CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Trump Compared to Peter the Great
Trump seems to show many qualities to Peter the Great from Russian history.
In Russian history, Peter the Great was ruthless but made great progress in modernizing backward Russia. He was hands on, ruthless, extremely politically incorrect, and willing to put his country interests first at expense of other countries. Mr Trump hundreds years later and in a different part of the world seems to have reincarnated into a similar profile. Obvioulsly a different current state situation with different dynamics, but can we find parallel in history between Peter the Great in backward Russia hundreds years ago and Donald Trump of present day United States of America? Ultimately Peter the Great shaped the future of that country in a positive drastic way.
Trump and Peter the Great are similar. Both represented their county interests first, fought with power structure at their time, and most importantly were highly politically incorrect.
When Peter the Great made a point of publically cutting off beards for boyars (noblemen of that time), I compare that to Trump telling off other politicians or accusing Media of being "fake news"
Trump inherited a backward country full of corruption and a power system that is disfunctional. He is an outsider trying to drive change, and the system is trying to shut him down. He is decisive and doesnt care.
That is similar to what Peter the Great inherited. The Boyars tried to control power, resist change, and keep the country in the dark ages. Peter changed all of that. While I agree that it is too early to tell if Trump will have similar impact like Peter the Great, I think we can learn from history and draw a parallel.
That is a a good point and I agree with that argument. Peter the Great mission was window to the world via the Baltic sea. Trump believes that his mission is to make US more competitve with global trade dynamics via better trade agreements, immigration reform, etc. at the end of the day they have a similar objective. Obviously we cannot expect the same tactics hundreds years later, or have Trump actually go and fight for the Baltic sea
The test of his presidency will be if he can evolve from types of comments he was making while running for office. Now that he is in charge it is less of a necessity to insult his opponents
I dont know if These comments were deliberalty insulting to get more attention and popularity. At the end of the day, bulk of voting population votes based on whether they personally like the candidate. Some people like these comments
He was hands on, ruthless, extremely politically incorrect, and willing to put his country interests first at expense of other countries.
So were Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini. Are you comparing Peter the Great to those three? Are you comparing Trump to those three?
Of course they're similar if you compare them using those vague characteristics. About three quarters of the rulers throughout time could be described as hands on, ruthless, politically incorrect and nationalistic.
The difference is that the successful rulers with these characteristics were men and women with detailed plans and, most importantly, SMARTS. The best rulers like Peter the Great were strategic geniuses, which Trump most certainly is not.
It's a stupid comparison because it's extremely vague and generalised. By your logic I could say Hitler is similar to Queen Elizabeth or Boudicca.
While it is true that other political figures you mentioned (who happen to all be dictators) have qualities you mentioned, it is not true that they are similar to Trump. We will have to find out if Trump is successful with his strategy, it is too early to tell.
Clearly no two people are the same, and the question is if there are more similarities or differences.
Peter the Great is generally accepted in history as a positive role model who was ruthless but clearly got things done. If you are not a Trump supporter, I can see why you wouldn't like that comparison.
The fact is, Peter inherited a country in need of change, he went to war with other countries to expand its prominence, he had to fight with regime of that time to make progress. That provides sufficient ground for similarities.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to compare Trump to dictators, I was just going to one extreme to show how stupid the similarity was.
Peter inherited a country in need of change
So did Obama.
he had to fight with regime of that time to make progress.
So did Obama.
Therefore, Peter the Great and Obama are also similar.
Obviously I do not actually agree with this, but I'm just pointing out how easily this similarity can be manipulated.
The difference between Peter and Trump is that Peter fought against the regime to get things done that needed done; Trump is fighting against congress to get things done which he wants done but does not necessarily need doing.
he went to war with other countries to expand its prominence,
Trump hasn't gone to war yet, and if he does it won't be to "expand its prominence". The US is already the most prominent country in the world.
The reason why people like Peter the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, etc. succeeded is because they were political geniuses. They were strategic geniuses, manipulative geniuses, military geniuses, social geniuses... They knew how to run a country and its people because that was their talent. It's why people like you, me or - you guessed it - Donald Trump, cannot and will not ever become known as one of the greats, and why we cannot compare bumbling idiots with political geniuses. It's an insult to one of the greatest rulers of all time.
Who knows, perhaps Trump will actually prove to be a good leader. But comparing him even slightly to Peter the Great is ludicrous.
The points are valid regardless Obama also inheriting country in need of change and fighting regime - but obama's solution was to let foreigners in and embrace communism. He is a poor example of Peter the Great comparison.
Trump is not going to actual warfare, and you are correct that USA is already prominent. But USA is not prominent in exports, as we need access to manufacturing capability that we are not allowed to develop because of unfair balance of trade and subsidies by China.
