|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 5:00 am
Draevir Lady Liriel Baenre O-o; I got the short end. I have to prove that nationalism is good for the world. The most I have is opinions. And it doesn't help the judges are biased... *Grumble* Nationalism, by definition is a nation's furthering of it's own "good." The only way it can also be good for the world is if what is good for the nation depends upon it's effect on the world. This is a redundancy and poorly structured. "Good" in this reference is entirely subjective, and a subjective premise is very difficult to present in a logical argument. Furthermore, the idea that Nationalism is "good" for the world can only be studied by comparison to it's opposite, the lack of nationalism (which does not exist in any geo-political entity anywhere). In effect, you would have to compare nationalism to a utopia on Mars or an Amazonian tribe to even approach any substantive "proofs." Whoever came up with the debate topic either "rigged" it, or didn't actually take time to assess whether the topic was debatable. If they had, they'd realize that it's a semantic jumble and doesn't present a valid argument on either side. Still, you have been given this assignment, so you may have to dig deep to come up with a presentable defense. I recommend not personalizing the issue, because your side of the topic is rigged to blow up from the outset anyhow, so it's no reflection on you if your arguments seem flimsy. Just try to use logic and facts and realize that the arguments against your position will be just as flimsy and invalid. Start simply: find examples of positive results of national self-interest benefitting foreign countries and try to ignore the obvious negative results which went hand in hand. British (and other European) colonialism would be the first place I'd start. Then I would address capital investment in foreign industry for profit. Both of these concepts are shady and questionable, but are the only legs I would consider using at first glance. Tsun Tsu Proverb: When the mouse wishes to face the tiger, he leads it into the swamp where they are both equal. Perhaps you might mention your concern to your teacher. It may in fact be that he/she is aware of the ambiguous ground you are being asked to stand on and that it's purposely intended for you to find a creative way to deal with this royal mess of a debate topic. >.> I never though of it that way. ^-^ I think I can make this work, Thanks Drae~ *Starts scribbling notes*
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 5:06 am
selune dusk and i didn't say "all" i said "in general." -.- there a few, not many in my experience, MY HONEST PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AS I HAVE ALREDAY STATED, smart Americans. and in my honest personal experience, every foriegner i have ever met, online and in person, was extremely intelligent. sides, Li, why reason would anyone from another country have to say or do ANYTHING nice to Americans, when America is such an arrogant and rude country to the rest of the world? In MY personal experience, only a few are rude to foreigners, and that is because they get exasperated at them, because they did not take the time to learn English before going to an English Speaking country. And we (Which I doubt we are if you have ever met the French) are only rude and arrogant, because we can be. America is one of the few surviving Super Powers, which gives us the ability to say and do ( To an extent) whatever we want.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 5:13 am
It seems to me that compared to some Americans the English can't sue people. For those Americans its just a tap of a cup and then "I'll f***in' sue you!" As for the English, you hit them with a car and its "Sorry that was entirely my fault!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 11:56 am
I think it's kind of funny that some of you are calling other countries rude and arrogant when you're displaying characteristics of both yourselves. Just throwing my two cents in. Anyway, please make certain this does not turn into an argument thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 11:59 am
almostseth Once again, I would like to point out that subjects pertaining to politics, religion, race and nationality usually end in arguments and people being generally offended... Just something to think about before you post.
Thank you Seth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:10 pm
Lady Liriel Baenre selune dusk and i didn't say "all" i said "in general." -.- there a few, not many in my experience, MY HONEST PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AS I HAVE ALREDAY STATED, smart Americans. and in my honest personal experience, every foriegner i have ever met, online and in person, was extremely intelligent. sides, Li, why reason would anyone from another country have to say or do ANYTHING nice to Americans, when America is such an arrogant and rude country to the rest of the world? In MY personal experience, only a few are rude to foreigners, and that is because they get exasperated at them, because they did not take the time to learn English before going to an English Speaking country. And we (Which I doubt we are if you have ever met the French) are only rude and arrogant, because we can be. America is one of the few surviving Super Powers, which gives us the ability to say and do ( To an extent) whatever we want. i'm not going to say that i'm right and your wrong. but i still don't believe that being a superpower gives america the right to do whatever it wants. that's highly unethical, and very unclassy. i don't like the ability to sue. i realy hate law-systems anyway...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:13 pm
Draevir selune dusk and i didn't say "all" i said "in general." -.- there a few, not many in my experience, MY HONEST PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AS I HAVE ALREDAY STATED, smart Americans. and in my honest personal experience, every foriegner i have ever met, online and in person, was extremely intelligent. sides, Li, why reason would anyone from another country have to say or do ANYTHING nice to Americans, when America is such an arrogant and rude country to the rest of the world? Again, there are situations in which the U.S. has grossly mismanaged it's affairs abroad. If we fail to see what the U.S. has done right (in aiding foreign countries, poviding investment capital, and disaster relief), we miss the mark. I believe it is beneficial to take a holistic view and realize the positive impact that nations have, not just their flaws. I believe this is important with nations, and individuals. I'm not criticizing so much as I'm offering a positive perspective. Negativity is not proactive, it merely adds to the problems that exist and magnifies them. If you want to see change, you must seek out examples of that change and embrace the potential which lies in the heart of every country and every person. Okay, done soapboxing, bleh. xp why should any country have to get involved with another country's policies? now, helping out with disaster relief and protecting people from terror, i can understand that, but what about the fact that EVERY ******** country it seems wants to make it's government system the same government system in ALL countries!? America considers Russia evil for wanting to spread comunnism to the world, but America tries to spread democracy to the whole world itself! AND DOESN"T EVEN REALY HAVE A DECENT NOTION OF FREEDOM ANYWAY!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:14 pm
