The Instigator
Jared_BL
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ConservativePolitico
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points

The Chinese Government is a Terrorist Cell

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 4 votes the winner is...
ConservativePolitico
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/11/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,262 times Debate No: 19806
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (4)

 

Jared_BL

Pro

Taxation without representation (ie a representative democracy) is theft, because without a doubt the alternative way of deciding who gets to run the government is by using violence. That is, whichever group within a society has the most guns, eg Al Qaeda, gets to be the government (I would also argue that whichever group with the most guns to gets to host elections for "democratic governments", but that is another debate: http://www.debate.org...).

If taxation without representation is theft, then it is also armed robbery and kidnapping. If a Chinese citizen does not pay money to the extortion racket called the Chinese Government, then he will be abducted at gun point and eventually herded into a raping pen commonly known as a "third-world-prison".
ConservativePolitico

Con

This debate is so ridiculous that I have to take it in order to clarify...

Definitions:

terrorist cell - a cell of terrorists (usually 3 to 5 members); [wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn]

tax - A compulsory contribution to state revenue, levied by the government on workers' income and business profits or added to the cost of some goods, services, and transactions [www.dictionary.com]

terrorist - A person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims [Google Dictionary]

government - The system by which a nation, state, or community is governed [www.dictionary.com]

According to the definition of a "terrorist cell" it is a group of terrorists consisting of 3-5 members. The Chinese government employs thousands upon thousands of people. Last year the Chinese recruited 16,000 new people to work in government through the Civil Service Exam [http://www.chinatoday.com...]. So based solely on the definition the Chinese government cannot be classified as a "terrorist cell".


Also you cannot join taxation without representation to theft and armed robbery and kidnapping. Every nation on earth requires you to pay taxes and if you don't you'll be arrested... probably by a police officer who in most countries will carry a gun. Tax evasion in a crime everywhere not just in China. I fail to see the argument. Many places on earth don't have representation for taxation but that doesn't mean they partake in terrorism it just means people can't vote on tax rates.

This debate was founded out of a half baked rant that doesn't even make logical sense nor does it pose any valid points to the argument laid out.

Resolved: The Chinese government is not a terrorist cell.

Any other arguments you throw out now might try to prove that the Chinese government might not be the best government but you can't possibly call them a terrorist cell.

Thank you.

Debate Round No. 1
Jared_BL

Pro

Fine. It is not a terrorist "cell". Allow me to get used to the level of hair-splitting on this site - which is probably a good thing. If I can rephrase that, it would be: "The Chinese Government is a Terrorist_Organization".

You said the following:
---
"Also you cannot join taxation without representation to theft and armed robbery and kidnapping. Every nation on earth requires you to pay taxes and if you don't you'll be arrested... probably by a police officer who in most countries will carry a gun. Tax evasion in a crime everywhere not just in China. I fail to see the argument. Many places on earth don't have representation for taxation but that doesn't mean they partake in terrorism it just means people can't vote on tax rates."
---

The fact that every nation on Earth requires you to pay taxes is irrelevant. Those "nations" without representative democracies (I would argue this doesn't matter) are simply terrorist_organizations in disguise. In China, only one organization of individuals is recognized as The Chinese Government, but it is probable that many more organizations of individuals want to be The Chinese Government. Who wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of taxation without representation? So what makes this one organization out of millions so special that it gets to be recognized as The Chinese Government?

The only consistent characteristic is overwhelming force; one particular organization has more guns than any other organization within the geographical region of "China". That is why the Communist Party gets to be called the Chinese Government and the largest Chinese triad gang in China does not.... yet. The moment the largest Chinese triad gang in China accumulates more guns than the Communist Party, is the moment they get to be The Chinese Government because of overwhelming force.

You are willing to say that people who don't have representation for taxation are not victims of terrorism. So it seems you also believe that if the Chinese Government was ruled by the Triad Gangsters Party and subjected "its citizens" to taxation without representation, those citizens are not victims of terrorism. I'm sure you agree that a Chinese triad gang which robs and kidnaps shopkeepers that don't hand over a percentage of their profits, is terrorizing the local population through their extortion racket. Yet The Chinese Government is just a gang of thugs that terrorizes peaceful people through its superior and more dangerous extortion racket.
ConservativePolitico

Con

I would like to note that my opponent has failed to refute any of my points directly.

Your whole argument is based around you making China sound like its in an open state of rebellion or that the people are being savagely repressed when this is not the case. In fact China is one of the happiest countries on earth based on the Happy Planet Index. In 2009 China ranked 20th out of 143 with a high score of 57.1 [http://en.wikipedia.org...] and the Chinese government has continuously said their people's happiness is one of their highest priorities as demonstrated in this article, [http://articles.latimes.com...] the government monitors the people's happiness very closely.

There are no groups of thugs roaming around China trying to take over, there isn't a gun pointed at the people's head. The Chinese people are happy because government makes their lives simple. There are no mass killings in modern day China and the government is not a terrorist organization.

My opponent really has no argument. His anarchist tirade does nothing to support his point except for throw out a bag of speculative "what-ifs". The citizens in China aren't "subjugated". There are over a billion Chinese, if they really wanted to revolt they could. Arguments about weapons and taxes mean nothing in this debate. You are debating that the Chinese government is a terrorist cell which I've already shown to be false.

