Debate Rounds (3)
Thanks for introducing this topic!!!
The premise of my argument will be my concept of an active cosmopolitanism defined as actively pursuing the protection of all humans.
Sovereign countries are only sovereign when they recognize the fundamental human rights of its citizens. Unfortunately, a trademark of many countries is that they do not protect human rights or they perpetrate their abuse. Thus, the US is obligated to contain governments that choose to violate human rights.
There are two arguments supporting that.
First, Dasching and Deschant in 2001 argue that neglecting the protection of human rights otherizes and dehumanizes victims, thereby reducing them to a bare life, devoid of value. That is explicitly in violation of the etymological principle of 'human' rights.
Additionally, Harries of Harvard University concurs with the argument that when the United States does not protect human rights on the international sphere, its credibility as a nation is reduced to a minimum. As a result of our neglect, we are pressured to change policy by other countries in the United Nations and in the world. The impact on our nation is a devolution of international power and acceptance, which opens the United States up to acts of violence and aggression by other countries.
I have more arguments that will be introduced in the second constructive.
I am excited to debate!!
I am pretty sure you are stating that for America to be safe from harm, the US has to be world police and force their opinions on other countries. What if the communist country was not interested in changing their view points?
In Julius Caesar, Caesar was murdered because the senate thought that power would turn him evil. Was that correct for them? That is what the entire book is trying to get us to think about. Is it alright for the US to assume that something is going to happen and then act upon it?
The containment policy is forcing the US opinion on countries all over the world.
My question for you is:
Is the US forcing their capitalist opinions just as bad as a communist country forcing their opinions on us?
First, when your rhetorical, implicative argument that we shouldn't change the opinions of Communist countries if they don't desire to be changed has multiple flaws.
A) Most likely, the people who are 'not interested in changing their view points' are usually the oppressive and repressive, dictatorial leaders that subdue their people with force, be it physical, spiritual, or economic.
B) A rhetorical attempt at a warrant isn't a warrant at all. You need proof.
C) The point at which governments violate the human rights of their citizens necessitates intervention by the United States.
Moreover, the United States' collective government, as long as it abides by its Constitutional premises, cannot perpetrate unjust actions that violate human rights. The policies of particular individuals with power can and that's wrong. However, because the United States has the foundation that best supports the rights due to humans, it is obligated to secure those negative rights for all other humans as well. Thus, the United States is legitimate enough to act on the international sphere.
Additionally, the United States, after enacting containment policy for a country, contextually, does not "force" its opinions on countries. It destabilizes oppressive regimes and translates power over their regions to the people to develop a satisfactorily sound and democratic government and then allows them to mature as a people.
Moreover, because a communist country suppresses the rights of individuals within its countries, were the communist country to enforce its policies that violated rights upon United States citizens, other countries' citizens, or their own citizens, that enforcement would be unjust.
clarinetgeek444 forfeited this round.
jameslallen forfeited this round.
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.