It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ktprktpr
...the primacy of the pro argument is to convince the reader that "western" equals to democracy (take note of his requirements).
Originally posted by ktprktpr
However, if my opponent truthfully believed this argument, s/he would have never written:
"… there are non-democratic, and non-Greek descended (democratic) nations,"
Western life refers to the high (relative) standard of living for most citizens in the Western world (in the meaning of rich countries). They may also have democratic, (mostly) secular governments, rule of law and developed bodies of laws that have some expression of rights (for their own citizens) in law.
The student demonstrations at Tiananmen Square in 1989 were not the first time in the 1980s that Chinese authorities were faced with organized demonstrations expressing dissatisfaction with their rule. In late 1985, and again in late 1986, Beijing and Shanghai were the site of student protests. Students carried banners with slogans such as "Law, Not Authoritarianism" and "Long Live Democracy."
by Nancy Bermeo
If one looks at the cases in South America after the Cuban revolution, the democracies that collapsed were often led by people who were elected by small pluralities or who inherited power because a more legitimate leader died. Many disastrous democracies emerged from situations where leaders were not seen as legitimate from the very
by Aga Khan IV
Three concepts seem to me to be essential in creating, stabilising and strengthening democracy around the world, including among the people of Africa and Asia with whom I have worked in the past. These concepts are meritocracy, pluralism and civil society...
1. Lacking the necessary ability, capacity, or power.
1. Of, characterized by, or advocating democracy: democratic government; a democratic union.
2. Of or for the people in general; popular: a democratic movement; democratic art forms.
3. Believing in or practicing social equality: "a proper democratic scorn for bloated dukes and lords" (George du Maurier).
1. Political independence; autonomy.
2. Popular or representative government; democracy.
You are guilty of the retroactive definition I explained earlier, where the definition of Western society always includes what's right and excludes what's not.
...my opponent can't write that "there are non-democratic and non-Greek descended Western nations," because it contradicts itself.
...you admit that being Western is not enough to achieve democracy...
...This means that there is some other magical element required for being capable of democratic self-rule. So if it’s not being Western by your definition, then what is it?
notes on E.P.
…the rural, agricultural, slaveholding South gave way as the United States joined several western European nations in embracing a future of industrial capitalism with all the cultural change that came with it.
Mt. Vernon estates
At the end of the Revolution, a number of Army officers said America should have a King or Emperor, and wanted to give the job to Washington. He opposed the idea and prevented the officers from carrying out a planned military takeover of the country in 1783.
"Your position never gives you the right to command. It only imposes on you the duty of so living your life that others can receive your orders without being humiliated."
…citizens in a democratic society share culturally defined responsibilities toward other citizens and that a consistent concept of democratic citizenship will have to accommodate this relevant fact.
Americans still seem confident that Iraq should be able to develop democratic institutions. But, their confidence in the establishment of the democratic process is being challenged by the continuing conflicts between the ethnic and religious groups like the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds."
Some conceptions of ideology de-emphasize the power aspect and see ideology as the structure of assumptions which form the imaginative world of groups. Ideology, writes Althusser, is "a representation of the imaginary relation of individuals to the real condition of existence." Further, Althusser writes, ideology creates us as persons: it "hails" us, calls us into being.
"By the end of 1989, and even more clearly by the end of 1991, all this changed. The West had clearly won and could claim to be the "only game in town." As a result, in the current context there is nothing like the old tension and clash between alternative ideological forces. And, in the absence of contestation, the values of the West have taken
on an air of naturalness."
The point of this debate was Democracy and what was required for it to exist. Ktprktpr showed quite strongly that the basics of Western society are not required for Democratic self-rule to be realized. TheLibra did an excellent job at defining what Western Society is but failed to show that these things are required.
My vote is for “thelibra” I find his debating skills alone exceeded that of his opponents.
I also believe there was no need for “Ktprkpr’s” rudeness toward the observers and judges of this debate. As to the repeated use of wikipedia I find it shows a lack of research from various sources.
Well, this has been probably the hardest debate to judge, if only because it seems as if the actual topic of the debate was never argued. Perhaps because they were uncomfortable with the topic, both debators focused on definitions, and while both presented excellent ideas on the foundations of democracy and Western society, I feel that the debate ended with neither opponent fully tackling his side of the debate.
That being said, I think the discussion that did take place was very good. I was especially impressed with thelibra's quite thorough and logical presentation of the four tenets of Western society and while at times, it seemed as if he was arguing the con side of the resolution, I think he did very well. ktprktpr also made some great points, however, I feel that his argument was shrouded by irrelevant pettiness and unnecessary jabs at his competitor.
First off, congratulations to both contestants for a memorable debate. Both members handled a touchy topic exceptionally well, and I thought the strategy of focusing on the definition of “western society” was brilliant.
The exchanges seemed a bit acrimonious and personal at times, but that was hardly surprising in light of the topic. thelibra did well to focus on the question of what defines a western society, and did so convincingly. ktprktpr seemed to stray from what could have been a decisive counter and was slow to make his case, and both seemed to drift into ad hominem more than necessary.