The Instigator
Kalebsklips
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Nac
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

A violent overthrow of the government is never acceptable

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Nac
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/4/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 625 times Debate No: 72910
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (1)

 

Kalebsklips

Pro

I'm trying to get a view of both sides as I have to debate this in my English class.

A violent overthrow of the government is never acceptable as violence should never be a means to change something. If a dictator is in charge and the country under them violently attempt to overthrow the leader, the country would be stooping down to the same level as their leader.

Secondly, a violent overthrow of the government doesn't solve issues unless you are able to restore into a democracy. This is difficult when a whole group of people are trying to be the leader. After a revolt, how do you possibly as a group without a leader, choose the right one?

Any help with the other side of this debate would be greatly appreciated!
Nac

Con

I accept this debate and wish my opponent good luck.

Since no set road map for the debate is established, I will respond with what I see as logical, and let my opponent object if he wishes to.

1. Burden of proof shall lie on my opponent, since this is the most likely scenario of his in class debate. This means he must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the resolution is correct, and I merely have to show how his reasoning is fallacious, not how the diametric opposite of the claim is correct.

2. Inferring from his reason for proposing this debate, he would like for an immediate start to this debate, since he would like as much of a chance to argue as possible. As such, my case will begin after this list is concluded.

3. The reason he is debating also leads me to infer that he would like for my case to be based around possible issues in his debate, so I will begin my rebuttal right away.

If my opponent has any problems, he is free to challenge any of these assertions. However, we will need to reach a consensus if any dialogue of value is to be derived

On to my opponent's case.

My opponent claims that a violent overthrow would place the common man on the same level as their government. However, there are numerous cases in which this comparison rings hollow. If people are being executed, their lives destroyed, their livelihoods placed in jeopardy, a violent overthrow would not place us on their level. To do so would remove any sense of morality in intent from the discussion, as their intent was to stop the suffering of a group of people, as opposed to a lust for power*. In the same way a starving man may be considered justified for stealing food, the group of people would be justified in their actions if it establishes a better future. If the government will not listen to diplomacy and the suffering of a people is continually occurring, the good outweighs the con because all alternative means have been exhausted.

* Because of the phrasing of the resolution, the pro side must prove every possible case of a violent overthrow of the government. As such, I chose an intent that would create an upper bound, showing the bar that my opponent can cross to prove his case.

Pro's second contention is irrelevant to the resolution because it only concludes that violent overthrows in which the rebels have no leader are unacceptable, and he must conclude that, essentially, there is no conceivable violent overthrow of the government that is acceptable.

I will let my case stand for now. Good luck to Pro on his debate in English.
Debate Round No. 1
Kalebsklips

Pro

Kalebsklips forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Kalebsklips

Pro

Kalebsklips forfeited this round.
Nac

Con

Extend.

I thank my opponent for this debate. I hope his in class debate went well.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Kalebsklips 1 year ago
Kalebsklips
oh! So true! I didn't even realize you could open a forum!
(I'm so new to this site :P lol) next time I will definitely do that!
Thanks again!
Posted by Nac 1 year ago
Nac
Probably just wait for it to forfeit, if you would like to do so. I'll let you choose if want to do so.

I think you should probably post a forum instead of a debate. It would allow for a more open conversation, especially if counter points are hard to come up with on your own.
Posted by Kalebsklips 1 year ago
Kalebsklips
in 2 days! So I'm going to try to get around to posting a debate on here eventually! But I'm not 100% sure if I'll have time. Thank you so much for providing help with this! How do I surrender and let you win?
Posted by Nac 1 year ago
Nac
Oh, alright. When is this debate?
Posted by Kalebsklips 1 year ago
Kalebsklips
we were able to pick, but as of right now all of the topics are taken..
Fortunately I am actually debating on your side! I took this side to debate so that I could get good points for my argument :)

I am fortunate that I'm actually debating your side, because as you said, I really cannot think of something that my opponent in class will have to say!

I used any points I could think of for my opponent, but that's essentially all I've got!
If you have any other points you think I should use (for your side) please share!
Thanks for everything you've done!
Posted by Nac 1 year ago
Nac
Were you able to choose your topic yourself? Because this stance seems exceptionally difficult to argue. Defending any case which states "never" or "always" is a task I do not like undertaking.
Posted by Kalebsklips 1 year ago
Kalebsklips
yeah, so we are debating in front of our class, against another person. (So it's almost like a courtroom) the class then votes on who proved their point better. So if I can prove my point without a shadow of a doubt, then that would be GREAT!!
Posted by Nac 1 year ago
Nac
It's alright. It's a bit of a strange concept. Burden of Proof means the duty of one side of a debate to prove his or her case beyond a shadow of a doubt. In your case, it seems like your teacher gave you the burden of proof, since that is generally the case when a resolution is phrased like that.
Posted by Kalebsklips 1 year ago
Kalebsklips
Im sorry, I have no idea what that means :P

If you are able to provide any proof for your argument, then that would be greatly appreciated!!
(Not sure if that helps)

Thanks!
Posted by Nac 1 year ago
Nac
Who possesses the burden of proof in this debate?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by That1User 1 year ago
That1User
KalebsklipsNacTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.