The Instigator
Jifpop09
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
Jevinigh
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Nations would benifit from using Tridemism as their political philosophy

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
Jifpop09
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/9/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,130 times Debate No: 48741
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (15)
Votes (1)

 

Jifpop09

Pro

Tridemism is a political philosophy designed by Sun Yat Sen, but in America, it is very similar to Progressivism. It promotes 3 main beliefs known as the principles of the people.

1. Nationalism

2. Democracy

3. Welfare of the people (Socio-capitalism)

It calls for the three main pushes in the American Progressive era

1. Official Recall

2. Initiatives

3. Referendrum.

In short, it promote high interaction between the people and government. A mix of direct and representative democracy.

It also promotes a three branch government, and checks in balances.

If you were not aware, this is strikingly similar to the US, with a few slight differences.

Notable Nations which use Tridemism as a philosophy
-------------------------------------------------------

United States

South Korea

Taiwan

If you want any more information before we start the debate, please inform me.
Jevinigh

Con


Opening this debate, I first contend that the reasons why we have created nation states in the first place has nothing to do with social policies or national or relgious dogmas but that the driving motivator for the states Existance is Economic in nature. Economics here is based in general welfare to begin with and expands as civilizations have grown into prosperious contexts of wealth. How ever the people of a nation look to the nation state first and fore most to be a methof protecting and encouraging wealth and prosperity. In the days of Imperial conquest this was done with territorial expanion. In this Cnetury, it is not quite so clear. For this reason, at its premise Tridemism is not terribly relevant as it tied in greater effect to the social relation betweeen a people and government than it is to the Economic welfare of people an state.

Social freedoms are not the same as Economic freedoms but they have in common that a firm balance must be struck between authoritive state and liberal minded policy. This ideal balance is infact a moving target, driven by the ever changing will of the people and it is irreagardless of whether the state is democratic or authoritvie in nature that a Balance must be struck. That said. several civilizations in their prime have done a reasonable job of keeping up with it. Notably the famous civilizatiosn on which modern Tidemism was built upon. Western examples such as Athens, Rome and even the Contutional monarchy of Great Britian, during its hieght was an excellent example of balance between authortive and centralized powers of state.. and liberal economic and social policies. While this balance may or may not be easier achieved through Tridemism as you've defined it, it has not been ahcieved by this system exclusively.

Enter the 21st century, With rapidly evolving Technology creating a crisis in economics as our systems scramble to catch up with Hardware and software advances of the previous decades, Obvious cracks in the modern systems of both Economics and politics are forming and growing ever wider. Systems be them Tridemism or Authoritive in nature are increasingly ireelvant as western culture increaingly liberalizes in social policy. Governments which require their citizens to serve in the capcity of funding the state are pressed ever harder as to make the spread sheets balance. Here in coems the beauty of a Technocract, Resource based Economy, A machine based government with the only simple function of forfilling the needs of its human citizens. It has no social policy and no need of one. it is a government focused only on utiliatrian functions and its nature is bound like wise to mechnaical functions. Where in the past I would have sugested that out nation states should be treated as if they where a business. I now propose that a state is best if thought of-and-used as a computer. It serves a function, it is operated,maintained and repaired in a methodical way, it operates like wise. Undecirminating, Unbias. This is the Ideal state and I look forward to debating it with you.
Debate Round No. 1
Jifpop09

Pro

I would first like to tell my opponent that I have no problem with technocracy, but I will be debating the San-Min Doctrine

Argument 1: Tridemism has been very successful so far.

Taiwan:
The country of Taiwan is notable for using Tridemism as their main political philosophy. The whole government is centered around Tridemism, and it is now one of the Four Asian tigers, and one of the most free and liberal nations on earth.



http://www.isn.ethz.ch...


United States:
Back in America's Progressive age, we had made some of the greatest advances in democracy. The progressive party, from which the san-min doctrine was formed, is notable for being led by Theodore Roosevelt. Almost everything on the progressive platform had been fulfilled within 30 years, and we became the worlds leading economic and military super power.



http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu...

Argument 2: Nationalism

Nationalism, whatever your view on it may be, is undeniably a great factor to have in your county. It brings people together, and makes them work for a commoncause. To make their nation the best one possible. What a beautiful thing, to unite religions, ethnicitys, and cultures under one banner.



http://www.britannica.com...

Argument 3: Democracy

How great is democracy. It took 1000's of years for humanity to realize that power should not rest in one mans hands. Democracy gives power to the people, and the people give power to the state. Which brings me into my next point...




http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Argument 4: Welfare of the People

The San-Min Doctrine promotes the Welfare of the People as the first priority of the nation. Advocating the goverernments role in making every citizen well and happy. While many interpret this as socialism, it can mean a lot of things. It means that all citizens get an equal chance, and citizens who can't keep up will be supported.




http://americanart.si.edu...