I'm not kissing the dirt here either, but America does have good qualities, like it or not. I'm just really uncomfortable with the whole majority squashing out the little guy as of late; but that's democracy for you. Proposition 8 pretty much disgusted me. I can't believe people were willing to go that far and spend that much money just to ostracize the rights of people that were different from them. I guess I'm sort of a liberal in that respect; I get unsettled when other people try to play God with lives. What with the multitude of hate crimes etc. springing up lately, it's a stinging reminder that racism and prejudice has not gone away in the states, and probably won't for a long time, regardless of law. Honestly, it saddened me. I'm not a big fan of most Americans, even being one, and it doesn't mean I don't think this country has greatness left in it; but seeing that amount of bigotry still rearing its ugly head after two hundred or so years of progression is a disappointing sight. I think my love said it best:
"I find it terribly terribly saddening that i have to go over there for 7-8 months to help bring about the deaths of as many assholistic terrorizing bastards as possible. Simply to find that the zeal that Americans give to hating each other for simplistic and assumed ideals they don't always happen to share is never losing strength in it's pile-driving push forward to blinding everyone in the game 'An eye for an eye'. "
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:16 pm
aye... i guess those that best know what they are talking about are the ones in the field, right? iii-_-
i dunno, i guess i'm just realy passionate about my beliefs here... i'm pro-Communitarianism myself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:26 pm
I can see what you mean. There is a lot in the war I don't agree with America on. Take the war in Iraq, which is a big deal. There are parts of it I agree with and parts I don't. But I think the funny thing? The pro-peace people of Iraq WANT America to stay over there. The indigenous races of those nations have been in wars for generations; no doubt they're tired of it. Their economy depends on the oil wells over there, and you wanna know who's guarding those right now? Americans. I can only hope if we do decide to pull out of there, they'll leave some units behind to keep that vigil up until Iraq has trained a suitable defense system; because if those are left vulnerable, the first batshit ******** that wants to make some noise and wreak havoc only has to target the jewel of their wealth to force people into discord once again. So in that, I believe America is doing something good. Terrorism is a big issue and it's getting bigger; I think people fail to see just how big of an issue it is. Sure, I don't agree with the fact that in the process of war, some innocents are compromised, but that is war for you. War isn't generally about who is right or wrong, it's about who is left. I hope America will take some measure of dignity in the days to come with our new leadership.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:40 pm
yeah, i mean... i didn't like the initial reasons for going into the middle east. but once we got there things got unexpected. and now i see the soldiers doing extra good work and i am glad that they are. i want them to come home, but i still want them to keep up making life better for the iraqians.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:41 pm
I think we have a pretty good notion of freedom, actually. Unfortunately a lot of that beauty gets lost in the face of laws. Laws in themselves are a contradiction of freedom; but without laws, you can count on some psycho to rain all over your parade and stick a bullet in your face. The nature of humanity is conflicting. Peace in itself cannot exist without some form of threat to keep it alive, and in that I find much irony.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:46 pm
i'd much rather have a single ruling body of MULTIPLE PEOPLE to decide everything, without any codified laws. i think that solves MY problem with society.... but not enough people agree with my idea to make this change, or even to start a new nation....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:57 pm
Well, uh, you sort of do. The president makes all the decisions, but he/she still has to go through congress and his advisory team to really make things happen. It's a figurehead sort of deal. And with a nation this big, you need some kind of law to prevent idiots from killing everyone. I wish laws were more basic than they are now, though, by far. Laws on schools, laws on practices, laws on marketing, laws on home ownership, and now even laws on who and what gets to be married.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:59 pm
i truely think that a nation can function VERY WELL with guidance rather than hard-fast rules. and i hate this branch-system with the legislative, the executive and the judicial.... i want just one branch. just judicial. that be it.
EDIT: here's how it would be set up:
A Senate or Council of 8 or 9 Senators, one of them being a Judge or Praetor. (preferably a Judge, i wouldn't like church and state to be the same realy...)
anyway, the Judge has final say on all matters unless outvoted by 5 or more Senators. all matters would be decided in this way, by being discussed by everyone on the Council/Senate.
my girlfriend sara thinks there should be a bill system, which i disagree with, since it makes it take too long to get anything done.... she, and pretty much everyone else i have told this too, are not comfortable with the Judge having such a strong say in things....
there would be no codified laws. all issues are settled in Court by the Senate/Council. they are the third party for all disputes. they would be elected by popular vote if the nation is small enough, or as the voting system for America if larger. (in which case each state would have a Governer.) I feel a conciderable length of office is neccasary, so i am for the full 4 years, but sara says only 1 year and no re-election two years in a row. *shrugs.* it is a work in prgress realy...
each city would have a Mayor. and problems would be settled in this order:
City, State, Nation. (that is, Local issues are handled by the Mayor and a court in City Hall, State matters are handled by the Governor of that state in a State Court, and National Metters are handled in court by the Senate/Council.)
all ideas as for say, what needs to be done to improve the community, be it building a new bridge, funding for schools, etcetera, are voted on, and handled by the matter it applies to (city, state or nation).
what do you think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