That is why he is starting a trade war - not with physical weapons, but with smart negotiations. I am optimistic he will win, but we need to see.
You may find it ludicrous to compare him to Peter the Great, but is it fair to call him a bumbling idiot? I actually think that's ludicrous.
LMAO. Embrace communism? Obama has done no such thing. You've lost a lot of credit from this one statement.
Obama is considered pretty conservative by our standards in the UK. I always snort with laughter whenever some idiot calls him a socialist or a communist, because he's far from either of those.
That is why he is starting a trade war
That is not comparable with a man who United an entire country and turned a back-water nation into one of the most powerful forces in Europe.
I am optimistic he will win, but we need to see.
There's no way you're going to compete with China's level of production. Simply put, China is a country with a huge, huge population and its economy is focused pretty much solely on industry.
For the US to beat China at its own game, you'll have to build thousands upon thousands of factories. And that's just the beginning; you'll then have to actually find people willing to work in those factories. The population is becoming increasingly college educated, which leaves a very small percentage of unskilled workers left to fill the army of factories. Now, here's where Trump is shooting himself in the foot: to fill these factories, you're going to need - that's right! - immigrants! How can you build an industrial economy without immigrants?
is it fair to call him a bumbling idiot?
Yes. He has the vocabulary of a 5 year old ("bigly"??!?!?) and he has the body gestures of a spastic girl who's just been given a jar of cookies. He's the Boris Johnson of the US.
I think that it is distasteful to compate Trump (or anyone else for that matter) to Hitler, after hirrible war crimes committed and mass extermination of millions and millions of people.
I wasn't comparing Trump to Hitler, I was saying that the comparisons used to compare Trump to Peter the Great are so vague and typical that you could use them to compare Peter the Great and Hitler, or Trump and Hitler.
"Stupid comparison" is overreaching NicolasCage. I think to many Trump supporters the comparison resonates. At the end, I judge people by outcome they achieve. While I agree that Trump still didn't have an opportunity to achieve the outcome, there are sufficient similarities between him and Peter the Great.
As far as your comment regarding SMARTS, He did get the initial outcome of getting elected despite all the odds.
there are sufficient similarities between him and Peter the Great.
No there aren't. I've disputed the similarities. Peter the Great would be thrashing about in his grave if he heard such a comparison.
As far as your comment regarding SMARTS, He did get the initial outcome of getting elected despite all the odds.
That's not because he's smart, it's because both the far-left and far-right are morons.
Many of the people who support Trump are too stupid to acknowledge facts and criticisms and follow him no matter what he does.
Many of the others who voted for Trump did so because they weighed up the candidates and chose what they believed was the lesser of two evils. Both choices were awful, and I hold no judgement against these voters.
Then, there's the group who voted for Trump because, rightly so, they're sick of the far-left chastising and insulting them for the slightest difference in political opinion. These people completely sour the rest of the left, just like the alt-right sour the name of conservatives.
It's a pretty wild claim isn't it , I don't think Peter the great would have got upset if his daughters clothing range was pulled from one of the old time bazaars , if you had of said ' Trump compared to Peter the greats court jester ' you may have been onto something ....
Well most the world are calling him a clown , he is already down as the worst ever American president and he has barely started ; a man who's given the most powerful position in the world and he's bitching about his daughters clothes range being dropped by a retail chain is by all means a clown
Actually, I would say that is a vote for similarity. Boyars conspired against Peter the great to ensure he doesnt get too much power, as they feared him disturbing current regime. Here we have media, Businesses like Nordstrom try to do the same thing.
Really Dermot?? A courts jester? He has made it very clear that he doesn't like COURTS, OR JUDGES, (With the exception of those appointed by HIM that will be GREAT JUDGES on GREAT COURTS which will make GREAT decisions when they follow HIS instructions!)
Well wait and see , Trump has been honoured by his people with the ultimate honour and he is bringing disgrace on that honour and on the US . Outside the US just look at what the press say daily about Trump and the US I've have never seen such widespread dislike and disrespect for an American president .
I am not sure where you get your poll information that most of the World call Trump a clown. I am not disagreeing that he has caused much media activity, but it is fair for him to get upset if his political opponents attack his daughters business to get to him.
Well , the minute Trump was elected the headlines around the world were more or less unamimious in their disappointment; normally the president of the US is given an enormous amount of respect by most nations not so Trump .
He should keep his petty squabbles out of the public eye and certainly not get involved in his daughters failed business venture , do you really want your president tweeting the latest bulletins on his petty squabbles with others ?
