The Instigator
Danielle
Pro (for)
Winning
56 Points
The Contender
PublicForumG-d
Con (against)
Losing
51 Points

The United States Federal Government should help to modernize third-world countries.

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: 5/22/2008 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,954 times Debate No: 4139
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (38)
Votes (35)

 

Danielle

Pro

"Sometimes we must interfere. When human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant." -- Elie Wiesel

Clarification: A common misconception regarding third-world countries is that "the poverty of the developing nations can be attributed to their failure to innovate, resulting in technological and therefore economic deficit" [1]. That is simply untrue. Western civilizations were able to expand and modernize through our colonial prowess; we subjected underdeveloped nations to blatantly unfair and outrageous policies such as slavery, manipulated labor, exploitation of resources, unequal trade, and military intimidation.

In a sense, we [the Western world] are responsible for their inability to progress and transform. Through imperialism (and force), we have enslaved the individuals living in third world countries by forcing them to comply with our wants and needs. We continue to let them live in poverty so we can pursue our own economic agendas (i.e. cheap labor). Not only is this practice completely barbaric and entirely immoral, but the logic behind it has backfired and put the United States in a very comprimising situation...

Issues: For one, many conscious Americans feel that we have "blood on our hands" so to speak, and feel somewhat responsible for the United State's contribution to the condition of many third-world countries today. It is because of our exploitation that these nations have been both exposed to the Western World (in other words, they know what they're missing out on), and prevented from achieving the status that we have maintained. Consider the United State's occupation of other countries since our inception. Because we are a capitalist driven economy, we are constantly seeking new ways to take advantage of those who are less fortunate than us for our own personal gain.

In addition to being a humanitarian issue, these practices have consequently led to our own economic demise (with the most prevalent aspect of our suffering economy being the outsourcing of American jobs). Further, the unberable conditions of some third-world countries have forced people to seek refuge in the United States. As a result, we not only have immigrants working illegally for a fraction of the legal wage, but Americans have also been forced to pay for these immigrants (education, hospital visits, etc.) via our tax dollars.

Proposition: The United States Federal Government should help to modernize third-world countries. While we still have to keep our own economic interests in mind, helping other nations build up their own economies will prevent people from bleeding ours dry via the influx of an unsustainable population. It is common knowledge, however, that our own economy is suffering and therefore one might assume that we do not have the resources to help other countries. The truth is that in helping underdeveloped nations, the U.S. can actually improve our own economic situation by creating a win-win situation for everyone involved.

Here's an example. In 1947, the United States agreed via The Marshall Plan that we would give Europe $13 billion to recover from the damage of WWII. The catch? Well the money was to be used to buy products and services from the United States, and the goods had to be shipped using American vessels. In this situation, both parties benefitted. Europe was given the tools necessary to build up their own economies (many of which dominate the world today - especially the Germans), and Americans at home were able to live comfortably knowing that their jobs were secure.

Justification: In the past, the U.S. has attempted to rectify some of the damage it has imposed on other people(s) including Native Americans and African Americans (via affirmative action). By helping to modernize third-world countries, we would effectively be doing good for others as well as ourselves. First, we can attempt to repay the countries we have exploited for centuries by bringing technology and democracy to them. While it would be wrong for us to assume that other countries wish to lead this Westernized kind of life, fortunately we don't have to assume anything -- we can see that mass movements to enter the United States BECAUSE of these things mean that other people want the same liberties and economic freedoms that we have.

Second, other countries have repeatedly asked for our help. Consider the warm welcome George W. Bush received from Ghanians in February 2008. "Africa salutes you for these gestures of goodwill that are impacting the lives of many ordinary persons on the continent for the better. Here in Ghana, we appreciate the assistance of the United States in the establishment of strong and viable democratic institutions to engender fair elections, the rule of law, and respect for political and economic rights of all Ghanaians ... We welcome your government for facilitating measures to promote the setting up of private equity funds through the Overseas Private Investment Corporation. We have no doubt that these far reaching measures will accelerate economic growth to change the fortunes of our continent and help bring the much needed relief and employment to millions of ordinary citizens of Africa ... In this regard, my government has always supported dialogue for resolving all problems on the continent, particularly Darfur, Somalia, and most recently Kenya and Chad. We welcome the assistance which the United States of America is offering through the United Nations and the African Union in the search for a solution to these conflicts" [2].

Third, undeniably the United States would have its own interests secured in choosing to help modernize third-world countries. Like I've mentioned, by bringing these much wanted/needed technologies to other countries (which would create jobs and help stabalize their economies), it would help to diminish the incredible amount of illegal immigration into the United States. Americans simply cannot afford to pay incredibly high taxes for the tens of millions of people who do not lawfully reside within our borders. Lower taxes means more money for consumer spending, thus jump-starting our economy towards future success and an end to this terrible recession.

Further, in choosing to help these countries in need, the United States would also be securing hundreds of thousands of American jobs. A - there will be less immigrants working for lower pay, meaning more available jobs for Americans. B - More stabalized economies leads to less outsourcing, so more jobs can stay here at home. And C - by encouraging these developing nations to invest in American products, we will create many more jobs at home, especially in factories (the midwest) where the economy is taking the hardest hit.

