The Instigator
ranil718
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
TrasguTravieso
Pro (for)
Winning
16 Points

Are Capital Cities Necessary For A Thriving Country?

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 4 votes the winner is...
TrasguTravieso
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/1/2013 Category: Arts
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,011 times Debate No: 30836
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (8)
Votes (4)

 

ranil718

Con

Why should we have to subject to the anarchist wackos who don't want a capital city? The fact is, that it is necessary for economic and political power.
TrasguTravieso

Pro

While convenient, it has not been historically the case that this is absolutely necessary. From the time of the Catholic Kings to Carlos I (V of Germany) Spain had what was called an "itinerant court", which means that the ministers of the crown travelled along with the monarchs to wherever they considered their presence necessary. During wars, for instance, the monarchs would travel to the battlefront to make their presence particularly felt. This continued up to the time of Felipe II, who finally settled the court in Madrid, which has since served as the countries capital almost without exception.

This, along with other contemporary examples, while not enough to prove that it is ideal to do without capital cities (which are quite convenient for commerce and political stability, is enough to disprove the contention that they are necessary to thriving countries.
Debate Round No. 1
ranil718

Con

ranil718 forfeited this round.
TrasguTravieso

Pro

Extend arguments
Debate Round No. 2
ranil718

Con

ranil718 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
ranil718

Con

ranil718 forfeited this round.
TrasguTravieso

Pro

This is discouraging.
Debate Round No. 4
ranil718

Con

ranil718 forfeited this round.
TrasguTravieso

Pro

Why are all the interesting resolutions posted by people who never go back to the site and defend them?
Debate Round No. 5
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by TrasguTravieso 4 years ago
TrasguTravieso
Crap, you're right. I didn't notice the Pro-Con issue when I accepted the debate. Seeing as ranil718 is posting arguments in favor I hope we can proceed in good faith, but if someone decides to be a stickler this will get annoying...
Posted by ShortWinded 4 years ago
ShortWinded
Yeah dude... First. Stop this debate as you worded that your for but places yourself on con.
Just end this one if this site allows and start over.

We are all here to learn and improve..
And best of all this is an easy lesson
Posted by Citrakayah 4 years ago
Citrakayah
: What *exactly* is the benefit of having a capital city?

Simple. Fills up almanac space.
Posted by AlbinoBunny 4 years ago
AlbinoBunny
If you are con I'd be happy to argue for capital cities being necessary.
Posted by FaR 4 years ago
FaR
I don't really understand your resolution, its in a form of question and you are Con. Are you Pro Capital cities? Revise your resolution or clarify your position and i would be happy to debate as an Anarcho-Capitalist.
Posted by toolpot462 4 years ago
toolpot462
What *exactly* is the benefit of having a capital city?
Posted by Cody_Franklin 4 years ago
Cody_Franklin
But seriously--you've also put yourself on the wrong side of the debate; Con argues that capital cities are unnecessary.
Posted by Cody_Franklin 4 years ago
Cody_Franklin
I'm an anarchist, and I'm not a wacko. So, maybe fuck off.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Pennington 4 years ago
Pennington
ranil718TrasguTraviesoTied
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
Vote Placed by Daktoria 4 years ago
Daktoria
ranil718TrasguTraviesoTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Derp. :-P
Vote Placed by TUF 4 years ago
TUF
ranil718TrasguTraviesoTied
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: Sorry for pro, not everyone can commit to doing actual work lol.
Vote Placed by 1Devilsadvocate 4 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
ranil718TrasguTraviesoTied
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: F.F. It seems that the con & pro titles were the opposite of the way it should have been.