I don't believe or never have in what's appropriate , what to me is appropriate is that people honestly express how they feel instead of dancing on eggshells and saying what they expect the mob wants to hear
What is "Not Sumilar" ? I have never even heard of such a word ? Welcome aboard Foreigner and maybe you should learn to use spell check !!!!!!!!!!!!!! LMMFAO
So agree on the use of spellchecker issue. Others seem to understand that it was a typo and are able to comment on their position. But thank you for insulting all foreigners..I guess you are a Trump supporter. lol?
I thought it is a debate, not a spelling competition. In any case, I see that the spelling issue was corrected. I would have expected an actual argument to this debate, instead accusing the moderator to be a foreigner because he didn't use a spell checker.
It's interesting that you expect everyone to use spell-checker. Many folks are on the go, and frankly mobile interface on this site is lacking, especially when it comes to spell-checker.
"hands on" and "ruthless" are characteristics of countless leaders throughout history, "politically incorrect" is vague and meaningless (not trying to be rude, but that term is devoid of any legitimate, consistent meaning that transcends partisan rhetoric), and "willing to put" country before self is incredibly arguable, particularly when it comes to Trump.
Peter the Great was great in large part because he forced the conservative establishment (I do not mean "big c" Conservative, as in Modern American Conservative ideology) to adapt to a change social and economic order. The thing is, Trump is doing the opposite. In an age where fossil fuels are becoming less financial viable, President Trump is trying to subsidize the industry. In an age where coal supplies are dropping, Trump is promising to revitalize the mines. In an age where American manufacturing is becoming more and more automated, Trump is promising to bring back factory jobs. In an age where American labor is becoming less globally viable for low-skill work (due to rising costs of living, in large part), Trump is promising to bring back our industrial global hegemony.
To put more simply, where Peter the Great sought to bring his country out of the past and into the future, Trump is actively promising to take us away from the future and into the past. He is trying to bring back the post WW2 economic boom that was caused by an incredibly complex combination of factors, from the advent of globalization to the industrial depression of a war-ravaged Europe, despite the fact that these factors can't come about again. In a time where we need to be looking to establish our post-industrial, post-manufacturing economy, Trump is looking to the past for answers. That is, essentially, the exact opposite of what Peter the Great did.
But that trade war is set to diminish, not increase, our economic influence. Peter the Great took part in economic and political expansionism, while Trump is explicitly advocating for isolationism.
Trade war will increase, not diminish USA influence. It will stop unfair advantage we provided to major oursourcing countried and will develop american export capabilities. There will be winners and losers, but net long term effect will be postive (if we negotiate well).
That is similar to Peter the Great expansion to give Russia "the window to the World" via his fight for access to Baltic sea. There were winners and losers (losers those who dies fighting the war for Russia). It was a major risk, as if Russia would have lost the war, it would go even more backward in the dark ages.
We don't have the workforce or the industrial infrastructure for any of that to be true, though. This isn't a matter of wishful thinking, it's a matter of demographic trends in aging and birth rate as well as labor costs and basic infrastructure. We do not have the means to become a net exporter. Full stop.
Additionally, one can not increase influence by decreasing interaction. If you become isolationist, your influence diminishes. Your example of Peter the Greats desire for Eurocentric multiculturalism is a perfect example of how unlike him Trump is. Peter sought to increase the prevalence of external cultural influence in order to progress Russian society. Trump is seeking to decrease external cultural influence, explicitly.
You can't reallyou just say that because there are winners and losers, he is like trump. There are always winners and losera, for essentially everything.
I don't agree that Trump is taking us to the past. Trump is advocating a new future for our country. Future where we are competitive in multiple industries, don't become a dumping ground for illegal immigrants, make it difficult for terrorists t enter the country, and stop wasting money on inneffiemt health care and wars that's not of our business in the first place.
That sounds like a pretty good goal, and doesn't sound to me like the past.
I don't agree that Trump is taking us to the past. Trump is advocating a new future for our country.
But look at the actual policies he is advocating for. As I said, he has actively stated his desire to bring us back to a post-WW2 industrial bubble, which is not possible.
Please, don't just listen to his rhetoric, look at the actual policy proposals that he makes, and come up with your own conclusion of what direction it takes our country in. Because attempting to use the government to artificially inflate economically non-competitive industries is not "the future".
His policies will rebalance trade, and will provide US the competitive advantage we lost when we allowed China to subsidise manufacturing capabilties with their artifically maintained currency exchange
He is advocating for the future. His policies will make US competitive again with exports capabilities. Peter the Great wanted to be like Europe, and Trump in that sense like China/India for export goods/services.
Narwhal, I think your points are partially valid. However, I think that impact of Trump trade wars are far more complex than what you are describing. Like Baltic Sea situation, he is trying to invest in capabilities that he believes are important for the Country. The long term impact of all of that is rebalance of the types of jobs as well.
