- Dictature is better than democracy !
Debate Rounds (5)
R13; James Bovard, Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty
"The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you don't have to waste your time voting"
R13; Charles Bukowski
- Democracy is more like a lie we are livin in, or the people live in a moderated dictature like modern day slaves with their head in the clouds, incapable to see the bars of the cage they are locked in. Democracy this dream of ours to be free has become an realistic illusion while our lives are pointless, as they say better to be slapped by the truth than to be kissed by a lie... Thats why i think dictature is a better choice cause the people know the truth and accept being ruled from a leader who has the power and the courage to represent them and their interests, someone who is a real patriot and loves his country, loves the people and fights for their rights, its not impossible to find that kind of man. While democracy and its hypnotising instruments are driving people crazy, planting wrong ideology in human society where the unjustices seem to be the right thing to do, where wars mean peace and where all the negative things that are momentally happening in the world are being made in the name of democracy. One of the most important components of democracy is equality, we all living in democracy but we are not equal, is state a coorporate that we work for? Or the leaders should actually work for us, where is that power that the people are meant to have in democracy? To answer these questions man has to become realistic and admitt that its actually the same dictature or democracy, the difference between them is that dictature would be more realistic and not offending others intellegence while democracy is a dream and its destructive and bad interpretted ideology is ruining everything about mankind. i preffer the truth, do you... ?
As people we are all born with rights, Rights that in this country are protected by the constitution. In a dictatorship, you have now rights, no freedom, your life is owned by the government. The people whose lives are dictated by one man have no way to argue with him, no way to change any bad policies, and sometimes no way to leave the country, if they don't want to live there. This is a very different situation than a nation that allows the people to choose their own leaders and to choose the people who pass the laws that affect their lives. In a dictatorship, you can't choose your own leaders, the people of the nation have no power over there own lives. It is the people that must control the government, not the other way around.
My opponent states that democracy is dictatorship in disguise, this is false.n a democracy, especially the one I live in, we have the right to bear arms, freedom of speech, and the freedom to pursue our dreams as long as it doesn't violate the law and others rights. Right now i can write blog, making fun of Obama , saying that he is a terrible president and so on. In most dictatorships, if you do that, your going to disappear over night.
My opponent also states that it would be good to know that you are ruled by a man who "real patriot and loves his country, loves the people and fights for their rights." The only thing wrong with this is that its a dictatorship, so you don't get to decide who rules. Do you really want some one like Kim Jong-un or Castro in charge of your life.
One of the foundations of democracy is the assumption that all votes are equal. Well, that"s the theory"but in fact it is rarely so. It assumes that all opinions are worth the same, which is quite a big leap of faith, since we are putting the same value on the opinions of the educated and the ignorant, and the law-abiding citizens and criminals. Even if you think that all people are created equal, it is obvious that their environments are very different"and as a result, so is their character. By assuming that all opinions are equal you are also assuming that most people are able to reach a rational, informed decision after seriously exploring all pros and cons. Thats impossible, so to avoid the election of fake devoted politicians who use the blindness of the masses there is dictatorship. Most of dictators during history were brave men, supported by the masses and starting the moving to 'liberate' the masses from bad governing, revolution. To make a revolution those leaders should be feared or loved by the people if they can't be both.- like Machiavelli said, in this case people are supporting the new dictator right? The same in democracy by voting, but the problem is that there's much more space for manipulating votes and the people who dont know whats the best for them are likable to make a big mistake by voting the wrong person. To start a revolution, that 'Dictator' has to be intellegent, to be supported from the masses, to have a different vision of reality and a plan to make that vision real, to be brave, to love his country and people... Thats a great leader.
