CreateDebate


Debate Info

6
7
Globalism Nationalism
Debate Score:13
Arguments:9
Total Votes:13
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Globalism (6)
 
 Nationalism (3)

Debate Creator

Slavedevice(1393) pic



Globalism vs Nationalism

Do think the future will the USA becoming more closed and internal OR if Democrats get more power will we go more and more a global society?

Globalism

Side Score: 6
VS.

Nationalism

Side Score: 7
1 point

We will never have peace with nationalism. Borders will always have to be "defended", Races will always be either better or worse than another. Religions will always work toward "supremacy". The more we work to be ONE WORLD, the sooner we get to a place like "The Enterprise", where all "kinds" work together. Yes, Mr. Spok anything else is "illogical", but, today we are not wise enough and too greedy, and too religiously divided to be "logical". It might take a few centuries to get there, .... should we survive.

Side: Globalism

I personally agree with you! My profile meme explains this Brave New World scenario if you check out the history behind it.

We need a final war

Side: Globalism
AlofRI(3294) Disputed
1 point

I'm glad you agree with me, however, we are in disagreement about a final war. Likely you haven't lived through enough wars. I've lived through WW2, Korea, Viet Nam, the two "Desert Wars" the "Cold War" the War against Women, the ongoing "Civil War", the ongoing "Religious Wars" ... have I forgotten any?? No matter, we've had enough!

Side: Nationalism
1 point

Yes, I can't help but agree with globalnationalism.

>...................................................................

Side: Globalism
4 points

A one world government is a terrible idea for a myriad of reasons. While it seems a laudable goal, this perception is the product of shallow, optimistic analysis. The main reason people think it is a good idea is because it would, in theory, mean that wars were not possible. Obviously, however, this isn't the case: civil wars and insurgencies have the same results as wars between nations: death and destruction.

In addition, imagine if the one world government became malevolent. As it stands, if our nation of residence is becoming oppressive we can simply flee elsewhere. Under a one world government, however, where could one flee to escape it's totalitarian clutches? Further, what force could oppose a malevolent world government? When Adolf Hitler set his sights on world domination it was only other nations that could stop him. Those within his empire had no such ability and even the French resistance required outside aid. The French resistance also only existed due to the fact that the French army wasn't entirely militarily crushed because they were conquered so quickly by the German Blitzkrieg. If there is a malevolent one world government, there will be no force that can oppose it and emerge victorious.

Further, one must think of the manner in which we have progressed as societies in the past. Different nations try different methods of rule and we can compare these to inform our manner of governance. One might find, for example, that giving one's citizenry greater freedoms results in greater productivity. This is a big reason why nations grant freedoms to it's citizens; in the interests of what is pragmatic, rather than in the interests of morality. Different nations and empires each found different methods of progression at different times and intentionally or unintentionally shared these. For one example, the renaissance is at least partially creditable to the manner in which the Medici ruled Florence, including their patronage of artists, inventors and other polymaths.

Finally, one must think about the ability to be represented by one's government and it's accountability to it's citizens. When one is governed on a smaller scale, one can be greater represented by their government. This is both because one makes up a larger percentage of the voting population and because different issues have different importance to people living in different areas. This is demonstrated by, for example, the cities of the U.S. being more left leaning while the countryside is more right leaning (Source 1). These contrasts are magnified when one considers the political and ideological differences between nations. It is also an immediately apparent fact that a government is more accountable to it's citizens when it is more local. A multinational government based in Brussels, for example, has less reason to be afraid of unrest in London than unrest in Brussels. Moreover, it is easily demonstrated that at larger numbers accountability and representation is reduced. If one has 100 citizens and one ruler, it merely takes ten outspoken citizens for a problem or concern to be made apparent. If one has one million citizens, however, it takes one hundred thousand protestors to have the same effect.

Sources:

(1) http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/11/political_landscape

Side: Nationalism
2 points

You hit the main points except one.

The ability of any organization to function effectively is limited by its size.

A single world government would have just too much to do, too many people to govern, too many diverse interests to balance, too many layers of bureaucracy, and would ultimately be far too expensive.

The government would simply collapse under its own weight and inefficiency.

Side: Nationalism
1 point

We have no choice! We are on a dieing planet- only practical solution is a fast decline in population. I pray it will happen so that the human race will go on and evolve into near immortality. Genetic Engineering and all that stuff Hitler wanted but these Knuckle Dragging Semitic religions forbid.

Amen

Side: Globalism
1 point

Though I disagree with you, I up voted you because you have such vast knowledge and you are one of the best debaters!! I think as you do a OWG would be extremely cumbersome and impossible in traditional times. But with great advances in IT and TRANSPORTATION it would be manageable.

But you have a great argument!

I have to be honest >>I think Hitler failed bc he wouldn’t abandon Christianity (as he wanted) and He drug his feet on Nukes bc it was “Jew Science “. Haha

Side: Globalism