The Instigator
Darkfire62
Pro (for)
Losing
15 Points
The Contender
Krakken101
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points

The United States Federal Government should not continue to encourage patriotism in schools.

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  
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: 6/22/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,346 times Debate No: 4477
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (10)

 

Darkfire62

Pro

This is for anyone looking for a well-rounded debate.

Resolved: The United States Federal Government should not continue to encourage patriotism to in schools.

Definiotns provided by www.dictionary.com

Continue-to go on with or persist in.
Encourage-to promote, advance, or foster.
Patriotism- devoted love, support, and defense of one's country; national loyalty.
Schools- institutions where instruction is given, esp. to persons under college age.

My argument is that students should not be encouraged by the U.S. government to promote patriotism in the school systems. I bring for the first round these three arguments.

1. Patriotism is known to produce harmful effects to children if taught institutiomally.
2. Patriotism is similar to that of socialism, humanism, and nazism.
3. The United States Federal Government does not need to be the ones teaching the students about patriotism.

On my first argument, Institutions such as schools are where children learn the basic fundamental education that they will use for the rest of their lives. But also, schools are where students decide on habits, friends, and even what governmental party they want to be in. After all, the average student from grades K-12 go to school for nine months out of the year, and eight hour a day, five days a week. Schools are an institution where the things that should be taught should not have a negative influence on students. Now as for patriotism. Patriotism as defined above is love, loyalty and defense to a country. Now at first patriotism seems good, but the Brussels journal reports "Are countries really appropriate objects of love? Loving things can be bad for us, for example when the things we love are morally corrupt". Also mailonline quotes thie above statement exactly. By promoting patriotsm t students now, they will be patriotic even if the United States becomes corrupt (which the U.S. isn't far from). Also as history is concerned Hitler, along with being taught anti-Semitism, socialism and humanism, was in fact taught patriotism. Patritosim taught young can lead to superiority of a race. In the past American history, Americans have felt superior against Afriacan Americans and Indians. Even today, Americans have superior race feelings towards the people of the middle east, Mexicans, Cubans, and even African Americans. ALL of this hostility was and is taught by parents and schools. Students are bound to think that if you do not love America thaen you should be treated terrible physically and emotionally. In the Declaration of Independence, it states that all men are created equal, and patriotism is in fact completely reversing this fact to the students who learn to be patriotic at an early age.

My next argument is that patriotism is similar to that of socialism, human, and nazism. First of all, let me define these words according to dictionary.com.

1. Socialism-(In Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
2. Humanism-Philosophy. a variety of ethical theory and practice that emphasizes reason, scientific inquiry, and human fulfillment in the natural world and often rejects the importance of belief in God.
3. Nazism-The ideology and practice of the Nazis, especially the policy of racist nationalism, national expansion, and state control of the economy.
A. form of socialism featuring racism and expansionism and obedience to a strong leader.

Now, as was said in my first argument, Hitler learned to hate a specific race and learned the major fundamentals of bad government. Socialism to control all of the industry and capital that the Germans produced. Humanism to beileve that Hitler's role in the human world was to establish a pure and superior race and eliminate the bad blood (or Jews). Patriotism to love and defend the Fatherland at all cost. More important, loyalty to the Fuerher. Of course, combine all of these and you get Nazism. In the definition stated above Nazism covered all of these including patriotism. Now if Hitler hadn't have learned these ideals early in his life, then things might have went alright. This is an excellent example that patriotism can easily be confused with the ideal that some humans are more equal (or better) than others. The idealogy of patriotism can be so closely reated to dangerous bad government ideals that teaching it to a child will inevitably bring destruction and devastation to America. Teaching this to young children and even teens can and will produce harmful effects in the long run.

Now on to my third and final argument for this round. The Federal Government shouldn't be encouraging patriotism to America. In many ways, that is very similar to when Communist Russia was teaching communism to schools. First let me give a brief history note of socialism and how communism came from it.

[Socialism] was first applied in England to Owen's theory of social reconstruction, and in France to those also of St. Simon and Fourier . . . The word, however, is used with a great variety of meaning, . . . even by economists and learned critics. The general tendency is to regard as socialistic any interference undertaken by society on behalf of the poor, . . . radical social reform which disturbs the present system of private property . . . The tendency of the present socialism is more and more to ally itself with the most advanced democracy. --Encyc. Brit.

