The Instigator
v.dtilak
Con (against)
The Contender
danielkhan
Pro (for)

The only war worth fighting is the one against inequalities

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
v.dtilak has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 8/15/2017 Category: People
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 302 times Debate No: 103549
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

v.dtilak

Con

This topic can be totally be disagreed upon. There are more prominent wars to be fought against like for example the war against poverty. A society in which some people have millions of dollars a year to live on and others have tens of thousands ,which might well be unequal. But as along as people have those tens of thousands then there's going to be comparatively less poverty from a society with people who are more equal but have an annual income of $500 to live upon.

Would it be fair to fight for one thing only because we have a weakness for that particular subject over others and leave the other? Wouldn't it be fatal?
danielkhan

Pro

Hi,
Nice to meet you and thank you for your statement.

I (Pro.) wholeheartedly support this statement with a passion. Is it not our greatest goal? The goal, that once achieved will bring enlightenment and completeness to this world?

" There are more prominent wars to be fought against like for example the war against poverty. A society in which some people have millions of dollars a year to live on and others have tens of thousands "(Con.)

If we digest your statement above, you describe the war on poverty; a war against those with and those without, by common definition.

I counter your statement by calling upon our friendly scholars at Cambridge for the dictionary definition of 'inequality', I quote:

"the unfair situation in society when some people have more opportunities, money, etc. than other people:" Cambridge.(1)

In your opening statement you define the very thing you stand against, you describe inequality in its most despicable form.

Your second statement.

"Would it be fair to fight for one thing only because we have a weakness for that particular subject over others and leave the other? Wouldn't it be fatal?" (Con.)

I again call to arms our Cambridge scholars who in defining inequality impose it to no single subject matter. It is a broad sweeping statement, a definition meant to capture any and all types of inequality, or to use your words, and and all things which are deemed to be. "unequal".

I put the question to you? What matter if any can supercede the war on inequality?


(1) http://dictionary.cambridge.org...

Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Purushadasa 5 months ago
Purushadasa
Yes it is related to the subject:

We are actually not equals, so why "fight" against inequality? It makes no sense to engage in such a fight.
Posted by danielkhan 5 months ago
danielkhan
But there may be truth in Purushadasa's statement.
Do we all not have something others don't have? Do we not all pride ourselves on that very fact that where we lack for something in parts, we make up for in others?
Are we not by our very nature, a nation of inequality?
Posted by danielkhan 5 months ago
danielkhan
But there may be truth in Purushadasa's statement.
Do we all not have something others don't have? Do we not all pride ourselves on that very fact that where we lack for something in parts, we make up for in others?
Are we not by our very nature, a nation of inequality?
Posted by danielkhan 5 months ago
danielkhan
But there may be truth in Purushadasa's statement.
Do we all not have something others don't have? Do we not all pride ourselves on that very fact that where we lack for something in parts, we make up for in others?
Are we not by our very nature, a nation of inequality?
Posted by v.dtilak 5 months ago
v.dtilak
Purushadasa ,your comment was not related to the topic at all
Posted by Purushadasa 5 months ago
Purushadasa
But we are all unequal, actually.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.