That Government Transparency is necessary for the existence of a Democratic Nation
Debate Rounds (5)
1. A democracy is a political system whereby the power is held by the people through elected representatives (of the people).
2. These representatives of the people are not separate to the people, rather speak on and judge on behalf of them.
3. If there is information that the representatives know, then If they don't share it with the rest of society, they no longer become representatives and internal to the system of government, rather external and misrepresent- this is because it then contradicts the system of a democracy; that is, the power is no longer with the people, rather, with those elected officials. This only becomes a problem when, given the fact that the system of electing is partially built on trust, this power becomes unevenly distributed throughout society
4. If there is government secrecy, the democratic system of government topples
Please refute me if you will; Only hoping to learn and refine my perspective on the world. Thanks!
However 1-4 are your arguments and not your definitions
If those were definitions there would be no way for you to lose
My main argument is that a government has our best interest at heart and it will make decisions to keep our country safe.
Ill let you rebut that claim and then we can start the arguement
The government itself is tasked with keeping the country going. Now of course there are a few bad apples but that doesn't make the entire system a failure.
Transparency for the government will put even more distrust into the hearts of its citizens
They need to do whats necessary, whether good or bad, to keep us safe and people in the streets calling them murderers isn't helpful and is actually counter productive. A citizen needs to live in this country and be happy. He doesn't need to know all the extensive things that we do.
Government should always be for the people and by the people but there needs to be a middle ground. We already elect representatives to represent us we dont need to keep bugging them or provoking them to do what we want all the time. Sometimes the government knows more than we do because, lets face it, most Americans arent really the sharpest knives in the drawer
1. The government always has our best interest because they are the ones running the country - I don't think that is in any way a deductive or inductive argument. To state such a cause and effect is a massive leap of faith. The problem with this leap of faith is the fact that it allows room for manipulation and enslavement- If there is a means of countering this, then maybe you may have a point. However, the problem with this is that stating that the democratic system eliminates manipulation and enslavement due to elections creates a problem if transparency doesn't exist...
2. Now of course there are a few bad apples but that doesn't make the entire system a failure. - I never said it makes the entire system a failure... I'm just saying that it's anti-democratic if the government is anti-transparent (Of coarse, I'm open to changing my views if more notions are put forth)
3. Transparency for the government will put even more distrust into the hearts of its citizens - No justification given whatsoever... In fact, the current disillusionment with the government's anti-transparency and increasing figures of people choosing not to vote is evidence enough to show the disillusionment people have (this is very generalised) with the current political system... People are disengaged and detached, and the fact that there isn't transparency isn't really aiding the resolution of this
4. They need to do what's necessary, whether good or bad, to keep us safe and people in the streets calling them murderers isn't helpful and is actually counter productive - Whether they need to keep us safe or not isn't the point... It's whether government transparency is necessary for a democratic nation to exist. Red Herring. And also, if the government has murdered people (hypothetically), then people are justified in calling them this in the streets. You also don't mention how it is counter-productive in any way, does it not breed change?
5. A citizen needs to live in this country and be happy. He doesn't need to know all the extensive things that we do. - Again, no evidence to back up any of the statements you're making and no explanations given as to why a citizen doesn't need to know all of the extensive things that he government do.
6. We already elect representatives to represent us we don't need to keep bugging them or provoking them to do what we want all the time. - But what if they aren't truly representing us? And to say that we shouldn't be vocal about what we want is antithetical to the liberties that the democratic system portrays.
7. Sometimes the government knows more than we do because, lets face it, most Americans aren't really the sharpest knives in the drawer - Whether Americans are intelligent or not is beyond the fact that there should at least be the option of knowing these things. I don't think the matter of transparency can be negated by your judgement on the intelligence of the American population.
And let the discussions continue :)
1) Its not a massive leap of faith. If your job is a plumber you are tasked with plumbing a toilet. Are you going to somehow sabatoge the toilet? No? That's the same logic as the government trying to ruin the country for the citizens in a democratic nation because in the end they want reelection. Manipulation can happen, but not enslavement but if it is manipulation it does not conflict with the definition of democracy
Democracy: a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives: (Oxford Dictionary)
Because of this I do not see how manipulation can destroy a democratic nation because according to the definition its a system of government where the population elects representatives
2) You still haven't explained WHY a government without transparency is somehow anti-democratic.
3) Yes transparency in everything the government can/will do will create distrust and disgust. When everyone didn't know we were torturing muslims in Guantamo we were good. Then we realized what was happening and there were riots and protests
4) Again you still haven't explained how government transparency is against a democratic notion. Ive already explained why it isn't against it in 1) and when the government kills terrorist leaders with few civilian casualites we should be thanking them not bashing them
5) Again no explantion why a citizen NEEDS to understand what the government does. BoP is on you since you didn't specify that in your arguments. I hope you knew that
6) If representatives aren't representing us then elect another one.
7) Again complete transparency does NOT help the common citizen. It actually hurts them
Also, whether the government manipulates or doesn't manipulate is beyond the point. The point is whether transparency is necessary for a democracy to occur.
2. I did in my first argument. I asked if you could provide alternate definitions to those that I was posing, however, your arguments turned more into Red Herrings and straw mans.
4. Observational selection is no means to put forth an argument. You've used one example and given your previous example about Guantanamo bay, self-annihilate your argument...
5. It's not a matter whether a citizen needs to understand what the government does or not... It is simply a debate about the nature of transparency and its coherence with democratic ideologies... The straw mans are multiplying
6. Yes, however, how can we ever know if they are representing us or not given the nature of the anti-transparency... this is an issue.
7. How? The article doesn't seem clear in the argument is making. Also, hidden agendas must be considered.
1) The role of the government is to help regulate the country and keep it going. The country isnt broken like your toilet yet it needs constant nurturing like a gardener does to a plant. Without the government the economy would wilt
What do i mean by this
Democrats are usually big government people
Republicans are small government people
Without big governement the economy takes a beating
click="document.location='/Reformist/photos/album/5682/39293/'" src="../../../photos/albums/1/6/5682/332567-5682-vgs8f-a.jpg" alt="" />
click="document.location='/Reformist/photos/album/5682/39292/'" src="../../../photos/albums/1/6/5682/332567-5682-fdgw4-a.jpg" alt="" />
So big government is generally good for the citizens because the better the economy the better its citizens.
Transparency can hurt in mulitple cases because sometimes we need to do things that are neccessary for good even if the average american doesnt know about it
2) Again you didnt explain how no transparency conflicts with the definiton of democracy which, again is: a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives
No government transparency does not conflict with this definiton. We are still electing members to represent us in the USA.
3. Thanks? Why are you thanking me. Because of that there is more anti american people in the world.
4. Its not observational selection. This is a debate. You need to prove why your stance is true. And you havent so far.
5. And.......... you still havent provided an explanation why its against democracy. I feel like im repeating myself
6. Even if theres almost no transparency we know what bills they are voting in and vetoing out.
7. Did you even read the article? Read it again because i think you skimmed over it
Overall it was nice debating you man
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.