Final answer:
Corruption is worse than armed robbery because it has far-reaching consequences, undermines institutions, and erodes trust in governance, impacting entire communities rather than isolated victims.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question at hand asks us to debate in support of the statement that corruption is worse than armed robbery. In constructing an argument that supports this position, we should consider the long-term impact of corruption as compared to the immediate, but more isolated, effects of armed robbery. Unlike armed robbery, corruption often involves the abuse of power by those in high-ranking positions, which can lead to widespread consequences such as the undermining of institutions, the erosion of trust in governance, and significant economic setbacks for entire communities or nations.
Using the provided reference material, we can draw upon the ethos of the Kenyan African Union, as mentioned in the excerpt, that detests theft because it damages the reputation of the whole tribe. This can be paralleled with the idea that corruption wreaks havoc on the entire fabric of society. Furthermore, the scenario provided with the police highlights the difficulty in obtaining evidence against those who commit corruption, illustrating its insidious nature. The quotations about money causing immense harm also support the argument that corruption can have far-reaching negative effects, more severe than the isolated incident of a robbery.
It is essential to approach this debate with empathy for dissenting opinions, using nonaggressive language to acknowledge different viewpoints while assertively backing the stance that corruption carries more detrimental consequences. By integrating reason and evidence, such as the impact on social trust and economic health and by quoting relevant sources, we form a compelling argument that corruption is indeed a more severe issue than armed robbery.