You are clouded by your anarchist bias.
Debate Round No. 2
Jared_BL

Pro

---
"There are no groups of thugs roaming around China trying to take over, there isn't a gun pointed at the people's head. The Chinese people are happy because government makes their lives simple. There are no mass killings in modern day China and the government is not a terrorist organization."
---

How can you argue that China is not in a state of rebellion against their dictators when they have to be threatened with violence to fund them? The first requirement for asserting whether a citizen prefers Dictator Hu Jintao, is that the citizen gets to choose whether or not Hu Jintao bosses him around in the first place. Eg you cannot force me to eat only hamburgers, and then say that I love hamburgers. Of course I love whatever prevents me from starving to death. When Hu Jintao forces Chinese citizens to give him money, he eliminates the element of choice. Of course Chinese citizens are happy about government programs, because they don't get to choose whether or not to give up their money. The Chinese Government is always the best that it can be. In order to determine whether or not Chinese citizens are truly happy about their government, they must be allowed to fund it voluntarily or at least through the facade of representative democracy.

In terms of the fear factor regarding my label of "terrorist organization", this is my argument:

The most important goal of the Chinese Government is to maximize revenue through the threat of violence, otherwise it cannot achieve any of its other goals. It would be counter-productive for the Chinese Government to impose conditions under which large numbers of citizens are inspired to rebel. Fear of coercion is only necessary as a means of maximizing returns. 99.9% of Chinese citizens might be completely overjoyed about their daily lives, but absolutely terrified whenever they have to file their tax returns, knowing that one mistake could land them in a hard labour camp or worse. If just one peaceful Chinese citizen is terrifed of paying their taxes, the Chinese Government fits the definition of a terrorist_organization; they are an organization of individuals who use the threat of violence to extract property from a peaceful person.
ConservativePolitico

Con

"How can you argue that China is not in a state of rebellion against their dictators when they have to be threatened with violence to fund them?"

-- This statement doesn't really fit the argument and coincides with what I said above in the debate which is that people must pay taxes and if you don't you're threatened by an officer of the law who is usually armed. So if that's what you're trying to say then fine you can make that stretch if you'd like. But in modern day China people don't disappear from their homes for misspelling their name on a tax return form. The China you're thinking about is the China of the 1960's-1970's and the cultural revolution. China today is nothing like the China of 40-50 years ago.

"they must be allowed to fund it voluntarily "

-- If given the voluntary chance to pay taxes my guess would be that 0% of people would pay the taxes they are currently paying. Nobody wants to pay taxes but that doesn't mean you hate the government. Do I want to pay taxes every year? No. Do I hate my government? No. No one will voluntarily pay for anything, its human nature to want to save for yourself but that doesn't mean that its in connection to a hatred of government.

"In terms of the fear factor regarding my label of "terrorist organization", "

-- My opponent has changed his own wording and is using a false quote here. He never labeled the Chinese as a terrorist organization. This may be besides the point but I want to point out my opponents failure to stay consistent with his reasoning. His original wording way "terrorist cell" and when I pointed out the error in that phrase he changes it to an organization. I have clearly beaten him on the topic of the debate.

Once again I would like to point out how the Chinese people are not coerced, terrorized or threatened in the ways my opponent claims, what he is describing is a normal justice system for any developed or developing nation. If you evade your taxes you will be arrested, not coerced. If you perform a violent crime I suppose you could be threatened while you are taken into custody but there is no more Culture Revolution in China, no more Great Leap Forward, no more aggressive communism. It is now essentially a one-party state with a government regulated pseudo-capitalist economy. People are happy in China like I pointed out before, not terrorized.

*****

My opponent used nonsensical anarchist ramblings, presented no factual evidence to back up his claims, presented no sources at all, and dodged direct debate whenever possible. An interesting and technical debate to be sure.

Do the smart thing, vote Con.

Thank you.

Fin
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by ConservativePolitico 5 years ago
ConservativePolitico
What if What if What if. Thats all you spew. And your anarchist views are starting to annoy me >.>
Posted by Jared_BL 5 years ago
Jared_BL
I agree that you won the debate, but only because I started off calling it a terrorist "cell".

I never dodged any of your arguments relating to taxes, etc, you just failed to see how people who call themselves "policemen" could be terrorists. The mafia can force you to pay a fee towards one of its extortion rackets, but we don't call them the Government because it doesn't have a monopoly on violence and we can't vote for different mafia bosses.

You apparently believe that if the mafia became more powerful in Sicily than the Italian Government, and most Sicilians were happy about not being able to choose the mafia boss of their liking, the mafia could still be called a Government that "protects us".
Posted by Jared_BL 5 years ago
Jared_BL
Isn't the world a beautiful place? In fact, it's so beautiful that I can make do with seeing it from my computer screen. Yes, there's no need to see the Great Wall of Slavery in person - less I be kidnapped and shoved into a raping pen.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by InVinoVeritas 5 years ago
InVinoVeritas
Jared_BLConservativePoliticoTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: blatant victory
Vote Placed by vmpire321 5 years ago
vmpire321
Jared_BLConservativePoliticoTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: CON showed why PRO's arguments were invalid or false..
Vote Placed by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
Jared_BLConservativePoliticoTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con right off the back showed how the chinese government is not a "terrorist" cell and proved its legality afterwards.... Easy win for the con
Vote Placed by youngpolitic 5 years ago
youngpolitic
Jared_BLConservativePoliticoTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con battles an elusive opponent with sources and arguments pertaining to the original debate. Con wins hands down. Pros arguments didn't make sense half the time or were irrelivant.