Assuming the illuminati is real it is good for the world and for humanity
Debate Rounds (4)
First round is acceptance
When the Bavarian illuminati originally founded by Adam Weishaupt was formed its professed object was, by the mutual assistance of its members, to attain the highest possible degree of morality and virtue, and to lay the foundation for the reformation of the world by the association of good men to oppose the progress of moral evil.
Assuming for the purposes of this argument the illuminati still exist its founding principle is proof of the good intentions latent in its formation. Initially i was planning on using a lot of sources to back my argument up, but upon reading the drivel available i will just argue
Assuming the illuminati exists in the manner conspiracy theorists describe it, the very foundation of its existence (according to conspiracy theorists) is based on world domination. It is necessary for the betterment of the world to unite its people under a single government. This is the only way we as humanity can progress. The United States of America for example would not be the superpower it is today had it not literally been states that united together.
In theory unity of countriesuld lead to less conflict, if we're all governed by the same "organization" or same mindset there wouldn't be a rational basis for any sort of war. Especially taking into consideration the fact that wars emanate from military and political leaders
Thye illuminati, assuming it is a group of international bankers and families that are economical power houses. We can safely assume that they weld be more equiped to run the united world economy. The experience they have is clealry indicative of their ability to run economic institutions effectively. Is it not good for any country to have at its helm a person or people capable of improving the economic landscape of the country
Furthermore based on conspiracy theories (which is the basis of the argument) the illuminati appears to be a rational, ambitious and capitalistic institution. All these values are attributes we value at this day and age. For example the principle of curbing the population would actually be good for mankind.Currently about a 3rd of the world's growing population lack access to clean water, this number is set to increase as population increases, do we want to live in a world where even the most basic of all resources such as water becomes a scarcity? What about food, how are we to feed the ever growing population, what about animals displaced because of humanity's greed and land grab? What about the environment and the ever growing impact we have on the very same world that shelters us. "Illuminati" is "enlightened" and rational enough to see these problems and to seek solutions to rectify these issues.
People assume the illuminati is some evil organization, leading the world to destruction i beg to differ, the illuminati sees beyond religious and cultural differences and instead merely seeks to enlighten the world with principles that nurture ambition and obeidence If you are not ambitious, do not work hard enough and are not enlightened to the ways of economics you will not advance beyond the socio-economic ranks set by your parents (unless by chance), as such you will have to learn to be obedient to the rulers of the world. You choose your own destiny, you either chase economic prosperity or the security provided by obedience. Sometimes humans need something to guide them, a philosophy to govern the way they live. Which is one of the reasons why religions exist and very important to a lot of people. Religions (particularly christianity and Islam) literally govern people's lives by telling what to do and what not to do. The laws of nature stipulate that there must be rulers and followers, the followers will generally abide to the rules of the leaders, this is necessary to maintain some sort of order in an otherwise chaotic world
This is one of the main reasons why nations tend to be governed by a founding document known as the constitution, this document serves as a reminder to people to abide to the rules set by the rulers. The same concept would ring true with the illuminati, they would provide a leadership base on a broader scale, capable of uniting people through a common cause
Pro will leave the rest of his arguments for the next round
To have a little more knowledge I researched more about the illuminati even though I already know a little. http://www.sjgames.com...
The idea of a group ruling the entire world is just frightening. Would the common person really want to be ruled by one power only? Yes America did unite all 50 states to create one super power but a world power? What's going to happen if one disagrees with another like republicans & democrats? Basically everything you see about the illuminati in your eyes, is good, I say it's not.
As far as the illuminati controlling everything that's a call for destruction. Reason being is because I think most people would feel they have lost their freedom. Illuminati are known to spy on people. Illuminati has been modeled around Freemasons. Illuminati want to get rid of all religion & have a religion based on government. Would a New World Order be good or bad? An NWO implies that all nations surrender their sovereignty to a world-ruling government. For nearly a century, the world has depended on the protection and leadership provided by a strong, independent United States of America. Considering the corruption that absolute power seems to always bring, a powerful world government ruled by human beings would be a catastrophe for the United States and all the world.
The power of human conspiracies is usually overemphasized. But throughout history, there has been one superpowerful conspiracy by Satan the devil, "who deceives the whole world" (Revelation 12:9) For those who are religious know that EVERYONE should have free will & no nations should be controlled by one power.
This is for you Pro but aren't illuminati showing "signs" that they are real?
This video shows how the illuminati are Freemasons & freemasons are satanic people.
