The Instigator
ImAPanicBomb447
Pro (for)
Winning
24 Points
The Contender
Brnny202
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Righty10294 cannot legitimately defend his claim

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: 1/8/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,251 times Debate No: 1536
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (8)

 

ImAPanicBomb447

Pro

While reading this, keep in mind that I posed this debate directly to him to allow him to defend himself but he declined to debate me.

Our young friend righty10294 posted the following comment on a debate entitled "Best Countries in the World":

"Lets see, wuthout US we would have no demorcracy, no fridge, revolver, etc etc. In other words, without the US the whole earth would be led by some tyrant, with technoalgical advances the same as the 1700's. We are the best country, and best supperpower."

The full context can be viewed here: http://www.debate.org...

In this debate I intend to show that this statement is baseless and full of factual errors. I will examine his statement point by point. Much of the information can be found within a few minutes of searching on wikipedia.

1"Wuthout US we would have no demorcracy..." (common sense, as well as wikipedia, democracy/suffrage)

Spelling and grammar errors aside, this is still an incorrect statement. To refute this, all I have to do is show examples of Democracy that existed before the United States (ignoring the fact that the United States is best described as a republic, not a direct democracy). See: Ancient Greece, Maha Janapadas, Ancient Rome, the Iroquois Confederacy, English Parliament, Scandinavian Things, etc.

In the area of women's/universal suffrage, even this is not an American invention. See: Corsican Republic (1755), Paris Commune (1871), Tavolara, Franceville, Finland, New Zealand, etc. Women were allowed to vote in New Zealand in 1893, and Australia in 1902. It wasn't until 1920 that the 19th Amendment was passed in the United States. Hell, the 15th Amendment was only passed in 1870!

2"no fridge" (wikipedia, refrigerator)

Here I simply have to show that a refrigerator existed that was not invented in the United States, and is not an improvement on an American invention.
Artificial Refrigeration was invented by William Cullen at the University of Glasgow in 1748, years before the American Revolution. Compression refrigeration was invented by an Englishman, Michael Faraday. James Harrison, of Australia, introduced vapor-compression refrigeration to the brewing and meat packing industries. The absorption refrigerator was invented by Swedes.
Marcel Audiffren, a FRENCHMAN championed the idea of a refrigerating machine for cooling and preserving foods at home. His patents were purchased by the American Audiffren Refrigerating Machine Company.

As for other, American advancements in refrigeration (or any invention, for that matter), there is no proof, nor way to prove, that these things would not have eventually existed without the United States.

3"revolver" (wikipedia, revolver, James Puckle)

Snapchance revolvers were first made in the late 17th century. The earliest specimen is dated to 1680 and attributed to John Dafte of London. Elisha Collier patented a flintlock revolver in Britain in 1818, with significant numbers of them being produced in London by 1822. Not to mention "The Puckle Gun", first demonstrated in 1718 by James Puckle.

So the first sentence would appear to be refuted. On to the second.

"without the US the whole earth would be led by some tyrant"

Please show the proof, or even evidence of this ridiculous theory. Perhaps you haven't yet studied imperialism?

We've been friends of the French Empire under Napoleon, and more importantly, the British Empire all through the age of Imperialism. But still, no country has come closer to world domination (through political, economic, and military means) than the United States itself.

"with technoalgical advances the same as the 1700's"

This is the most laughable claim yet. I will not waste time on it, since the only thing that has to be shown is that one technological advance has been made since 1799 in another country besides the United States. I've already shown this, actually, in the section about revolvers.

"We are the best country, and best supperpower."

Without an agreed upon set of standards, this is impossible to determine. Even with a set system to decide it, every single point you made was incorrect, and so they do not support this argument.

I'm not picking on you but I hate to see a younger person just blindly following rhetoric without looking at facts. Making claims like this is conducive to furthering the image of the stubborn, stupid American. It leads to fervent nationalism and war. It's a short step (and one that's already been made) to go from "We're the best" to "Let's spread our goodness around the world through violence".
Brnny202

Con

It is possible for Righty10294 to defend his claim. There are in fact many universities that teach debate. It is actually possible for him to take said classes and defend the claim that other countries are dependent on US aid.

Secondly, because you use sources like Wikipedia, Righty could easily change the entries to make himself correct. You use a user-edited web site to find facts. Not only would Righty be able to change your sources to make him claim valid, he could debunk your evidence entirely on substance.

Thirdly, since you introduce no other rules, such as a timeline for Righty to defend his claim, or any guidelines for whether he must defend the larger claim or only provide better evidence, you leave this debate entirely open ended.

Given an education on how to better debate and the time to do better research. "Righty" could easily defend the claim that the US is a super power.
Debate Round No. 1
ImAPanicBomb447

Pro

Hello, thank you for taking up this debate. I feel very strongly about this subject (blind nationalism), and I'm happy to have someone to debate. Please excuse me for taking your statements out of order, I haven't edited them otherwise as you can see.

