that old houses should be replaced by modern buildings, others argue that preserving old buildings can be highly beneficial for the country. From my perspective, old houses should be protected by public authorities, as this approach can safeguard a nation’s heritage and identity.
On the one hand, there are valid reasons why many people support the view that old buildings should be removed. One compelling argument is that old houses can negatively affect citizens’ quality of life and therefore contribute to environmental problems. For instance, old houses often lack facilities for residents’ living standards such as access to the internet or electricity problems, which can pose certain drawbacks for individuals’ personal success. Therefore, students who live in old buildings may struggle to complete their homework due to poor access to reading materials.
On the other hand, I strongly contend that old buildings should be preserved. The primary reason is that low-income families may find it difficult to afford newer buildings because of their high-tech devices or facilities. In addition, old houses can help preserve national identity and therefore safeguard a nation’s heritage, which is indispensable for national development. For example, families who live in old buildings are more likely to maintain strong relationships with each other, as they prioritize interpersonal relationships over glamorous lifestyles.
To sum up, although modern houses offer convenience and the widespread availability to online materials, I am convinced that old buildings are essential for national identity and social cohesion. A more balanced approach would be to protect old houses in order to preserve a nation’s heritage.