Earth will Have a Global Revolution within 500 Years
Debate Rounds (4)
Welcome to my first debate!
Will Earth have a global-scale revolution before 2515? Could all countries in the world unite into one colossal powerhouse? Or could every country split up into thousands of city-states, each with their own form of government? Or will everything just stay the sameThat is what this debate will discuss.
I am debating Pro for this debate. I do believe technology and culture will completely change how we as humans interact with eachother.
Personally, I think that countries could split up into city-states with some form of interstate law. A form of direct democracy could be the primary method of government.
Be direct, clear, and PLEASE have good grammar. Round 1 will be acceptance, Round 2 will be the debate, Round 3 will be rebuttals, and Round 4 will be conclusions.
Have fun, and enjoy my first debate!
This is my first debate that i am participating and i am looking forward to it. :) P.S Please point out mistake in debating method if i go wrong. Thanks.
Yes there will be great changes to our lives with tecnhology and culture. And more to add I am against the fact that we would literarily split up into city states. I am afraid a change were a one world government controlled by a big corporate giant is not a thought which should be easily given off. We very well know the power of technology and we humans have literarily become slaves of it. Hence i strongly believe Global revolution in 500 years maynot be an easy situation.
(Make sure to correct some usage errors. Bad grammar is always unprofessional.)
First of all, I do not believe that Earth will unite into one supergiant corporate totalitarian place. That idea is completely ludacris and humanity will surely fight against it.
I do not understand why you are against small city-states. Please explain.
About technology, you may think we are slavesto it as of 2015, but I'm 99% sure by 2515, we will simply become one with technology. The Internet of Things is the first step to this process, and you really should look it up if you haven't already.
Lastly, you must understand that even not accounting for the fact that time is "speeding up" (the 1900s have had more stuff happen in them than the rest of the 1000s combined), 500 years is a LONG TIME. Remember that our last global revolution happened only 100-200 years ago (monarchy to representative democracy) and it surely will happen again (representative democracy to direct democracy) soon enough. Possibly we will evensee hints of a new world sociology before we are both dead.
So the above sentence explains why the idea of small cities is far fetched.
Now coming to the technology aspect. We have been long fighting for what we call Privacy. Big corporates already have been using the user datas trading for money. The primary concern about the Internet of Things is the privacy issue which can be very serious when our personal data is in the hands of big corporates and we are literarily obliged to them. See now itself you can take example of many big companies who take our data and literarily many are not knowing about they might be selling to others which can potentially lead to big dangers.
And to add about the direct democracy(It was an interesting read and it was the first time i came across the concept. Thanks). It would be pretty hard to implement the idea of direct democracy into such an increasing world population with no concern whatsover what happens to the world. People care less about decision making process, we can very well see how many persons are ready to get involved in politics and decision making process directly in direct democracy. People tend to stay back and mind there business. So i guess the idea of direct democracy wont work. People have there needs and coprorates are filling slowing buying themselves and making them under there control. Coporates control many government influence election and almost everything. So maybe we are moving towards corporate takeover. They are taking patents in medicines, advanced military and robotics and so what more do we want to belive its all easy for them.
The progress of human history has generally swung from a very individual point of view into a very totalitarian one, and I believe it is currently swinging back.
Think of it like this: the cavemen were extremely individual, all they had were their family and a cave. About 10000 years ago, different families started joining together, and eventually began farming. This was the beginning of human civilization. Then, about 5000 years ago, different city-states joined together and created places like Egypt and Mesopotamia: the first human countries and empires. These empires were all led by a very select few (mostly only one person), and they were the largest and most powerful governments humanity has ever had. The UK just 400 years ago ruled almost the entire world.
Then, America came, and started swinging the pendulum back to small city-states. The most powerful country in the world shrunk from the entire world to a section of a continent. And this is where we are today: different sections of individual continents (with the exception of Russia) being sectioned off into countries, usually under a representative democracy rule.
We can only swing the pendulum farther in the direction it is going at this point, and that direction is smaller countries.
Now to technology.
Privacy is a HUGE issue today, I will NOT argue with you there. But I will say most of our issues in provacy come from government agencies rather than companies. Google will never have a human look at your emails (it's all done by robots), but the NSA, for example, could easily look at a terrorist's communication.
Is that a good thing? Maybe. We don't want terrorists plotting in secret, but the NSA could easily mastake a normal person as a high-risk bomber.
Your best argument is certainly your argument about how people won't get involved in politics if Direct Democracy takes over. This issue has several solutions (Liquid Democracy, better education) and I really think its up to the now much smaller city-states to solve this issue. That said, because countries in 2515 have shrunk immensely, politics will become much more local, and as such, more accessable to the public.
You ended off your argument on a note of conspiracy regarding corporations. You would be correct if the pendulum was pushed in the other direction, and the world would unite as one great nation, but since countries are getting smaller, corporations will only be more local. For all we know, an entire city-state could be dedicated to being the HQ of a worldwide corporation in the future.
Even if all you say is true do you really think that these small cities as you mention get independent powers and be able to exercise themselves? Can they just be themeselves they have to depended and be depended on the big shots.These governance will be always be controlled by some big guy. That is what I have been stressing from the start. Its not the elected government that takes decision but some shadow people. You can see how biased decisions and laws are being made. The biggest threat is these corporates are also swininging in a rather weird direction same as your case with small cities. Small or Big it doesnt really matter as long as they have control. We see how some governments take over the other countries and say they have established democracy and put a puppet government out there. And this is not a rare case we have seen the same thing happening all over. These are the government who will be pushing us into the idea of direct democracy, I seriously doubt if they will ever do that and even if they do it, it will be by making some hidden knots so that people dont exercise the ultimate power. I seriosly have no faith in way the world is moving. This is a 50-50 scenario we could maybe expect or wish that these worst scenarios doesnt happen. Ultimately its who exercise the power and who has the resource in hand and not if its small cities or big cities. Hence there is always that big shots who exercise the power.
And i would like to add some more about the privacy and user data. As you mentioned the agencies themeselves use it and i agree yeah maybe they do just some good by spotting terrorist out. And to add if i say they can be used for even worser things. Say a Company Z sucessfuly makes a medicine for Diesease, and say a Company X gives money to Company Y to steal information from Z and so as to jeopardize Z. And thus here no government agency is involved corporates can simply sell the user data. Every common man can be a victim. I dont know how corporations can be local. It will always be global and be exercising as much power and area. They will try localize and get in each and every corner, I think thats the correct way of saying. It will be like watch out they are everywhere. I dont know if i am being too hard on Corporates, maybe they will be the one who is creating a fake global revolution :)
Like I said earlier, humanity would surely fight against a large-scale government. It would be impossible.
Small-scale city-states can easily ally with others or be independent. It's all in the government.
Corporations will stay international, but I don't see how they would "take over" city-states as Con is saying.
And lastly, I see your Con's point with corporations, but city-states can still team up and fight against corporation-takeover. Besides, why does Con think corporations will want to take over in the first place?
It was a pleasure debating with you, CosmicSpirit.
Vote Pro, and have a good day, everyone.
"Small-scale city-states can easily ally with others or be independent. It's all in the government."
So I guess it doesnt really matter large or small cities as i said in the previous argument.
"Corporations will stay international, but I don't see how they would "take over" city-states as Con is saying."
You are the one who said in the previous argument that Corporation will be local and HQ being dedidcated to state.
Yeah people may or maynot fight back. As i said in the first sentence it all depends on the mindet and with the current going i dont think a proper fight back will be waged by the people.
And also as i said in the previos argument still its a 50-50 scenario. And some corporations still give me hopes of brining advancement to humans namely Space X, Tesla Motors working closely with the governments all over the world. So if corporations with positive mindsets like that comes up then we can surely hope for a better future and i still beleive there will be many coming. Lets home best for the future of humanity :)
Many Thanks to you also AwesomeSaucer for showing interest in debating with me and it was my first time here in debate.org and i had my difficulties but this sounds fun, looking forward for more.
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.