'It is the people that must control the government, not the other way around.' i think youre living in america right ? Tell me please how are the poeple there controling the government? Are really the people of america that violent to start wars in the middle east? Do they really agree to make wars, kill innocent people and its own soldiers? Is that American patriotism that means to atack countries to take their natural richnesses, no my friend thats not patriotism, patriotism is to defend and to love what's yours, without atacking someone innocent by faking terrorist attacks etc. However, if u control your government, why does your government and our governments have secrets? Shold they actually be transparent, in democracy we have to know whats going on right? Freedom of speech, yes, what happened to Julian Assange? Why is he in prison? Should he have that freedom to speak and write too? Medias are supposed to show the truth, not the truth what government wants us to know right
Scroll up to see that still in dictatorship people do decide who rules, cause if not they would not support the revolution. and in the end i want to answer your final question, Yes i would like someone like Castro or Kim Jong Un to rule my state, but it doesnt mean in the same way dont be ridiculous, also my life wouldnt be in charge on my dictators hands, want to know why? Because every leader is afraid of the people, just the same as the people are afraid of the leader, if there goes something wrong and the people dont like the leader anymore, there is always going to come a new revolutionary person to start it over again, just like the elections in democracy.
I still support my statement that dictature is better than democracy, at least in dictature you know your own position and you are not being fooled with democratic lies !
In the society that I live in, there are multiple ways to deal with this. Petitions can be signed to call for reelection for mayors and governors. Are rights are protected by a constitution. Any president that violates this constitution or the law, can be impeached. In the society that I live in, no one is above the law. In a dictatorship, the dictator is the law. Free to do what ever he wants, with no consequences. This is not how a society should, function.
My opponent says that there us only soft leaders who become cruel after the election. Look at Joseph Stalin, who was the leader of the Soviet Union. He was known for being brutal, before he came into power. He was involved in man criminal activities, as a young man. When he cam into power he caused millions of his people to die. The best way to stop a cruel leader, isn't just stopping him from getting elected, but to make so if they do get elected, that the government doesnt have power, so he can use his cruelty. You also say that the dictator should be someone who respects are rights, but if no leader is cruel until he comes into power, then how would you find this person.
After reading my opponents last response, it was hard to stop my self from laughing. It seems clear that my opponent belives in all kinds of conspiracies, saying that the United States fakes terrorist attacks. My opponent says he rather be given the truth the a lie, yet he has been given the truth and he chooses not to accept it. Now I'm going to end this part of the debate before he starts a argument on how 9/11 was done by the government or that the Boston bombing never happened.
I am sorry to say that because of time I am going to have to end this round, but I will countine it next as well as going over his response.
As I see you are missunderstanding Dictature, " In a dictatorship, the dictator is the law. Free to do what ever he wants, with no consequences. " this statement of yours makes me think that you're confusing dictature with monarchy but even the king was not completely free to do whatever he wanted... In dictature there are parliaments like in democracy too, and the dictator has not that freedom you think he has.
Your example with the Soviet Union repectively with Joseph Stalin its true but his people loved and feared him, to be more concrete no one had the courage and will to say against him cause if they would inniciate something aagainst him together, a single man can not stand against the masses. I'll give you an example for a perfect leader as a dictator, Josip Broz Tito he lead the Yugoslavian socialist federation for years, without cruelty and respecting the rights of everyone in his territory of jurisdiction. I'm Albanian from Kosovo, and my country is separated and independent from Serbia since 17 february 2008 but i know our history and i know that our rights were much more respected during Titos dictatorship than now in democracy and under the monitoration of the US and the european union. At least Kosova then had a kind of authomony which means that now we can not decide nothing in ourselves acomplishing the orders of the US and the Europeans. We are living in a ghetto, isolated and with a low economic income which icreases the crime rate and all the negative phenomenons. To find a great leader or a great dictator is not easy, but not impossible there are much more chances that this dictator finds us than we to find this dictator, cause really people everywhere are getting brainwashed and blind !
My dear opponent, based on my historical knowledge about your country and based on the knowledge of capitalism all those so called 'conspiracy theories' seem to be real to me, and everyone who does not believe in them must be ignorant by ignoring all those facts based in a simple logic. As i see my opponent already knows that all those terrorist atacks were done by his own government but he doesnt want to accept it because he actually wants to believe that beutiful lie told to him in the name of democracy, well im sorry but everyone is seeing your terrorist acts of your government my friend so dont try to protect it when it doesnt protect you !
I'm waiting from you to show me that democracy is for real, that it is true and it exists, I'm waiting some strong arguments and facts that I simply can not find something to put them down, otherwise im going to win this debate my friend !
