The Instigator
hanwoo
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Zarroette
Con (against)
Winning
32 Points

THBT the government should protect the minority group"s culture

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
Zarroette
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/14/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 629 times Debate No: 68307
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (6)

 

hanwoo

Pro

I believe that the minority's group should be protected from the government because if the government protects the minorities, the government can receive taxes from the minorities. For example, China's more than 5000 minority groups, if China supports them the China government can exact taxes.
Zarroette

Con

I accept. I look forward to seeing Pro's opening round of arguments.
Debate Round No. 1
hanwoo

Pro

hanwoo forfeited this round.
Zarroette

Con

Despite hanwoo's tactical decision to avoid affirming the resolution, I cannot give up a turn to bypass making arguments, else I will only be responding in the last round (which is unfair to Pro). Hence, despite the BoP still not being fulfilled by Pro, I will still make arguments.


Negation Case


A1: People prefer other people of the same culture; having different cultural identities creates disunity

I


In his novel,On genetic interests: family, ethny, and humanity in an age of mass migration, Frank Salter argues that“Relatively homogeneous societies invest more in public goods, indicating a higher level of public altruism”[1]. The argument is there which shows cultural factors to be of relevance in regards to a stable/loving/caring community.


As an example, further on in the novel, specifically on page 123, “…it follows that adaptive ethic nepotism not only selects for ethnic altruism, but for all gene-based characteristics distinctive to the group. This applies not only to traits with high heritability, such as cognitive profile…but to cultural traits passed on through socialization within the family…such as political culture” [2].


In English, what this means is that people are more likely to get along, be nice to each other and be more charitable if the other people are of the same culture.


II

To further support this conclusion, Professor J.P. Rushton, in his research paper,Ethnic nationalism, evolutionary psychology and Genetic Similarity Theory,found that spouse and best friend relationships were influenced by ‘opinions and attitudes’ with a correlation of 0.5, with other factors like ‘physical appearance’ only at 0.2. Only ‘age, ethnicity and education’ scoring higher (0.6) [3]. This means that for relationships of value, people are definitely basing relationships on cultural factors (i.e. opinions and attitudes).


III

Implicit Egotism isthe way in which people gravitate towards places, people and situations that reflect themselves [4].Implicit Egotism, as explored in a multi-academic circle by John T. Jones (United States Military Academy), Brett W. Pelham and Mauricio Carvallo (State University of New York at Buffalo) and Matthew C. Mirenberg (Columbia University), shows “…[the research paper’s] evidence suggests that implicit egotism is a valid and replicable phenomenon that influences people’s choice of a lifelong romantic partner in much the same way that it influences their evaluations of a stranger on a semantic differential” [4]. As indicated in J.P Rushton’s work, people will treat strangers (effectively other members of the community) differently based on their culture.Therefore, on average, the absence of cultural similarity creates more disunity than the presence of it, and this will generally make people less happy, friendly, altruistic and trusting of each other than would be found in a culturally homogeneous community.


A2: The more extreme impact of culturally divided nations

Let me be clear before I make this argument: I do not hate Muslims or Islam. I am merely showing you that Islamic culture struggles to assimilate into different countries, and vice versa. It is a great example of what happens when cultural tensions are high.

Cultural differences can create outright hatred between people. Consider the relationship between Muslim groups and some parts of the rest of the world. In a specific example, “41% of the general public in Spain says most or many Muslims in their country support Islamic extremists. But just 12% of Spain’s Muslims say most or many of the country’s Muslims support extremists like Al Qaeda” [5]. See the high tension?

Other examples of serious problems is that in 2006, “29% of Jordanians view[ed] suicide attacks as often or sometimes justified” [5]. Another statistic from 2006, “61% of Nigeria’s Muslims say they have at least some confidence in bin Laden” [5]. Have a look at what these statistics do to the relationship between Muslims and Westerners:



It is not that either culture is inferior. It is not that some Muslims and some Westerners cannot be friendly to each other. It is that these cultures living together cause serious damage. Recently, it only took one Islamic Extremist to bring Sydney to a standstill [6]. It is differing cultures that create these atrocities



C1: Different cultures creates negatives


If the government of any country decides to "protect the minority culture", the government will be doing the entire nation a disservice by encouraging tension, distrust, unfriendliness etc., as well as more extreme ill-feelings amongst its citizens. Therefore, the government should not protect the minority's culture, but instead should protect cultural homogeneity. The resolution is negated.




References:

[1] http://books.google.com.au...
[2] http://books.google.com.au...
[3] http://www.euvolution.com...
[4] http://new.dixie.edu...
[5] http://www.pewglobal.org...
[6] http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au...
Debate Round No. 2
hanwoo

Pro

hanwoo forfeited this round.
Zarroette

Con

Even if you do not agree with my arguments, Pro made no affirmative arguments, so I should win by default.

Please vote for me =)
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
hanwooZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Con. Pro forfeited nearly every round which is rarely acceptable conduct in any debate setting. S&G - Tie. Both had adequate spelling and grammar where applied. Arguments - Con. Pro failed to present any case whatsoever. Due to Con left standing unchallenged, it's a clear win for Con. Sources - Con. Pro did not utilize any sources in this debate whereas Con did.
Vote Placed by PapaNolan 2 years ago
PapaNolan
hanwooZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had no arguments
Vote Placed by Paleophyte 2 years ago
Paleophyte
hanwooZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited, failing to make a single argument.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
hanwooZarroetteTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF and no contest against con's arguments.
Vote Placed by Smithereens 2 years ago
Smithereens
hanwooZarroetteTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: This kinda reminds me of what people were like back in the times of open racism, the beliefs that marriages between different coloured skins would be ineffective, the Australian belief that blacks couldn't take care of their own kids, etc. I'm inclined to believe that further social development will swing heavily in pro's favour, judging purely by the current trend, however Con makes a compelling case for the state of society as is. Arguments and conduct to Con for reasons. Interesting read.
Vote Placed by 1harderthanyouthink 2 years ago
1harderthanyouthink
hanwooZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: FF