Now I'm very intrested in how my opponent will argue that this doctrine will not help various countries, but I'm certain that some good points will be made. Thanks for debating with me, and good luck.
Jevinigh

Con



20th century thinking is inadequate for future progress. Because democracy has done relatively well in the past does not mean it is the best system for us to use going forward. The impact of technology cannot be ignored and our technological systems changed everything, be it the 16th century Agriculturual revolution, the late 18th century industrial revolution or the 20th century digital revolution... These revolutions are more like evolutions, Each radically changing the dynamics of human society. How ever this time we seem to be adapting socially to the changes much slower, As a topic for another debate I will go into more detail about how We clinging to out dated economics that no longer serve Humanities growth.

Democracy plays a part in these reluctance to let go of old systems, partly for its facilitation of mass manipulation, especially in a time of isntant communication. But it is mostly the very idea of Democracy that is outdated, equally outdated to systems like Autocratic monarchies we left behind generations ago. I said in my opening debate that the ideal system is that which oparates like a machine. In truth the ideal government is a machine. You see, Demcoracy be it controleld by consertive or progress interests has no solved any of the most pressing issues of our time.

- Global enviromental degredation
- Wars
-Violence,sexicism,racism.
- Unemployment.

These and more... Politciacians have not provided solutions from either party. Regardless of our election of Obama or Bush... Clinton or bush...None of them solve the problems because they are not qualified to solve them, they arn't scientists.. they arn't engineers. They are usually lawyers.. Ask your self what qualifies a lawyer to make judgements about infastructure he barely understands.

So what is the answer? Science.

Science has provided us with a sound set of procedures for ariving at conclusions and developing solutions and Science does have the answer to these problems. High Density Renewable energy sources, A Post scracity wolrld will have no wars, Nor will it have these problems of biggotry and Science offers us a system that does not use a market system. ( Resources and further details at the end of the post.)

The system we want, the system need going forward is one that utilizes science to solve out problems, because the facts are the facts... Truth is truth it does not matter what your opinion about gravity is, it works. It does not matter what your opinion about rising sea levels are, they are rising. It is is true even if you refuse to beleive it. In Democracy, every one has a say... everyone has an opinion and thats all fine and good... but at the end of the day your opinion wont effect gravity and it wont stop the seas from rising.

Our new reconomics will be driven by automation, Human labour will be unnnessary and our systems will be designed to meet the needs of all humans on this planet and despite what you are often told by the advocates fo the status qou, there is enough to go around and more. In jsut 10 years we could have a global,access,abundance. Sound far fetched? You are going to have to do soem homework.

Start here:
http://en.wikipedia.org...;

than continue with this presentation ( full length documentry) that lays it out reasonably.
https://www.youtube.com...;

Further reading:
http://www.thevenusproject.com...

http://www.theresourcebasedeconomy.com...;

An incredible documentry titled The Future my love.
http://www.futuremylove.com...;

Dont ever, EVER accept "Human nature" as an excue. Never let some one say somethign wont happen with out giving a solid reason. I gave you what you need to start a jounrey to a new way of looking at the world. What you chose to do with it is up to you.
Debate Round No. 2
Jifpop09

Pro

I extend all arguments, and request my opponent to stay on the actual topic. The resolution is "Nations would benefit from using using Tridemism as their political philosophy", so he should be arguing that the three principals are not good when applied to a country.

I notice my opponent is passionate about technocracy, but this is not what the debate is about. Thank you for understanding.
Jevinigh

Con

I Did not go off topic at all, I contended that Trideism is the inferrior choice and I laid out the reasons why quite clearly. But for your sake, I will repeat why the system is obsolete and niot fit for nations in this century.


Democracy :

As i said above, every one has an opinion and in democracy we "vote on it"... Look at the Gobal warming issue in the United states and how long it took us to get over science denial by conservative elements. I repeat my earlier statements, It does not matter how much a people deny science- science is true regardless. You can Vote all you want but the opinion of the majority doesn't change anything in the real world. Democracy is an outdated system, designed to meet the needs of people who lived in a low energy civilization which was in the midst of a technological revolution that brought us into the industrial era and the eventual end of the colonial age.

Nationalism :

There is no way the children fo the future will be localized in this way. Already on our generations you see far less respect for nations and their borders, everythign about our culturue underminds the idea of having imaginary lines people that cannot or should be crossed. You music is global, our news is global, our movies and sdhows are global. Everythign about the 21st century culture is global and there is no room for artifical bounderies between people in that culture. Nationalism is detrmental to our society and serves only to slow down progress of a unified culture.