My opponent talks about, how in democracy the voters can't reach a rational decision, but this is not how it works. In democracy it is majority rules, there are going to be many people who still don't agree with the decision after its passed. This shows me that my opponent doesn't even understand how democracy works. My opponent also says that voters can vote wrong person. He his implying that it should be someone else who decides what is best for us. This is another reason, why dictatorship is terrible, I believe no one should run my life, except for me.(of course I still can't violate the law)
You asks me if we really have freedom of speech, then why is Julian Assange in prison. This is another example showing that you don't know what your talking about. First off Julian Assange isn't in prison, he is in the Embassy of Ecuador in London. Secondly He isn't even wanted by the United States, he's wanted by Sweden charged for is hacking and sexual assault by Sweden. For someone who claims that he want the truth, your not really good at getting it.
You say that the government won't control your life and that people can control there government through revolution, yet this is true, it isn't always the case. The fact that you says this shows me that you doesn't understand what a real dictatorship is, you states that "leader is afraid of the people, just the same as the people are afraid of the leader." Let's look at North Korea, a place that you says you would be alright if the leader was your dictator.
The government in North Korea rules with an iron fist. The government has caused the starvation of thousands of its own people, they imprison many innocent people, because of out rages laws, like the three generations law(which states that anyone who commits a crime, the government has the right to put both there son and grandson in jail.), and now there's a law telling people, what kind of hair cut they are allowed to have. Life in North Korea is not good, yet why hasn't there been a revolution? The answer is simple, everyone in North Korea has been brainwashed. Starting from when they are little kids to when they are adults, they are told about how good the government is and that they need the government. Government tells them what they can and can't look up on the internet and what they can and can't listen too on the radio. The government keeps them isolated from the rest of the world, so communism is all they know. They don't know about democracy and capitalism because the government doesn't want then to know. The people of North Korea are slaves and they don't even know it. This is why the government would control your life in a dictatorship. You say that democracy is a lie, but it is dictatorship that is a lie.
Even if you weren't brainwashed, what are you going to do to revolt against the government. Most likely you won't have any guns or weapons to help you. The government is going to be armed with thousands, maybe even millions of soldiers. You act like revolutions, is a simple thing. Were I live leaders can be controlled through elections. You say that the voting of a new leader, won't change anything, yet bad polices get changed all the time.
You say that you wouldn't mind if Kim Kim Jong Un was your leader, as long as he doesn't rule the same way as he rules North Korea. In a dictatorship you don't get to choose how he rules. He is the law, he can do what ever he wants with no consequences. In a democracy if you do't like the way its ruled you can leave the country. Good look luck trying to leave a place like Cuba or North Korea. You seem to have a very false idea, that you would have freedom in a dictatorship.
I will now begin my debate on round 4
My opponent asks me, if your rights are protected the same way as the people who are richer then you in capitalism? The answer to this is yes. Capitalism offers everyone the opportunity to become rich, you don't have to be born in a wealthy family to become successful. My opponent is probably going to disagree with this statement, so let me give you some examples.
Gardner Rich & Co(Chris Gardner)
Started out homeless
Was once living on food stamps and welfare checks.
Grew up in a housing for the poor
Started out washing dishes for only $1.20 per hour
Forever21(Do Won Chang)
Started out as a janitor
My opponent states "The president has no reason to violate the law because he can do whatever he wants just like in a dictatorship". Let look at Andrew Johnson who was impeached after violating the Tenure of Office Act. Bill Clinton was impeached on two charges, one of perjury and one of obstruction of justice. Richard Nixon resigned before he was impeached over the Watergate Scandal, named for the burglaries at the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel in Washington. These are some good examples of why the president is not above the law.
You say that even dictators are not above the law and has too obey a set of parliaments, but this is rarely true. Most dictatorships do not have parliaments and the ones that do, end up getting rid. Lets look at Joseph Stalin again. Let me prepare an example. Hitler is responsible for about 11 million deaths due to Nazi camps. Stalin had around 20 million non combat deaths. Now does this really sound like he was following a parliament. I will also add that a lot of his deaths where caused by famine. This is another problem with a dictatorship. In most dictatorships it is left to the government to distribute things such as food.
