Classical Liberalism is More Effective Than Conservativsm
Round 2: Introduce and Expand on Arguments
Round 3: Rebuttals
Round 4: Counter-rebuttals/Conclusions
NOTE: I am arguing for the more general Classical Liberalism, not the version specific only to the United States.
My definitions of both worldviews are as follows:
Liberalism- a political worldview founded on liberty and equality, usually supporting civil and human rights, private property, and a free market
Conservatism- a political worldview advocating traditional and existing social institutions, usually supporting tradition, customary values, and social conformity
Please be respectful and do not use offensive language or a personally insulting tone.
Good luck to my opponent.
1. The effectiveness of a political philosophy can be measured by the quality of life that a government employing that philosophy can provide it's citizens.
2. A government founded on liberal ideology, which supports civil liberties and limited government to protect the right of the individual, is more likely to be less restrictive on the activities of it's citizens, thereby allowing them more personal freedom. A conservative government will be more inclined to restrictive policies, as it is likely to support conformity and traditional values, which are often in conflict with personal freedom. A prime example of this is the ultra-conservative Islamic government of Saudi Arabia, in which Sharia law places immense restrictions on personal freedom.
3. My final and most important premise is based on the Darwinian principal that those who are the most adapted possess the best chance of survival (in this context, success). Conservative states, whose philosophy is inherently opposed to change, reform, and adaptation, will eventually fall behind more liberal nations whose policies will be tailored to suit modern society. The only constant in our world is change, and only those who can adapt to it will succeed. Conservatism is naturally in opposition to adaptation (it's defining principal is aversion to change), no matter how beneficial and rational that adaptation may be.
My opponent has not used any sources to back up what he has said, keep that in mind, voters.
Humanity enjoys taking a part in faith, or religion. Valuing religion, is important, and a key belief to support a strong foundation for human rights. A free exercise in a religion, is what makes people moral, and confident in their everyday life. The picture that I have posted above, basically sums the rest of it up. The government, cannot tell citizens of the U.S. who to believe in, or why their God is 'wrong'.
The defense of a nation, is very important. By increasing the military budget, the safety of a nation, and its citizens, will. increase. A country with a well-funded military, can help advancement in technology, or other important researches. During Ronald Reagan's presidency, the military budget went up by 43%, this helped with more troops, weapons, equipment, and a better intelligence program.
One big issue all over the world, is the economies of nations. A big economy, can help a long-term growth of a nation. A smaller economy, can keep a country in the dark for ages. Capitalism will bring long-term economic growth to any country. Another great idea that will help businesses, and an economy, is the cut of corporate taxes. A cut in corporate taxes will lead to better living standards, long-term economic growth, higher wages, lower tax burdens, lower corporate debt, and increase productivity, entrepreneurship, and investment.
There are other things that can be cut, helping the economy of a nation. One, would be welfare. Cutting welfare out of the government spending can cause an immense increase in the growth of an economy. Lower job taxes, will help the homeless/poor people get back on their feet. At this stage, welfare is smaller, corporate taxes are smaller, and job taxes are smaller. This would help increase jobs, increase growth of the economy, and help businesses.
Here are my rebuttals to your arguments:
1. The concept of freedom of religion is a liberal one. In fact, liberalism was the first political worldview to advocate religious freedom. The only requirement is that members of ALL religions are afforded the same rights.
2. Conservatism as a political philosophy does not necessarily entail an increase in military budget. In fact, it does not focus on any single political issue. Rather, conservatism is a political worldview advocating tradition and existing social institutions. Ronald Reagan, though he is undoubtedly an excellent example of a conservative leader, does not represent all of conservatism.
3. A conservative government does not necessarily mean a big economy, just as a liberal government does not mean increased welfare spending and taxation for corporations. Through liberalism places a high value on equality, it also advocates limited governments and individual rights.
Religious Freedom Rebuttal
There is a religious conservatism, to say that religious freedom is liberal ideology, would be a lie. Wikipedia says "Religious conservatives principally seek to apply the teachings of particular religions to politics, sometimes by merely proclaiming the value of those teachings, at other times by having those teachings influence laws." http://en.wikipedia.org...; . Conservatives also support individual freedom, that individual freedom, is also religious beliefs. The government should not interfere with religious freedom, is another thing related to this topic. Now you know that it doesn't just apply to liberal ideology.
The Military Rebuttal.
EthanSaldanha forfeited this round.
My opponent has forfeit the last round, I cannot make any rebuttal.
Thank you voters for reading this debate.
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|