I must wrap up my argument now & ask con to extend the debate time.
The illuminati being fake or not is irrelevant as the argument stipulates that we assume it is real
Pro argues firstly that the idea of group ruling the entire world is no more frightening than the idea of a single ideology running the world. Capitalism literally runs the world, few can All modern major economies are built and maintained b principles of capitalism. With capitalism it naturally follows that he who has the most money has the most influence as he has the most power over others (who need his money, influence and business acumen). Which is why the wealthy are more protected by the state (through more lenient tax policies for example) and why the systems of the world seem to favour the wealthy (the judiciary for example favours the wealthy on the basis that all things constant, he with a better lawyer has a better chance of winning a case and the better the lawyer the more the fees one must power to attain his services). Anyway before i digress too muich the point i'm trying to make is capitalism affords the wealthier to have more power and influence in the world. Pro argues that the world we live in is already ruled by a group or rather groups of companies. Big oil companies literally dictatethe prices of fuel and ultimately the price of all commodities which need to be transported. Big Banks control foreign exchange rates and indirectly affect inflation and interest rates
The point Pro attempts to convey is that we already live in a world ruled by a group or rather groups of companies, this is so because capitalism is structured in such a manner that this is bound to happen. Is it really as frightening as you make it out to be? Would it not be less "frightening" if a group we knew of ruled the world, not behind the shadows but out in the open. If we accept the illuminati there is no reason for them to rule from behind the curtains. Generally speaking the moment a ruler/rulersemerge from the shroud which once covered their leadership they are become more accountable for their deeds or misdeeds. If we allowed the illuminati to rule in the open they would be more accountable and act more responsibly towards the people of this world.
What happens if one disagrees?
nothing happens, you have a right to disagree. The problem with giving every single person a say in politics is we allow people who are literally incapable of deciding what is good for themselves let alone the world in general, to have the power to effect chage. This is a very dangerous power and should not be exercised by people who fail to think rationally and who allow emotions to cloud their judgements. Pro argues that it is necessary to allow the illuminati as a rational organization to lead the world in a rational manner, absent the rhetoric and lies of current politicians
people would feel they have lost their freedom.
What freedom? Without money you can barely do anything in this world, is the freedom you speak of tied to ones monetary ability to perform these so called acts of freedom? Is Con referring lack of freedom in terms of the illuminati controlling everything? What does the general populace currently have control of, what freedom is there to take in the first place. The Stock market is not run by the general population, nor are banks, healthcare, government, insurance agencies, oil companies or anything in this world. There is no freedom to take, people are not free and have never been free. Freedom is after all a dangerous concept as it opens the doors to anarchy under the guise of free thought, there must be some form of order in this world and unfortunately or fortunately depending on how you see it, freedom and order cannot co-exist
Illuminati want to getd of all religion?
If there are any voters this opinion might make me lose a few votes, however it must be said. Religion has been one of the biggest causes of war throughout history, from the crusades to the modern day war against terrorism, which conveninently happens to occur as a result of "Islamic extremists". There are so many religions in this day and age, one of the problems with this is that it creates divisions between people. A lot of people go as far as hating each other on the basis of their religious choices. Homophobia literally emanates from religion, some may argue that religion on its own is not the problem, Pro however argues that it is evident that civilization is built to co-exist with the current forms of religion. Thus an overhaul of the current is required which is exactly what the illuminati offers
"For nearly a century, the world has depended on the protection and leadership provided by a strong, independent United States of America"
Does this statement not prove that the world can be effectively protected and governened by a single body?
For the purposes of this agument i will not delve in the potion of your argument about Satan because his existence or non existence is another debate on its own
I think first people must remember that for this to happen there must be a smaller earth population. The chances of me & Pro & the person reading this to die is 95% because that is how many humans they want to get rid of on the earth. So Pro you realize you may not even see the NWO if this were to happen.
Pro keeps talking about if the illuminati ran the world all capitalism & currency & jobs yes Pro? Well lets talk about banks. "During the financial crisis governments provided taxpayer support for banks, steadying the global financial system and helping to avoid a repeat of the Great Depression. Those bank rescues exposed governments and taxpayers to losses. And in the long term they will have made banking riskier if managers and creditors conclude that bailout is part of the fabric of the system. To avoid that fate, the "too big to fail" problem must be cured. We believe it can be and that serious progress is being made. Evidence can be seen in the joint paper released by our organisations today which outlines a resolution strategy for large and complex financial companies. Alongside higher capital and liquidity requirements, the best chance of a durable solution will come from a process for resolving the largest international banks " so-called global systemically important financial institutions (G-SIFIs) " in an orderly way when they fail. The failures of G-SIFIs that confronted the US and UK in 2008 were unprecedented in scale, complexity and interconnectedness. They also outstripped the capabilities of the legal frameworks in place."