"Given an education on how to better debate and the time to do better research. "Righty" could easily defend the claim that the US is a super power."

This is absolutely, 100% true. But perhaps I should first point out that his claim was not that "the US is a super power". He stated that the world would not have democracy, the revolver, or the refrigerator without the United States and that the US is the BEST country and the BEST superpower.

He may be able to argue with me, but, as stated in the title of this debate, he would have to be making legitimate (true/supported) claims. If you accept my evidence as legitimate, then it would be impossible for him to legitimately refute them.

But your argument has made me realize that perhaps further explanation is required on what I mean by "his claim". I am taking his entire statement as a whole. The reasons he gave that led to his conclusion are all either false or simply not a good basis for his conclusion. My thesis is that he cannot legitimately defend his claim using the evidence already given. Perhaps a tautology (an invalid argument is invalid), but in my opinion educational nonetheless.

"Secondly, because you use sources like Wikipedia, Righty could easily change the entries to make himself correct. You use a user-edited web site to find facts. Not only would Righty be able to change your sources to make him claim valid, he could debunk your evidence entirely on substance."

This would not change the truth of any of our claims. He, or anyone else, may feel free to fact-check my arguments (Also, see the Nature study on Wikipedia vs. Encyclopedia Britannica. Very interesting study where both were to shown to have about the same accuracy!). I purposely used Wikipedia because of its popularity and accessibility. I wanted to show the ease with which these claims can be refuted. But as I said, please feel free to fact-check, as we may all learn something.

The only way I could see him refuting my argument is if he took a linguistic leap and claimed that when he says "we", he means Americans. But do note that while this would make his invention arguments completely true, they would do nothing to support his other claims.
Brnny202

Con

Brnny202 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
ImAPanicBomb447

Pro

I'd just like to reiterate that we are not dealing simply with the claim that "The US is a superpower", but with the more elaborate claim that Righty made.
Brnny202

Con

Brnny202 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Daddy_Warbux 9 years ago
Daddy_Warbux
lol..I was about to say. That would have been sweet though. "So I met tom from streetlight online. How was your week?"
Posted by ImAPanicBomb447 9 years ago
ImAPanicBomb447
we're called streetlight manifesto. my name's tom. lol jk. From Under City Chaos. we're not even a band anymore lol we're from Niagara Falls, NY.
Posted by Daddy_Warbux 9 years ago
Daddy_Warbux
Haha sweet. I saw them with Anti-Flag in December. And your band is..? Anything I may have heard of?
Posted by ImAPanicBomb447 9 years ago
ImAPanicBomb447
haha it certainly is daddy warbux. they're my favorite band. I actually played a song onstage with them when my band opened for them over the summer. Awesomeeee nighttt my friend. lol.
Posted by Daddy_Warbux 9 years ago
Daddy_Warbux
Off topic, but, Panic Bomb, is your username a BTMI! reference? Please forgive me if I am mistaken.
Posted by zarul 9 years ago
zarul
We are the world's greatest supperpower, how can you contest that? I mean honestly, who's got better suppers than US?
Posted by ImAPanicBomb447 9 years ago
ImAPanicBomb447
I meant that the United States has come closest to controlling "the whole earth", not that they are tyrants. I don't have an opinion one way or another on the tyranny aspect of it.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 9 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
I should note that whoever is winning the race for military supremacy is not necessarily the closest to being "some tyrant." A government could potentially govern the whole world with no necessary impact on the degree of "tyranny," in the common term, involved. Indeed less tyranny (more freedom) makes world conquest easier, because you have less micromanaging to do.
Posted by ImAPanicBomb447 9 years ago
ImAPanicBomb447
lol very true about screwing itself. I assume he's the only one who will actually take up the Con position, and I certainly hope he does.
Posted by Yrael 9 years ago
Yrael
Lol, I could almost take this debate up from an economic/hegemonic standpoint..... but I wouldn't actually believe what I was saying. Not to mention Righty10294's argument has me screwed from the start, if thats what I would be trying to defend. =)
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by solo 9 years ago
solo
ImAPanicBomb447Brnny202Tied
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 Daddy_Warbux 9 years ago
Daddy_Warbux
ImAPanicBomb447Brnny202Tied
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 ImAPanicBomb447 9 years ago
ImAPanicBomb447
ImAPanicBomb447Brnny202Tied
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 righty10294 9 years ago
righty10294
ImAPanicBomb447Brnny202Tied
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 cloppbeast 9 years ago
cloppbeast
ImAPanicBomb447Brnny202Tied
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 albert7966 9 years ago
albert7966
ImAPanicBomb447Brnny202Tied
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 Pricetag 9 years ago
Pricetag
ImAPanicBomb447Brnny202Tied
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 Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
ImAPanicBomb447Brnny202Tied
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