Finally, in choosing to improve the conditions of other nations, the U.S. can hopefully "clear its name" post the George W. Bush regime. It is common knowledge that we have lost a lot of respect world-wide as a result of our instigation of an incredibly unpopular war (to say the least). Hopefully our humanitarian efforts will be looked upon favorably by others, as well as supported by economists here at home. Bottom line: helping to modernize third-world countries can mutually benefit both American citizens, and the impoverished in other nations.

Quote:
[1] http://www.casacollective.org...

Source:
[2] http://www.whitehouse.gov...
PublicForumG-d

Con

PublicForumG-d forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 1
Danielle

Pro

Go Go Modernizer Rangers!

I say we bring technology to third world countries so they can write blogs about all of their problems.
PublicForumG-d

Con

I'd like to note for the record I would've loved to debate this, and my opponent gave her approval to do so, but unfortunately, she has decided to lie. :(

Lwerd - "Sure I'll repost the rounds!"
Me - "ok."

NOTE: This is paraphrased. Don't try to be like "wah he's a terrorist saying things I didn't say". I'll post the full text in r3 for your own review. This definately sucks on the part of the Lwerd.
Debate Round No. 2
Danielle

Pro

In conclusion, the United States Federal Government should help to modernize third-world countries .
PublicForumG-d

Con

PublicForumG-d forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
38 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by whiteflame 5 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: fire_wings// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision:

[*Reason for removal*] Vote placed outside of what is considered to be reasonable expectations for proper voting conduct. Contact head moderator Airmax1227 for details.
************************************************************************
Posted by Danielle 8 years ago
Danielle
Btw, you're little 'plea' asking people not to vote for you is dramatically over the top and incredibly ridiculous. It's quite the coincidence that "SOMEONE" made a whole bunch of accounts, down-voted ALL of my debates to make my win percentage go down by about 80 points (waaaah I'm crying -- I don't think I can ever get over this waaaah) whilst at the same time up-voting all of YOUR debates... LOL. Honestly, you're a joke.
Posted by Danielle 8 years ago
Danielle
I'm an idiot? Why? Just because you're a whining, sore-losing cry baby does not make ME an idiot. I am 100% right for the stance I took, and people who know about what happened (via the Facebook explanation -- about how you lied and whined and moaned and complained about not having enough time to post your response... waaaah...) agree with ME. GET OVER IT! You were busy and couldn't debate, the same way dozens of other competitors got busy and couldn't debate -- debaters who are FAR BETTER THAN YOU (i.e. Vi_Veri, Brik, Zakkuchan, etc.). I have forfeited many a round and debate on this site because I didn't have the time. BIG DEAL. It's not the end of the world. If we would have debated this topic, I would have destroyed you. I know this because anyone who is so immature "in real life" and who lacks the capability to post anything remotely humble or sincere probably lacks the capacity to put forth an articulate and intelligent debate of any kind... unless the person you "share the account with" did the debating for you. Hah. And by the way, you'll never get the chance to even try and beat me in the remainder of this tournament, because pretty soon you're going to be defeated by Logical-Master or beem0r in the Losers Bracket anyway. So quit b1tching -- everyone thinks you're a tool for the way you're so upset over something that many other people go through all the time. You really need to grow up.
Posted by PublicForumG-d 8 years ago
PublicForumG-d
I should NOT win this debate. I did not win this debate. Do not vote for me. I should've been ABLE to win this debate, and believe I am a better debater than the lwerd, but i did not win this debate.
Posted by PublicForumG-d 8 years ago
PublicForumG-d
Agh let me clarify:

Lwerd: Idiot.
Jamcke: Innocent bystander.
Posted by PublicForumG-d 8 years ago
PublicForumG-d
lol the Lwerd. I don't think you're an idiot :) I don't have any reason to.
Posted by Jamcke 8 years ago
Jamcke
Wow PublicForumG-d, were you referring to me or theLwerd?
Posted by PublicForumG-d 8 years ago
PublicForumG-d
It could've, had I been allowed to debate.
Posted by SweetBags 8 years ago
SweetBags
to bad pfg, this could of been good. vote pro.
Posted by PublicForumG-d 8 years ago
PublicForumG-d
Hey, listen, just because your idiotic, loud mouthed statements that hold no water at all put me off from caring, that does not make you right.

It just makes you reaaaally annoying.
35 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
DaniellePublicForumG-dTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: 0-0
Vote Placed by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
DaniellePublicForumG-dTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:70 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
DaniellePublicForumG-dTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
DaniellePublicForumG-dTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
DaniellePublicForumG-dTied
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 Xera 8 years ago
Xera
DaniellePublicForumG-dTied
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 retributions-end 8 years ago
retributions-end
DaniellePublicForumG-dTied
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 righteous-reply 8 years ago
righteous-reply
DaniellePublicForumG-dTied
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 InquireTruth 8 years ago
InquireTruth
DaniellePublicForumG-dTied
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 Killer542 8 years ago
Killer542
DaniellePublicForumG-dTied
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