 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in World Affairs/Debate. |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Aff Case (long read) |
New poll |  |  |
| Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| User | Post | ||
SamuraiX Broom Hatter                Since: 11-19-05 Last post: 6295 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
|
I affirm Resolved: In matters of US immigration policy, restrictions on the rights of non-citizens are consistent with democratic ideals. I offer the following definitions to clarify the round US immigration policy- of or relating to the policies and enforcement of laws governing non- citizens within US jurisdiction. Before I define democratic ideals i would like to clarify a term that is going to be key in deciding this round, which is meme, a meme is any social construct that we define based upon imitation, Glenn Grant elaborates on the concept of the meme, a meme is "A contagious information pattern that replicates by parasitically infecting human minds and altering their behavior, causing them to propagate the pattern. Individual slogans, catch-phrases, melodies, icons, inventions, and fashions are typical memes. All transmitted knowledge is memetic." This transmission can occur in any number of ways Visually, like fashions, linguistically like colloquialisms and phrases, and through any other mechanism that spreads concepts. In terms of government structures, like democracy, it is predominantly defined by its most powerful actors, and their policies. We know that democracy is a meme for three reasons: First because it behaves as a memetic virus, it diffuses across borders, spreading as it gains international recognition, second it isn't a naturally existing concept but rather one that is introduced into societies, and third it changes as an institution when new aspects are introduced, as has been seen in trends towards liberal democracy . Democratic ideals are the ideals that define a democratic state, they are thereby nothing more than transmitted information that goes along with democratic replication, although certain aspects haven't changed historically it doesn't mean that they can't change. It has no inherent notions or facets, everything about democracy is determined by how we view it. For example, a Greek conception of democracy wouldn't hold the connotation of equality that modern democracies argue for because it was based solely upon the premise of participation, nowadays many would argue that pure majority rule is undemocratic. These shifts create an odd platform for the debate round because democratic ideals are an inconsistent term, In order to show consistency the affirmative must show that regardless of the inconsistent aspect of democracy US' rights restrictions are democratic. There are two reasons to accept a memetic definition of democratic ideals, First it allows an unbiased pursuit of a truth statement in this round, if we select a specific definition of democracy then we are basing our round temporally, spatially, or culturally. any of these three things invalidates the purpose of this debate round by making it only applicable in certain situations. Second, memetics allow us to more effectively examine the impacts of policies on concepts, which is what the resolution requires, because it is discussing an ideal as an end goal, if we take a specific definition of democracy than we have already decided on what it is and nothing can ever impact back to democratic ideals because they are treated as an absolute unchanging concept. The primary value in this round is consistency with democratic ideals because that is the sole determining factor for an affirmative ballot. Because this is the sole burden on the affirmative i intend to show that regardless of the standard that you offer, US policies are lock-step with democratic ideals. Observation: Although a memetics definition of democracy allows us to escape a certain environment, the resolution also ordains an actor, which means that in order to debate the resolution we have to assume a certain degree of consistency in policies which aren't directly under the scope of the resolution, because without them we have no basis for the debate, if, for example, the United States were to take over the world tomorrow and grant everyone citizenship this debate would be meaningless so we have to assume the US as it is now, because it creates the best, most reasonable frame for the debate. My sole contention argues that because the United States has the greatest influence over democratic concepts, and is the predominant replicator of democratic ideals, democratic ideals are predicated upon the actions and policies of the United States, and thereby any action that the United States takes changes the concept of democratic ideals and is inherently consistent with those ideals. The United States defines democratic action in many ways, i am going to show 3 ways in which democratic ideals as a meme are predicated upon the actions of the US, and how each of those is sufficient to warrant an affirmative ballot. First, The United States actively promotes democratization around the world to a greater extent than any other democratic actor. as Seymour lip set, Professor at Stanford University (Political Sociology), argues, "the potential for democratic influence from the United States... should not be underestimated," to support this claim he offers four examples: The Kennedy administrations actions in Venezuela was "an important supporting factor," The Carter Administration putting pressure on Argentina "saved many victims of indiscriminate repression in the late 1970's and was a factor in the international isolation of the regime," and in Chile and South Korea, the U.S. role was mixed but still supported democratic claims. Support for eastern European democracy, act of 1989 instigated the 1989 democratic revolution, Latin American Policies in the 1960's, and Post-world war II Asia, are only a few more examples of America's attempts to spread democracy to every corner of the world. These actions continue even today with American pressure on the Middle east to democratize and legitimize. These democratic actions inevitably support democratic change all around the world, if the United States changes its domestic policies then new democracies that the U.S. supports and propagates will base their policies in a similar fashion thereby changing the scope of democratic ideals all around the world. The shift this causes changes the generally agreed upon facets of a democratic institution through international modeling and norms relations, given that, US restrictions are consistent with democratic ideals because they become normalized into the international community as democratic and are thereby consistent with democratic ideals. Second, The US is identified as a "city on a hill," and is used to define democracy for developing nations and grassroots movements world wide. As Graham Allison and Robert Beschel examine, "Western Democracies must