General welfare :

its a wonderful concept but Trideism is woefully inadequate to proporarly meet the needs of its people. The very anture of being a democratic national system puts it at cross purposes between serving people and the industries which power the nation. The "vote" must be considered ablong side the economic system with out these three systems being intrinsically atached. Its like playing 3 way table pong.


In short, Trideism was a great system forthe 20th century. It would still benefit many nations who adopted it for the next few years while the developed world begins to make its transition into a more scientifically midned stage of development. There is a better way.
Debate Round No. 3
Jifpop09

Pro

I Did not go off topic at all, I contended that Trideism is the inferrior choice and I laid out the reasons why quite clearly. But for your sake, I will repeat why the system is obsolete and niot fit for nations in this century.

I am sorry, but I worded it that way for a reason. If I said " Nations should adopt Tridemism", then you would be correct to bring up a new system. I worded it so you can only refute mine, because people kept doing this.

As i said above, every one has an opinion and in democracy we "vote on it"... Look at the Gobal warming issue in the United states and how long it took us to get over science denial by conservative elements. I repeat my earlier statements, It does not matter how much a people deny science- science is true regardless. You can Vote all you want but the opinion of the majority doesn't change anything in the real world. Democracy is an outdated system, designed to meet the needs of people who lived in a low energy civilization which was in the midst of a technological revolution that brought us into the industrial era and the eventual end of the colonial age.

We have it for a reason though. Because one side is not always right, and it is essential that everybody gets a fair and equal say in government. While a council of scientists sounds great, scientists are not always right on everything, just due to their status. What if the people who believed in Global Warming were a minority. That is why we need democracy.

There is no way the children fo the future will be localized in this way. Already on our generations you see far less respect for nations and their borders, everythign about our culturue underminds the idea of having imaginary lines people that cannot or should be crossed. You music is global, our news is global, our movies and sdhows are global. Everythign about the 21st century culture is global and there is no room for artifical bounderies between people in that culture. Nationalism is detrmental to our society and serves only to slow down progress of a unified culture.

Nationalism unites ethnic groups. It creates work ethic. People want to aid their nation, and make it the best it can be. Without nationalism, we would be divided and less efficient. I can not tell you about the future, but nationalism is beneficial now.

its a wonderful concept but Trideism is woefully inadequate to proporarly meet the needs of its people. The very anture of being a democratic national system puts it at cross purposes between serving people and the industries which power the nation. The "vote" must be considered ablong side the economic system with out these three systems being intrinsically atached. Its like playing 3 way table pong.

And I would love to hear how pure capitalism with socio guiadance is ineffective. Its worked well for the US and Taiwan. Taiwan is extrmely well off for all its citizens, so how can you make accusations it does not work? During the US progressive era, we made some of the biggest economic advances in history, and tridemism got us out of the great depression.

http://www.taiwan-agriculture.org...
http://www.heritage.org...

Conclusion

- M
y opponent has spent the first two rounds arguing on a off topic future system, while making few arguments that debate the resolution. "Nations would benefit from Tridemism". The resolution is worded in such a way that eliminates bringing up new resolutions.

Thanks for the debate, and thanks for reading audience.
Jevinigh

Con

Jevinigh forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Jevinigh 3 years ago
Jevinigh
maintain that i din't go off topic and I had to Forfeit the last round sue to life situations.
Posted by Jevinigh 3 years ago
Jevinigh
Alright.
Posted by Jifpop09 3 years ago
Jifpop09
Kind of, but don't worry about it.
Posted by Jevinigh 3 years ago
Jevinigh
Hey Jif. Is this happening at a bad time for you?
Posted by Jevinigh 3 years ago
Jevinigh
Remind me not to post at 2am again... the typos... I really should have proof read.
Posted by Tophatdoc 3 years ago
Tophatdoc
Ok
Posted by Jifpop09 3 years ago
Jifpop09
As I said. Anywhere the French been are in my genes most likely.
Posted by Tophatdoc 3 years ago
Tophatdoc
Interesting but are you Chinese?
Posted by Jifpop09 3 years ago
Jifpop09
Imagine a long line of french men traveling all around the world making babies. Then you got me.
Posted by Tophatdoc 3 years ago
Tophatdoc
Quite a number of times, you have brought up topics that are Chinese. Are you Chinese?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Actionsspeak 3 years ago
Actionsspeak
Jifpop09JevinighTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con went off-topic and ended the debate with a forfeit.