The Instigator
Curtis_Mcgee
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
phantom
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

The "Third World" is a necessary evil for human society to attain success

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 2 votes the winner is...
phantom
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/13/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,283 times Debate No: 15921
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (2)

 

Curtis_Mcgee

Pro

This debate has 4 rounds, the first round to give definitions and any explanations necessary to the debates success and the other 3 for the actual debating period.

Success: Defined as (by dictionary.com) (1)
1.
the favorable or prosperous termination of attempts or endeavors.
2.
the attainment of wealth, position, honors, or the like.

Third World: Defined as (by thefreeonlinedictionary.com) (2)

1. The developing nations of Africa, Asia, and Latin American.

As pro/for I will hold the burden of proof, my opponent will counter my arguments.
Should my opponent wish to add any more definitions or clarifications, please feel free to do so in this round.

(1) http://dictionary.reference.com...

(2) http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
phantom

Con

I have one definitions to make.

(1) Necessary: Being essential, indispensable, or requisite: http://dictionary.reference.com...

I also would like to ask my opponent to define society in the next round as it can have multiple meanings.

I look forward to having this debate, and good luck to Curtis_Mcgee :)
Debate Round No. 1
Curtis_Mcgee

Pro

Curtis_Mcgee forfeited this round.
phantom

Con

First I'd like to make sure the viewers know to look in the comment section for my opponents debate for round two. I also fully believe what pro said to be true regarding his not posting the argument in the debating section on time.

Secondly I apologize for the shortness of my argument. I meant to write more but I couldn't find enough time as I was busy with other things. One reason being that I had two days to post my argument while I am used to having three days, as all my other debates have been.



Mainly what I will be doing in this round, is pointing out the flaws in my opponents argument.

(1) The first (and biggest) flaw is that pro says it is necessary. Well I have to say It isn't necessary. Society could still have success without the third world. Even if they didn't have as much success (not saying they wouldn't) they still would attain success.


(2) The third world is part of society, and they are not successful. That is another flaw in pro's argument.

The third world people have little success but they make up a large portion of society.

So why is it necessary for other countries to starve for society to gain success. Aren't they part of society too? Absolutely.

(3) So you could ask this question would society be considered more successful if their was no third world? My job isn't to prove that society would attain greater success if the third world didn't exist then if it did. However that would easily prove pro's arguments wrong.

I think it would be a tremendous success if third world stopped existing for society as a whole. Society in fact should concentrate on trying to improve the third world countries. The result might be that the wealthy people would not be so wealthy, but what about the starving people in these countries?

I will now let my opponent post his argument for round three.

Debate Round No. 2
Curtis_Mcgee

Pro

Curtis_Mcgee forfeited this round.
phantom

Con

Extend all arguments.


Debate Round No. 3
Curtis_Mcgee

Pro

I apologize but i have to forfeit this debate and probably shut down my account on Debate.org.
Situations have arisen in my life that are too time consuming for me to continue my activities on this site.
I concede to con, and may you all enjoy your time on this site.
Best wishes.
phantom

Con

I'm sorry to here that. But best of luck.
Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Curtis_Mcgee 6 years ago
Curtis_Mcgee
to those who may believe i did not post it at the required time, the time given to reply was 2 days.
i posted my reply a little bit ago, but it appears not to have worked. if you check the time of my comments with my argument on it, you will see that i posted it almost down to the second of the timer that my opponent has to respond.
Please pardon the technological snafu of my posting.
Posted by Curtis_Mcgee 6 years ago
Curtis_Mcgee
[4] http://www1.american.edu...

