The Instigator
Psalmist
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
TombLikeBomb
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Are most Canadians slaves to the corporation called the Dominion of Canada?

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/21/2009 Category: Society
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,145 times Debate No: 6604
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (3)

 

Psalmist

Pro

Since 1867, Canada has been established as the Dominion of Canada, making it an autonomous polity under sovereign authority within the British Empire. A citizen is a native or naturalized member of a state or other political community or nation who owes allegiance to its government and is entitled to its protection. Considering legal terms, the Queen is the head of state and Canada is a federal state. The federal level has executive or administrative (or elite) law, separate from common law. The Crown is a corporation, which supports and requires the support of other corporations to support the economy, which is what constitutes for ‘valuable members of society.' Slaves are held against their will from the time of their capture, purchase, or birth, and are deprived of the right to leave, to refuse to work, or to receive compensation, such as wages in return for their labor. Within a society which uses an economic system which few individuals hold a large percentage of all the wealth and a large percentage of the population live below the poverty line, is a demonstration of a lack of just distribution of wealth. To leave the country requires certification issued by the government. The unjust access to resources is a demonstration of force to labour without a equal opportunity to refuse work. Every dollar earned through labour is not without multiple taxation.
Where is the freedom democracy supposedly grants us within Canada?
TombLikeBomb

Con

I'm sorry, I misinterpreted your argument. Unfortunately, there appears to be no way to cancel my acceptance.
Debate Round No. 1
Psalmist

Pro

I guess not! Unfortunately, I'm not aware of a way to cancel. However, there should be an option, considering it may happen on occasions... prior to this!!! I was looking forward to what you would post! I take it that you agree? Or do you just have not opinion formed?
For your own reference, since we are engaged here (lol professionally), consider the definition of slavery without preconceptions. Then the history of Canada's formation. Concluded with the law governing the country and the interests involved. This will lead to a view of the dynamics surrounding the topic of freedom on a clearer scale of comprehension. Particularly to circumstances socially, politically, and morally which have influenced us directly and indirectly. The motives of those which initiated the possession of these lands have not changed in those continuing to govern the same lands. Still with little regard for the people and not intent of providing freedom to its citizens!
FYI
TombLikeBomb

Con

I think I do agree. I originally thought you were saying something near the opposite of what I now believe you're saying. In my experience, when people use "taxation" to explain "slave", they're referring to the familiar type of taxation exemplified by a government taxing, say, a plantation-owner, forgetting that the plantation owner is simultaneously taxing the share-cropper (previously chattel slave, subsequently wage-laborer). Even a chattel slave receives "compensation" in the form of sustenance and often differentiated compensation on the basis of output. And yet no one would call even the best compensated chattel slave anything other than a slave, so surely if "compensation" is to be defining, it must mean "just compensation". What keeps the chattel slave is only the legal condition of having exactly 1 possible owner. But if two classic slave-masters are kind enough to srike a deal whereupon their collective slaves were given a permanent choice as to whose plantation to work on, whose rules to abide by, whose expectations to fulfill, whose "compensation" to receive, etc....and if such "compensation" would not necessarily exclude tools of labor, and if the slaves would be within their rights to hire other slaves (options that escape the classic slave only because his master has no competition, as opposed to very few competitors)...they would continue to be called slaves by any modern "civilized" person. And yet, as you point out, the average Canadian is only truly free to choose among the limited number of masters on Canadian soil. But I would add that, upon "escape", he'll find himself with only a somewhat more numerous selection of masters, who owe their property to similar methods of royal conquest. It appears, then, that "slave" is either the special condition of having exactly 1 master to choose from, or it is the universal condition of being surrounded by property-owners, or it is a relative term.
Debate Round No. 2
Psalmist

Pro

Well, considering you misunderstood the question to be the opposite of what it is, and you actually agree with what my stance is, there doesn't seem to be much more for me to add. I will reserve my points for debate with the opponent which will require my explanations. Perhaps you should pose your point, which you were taking the time to post, as a debate topic...I'm sure there is an opponent awaiting the opportunity to address it!
I wouldn't mind addressing it, depending on how you present your stance. I say that to allow you the opportunity to propose a certain aspect of the topic you spoke on, if you should so choose, or continue with how you mentioned it already. Just a thought, so your comment doesn't go to not.
TombLikeBomb

Con

TombLikeBomb forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by wjmelements 8 years ago
wjmelements
InqireTruth speaks the truth.
Posted by InquireTruth 8 years ago
InquireTruth
If you forfeit the first round it would automatically take you out of the debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by FormAndTheFormless 8 years ago
FormAndTheFormless
PsalmistTombLikeBombTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by wjmelements 8 years ago
wjmelements
PsalmistTombLikeBombTied
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:40 
Vote Placed by InquireTruth 8 years ago
InquireTruth
PsalmistTombLikeBombTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30