My opponent seems to idolize a figure known as Josip Broz Tito. I do agree with him that Josip Broz Tito is at the top of the very short list of good dictators, but his rule came with a very big coast. The big coast that led the federation into decline was the whole single party system, a system that Josip Broz Tito believed in. This single party system meant that it wasn't how good you were at your job that got you higher on the social ladder, but how loyal you where to the party. This made the whole system very ineffective.
You says that its not easy to find a good leader, but not impossible. The odds of getting a good leader are greatly against you. An economic system that is completely depended the leader, isn't a good system. Most likely you will argue this by saying democracy is the same way, but this would be false. In many forms of democracy, there is a type of constitution(which states what the government can do any) and the separation of power. This means even if there is a bad leader elected, many of his policies can be over ruled. The power the leader has is also limited by the constitution.
You seems to be very aggressive on his belief that the United States fakes terrorist attacks in order to go to war. I would love to see evidence on this, if you have any. In a number of video, audio, interview and printed statements, senior members of al-Qaeda have also asserted responsibility for organizing the September 11 attacks. Authorities in the United States and Britain also obtained electronic intercepts, including telephone conversations and bank transfers, which indicate that Mohammed Atef, a bin Laden deputy, was a main figure in the planning of the 9/11 attacks. You say that everything that leads you up to the belief that the U.S. fakes terrorist attacks is based on simple logic. Logic is based on evidence, evidence that not only has been collected by the U.S., but also by other governments and private journalists, media, and investigation groups, some of which don't even like the U.S. Of course non of this will convince you, so maybe we can take a psychological approach. They way you talk about the U.S. it is clear to me that you have developed a hate at the country. This emotional hate has made it so your whole argument is based around your own biased opinion and ignorance. You have simply decided to ignore facts and real logic. This part of the debate has driven a little bit off topic, so lets get back to the debate.
My opponent wishes me to lay down an example that democracy is for real. For this example I will be using a country known as Singapore. Singapore has a very limited government, it is actually ranked second on the scale for global counties that have the most economic freedom. Singapore has a big zero tolerance police on political corruption. It is the people that control the government, yet there economy is doing great, and it continues to grow. Hong Kong(not to be confused with China, Hong Kong is classified as a world city independent from China) has very limited government, and studies have showed that there economy has been very slowly declining, since Chinese government is slowly taking it back.(http://www.heritage.org...)
Another problem with a dictatorship, is it often favors systems like collectivism over capitalism. Let me explain to you why this is bad. In collectivism the government gets involved in the free market, this gets ride of things like competition. Competition is when businesses compete to be the best. This means that business must create ways to make there product better then there competitors, by figuring out cheaper ways to produce there goods which would lower the price and ways too make there goods more efficient. This is how innovation is made, the creation of doing something better. When the government controls the free market you loose these things.
Another idea that most dictatorships favor, is the idea that there is a fixed amount of wealth. Therefore the wealth should be distributed equally among the people. This sounds like a great idea, but in reality it isn't. There isn't a fixed amount of wealth, wealth is created. I don't thing the government should be allowed to tell you how much money your aloud to make, as long as you make it legally.
I'm sorry to say and i don't want to offend you but people like you with their head in the clouds are the reason why there should be a person to decide whats the best for the people !
Let me remember that Julian assange accepted the protection of ecuador and he is under a political asylum. Does this mean he is free? He is isolated my friend into an embassy. Because he is prosecuted for telling the truth and if you have heard something about foreign policies you actually should realize the role of the US in the world and its capability to impact in other countries like it did in sweden and made sweden open a case for sexual assault against Assange... Remember Al Capone, he was imprisoned for hiding taxes because they had no proof for other crimes he commited, it's actually the same case, they cant accuse Assange for telling the truth, they had to make up something just to ruin his career and isolate him ! For someone like me its more important to get this truth out of the logic of mine than to be good at getting it in contamined sources with lies !
I said and i always will say that all the leaders in the world were frightened of the people except now, in the democratic world the leaders have hypnothised the people and they dont really care because they already know what people think, they have made people harmless and they have nothing to be feared about because they are surrounded by people like you !
The North Korean example is a proof that people are being manipulated just like in democracy, if you dont fight for your own rights who the hell is going to fight for them? If you dont protect what is yours who is going to protect it for you? Yes, its that simple ! If your country is so generous to help people win their rights and fights dictature like in Iraq did, excecuted Saddam Hussein? I ask myself why isn't it atacking North Korea ? Because there is no oil or because they are afraid of Russia and north Korea ? The people of North Korea is being opressed by its own will, because if they would be organised like people should be, If they fought back im sure they would set themselves free. They are slaves and they dont know it, just like you, you cant even think that you might be opressed, thats what your government makes you think, thats what my government makes most of the people think here where i live too ! World must wake up my friend ! Dictatorship in this case and always is the truth, and i repeat it Democracy is that beautiful lie you are living in !
"Even if you weren't brainwashed, what are you going to do to revolt against the government. Most likely you won't have any guns or weapons to help you." this statement of yours claims to offend Mahatma Ghandi and his Peaceful revolution against Great Britain,I also i heard that the US is planning to bann the right to have guns, could it be that the US is afraid of a possible revolution? "When you disarm the people, you commence to offend them and show that you distrust them either through cowardice or lack of confidence, and both of these opinions generate hatred." - Niccolo Machiavelli. Seems like the US is not trusting its own people... its true that government has maybe millions of soldiers, are these soldiers meant to fight against their own nation? Against their brothers ? If there happens a revolution are american soldiers going to fight against the american people? Is your government going to bomb you with nuclear bombs like it bombed Japan ? In your opinion thats democracy right ?
"Were I live leaders can be controlled through elections. You say that the voting of a new leader, won't change anything, yet bad polices get changed all the time." - and this statement of yours has a question ? Why do those bad policies actually get voted? Why to change them all the time if you can make them stop by voting as you are saying? Or are those bad policies changing and getting worser ?
"My opponent asks me, if your rights are protected the same way as the people who are richer then you in capitalism? The answer to this is yes. Capitalism offers everyone the opportunity to become rich, you don't have to be born in a wealthy family to become successful. My opponent is probably going to disagree with this statement, so let me give you some examples." Excactly i dissagree with you, the question was not if you get the chance to be rich or not, all these homeless people in capitalism do they like the way they live in? How do you explain that, that those persons dont want to be rich ? Don't be ridiculous ! The question now is are those homeless people treated equal? Are their rights protected the same way as the rights of the rich? Please dont try to get away from my questions, just accept the reality !
And the examples my opponent gave me about the presidents of the US are quite funny, it makes me really think what happened to those presidents ? I really think that my opponent believes that George W. Bush is a saint and a democrate. How does he explain the fact that a president of the US can break the international law as simply as he did by attacking foreign countries?
Your example with Hitler and Stalin makes me explain something to you, as you know Hitler was a dictator too. But the german people loved him and supported him always, because he was not brutal to them like he was with the jews and other nationalities. He loved his people too and fought for the german rights to have their better position in the world. Germany had a parliament back then. Just like the democratic US "protects" its own people and kills innocent muslims all around the world!
I dont idolize Tito i just gave you an example of a good dictator, the system was almost the purest socialism in the world and ruled by a dictator deciding fot the massive best!
Constitution and the separeted powers. Constitution has a lot of space to be interpretted in ways that can be in order with the interests of the people who are in power, and the separated powerty in legislative excectutive and the judiciary are meant to make a balance in a country based on the idea of Rousseau, unfortuantely nowadays this separated powerty is united and is working as one against the masses and in favour of the leaders ! If you dissagree give some evidence that im wrong.
The evidences that the US is faking terrorist attacks are obvious for people who dont ignore the truth ! I will not continue to explain you things you already know but you prettend that those things are conspiracy theories ! An Unignorant man should actually think about those conspiracy theories using his real logic and asking himself, where are those conspiracy theories coming from? Or its my country that keeps secrets from me ? Who is actually telling the truth? My government or the conspiracy theorists? Dont eat everything that is served to you, don't believe everything you hear, dont believe everything you have been told my friend!
Your example that in Singapore is the perfect democracy makes me assume that you deeply know that you are not living in a real democratic country because in case you did you would take an example of your own country... However everywhere i hear that countries declare 0 tolerance to political corruption but the 0 rate of corruption was never accomplished, its impossible to eliminate corruption, organised crime and other bad phenomenons. Either in democracy or in dictature corruption will always exist and you have to deal with it!
The economic example in a dictatorship depends always on the economic wealths and the economic system that the dictator considers to be the best, compared with opinions of the delegates or the people because even dictature pretends to represent the will of the people and it actually does ! And as i see you can only figure out a historical view of a dictator based on a communist ideology malinterpretted from the Russians, I really am curious to know why are you not capable to think outside the box and figure out a modern dictatorship? Where all the people are equal but not being lied, the truth is being told to them, and they are being ruled in peace by a person who knows the best for them? Does that really look that impossible for you ? Or you are hoping that there comes a chance for you in capitalism and you are going to opress the poor? Is that your dream ? What if you dont get that chance?
I gave my opinion based on simple logics that democracy is a lie, that dictature is better because at least you know you are being dictated, you dont live in an illusion. We are all suffering from this lie of democracy, some of us believe it, some other do not but they are living surrounded by an ignorant society and thats the same. Dear opponent im glad i had the chance to debate this with you and i hope that at least i made you think, and i hope i have opened someones eyes through this because the world must wake up. We are being ruled by unbelievably sick people in the name of democracy, in the name of this sick system!
The revolution is not an apple that falls when it is ripe. You have to make it fall. - Che Guevara
Lets make the change happen !
You say that the majority is not always right. This is true, but the dictator is not always right and the dictator isn't always smarter then the people. At least in a democracy it isn't left up to one man to deiced the fate of everyone.
My opponent has come back to argue about Julian Assange. He is in a political asylum, but he's there voluntarily. He's even said that he plans on leaving the embassy soon. My opponent claims that the U.S. made this up to ruin Assange's reputation, but Assange has even openly admitted to the crime. My opponent goes on to talk about Al Capone. Al Capone was arrested on tax evasion, which the police department had plenty of proof, since he had thousands of unclaimed bills hidden.
My opponent says" North Korea is proof that people are being manipulated just like in democracy, if you don't fight for your own rights who the hell is going to fight for them?" North Korea manipulating people does not connect to democracy at all, since North Korea in a communist country. North Korea is only an example of how dictatorships manipulate people. My opponent then asks why the U.S. isn't attacking North Korea. Im not sure if my opponent is aware or not, but there U.S. participated in this war know as the Korean War, which the whole purpose was to stop the spread of communism in Korea. Although we were only able to partly stop it. This is what led to the separation that made North and South Korea. Going to war with North Korea now could possibly lead to war with China, since they a sympathetic for North Korea.
You say that I offend Mahatma Ghandi, because I mentioned that you would have no guns. I do respect and admire Mahatma Ghandi, but he didn't even accomplish his full goal through peaceful revolution. Ghandi wasn't able to maintain unity between Hindus and Muslims, and was disappointed that Pakistan separated from India. You also mention that the Government wants to take away guns in the U.S. There are a few who want to take away guns, but most of these people are part of the more left wing parties, who are closer to dictatorships then most. I would also like o add that the right to have guns are a constitutional right, meaning that the government doesn't have the power to take them away. You also talk about the U.S. bombing Japan in World War II, but you have to remember that Japan was allies with Germany, who were working on the atomic bomb as well.
My opponent asks why do bad polices get changed all the time. A lot of the time polices don't work out how they were predicted too, but this flaw wouldn't be changed in dictatorship. In fact it would be worst, since the only way you can get a bad policy changed in a dictatorship is through revolution.
My opponent asks me if those who are poor have there rights protected the same way as the rich, the answer to this is yes. Rich or poor, you have the right to go where ever you want, when you want. You have the right to say what ever you want, work were ever you want, and so on. Both the poor and the rich are still bound by the law as well. My opponent then asks me, how do I know these people like the way they live and how do I know that they don't want to be rich. In the Declaration of Independents it says that one of our rights is the pursuit of happiness. This means that you have the right to work toward and gain happiness, but your happiness is not guaranteed. In other words, everyone has the right to work toward, success, but wether or not you become successful is dependent on the choices you make.
My opponent says, "I really think that my opponent believes that George W. Bush is a saint and a democrate." I think George W. Bush was one of the worst modern day presidents we have had, but he didn't break international law, since both the other countries and the UN identified a whole list of UN laws that they were breaking.
