The Instigator
wwwwh
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
BobTurner
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Is the USA hypocritical ?

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/10/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 490 times Debate No: 48810
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

wwwwh

Pro

I think it most definatly is/ was, escpecialy in the begining. it is for freedom but enslaved so many, for prosperty but is in/ caused so much dept, is for the people yet has so much greed at all levels of government. So what do you guys think.
BobTurner

Con

No the USA is not hypocrticial because it is not possible for a country to be hypocritical. That is personification. The people who FOUNDED this country where hypocritical. But even then you could say the founders WERE hypocritical, and that those in power WERE hypocritical, not that they ARE ("is" as you said -- present tense) hypocritical.
Debate Round No. 1
wwwwh

Pro

I agree that I did presonify the usa not however that it was incorrect to do so. For so many people are in it/ identify with it and it was those people I was refering to. I felt it incorrect to say the Founders because they are only a small part in its history. However it is conridictary to say the usa is the people and then say it is ideals. For the people do not nessasarly hold the ideals unless one made an argument that people that dont hold the ideals are not citizens of the us. However if you asked any person what the us stands for they would most likely name atleast one of these. But with the definition of the us being a colection of people who are born or trasfered to a certian region of the earth commonly identified as the USA. Those people would be wrong, the us stands for what the people stand for witch can be contridicting, thus it stands for nothing. Thx for furthering my understanding of this topic. Do you agree with my new stance or do you have a difrent defintion of usa?
BobTurner

Con

But the definition of the US is not the collection of people who are born here or emigrated here -- the U.S. is a country. Thus, the thesis falls flat.

If your new stance is that American ideals, per se, are in conflict with what people in the US have done, are doing, and will do, then yes, I agree. That obviously isn't the resolution, though.
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by xXCryptoXx 3 years ago
xXCryptoXx
lelz semantics
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
wwwwhBobTurnerTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Nothing beyond semantics. I would award S&G to con, if not for the random ALL CAPS words.