Now I thought about this for a while & I thought hmmm ok maybe a global bank would be ok to get the whole world out of debt. But I read that the illuminati has 1 member from at least each nation. So why not a bank for country? Currency should not be controlled globally because if these rulers of money can neglect certain people from certain places. For example like I said last argument. "What's going to happen if one disagrees with another like republicans & democrats?" Keep an open mind Pro that anything is possible. What if one member from lets say Russia. If this member were to be kicked due to him thinking the illuminati is now a bad idea. You know what I mean?
Free will does exist. By your view you say illuminati will control EVERYTHING correct? Are they going to control me by what I buy? What I wear? Will things we can talk about be restricted like religion? I do not believe illuminati will over cloud emotions with judgement to the people of earth because it is a club at the end of the day. EX: Lets have a vote, we control USA's currency to bail the debt? 8 raise their hand for yay & 4 say nay. There will always be a person who disagrees anywhere, even if the group is hand picked.
Pro also fails to react to my argument about Freemasons & my video about ILLUMINATI. The thought of reducing the earths population seems pretty satanic. He is also in denial that illuminati are affiliated with Freemasons which involves satanic beliefs.
I look forward to closing my argument next round.
With regards to the argument pertaining to banks Pro argues that a global currency would have reduce the effects of the global financial crisis the world faced in 2008, the current system of multiple currencies is a system based on trust, confidence and risks. The values of currencies fluctuate as new policies are passed. A single currency would eliminate such a system, there would be zero risk (especially when trading currencies, which is done by most major banks, governments and big corporations). This would be beneficial to investors as they require a stable system. A single currency would also eliminate the need for foreign exchange revenues. Furthermore global inflation could be regulated by a single global bank
"What's going to happen if one disagrees with another like republicans & democrats"?
The simple fact that someone disagrees does not immediately mean that he has to be kicked out. This is why solutions such as mediation exist. Talks could be carried out to understand and address the grievances of the said representative and if they do not come to terms, his/her assistant could be promoted to take over, or someone else from the country could be promoted to be a representative
"As far as the illuminati controlling everything that's a call for destruction. " That is a quote from your argument, you talked about illuminati controlling everything, do not mistaken your view for my view. The control i refer to is control of major economic and political decisions which actually have an impact on society. It would be impractical, virtually impossible and petty to control every single thing
Again, i shall not address your religious argument, religion on its own is a very touch subject if you want to affiliate the illuminati with satan then we have to have a separate argument with regards to whether satan exists or not.
Furthermore with regards to Freemasonry:
Freemasonry means different things to each of those who join. For some, it"s about making new friends and acquaintances. For others it"s about being able to help deserving causes " making a contribution to family and society. But for most, it is an enjoyable hobby
Pro you clearly admitted that they would take our free will & liberty. Pro said: "The control i refer to is control of major economic and political decisions which actually have an impact on society." If us the people can't make decisions on political situations then what's the point of the first amendment?
On the argument about Banks, there are alternatives of currency in one nation. maybe there can be virtual currency this way cash can be produced faster & an alternative to get the USA out of debt. I would have to only agree to a single currency to get rid of a "trust" system we have today as an obvious fact that stands out, we are not trusted with money.
Illuminati are affiliated with Freemasonry. "The Illuminati are widely believed to be a sect or faction of the Freemasons. The Freemason, hence the Illuminati, adopted their beliefs and teachings from the Knights Templar. The Knights Templar was originally a religious and military organization during the crusades. Its members became very rich through gifts of land and money from European rulers. By the 1300s, the Templars deemed themselves the "bankers of Europe," because of their enormous wealth and the breadth of their organization. They were hoping to "become wealthy enough to buy the world."
Please take this time to read this article just briefly. http://www.unc.edu...
Pro again fails to prove that the illuminati is not a satanic group. This makes me question if he was even open to any of my arguments. He does state he does not want to talk about satanic beliefs because it is not real but in that video it clearly shows the relation of illuminati & satanic beliefs.
To wrap up my entire argument, Illuminati will have to get rid of 3/4 of the population to get a one world government. They will control politics which we the people will not have a say anymore. Currency may get better yes but there is no reason to meet behind closed doors if they are a cause for good.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.