Now the link to socialism to commuinism is first of all, all communists are socialists, but not all socialists are communists. Since in my previous argument I proved that patriotism is close to socialism, it is also closely related to communism. Now that I made that point, I will continue on my other contingency that Communist Russia taught communism to students like the Federal Government is teaching patriotism to students. This right here proves that the USFG is not right to teach patriotism to students in schools. With these three arguments being stated, I now stand open for any and all arguments by my opponent. Thank You.
Krakken101

Con

My opponent eagerly suggests that by promoting Patriotism in schools is similar to that of Hitler's radical Nazi educational propoganda however my opponent fails to realize that while patriotism is a factor in Nazism it was also the contributing factor that destroyed it as well. You see if Americans during the early 1940's were distasteful and distrustful towards the country that provides for them, they would have seen no reason as to defend it without patriots in America we would never had destroyed Communism,Nazism, and other wicked ideologies.

So if America choose purposely not to instill love and beauty into the youth of its own people what will we have to rely on? If children are not taught to honor America how will it function? The simple fact is without patriotism a coutry cannot survive. And refusal to teach patritosim in the classroom simply because it may lead to totalitarinism is ludicus. The US government has been teaching patriotism for years and there has never been any instigation of a regime remotely similar to Nazism or Socialism. In fact the hostlities that were taught in the early days are currently fading away.

My opponent stresses that the Nazi policy of racial persecution and extermination was in fact caused by patriotism. This in fact is a complete lie the sole cause of Nazi agenda of Genocide was Propoganda, Culmination of Power, and Desperation.

Lets address Propoganda first propoganda according to dictionary.com :Information,Rumours,Ideas, dewliberatly spread to help or harm a person group or nation. hitler utilized this to create his regime of hate this had very little to do with Patriotism for you see the peoples love of Nazi Germany could only take them so far.

Next lets address Culmination of Power this phrase refers to Hitler's attainment to power at a very high and quick rate Patriotism refers to love for a nation not love for the leader as such the notion that Patirotism is responsible for Nazi Germany's actions is nonsensical.

Finally Desperation The people of Germany at the time had nothing to look up to around that time as we all know. They would have look to an orangatauan if it said the right stuff. This is how Hitler came to power he fed off the need of Germany to become something again.

As such Patritotism is entirely different for Nazism. And without Patriotism society cannot function without love and happinness for ones nation the country cannot function. ANd if these values are taught from a very young age the better off the country will be. The US has made integrating Partiotism with school a must thats why America is the feared all powerfull superpower it is today through Patriotism. I challenge my opponent to name one great cicvilization that flourished WITHOUT teaching patriotism in their school system! This isnt just America its in China,Russia,England,and even Canada. And if not the federal government than who will? The students dont simply grow up with it, or learn it themselves they need to be taught it. I fail to see how patriotism harms children in fact it makes children feel more secure,happy and confient in their nation. My opponent DarkFire would have you beleive that Patriorism teaches children to hate those who dont love America when this is obviously not true according to DarkFire's own definition of Patriotism it teaches love and support of ones country not hatred of those whom oppose it.

In conclusion to my argument and this round i find it impossible for a nation to thrive without a country to encourage patriotism into its youthful generation. And to the voters i wish for you to see the logistics of how Nazism as well as Communism have coorelation whatsover with Patriotism i wish for you to conceive that its quite honorable of the US federal government to take the responsiblity of tranning our great nations youth of loving and supporting it country. To DarkFire ihope you understand the implications and flaws of your own arguments. I wish for everyone who reades this topic to find the ligic in it as well. Thank You.
Debate Round No. 1
Darkfire62

Pro

First of all, I apologize for the grammatical errors that I made in the first round. Now, on to my argument.

First, I am going to refute my opponents arguments paragraph by paragraph. Then, I am going to extend on my own arguments.