When talking about Hitler my opponent says "He loved his people too and fought for the german rights to have their better position in the world. Germany had a parliament back then." This isn't completely true. There where jews and other christians that were citizens of Germany at this time, and they were treated with cruelty. Hitler only treated a small portion of his people with brutality. Also the people of germany were being lied too, non of them new about what was going on with the jews. When people found out bout this you, still think people loved Hitler.
Going back to Tito, he may have been a good dictator, but he still couldn't stop his own federation from declining. This shows that dictatorships are completely flawed systems. Tito, probably the only good dictator that my opponent can thing of, couldn't stop the decline of his own federation, then imagine, what would happen if you have a bad dictator.
My opponent say that the evidence is obvious that the U.S. fakes terrorist attacks, but he still gives no evidence. If its so obvious than why hasn't he said any? He is simply basing it off his own biased opinion. He asks me, where do you think lot of these conspiracy theories come from? A lot of them come from people like him, those that don't like to accept the truth. He is simply denying real world problems. I bet he also thinks that Israel is a peaceful utopia where things like terrorist attacks haven't been hear of and that ISIS is a non violent peace group.
My opponent wonders why I didn't use my own county as an example of a perfect democracy. I felt that using my own country wouldn't be as good as using another, since we are talking about democracy in general. In the U.S. you have the ability to go where ever you want, with no reason, to say what ever you want, to own your own property, and to own your own business. These are things that most dictatorships don't offer. If a democracy is a lie and the same as a dictatorships, then why do the countries that have democracy have more economic freedom and human rights then most dictatorships. This isn't lies it's pure observation, something my opponent chooses not to do. My opponent brings up the 0 corruption tolerance policy. It is true that, this can't stop corruption completely, but dictatorships don't need corruptions to be bad. A dictatorship is corrupt by nature, giving one man too much power over everyone.
You say that even dictators represent the people, but this isn't always true. Some dictators just want power and dictators don't always know what is best for the people. This can be the same in a democracy, but in a democracy you still have the separation of power. You also say I can only think of historical views of dictatorships. You have yet to give a good modern day example of a dictatorship. The reason you haven't is because there isn't one. I can't think of one dictatorship that exists today, that I would love to live in. You also accuse me of wanting to oppress the poor through capitalism. I don't dream of oppressing the poor, I just want be able reach the highest goal I can set for my self and there is no one to say others can't do the same.
Throughout this whole debate my opponent has kept talking about revaluation. Saying this is how people can control there government, but a system the requires you to have a revaluation or civil war, just to get something like one policy changed, is not a good system. Also if you went through a revaluation, why would you want to go back to a dictatorship? It would be clear that it doesn't work.
My opponent also hasn't argued about what I said on the one party system. This is because its true, when there is only on party it doesn't matter how hard you work to move up on the social latter, but how loyal you are to the government. He has also not said anything about my argument, that dictatorships doesn't promote competition, which almost gets rid of innovation.
My opponent wants a society were everyone is equal in wealth. This means wealth would be distributed by the government, let me tell you why this doesn't work. When the government is in charge of wealth it gets rid of motivation. People will ask themselves, whats the point of working hard or starting a business if I could just sit around, not do much and still make just as much money? This would cause very little wealth to be created and the society, would go into economic collapse.
My opponent tells me that I can't think of a real modern day dictatorship where everyone is equal. This is true, I can't, because no such place exists. My opponent is desperately trying to think of o modern day utopia, but a utopia doesn't exists and has never existed, it is simply fiction. He things the government should be dependent on the people and the people should be dependent on the government, this is false. I believe the government should be dependent on the people and the people should be able to be independent from the government. The governments only job should be to crack down on crimes and protect our rights. Why would you want your whole life dependent on one person?
I would like to note that my opponent has given no modern day examples of any good dictatorships, he has given very little fact(most of them being false). He has simple based his whole debate on petty conspiracies, ignorance and his own biased opinion. His main argument being that democracy is a lie and is the same as a dictatorship, even know its obvious this is false. You can see through pure observation, that democracies have more rights and freedom then dictatorships. My opponent chooses not to except this because he doesn't like it.
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.