The Instigator
Farooq
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
tjzimmer
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points

Ethnic nationalism is incompatible with a constitution that calls for racial equality.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/1/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,011 times Debate No: 1252
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (9)

 

Farooq

Pro

Although not so much a problem in the New World, many European nations (among others) a finding themselves in a sort of identity crisis and are facing a resurgence of far-right nationalists such as LePen (French), Sovereignty-Identity-Tradition (Pan-Euro), Flemish Interest, Swiss People's Party, Action Democratique (Quebec), etc who say that pride of one's heritage is important and that the cultures in question must be preserved. Although with such just, fair, burdensome constitutions there is little to restrict immigrants rights many attempts such as Quebec's initiative to make it illegal for immigrants to hold government posts without speaking French or the new language laws enforced in Flanders. When asked why they are doing these sorts of things it is always the same "It's for preserving our culture because we love it so much and want our spawn to be the same as us. We don't like these new influences. Our culture is dying, etc". But is this really bad? Why can't the government just stay out of culture and allow each person to pursue their own? Although one could understand patriotism, and love for one's country, nationalism based on historic bloodlines or traditions has no place in the liberal-democracies that currently inhabit the Western world. Culture does not need "protection", free nations can determine their own ideals about what types of language or arts best fit their current situation.
tjzimmer

Con

The basis of this argument says that cultural identity cannot be retained in a republic that calls for equal rights for all citizens. However, it is clear that diversity of ones culture can be retained at the same time being equal to all the other cultures around them. Take a look at the US policy on this issue. An example being African Americans, Hispanics, and other European Americans that have retained their customs and beliefs, at the same time being completely assimilated into American culture. I will expand on this in my next post. So, America is known as the melting pot however it is really a salad bowl. Everyone is thrown into one bowl "of equality" all meshing together yet still retaining their different qualities (onions, olives, crutons, etc) America is a prime example of the more diverse a culture is, the better the rights of all peoples are. It is understandable for governments that are far away from what we have achieved in America to want to retain their culture. Probably because they have very little ethnic diversity in their nation. The fact is that these countries are a bit more ethnocentric in the case of culture. Where we as Americans pride ourselves on understanding and equality of all cultures, some other countries pride themselves on retaining the old style and beliefs of their countries history. So I am for whatever the popular vote of the people says. If they want to have discrimination based on not being able to speak French or whatever than thats fine with me as long as it doesn't happen in America. The people in Canada for example need to find out what they hold most dear, their cultural diversity/history or equal rights (workplace, political office, etc) for all citizens.
Debate Round No. 1
Farooq

Pro

What is one's country? Is it the homeland from you came and your tradtions identify most with or one's current abode where one has citizenship and pays taxes to? In the Western world every country (exclduing Cuba and maybe Venesuala) is a liberal-democracy (i.e. democracy in which basic freedoms like speech, religion, and liberty and enshrined with foundation legislation). One of the most imporant of these aspects of course is racial equality. Many of these countries though (not so much in the New World other than Quebec) have historically been country forged from some sort of common culture, relgion, tradition, and most prominently of all langauge and heritage. Spain, France, England, Norway, Sweden, Quebec, Dennmark, Holland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, etc all are countries (except Quebec), but they are "nations" as well and feel strong bonds with people of a common heritage. However with their declining birth rates they are all receving much of their new population through immigration, mainly from Asian and African countries who are bringing their own tradtions, religions, hertiage, languages, cultures, etc with them. ALthough for practical reasons they will likly have to learn tounges other their native one (I was yelling at the Quebecers only because they failed to recognize Canada's other official language as a viable prerequisit, many immigrints see English as a more of an asset than French). With this new influx, many governments are unsure about whether to promote assilmalation, sometimes a little too aggressive into their societies as to fit in better these immigrints and showcase their national pride. But is this really compatable with the values of racial equality? Why shoukd one feel pride for one's heritage, is this not the very core value that has been known to run amuck in the cases of the Hotus, Serbs, Nazis, or for the whites in Darfur? When one says that one feels pride in their ethnic lineage is this not by extension saying that other cultures are inferior? Otherwise why would one be proud?
tjzimmer

Con

I am not really sure what you are talking about in your last post. Once again I will say that it is important for many peoples that are different in culture to bond together and create unified society. Many nations have a thick history of one certain ethnic group. But, with our world changing every nation has to deal with people that are different that what they are use too. America has paved the way for equal rights for all citizens of different race and culture. That is what makes America great different opinions and culture or nationalism all respected and equal. So people having opinions on what they believe morally or whatever obviously exists with racial equality. Im not sure what more evidence you need other than looking at the progress America has made in ensuring citizens are not stripped of their nationalism while making sure everyone is equal at the same time. It is definitely compatible.
Debate Round No. 2
Farooq

Pro

"Ethnic Nationalism" is ideal that one should be proud of one's heritage, even to the point of racism. I have not been talking about America or most new world countries in this thing, I have mainly been targetting the far-right in Europe or far-left in Quebec. I am completly favour of people being able to do whatever sort of cultural pursuits they wish (within reason) and hold America as one of the prime ideals of my debate. Based on your last post we seem to pretty much agree... that's probably my fault... my debate wasn't as orgonized and the topic lacked full clarity.
tjzimmer

Con

Well seeing as though you agree with my fundamental argument I guess I can rest my case. America is the best example of different shades of people receiving equal rights.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by claypigeon 9 years ago
claypigeon
FarooqtjzimmerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by zsavi524 9 years ago
zsavi524
FarooqtjzimmerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Mallory89 9 years ago
Mallory89
FarooqtjzimmerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by SperoAmicus 9 years ago
SperoAmicus
FarooqtjzimmerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Farooq 9 years ago
Farooq
FarooqtjzimmerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by thinkingduck 9 years ago
thinkingduck
FarooqtjzimmerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by joesabet2001 9 years ago
joesabet2001
FarooqtjzimmerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Statesman 9 years ago
Statesman
FarooqtjzimmerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by tjzimmer 9 years ago
tjzimmer
FarooqtjzimmerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03