In my opp. first paragraph, he agrees with me that patriotism is a contirbuting factor to Nazism. While he says that patriotism destroyed Nazism, the fact still remains that my opponent agreed with me about a negative impact patriotism taught to the young society can bring. This has proven my resolutional statement already. Therefore, withy my opponent agreeing with me, the pro has automatically won the debate. Yet I will still continue.
The next paragraph my opp. writes "if America chose purposely not to instill love and beauty into the youth of its own people what will we have to rely on?" This very sentence only helps my case. You will find that word "instill" is in that sentence. By definition from http://dictionary.reference.com... or dictionary.com, the word instill means:

Instill-To introduce by gradual, persistent efforts; implant. teach and impress by frequent repetitions or admonitions;

By my opponent saying that patriotism should impress patriotism by persistent efforts, his argument is ruined. This is exactly how Communism was spread through the children in Russia. By persistent efforts, children were utterly brainwashed into believing Communism. Now nobody should be brainwashed by anything. Now I have presented plenty of evidence proving the detriments of patriotism, but my opponent has not except for patriotism has only partially fixed the problems it has created. My opponent goes on to say that without patriotism a country would not survive. I am neither agreeing or disagreeing with this statement. However, I am not arguing about how bad patriotism is, but how very destructive it can be by teaching it to students and particularly those whose won't be able to understand completely. Next my opponent says that "refusal to teach patritosim in the classroom simply because it may lead to totalitarinism is ludicrous. The US government has been teaching patriotism for years and there has never been any instigation of a regime remotely similar to Nazism or Socialism. In fact the hostlities that were taught in the early days are currently fading away." Now along with the fact that my opponent cannot prove that there are no radicals invoking such terrible idealisms, the reason for there being no uprising is because this is not a third world country (yes Germany and Russia were third world countries). The United States is very stable and isn't ruled as an empire like Germeny and Russia were. There are key fundamental differences between Communist Russia and Nazi Germany agianist the U.S. Therefore that argument falls.

The next paragraph that my opponent states is a complete misunderstanding of what I intended (and stated) was patriotism's role with Nazism. I stated that Hitler had been instilled patrioitism when he was young. This was in the second arguments in the first round. The Nazi policy didn't directly promote patriotism, but through instilled learning when Hitler was young, he believed that citizens should love and praise the Motherland (which the def. of patriotism states "devoted love to one's country").

The next three paragraphs don't even apply since my opponent was misunderstood in his third paragraph.

Then in my opponent's seventh paragraph, in a summsrized version, my opponent writes that patritotism is entirely different for Nazism even though my opponent does not have any evidence to prove this fact and it doesn't even apply because that is not what this debate is about. He then writes about how "without Patriotism society cannot function without love and happinness for ones nation the country cannot function." Now taking away the repitition, my opponent says that without patriotism, acountry cannot function. I will neither agree or disagree, but it does not apply to the debate because the resolution isn't A country can survive without patriotism. Rather it is Resolved: The United States Federal Government should not continue to encourage patriotism in schools. Then he says that the younger the students are, the better it is to teach patriotism. Also he says that Ameriaca is the "feared all powerful superpower" it is today because of patriotism. Now my opponent can say what he wants to, but without evidence, these are just empty words. I, myself, have presented two sources proves that patriotism taught in schools is detrimental to the student and all of the history of Nazism, Socialism, and Communism that I have spoken of can be found in such biographies as "Inside the Third Reich" by Albert Speers and "Communist totalitarianism; keys to the Soviet system" by Bertram David Wolfe. As a matter of fact, nothing that my opponent has stated throughout round one has a source at all. Right now, all of my opponents arguments are nothing but pure opinion, which is another reason why the pro has won this debate argument thus far. Anyways, continuing with my opponents argument. Next, my opponent challenges me to name one great civilization that flourished without teaching patriotism in schools. My answer to this is that there are several great civilizations that flourished without the government teaching patriotism in schools. There was Rome, Babylon, Persia, Greece, Macedonia, Aryan civilization, Mogloian Empire, Aztecs, Incans, and the Mayans to name a few. Remember, the key rise to power with these civilizations wasn't patriotism being taught to the young society. Anyways, my opponent continues on by saying that if the government doesn't teach patriotism to students, then they won't be able to learn it. Well this isn't a problem that the pro has has to deal with. I, the pro, has to merely prove my resolution, and not solve the outcome of it. The federal government shouldn't be teaching the students patriotism because of how it fails drastically and confuses the young society. My opponent claims through his opinion that patriotism teaches you to feel happy, secure and confident with your nation. This is a flat out lie because patriotism teaches love, devotion, and loyalty towards a nation. The last claim in this paragraph and I qoute "DarkFire would have you beleive that Patriorism teaches children to hate those who dont love America when this is obviously not true according to DarkFire's own definition of Patriotism it teaches love and support of ones country not hatred of those whom oppose it." In other words, just beacuse people love their country doesn't mean that people won't hate other countries is basically what my opponent was trying to say out of his statement. This is a completely and unoquivically false statement. Everyone who is reading this debate knows the falsidity of what my opponent stated. Therefore every argument my opponent has made in this paragraph falls because of the reasons stated above.