never forget that in the final analysis it is the vitality of their values, institutions and societies that will be the strongest arguments for democracy. In this context the United States has a special role to play, since America has been the exemplar and promoter of modern democracy for the last two hundred years." This historical basis makes the US the generally agreed upon arbiter of democratic government, we are examined by other governments and when they undergo gradual transitions, their leaders use the US as an example, as Allison and Beschel further, "[The United States] provides leaders of nondemocratic countries with direct experience with the facts of life in democratic societies. Words are an important form of communication, but direct experience is even more persuasive. Boris Yeltsin illustrates this point vividly in his autobiography when he recounts his "shattering" visit to an American Supermarket: "when i saw those shelves crammed with hundreds, thousands of cans, cartoons, and goods of every possible sort, for the first time i felt quite frankly sick with despair for the soviet people." This provides a basis for governmental transitions without revolution based on US policy, but in cases of grass-roots opposition the large immigrant population of the US provides a unique basis for democratic movements because when foreigners return to their countries they bring back assessments and concepts of democracy, Norman Kiell furthers, "A great number [of foreign exchange students] are sponsored by their governments who look to them, as well as those who come independently to bring back and apply for their nation's benefit the technical knowledge and skills which America can provide, but they will carry back something else: their impressions of America and her democracy as they found it." These impressions provide a basis for concepts of democracy all around the world on an individual level. The impact of this being that individuals in numerous countries base democratic ideals on US policies. This means that, in terms of general conceptions, we have to affirm because US policies restructure how foreigners and foreign states view democracy and thereby how the world views democracy. Third, We as citizens identify with the structure of our state and it is the strongest corollary connection we have with democratic concepts. When the United States enacts policies they become naturalized into social concepts of democracy as Lawrence Mitchell (Prof at the university of Toronto in Sociology) discusses, "Even if Norms do originate in some external sanction, as the new norm theorists almost universally suggest, the process of complying with norms over time may inculcate their rightness and lead people to treat them as having their own internal justification- rules and reasons. Aristotle made the point in the Nichomachean Ethics, explaining that compliance with virtuous behavior- that is acting as though one were virtuous- ultimately leads to an appreciation for virtue, such that it justifies itself." This same thing happens with democratic ideals for citizens, the restrictions on the rights of non-citizens inevitably become normal and thereby become justified solely based on their existence. Once this happens citizens of the United States accept it as a component of their democracy and no longer question its authenticity in terms of their former conceptions of democracy. This can be most clearly seen in the pre-civil war era- had we been given a resolution about slaves and their rights in that time period we would inevitably affirm because of what social norms told us, but given that same resolution today none of us would be able to say that slaves don't deserve rights based on the biases that modern norms create. This means that we as Citizens have to affirm given that inevitably the restrictions that the resolution brings up will become normal and thereby democratic in our mindset. Because of the three reasons given above i firmly believe that the US' policies define what is democratic and thereby its policies are inherently democratic. I now stand open for cross examination. Anyone want to point out the strengths/weaknesses of this case? |
|||
|
Ziff B2BB BACKTOBASICSBITCHES     Since: 11-18-05 From: A room Last post: 6294 days Last view: 6294 days |
| ||
| Contention - The "spread" of democracy in Latin America is held affront by the events of September 11, 1973 where a militant regime was implaced in Chile. As well as the foundation of the School of Americas, which allows opposition groups to legitimate, democratic states to become heavily armed and form into an anti-government army.
In addition US Foreign Policy is irrelevant to the fact of interior US policy which should be based off of conclusive ideals within the democratic state in question, rather than the policy of the state outwardly. Therefore, it has no inherent weight on the intra-state policy, bar that the foreign policy falls directly upon the point of immigrants from said nation. On Eastern Europe, the actions of America allowed for the rise of brutalist dictators or allowed absolute corruption to go unchecked wtihin the nations. Also, the suppression of the thoughts of other democratic governments is undemocratic. The use of force against legitimate foreign governments on false basis, or the instigation of force from within by using methods from the external of the nation to benefit oneself contravenes democracy. Just some points to strengthen your argument. |
|||
|
Deleted User Banned    Since: 05-08-06 Last post: None Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Perhaps I'm wrong, but I thought Russia was responsible for eastern Europe, whereas the US and Britain were responsible for western Europe.  |
|||
|
Ziff B2BB BACKTOBASICSBITCHES Since: 11-18-05 From: A room Last post: 6294 days Last view: 6294 days |
| ||
| Following the collapse of Russia's supremacy on the region... America's hands were all over the Polish Solidarity movement and the tearing down of the Wall, I'm pretty sure that they have some responsibility to the Eastern European people, like those that live under the regime in Minsk. | |||
|
Deleted User Banned Since: 05-08-06 Last post: None Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Ziff Ah, sorry, I guess I confused where you were at temporally since you mentioned the 70s  |
|||
|
SamuraiX Broom Hatter Since: 11-19-05 Last post: 6295 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
| Hello, all. Got back from LCC debate, and I think it worked pretty well, have to see results tommorow. I was mainly critized because some people were...noobs. They said memes are probably not a real word, and they just thought it was a word like pwn, or leet. I'll post a revised draft soon, I hope.
[EDIT] At least one more round tommorow, gathering info on the meme and cutting case a lot--it loses meaning if you read 5 words a second.  (edited by SamuraiX on 12-03-05 02:45 AM) |
| Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Aff Case (long read) |
| |
