The Instigator
AbdullahAther
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Blade-of-Truth
Pro (for)
Winning
15 Points

protest

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 3 votes the winner is...
Blade-of-Truth
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/28/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 827 times Debate No: 67589
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

AbdullahAther

Con

Are the protests good for the society as a whole, given that governments are inefficient?
Blade-of-Truth

Pro

I accept the debate, and believe that protesting is good for society as a whole.

Clarifications

Protest is defined as: A statement or action expressing disapproval of or objection to something.

As Pro, I must show that Protests are good for society as a whole.

My opponent, Con, must show that it is never good to protest.

The BOP is clearly split.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With clarifications now done, I'll return the floor to Con to start with arguments since they were instigator.

Thank you and good luck Con!
Debate Round No. 1
AbdullahAther

Con

AbdullahAther forfeited this round.
Blade-of-Truth

Pro

Con has done nothing to negate the resolution, and has provided no challenges for me to overcome.

I will now present a few arguments with the aim of affirming the resolution as well as rebut the only claim Con presents.

Arguments & Rebuttals

I. Governments are not inefficient.

The only argument Con makes is that governments are inefficient. Unfortunately, Con provides absolutely no proof whatsoever to validate this claim. As it stands, it is nothing more than an unproven opinion, thus it gives no grounds to be accepted as a fact or valid argument.

II. Protesting raises awareness.

Many people argue that movements like the "Occupy Movement" was useless and never achieved the success they desired. [1] Some would say it was due to lack of proper leadership, lack of motivation, lack of educated supporters willing to act. Whatever the reason may be, one thing is clear, that movement raised the awareness of the class separation here in America and around the world. Was it common knowledge that the leading 1% had more wealth than the remaining 99%? I would have never known that if it wasn't for this movement. What it accomplished was exactly that, it raised the levels of awareness which might not have ever been made known otherwise.

III. Allows for social progress

Another important benefit to protesting would be that it allows for social progress to come from the people, not just the government or governing leaders. If there is a pressing issue, such as a chemical spill-over of local manufacturing plants into surrounding neighborhoods, it's up to the people to make the change they want. Without protesting to their local government regarding the manufacturing plant waste there might never be any notion or incentive to change their dumping practice. By Protesting, we are making it possible for the common man to be heard, and in essence, fight for a better quality of life. Without such protests, many changes for the better that have happened in our society might have never been. What we can see is clear, protesting allows for social progress to be had, whereas without protesting such changes might have never occurred.

In closing,

I've given two arguments as to why Protesting is good for society. My opponent has given no arguments for their side. The one claim my opponent did make, I've now rebutted - by showing that it lacks all forms of validation.

Thank you.

Sources

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
Aw man... no fun.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Tweka 2 years ago
Tweka
AbdullahAtherBlade-of-TruthTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit and Pro has fulfilled his BoP.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
AbdullahAtherBlade-of-TruthTied
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: No arguments from Con, so arguments go to Pro. I don't think a Wikipedia quote is enough for source points. Conduct to Pro for Con's round forfeit.
Vote Placed by LDPOFODebATeR0328 2 years ago
LDPOFODebATeR0328
AbdullahAtherBlade-of-TruthTied
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: Conduct goes to Pro because of FF. Argument goes to Pro because Blade-of-Truth was the only one who brought up an argument.