The Instigator
Swindenland
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
YeshuaBought
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Parliamentary republics are better than presidential republics

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/27/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 509 times Debate No: 118743
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Swindenland

Pro

Hello Internet!

Parliamentary and presidential systems of democratic government have been clashing since the modern reinvention of the rule by the people. This debate will determine which system is better and improve or worsen citizen's view on their democracies.

Definitions:

A parliamentary republic is a republic which operates under the parliamentary system of government. The legislature appoints the executive.

A presidential republic is a republic which operates under the presidential system of government. The head of government leads the executive branch which is completely separate from the legislative branch.

Rules:

First round is for acceptance only.

Second and third rounds are for argumentation and rebuttal.

Last round is for rebuttal only.

With that said let's debate. Good luck to my opponent.
YeshuaBought

Con

I disagree. Too much power concentrated in the hands of the privileged few corrupts absolutely. Look at Saudi Arabia. They kill reporters. So does Russia. I believe in a moderate balance between the rule of law, And arepresentative democracy. How would you feel if you least favorite political leader had absolute power over you and your people? Hitler had a parlament, No? I am part German, So i get to break Godwin's law. LOL.
Debate Round No. 1
Swindenland

Pro

Thanks for joining!

In this round I will try to prove that parliamentary republican systems are more efficient, Democratic, Safer, Socially cohesive (based on compromise), Accountable and adaptable, Therefore making the system better.

Note that I am not advocating for the Westminster type of parliamentarism or monarchism, But for parliamentary republics with constitutions like Germany, Switzerland, Finland, India and South Africa, Especially those with proportional representation.

Point 1: Parliamentary systems are more efficient. This is because, Whichever coalition is in power will be able to pass laws due to a majority in parliament (The executive was elected by the legislative). This allows the coalition to pass new laws, Further their nation's interests and actually build something. Legislation is also passed faster. This also makes the people happier, Because they feel like change is actually done and thus prevents populism.

Point 2: Parliamentary systems are more democratic, Because all voters are empowered. In a presidential system, Executive power is given to the largest majority. In my systems power is given to a parliament, Which represents all people, Thus not ignoring the other 49%.

Point 3: They are safer, Because any rogue government can be removed with a no-confidence vote. This happened in Armenia, Where an authoritarian PM was ousted and a liberal government successfully installed. Coalitions in practice fall apart, If government becomes rogue, Because not all parties want to participate anymore.

Point 4: They create social cohesion with coalitions. A government can only be formed, If parties co-operate. Different groups and ideologies have to make compromises. Compromise lowers polarisation and connects society.

Point 5: Accountability is ensured, Because a prime minister can be anytime ousted, If performing poorly, And replaced by someone better.

I will explain adaptability in the 3rd round alongside a new argument and examples.
Good luck

YeshuaBought

Con

What is wrong with a representative democracy, Where leaders are democratically elected. I person want nothing to do with a government that leans too far left or right. I believe representation without a consensual majority of citizens voting is a form of slavery/ Let's talk about Germany for a second since you brought her up. Germany is a known leftist dictatorshuip with no freedom of speech, Religion, Etc. If German citizens say for example that homosexuality is a sin or Islam is bad, They are subject to German hate speech laws. I was censored by Twitter several times for saying things that are too conservative for German hate speech laws. I won't quibble over that too much but suffice to say at least in real life, Free speech and religion is a right. Leftist governments like Germany, Canada, And England for example are turning into dictatorships where saying Jesus to a Muslim, Sharing the truth about what the Bible says regarding gender identity and other things put a target on someone's back. Now I am also not a conservative either, But I do defend free speech, And religious excercize. When the penbdulem swings too far left or right, You lose liberty. I want a government where I don't have to hide my faith or speech to avoid governmental pressure. In her efforts to avoid bing like Adolf Hitler, Germany is becoming a dictatorship where disagreement is a crime subject to the full force of secular law. I for one don't want a government like that.
Debate Round No. 2
Swindenland

Pro

Swindenland forfeited this round.
YeshuaBought

Con

YeshuaBought forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Swindenland

Pro

Swindenland forfeited this round.
YeshuaBought

Con

YeshuaBought forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.