Finally, in his conclusive paragraph, my opponent's statements in his conclusion have fallen because of his defeated arguments in the above paragraph.

The opponent's arguments fail because ALL of his arguments are nothing but opinion. I won't repeat my arguments from the first round, but I believe that I have proven the three arguments in my first round sufficiently with evidence, quotes, and sources. To my opponent, I hope that you see your flaws from arguing against me in this debate. I hope that the voters see that patriotism being encouraged by the USFG to students in schools can produce serious detrimental flaws. Thank you for your time.
Krakken101

Con

Krakken101 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Darkfire62

Pro

This is a terrible shame. Here I thought I was going to have a great debate about this resolution, but instead my opponent forfeits his round. Well right now, my arguments still stand, and for those of you voters who don't know what they are, read the first round on the pro side. I, of course, am going to allow my opponent a chance to present his argument in the last round.

Now as for the voters. The people who will be voting on this issue should look at the following details in this debate:

1. The pro has presented highly adequate sourcing and evidence to support my case.
2. EVERYTHING the con has said has been entirely opinionated and has not produce a single bit of evidence to support his case.
3. Every argument that the con has made has been successfully refuted by the pro (see round two) with ample sourcing from history books talking about the Nazi party and Communism itself along with the Communist governments.
4. Half of my opponents arguments (paragraphs 3-6) can't and don't apply since my opponent completely misunderstood my second argument in the first round.
5. The opponent shouldn't even get voted on because of his forfeit in his second round. The opponent had ample time to at least say something to support his argument. I understand if my opponent was busy but still, this presents an unfair advantage to the con since he can make his argument and I will not be able to refute anything that he says in the third round.
6. The pro has stayed within the resolutional boundaries in every way so that makes pro's arguments completely topical and should be voted.
7. Finally, my opponent has failed to present an argument saying why patriotism should be encouraged by the USFG in schools.

I would like to thank everybody who has taken the time to read this case. I would like to thank the people who will be voting on this issue. I would also like to thank my opponent for arguing against me in this debate. I will be presenting this argument again after the voting period of this debate starts, that way I can get a new opponent with possibly different arguments. Thank you one and all and vote for the Pro side on this issue!
Krakken101

Con

Krakken101 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Lithobolos 9 years ago
Lithobolos
Krakken was winning too. But he did not post twice so he loses.
Posted by blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
Krakken forffeited 2/3 arguments... There was lots to be addressed by him from darkfire's arguments. Darkfire wins. It should be a given.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 9 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
Not that I'm going to argue with you, but the fact that something (such as nazism) has goals "in the human world" does not make it humanist by your definition, whatever your claims... it fails the tests of reason and scientific inquiry :D
Posted by surfride 9 years ago
surfride
if only you had said that patriotism should be taught i would have debated you. . .darn.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by TalkingWhale 7 years ago
TalkingWhale
Darkfire62Krakken101Tied
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:07 
Vote Placed by studentathletechristian8 8 years ago
studentathletechristian8
Darkfire62Krakken101Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by JakeRoss 9 years ago
JakeRoss
Darkfire62Krakken101Tied
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 Lithobolos 9 years ago
Lithobolos
Darkfire62Krakken101Tied
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 Derek.Gunn 9 years ago
Derek.Gunn
Darkfire62Krakken101Tied
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 blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
Darkfire62Krakken101Tied
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 Krakken101 9 years ago
Krakken101
Darkfire62Krakken101Tied
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 
Vote Placed by tarsjake 9 years ago
tarsjake
Darkfire62Krakken101Tied
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 
Vote Placed by LakevilleNorthJT 9 years ago
LakevilleNorthJT
Darkfire62Krakken101Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Darkfire62 9 years ago
Darkfire62
Darkfire62Krakken101Tied
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