The Instigator
Farooq
Pro (for)
Winning
18 Points
The Contender
aluma
Con (against)
Losing
12 Points

It is hypocritical to believe the American Revolution was justified and the South's rebellion wasn't

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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: 8/9/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,964 times Debate No: 4958
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (10)

 

Farooq

Pro

It is obvious to any reasonable person who know's their American history properly that there was a rebellion in the 13 Colonies against London's authority in which both sides had patriotic convictions and grey priniciples. On one side there were the rebels, who despite causing their civilization to erupt into a violent civil war and stand up for their systems of slavery and apartheid that were being threatend by a strong Empire-wide abolishinest movement also had some good ideas as well which lead to the creation of one of the first fully democratic regimes with an avid reception of free religion, liberalism, rarely censored press, and advancement in civil and democratic rights(minus those for women and ethnic minorities). The Loyalists on the other hand wanted to preserve the general status quo, which included some positive effects like internal peace, defined Appalachian borders with the various Amerindian tribes, and progress towards racial equality (especially conpared to the American rebels) but also many negative things such as the continuation of an exclusionist legislature and a weaker constitution.

In the end the rebels won and a managed to cast themselves as the "good guys" in most history books.

Meanwhile, if one is to go four-score and seven years into the future, one observes another separatist movement shaking the North American continent. Again we a frusutrated collection of democratically elected regional legislatures (minus women and minorities, which I guess is standard for the day) who band together in hopes of establashing their own patriotic niche and independance in the new world, but are thwarted by the established auhtority's attempts to put unity ahead of democracy.

Now my opponent, pray why Lincoln's war was justified, and George III's was not?
aluma

Con

I acknowledge you have well thought out proposition and I will proceed by challenging the very root of your argument which is that ONE REVOLUTION WAS JUSTIFIED AND THE OTHER WAS NOT. Every side involved in a struggle is justified in their own eyes- the British felt justified in their cause as much as the American colonies were. The side that comes out victorious is therefore reassured in their justification and thus convinces the world and their progeny as such.

Today we see that the USA is the superpower that came to quell the Nazi terror-it would be painful to imagine what the world would have been after 1945 if the USA didn't exist. There is therefore no hypocrisy in justifying the American Revolution that led to the birth of USA. Similar thinking can be applied to the South's Rebellion, had they succeeded, there might no longer have been a superpower that could stand up to the Axis powers. This line of thought might have been the other way round if the American Revolution did not succeed or if the Confederate States of America emerged. Somehow, the victor lives to tell the story and shape the opinion of generations following -the commoner who justifies the revolution should be justified because he heard the story from the victor and has seen the effort/performance of the victor subsequent to the revolution.

We can conclude that the end justifies the revolution.
Debate Round No. 1
Farooq

Pro

Well well well. Not the angle of attack I expected, but an interesting one nonetheless

As for your allegations that the potential effects dozens of years of the future, that could not be foreseen, somehow alter the morality and justification of wars fought over other issues not pertaining to anything but present disputes, what logic is in it?

1) First of all if either the CSA had been successfully created, or the USA not so there would never have been the same sort of events that would happen, for even the smallest changes would alter world history in large unpredictable ways. World War II never would have occurred, at least not the same fashion.

For example if you own a gas station, and plot to blow up a competitor's franchise with the sole purpose of getting more business for yourself, are you justified if by doing so you end up causing a series of events that lead to the police intercepting a stolen nuclear warhead found buried in your competitor's lot? Certainly you have done more harm than good, but had no intention of doing such, only malice and avarice as your guides. The future is unpredictable, which why it is important to think of probable cause-and-effect, not every unforeseeable possibility. Neither revolution in question did the rebels think of preventing future genocide or warmongering, only of the needs of their region at the time.

2) Even one puts aside the notion that the rebels had no idea the value of their super power status would provide the world in the 40's and 60's, it still is poor logic. Likely a more internationalist dominated CSA would have moved to support her allies in Britain and France far more so that the isolationist Republican north, but I will not expand on this due to the fact it is pretty irrelvent.
3) Yes people are usually justified in their own eyes but the purpose of this debate is to judge and critique from an unbiased non-involved position. And so I say, if one weighs the values of self-governing and democratic values and finds them worth more than racial equality and peace than by all means, feel that the American revolution was justified, but also treat the Confederate rebellion as such as well. If not, than spit on the names of Washington, Madison, and Jefferson, but do so on Davies, Lee, and Benjamin as well. Believing otherwise is hypocrisy
aluma

Con

aluma forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Farooq

Pro

I stand by my statements ... it is aluma's turn to show why I am wrong or at least give up and admit to my brilliance; if he beleives it exists.
aluma

Con

I stand by my previous argument that one can't be labelled a hypocrite for believeing what he sees; it would rather be illusive to justify a 'rebellion' that failed or to vilify a 'revolution'that did not produce a failed state.

I would however add a few points:
-The American Revolution was based on pure self determination and true liberty from the heavy tax burdens and arduousness of laying at the feet of the British crown. The South's rebellion on the other hands was a selfish and inhumane move to retain slave labour. Thus while one struggle was to attain greater human freedom for the common people of the colonies, the other was to maintain the absence of freedom for black slaves.
-The south was bent on an agriculture-based economy while the north was moving to industrialize. See what happened to the other Spanish colonies of the America's that remained agriculture based and thrived on slave labour? They never became the super power that the industrialized North made out of the USA. It is evident that if the CSA succeeded, it would have had an economy on par with those other agriculture based economies of Central/South America.
--Justification's reference is ultimate good and ultimate evil. The former should be justified and the latter not. Was the South's intention of basing their economy on slave labour a good thing? I believe not.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by bthr004 9 years ago
bthr004
con forfeited,... that is to bad,... A clear victor none the less. I just can not vote,..
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by jmlandf 9 years ago
jmlandf
FarooqalumaTied
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 bthr004 9 years ago
bthr004
FarooqalumaTied
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 Killer542 9 years ago
Killer542
FarooqalumaTied
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 Farooq 9 years ago
Farooq
FarooqalumaTied
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 CP 9 years ago
CP
FarooqalumaTied
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 Derek.Gunn 9 years ago
Derek.Gunn
FarooqalumaTied
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 Rezzealaux 9 years ago
Rezzealaux
FarooqalumaTied
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 Captain.America 9 years ago
Captain.America
FarooqalumaTied
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 s0m31john 9 years ago
s0m31john
FarooqalumaTied
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 aluma 9 years ago
aluma
FarooqalumaTied
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