Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.

Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.

Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!

Identify Ally
Declare Enemy
Challenge to a Debate
Report This User

View All

View All

View All

RSS Ambassador

Reward Points:7
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
Efficiency Monitor

7 most recent arguments.
1 point

It is a well known fact that a more centralized government is more likely to survive than the one we have now.

A centralized government has a more unified and secure structure when it comes to passing bills and laws than our system which consists of distant states making their own independent laws and taxing systems.

Though we have a defense system, it is made up of several militias that can only defend their own surroundings. Even with sufficient supplies, it is most likely that these men will refuse to follow commands as they won't go against the people of their community. What we need is a loyal, central standing army prepared to go into battle even at times at peace so that we are not caught too off guard.

Our government can't even collect taxes from the states without their approval. This is bad as the government needs the money to pay off the debt from the war and circulate money to the states. If this is not done, the government will have no money supply to support either itself or the states.

1 point

While this is true, the whole purpose of this new structure is too prevent biased people from using their position to fulfill their own goals at the expense of others. These elites will be chosen to represent the needs of everyone when a decision has to be made. A new government only sounds bad because it takes away power from the overpowered, tyrannical majority that only looks out for itself with little disregard for the needy minority. The new government's ultimate goal would be to "secure the public good, and private rights, against the danger of such a faction" (303) as well as "preserve the spirit and the form of popular government" (303) to keep the majority content.

1 point

A large republic will give us a better selections of elites to choose to be representatives of the people instead of a small group of biased delegates chosen to pass laws that'll only help the wealthy majority at the expense of the poor minority. By having more variety, the public is exposed to delegates "whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice, will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations".(pg 304)

1 point

While it sounds like a great idea to have a several militias in the states, it would never work out in the long run. Militias consists of local citizens which would be a problem as they have too many connections with the people in their neighborhood to do their job effeciently.If we ever spontaneously attacked, it would take more time to prepare each and every militia than it would to prepare a single, well equipped, and trained standing army that is always ready for battle.

2 points

The people will not be able to govern themselves without set rules and limitations. It is human nature to put one's wants and needs before those of others. Madison refers to this fact with how it is impossible for someone to be their own judge in a case "because his interests would certainly bias his own judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity".(302)

2 points

The Articles of Confederation left openings that demagogues could use to their advantage by appealing to the majority to stay in power. A good way to do this was to put different factions against each other as even "the most frivolous and fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions, and excite their most violent conflicts.''(pg 301)

1 point

Even though this structure was with us when we defeated Britain, it doesn't mean that it is stable enough to fit the needs of the people as a whole. If we keep this government, the rights of the minority will be", disregarded in the conflict of rival parties; and that measures are too often decided by...the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority"(pg 300). In an ironic twist, the majority faction will become something similar to a tyrannical king leaving us right back where we started.

Ambassador has not yet created any debates.

About Me

I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!

Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here