[5] National Georgaphic January 2011 edition, (issn 0027-9358) author Robert Kuzig, pgs 43, 45, 52, 53
Posted by Curtis_Mcgee 6 years ago
Curtis_Mcgee
expensive goods, or not sell any of the products therefore losing many people wages and jobs.
On top of this, the earth is predicted to reach 7 billion people this year. [5] This not only puts an economic strain on the planet, but also an ecological one.
2) The ecology of the planet requires the third world in order to sustain itself and not exceed certain caps.
According to national geographic, "There will be billions more people wanting and deserving to boost themselves out of poverty. If they follow the path blazed by wealthy countries-clearing forests, burning coal and oil, freely scattering fertilizers and pesticides-they too will be stepping hard on the planets natural resources. How is this going to work?"
To look at countries consumption you need only look at its GDP. The highest GDP in the world is shocker, the USA. [5] However, emerging economies such as China and India have raised their GDP in recent years a total of 1506% [5] these countries were and are often used as a source of cheap labor for the west, however as these people increase their GDP, they also increase their consumption of finite resources.
Some nations need to stay in this third world status. While I in no way condone the exuberant consumer ideology of the west, I, as most of the people on this site will agree, have grown accustomed to a certain way of life. We would not be like to change that anytime soon, despite the strain we put on the planet already. If the rest of the world were to consume as much as we do in our privileged life, the world would be put under far greater pressure. As long as there remains a third world, preferably a larger one than we may be facing, the human race will not consume as much as it already does.

I reserve the right to expand and add on to my arguments in the next round.

And for my previous reasons I urge a vote for pro.

[1] http://dictionary.reference.com...

[3] http://www.wsu.edu...

[4] http://www1
Posted by Curtis_Mcgee 6 years ago
Curtis_Mcgee
God dammit i posted it...

here it is instead
Society.
1. An organized group of persons associated together for religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other purposes. [1]

Since in this debate I will be referring to all human society on earth, I will be focusing on the economic, cultural and ecological elements that all humans can relate to, as such things as religion and politics can vary from region to region and person to person.

ARGUMENTS
1) The planets economy requires the third world in order to sustain itself at our current levels and not exceed certain caps.
The idea behind modern capitalism is focusing on the consumer. [3] There are two types of people in the capitalist system, one being the worker/consumer and the other being the capitalist/producer. The worker is paid a wage by the capitalist for creating materials for said capitalist. The worker then uses this wage to purchase other goods and services provided by other capitalists. In this world capitalism has come to be applied to countries rather than people. Many major corporations within western civilization use third world labor as a source of cheap goods to supply to the west (the consumer). While I do not claim that the treatment of these workers, some of which are children, is at all ethical, it does provide the western world with its modern comforts. For those sitting in a GAP shirt sipping on a coffee on a laptop with Nike shoes on, you are probably using a lot more third world labor produced items than you think. A shirt costs 15 dollars because there is someone in the third world willing to make it for 40 cents an hour. [4] The economy cannot support the increases in pay to the third world. Were everyone to live like the west, the Earths economy would not be able to sustain itself. Wages would need to increase; therefore prices on goods would increase. There are only two responses to that, either increase wages to try and pay for the more expensiv
Posted by nonentity 6 years ago
nonentity
Sweeeet.

I live in Brampton, so I'm not one to talk >.<
Posted by Curtis_Mcgee 6 years ago
Curtis_Mcgee
Reason I made it two days man.
No worries.
Posted by phantom 6 years ago
phantom
If you don't mind I'm going to wait until tomorrow to post my 1st round argument, to better fit my schedule.
Posted by Curtis_Mcgee 6 years ago
Curtis_Mcgee
No I fully agree, Boo georgetown! :P
thanks for your interest, here's hoping I can prove entertaining at the least.
Posted by nonentity 6 years ago
nonentity
Boo Georgetown! Just kidding :) Welcome to DDO. This sounds like a really interesting debate... since I neither agree nor disagree with the resolution at this moment I will wait for someone else to take it and, for now, just add it to my favourites.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by nonentity 6 years ago
nonentity
Curtis_McgeephantomTied
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: Due to Pro's forfeit.
Vote Placed by CiRrK 6 years ago
CiRrK
Curtis_McgeephantomTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit