Blackflag (PRO)I thank the opposition for accepting this debate, on such a controversial and important topic.
I would like to establish that the institution of political parties furthers democratic values. A nation can never truly call themselves democratic if they are wholly partisian or bipartisian. A true democracy can only function when all the power is spread throughout different ideological groups, or a voting base large enough to swing a majority party if need be. With this in mind, I intend on proving three things throughout this debate, which will inevitably and convincingly prove my case.
1. Sith Followers should form a party because they can
2. Sith Followers forming a party would make us more democratic.
3. Sith Followers forming a party would lead to more political reform
I leave the floor to the opposition, and may we have an invigorating and productive debate.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-09-30 12:32:18
| Speak Round
Darth Vitiosus (CON)1. Response to "Sith Followers should form a party because they can"
The Sith are diametrically opposed to public appearances[1]. Darth Bane explains the problem in the Rule of Two which he points out that power shouldn't be blunt. Instead the Sith should utilize assassins, bounty hunters, and other covert agents to act openly for the Sith. The Sith must remain hidden and secretive in order to remain unopposed as Darth Bane decreed in the Rule of Two.
[1]The Book of Sith by Daniel Wallace
2. Response to "Sith Followers forming a party would make us more democratic."
The Emperor controlled the entire galaxy from Coruscant to the Outer Rim with an iron fist in the shadow[2]. Why would the Sith lower themselves to a democracy in merely one country?
[2] Star Wars Episode IV
3. Response to "Sith Followers forming a party would lead to more political reform"
To Respond.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-09-30 12:53:03
| Speak RoundBlackflag (PRO)Do to the spacing in quick debates, I plan to make my rebuttals starting round 5. I will open my case, by explaining why Sith followers should and can form a party
I must first ask my opponent to further back up his information. The Sith do indeed work non-clandenstine. They are running a whole empire, but it is important to differentiate Star Wars "lore" from reality. In reality, the Sith don't actually exist outside a small cult following, known as sith philosophers. So why should this small group of people form a party? Because they can of course. By forming a party, the Sith receive more voice in politics, can participate in general debates, and gain legal protection not otherwise granted to "non civil groups".
Therefore, the Sith have every reason to form a party, as it will lead to better structure and backing on the political scene, advancing their ideology.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-09-30 13:03:59
| Speak RoundDarth Vitiosus (CON)My opponent has continued to assure us that the Sith should form a political party because we must differentiate Star Wars "lore" from reality. However, my opponent has further demonstrated his failure to understand Sith philosophy as how it would transfer from fictional into reality. The first sentence is of the Sith Code is "Peace is a lie." The Sith philosophy is directly opposed to coexisting with one's enemies. The Sith philosophy transferred into reality would not result in the creation of a political party. The Sith instead would infiltrate both the Democratic and Republican Parties with the intention of diluting their influence and controlling them from within. The Sith would seek to control their enemies secretly without their knowledge, therefore remaining unopposed by anyone.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-09-30 13:20:34
| Speak RoundBlackflag (PRO)My opponent seems to actually believe that the Sith will recieve a congressional majority and actually implement their ideology. This is unlikely, but great, the sith have every right to try. If the Sith want to implement a dictatorship void of peace, then I encourage them to take to the the polls, but several things must be accepted.
Premise:The Sith will never gain a political majority
Premise: There is no realistic way for the Sith to implement reform through violence, given the US military
Premise: There are a small amount of Sith
Conclusion: The Sith should form a party and represent the Sith already in existence
As for infiltrating the Democrat and Republican party, we should also accept another conclusion
P: The Dem. and Rep. voter bases can't be dilluted
P: Corruption is llegal
P: The Sith can't survive by violent means
C: The Sith should form a political party
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-09-30 13:44:11
| Speak RoundDarth Vitiosus (CON)My opponent is misleading the readers and myself. I never stated anything about the Sith receiving any congressional vote at all.The Sith have no interest in sharing ideology as I mentioned earlier. Sharing the Sith religion is like sharing power.That is against the Sith way according to the Rule of Two. Most followers of the Sith know there is a reason why power isn't shared. In the Sith, at their height, there is one apprentice and one Sith lord[1].An example of this would be The Emperor and Darth Vader. Sharing of power only creates conflict within the Sith, such as the Sith Empire with petty squabbling Sith lords on the Dark Council.
[1]The Book of Sith
The Sith would merely control from the shadows without notice like how Communists infiltrate and co-opt groups.The same way that Senator Palpatine secretly took over the Senate and the Republic which turned into the Empire.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-09-30 14:00:25
| Speak RoundBlackflag (PRO)The opposition is again confusing "Reality" with "Fiction". While I agree that the Sith would, in the fictional world, work through subterfuge and misdirection, that is not possible for the real life Sith Philosophers, who do not have the three M's. Means, Money, or Members. In fact, the actual Sith have no organized structure.
The opposition has contested the "fiction", not the "reality", which is concerning. There has also been a lack of rebuttal's concerning the argument that Sith would be more effective as a political parties. Simply contentions that the Sith don't work in the manner I'm proposing. I have stated many times that the Sith don't have the power to gain influence in the manner my opponent suggests, like they do in the fictional world.
I'm not asking the Sith to change their beliefs, but the strategy they use in carrying them out.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-01 09:34:01
| Speak RoundDarth Vitiosus (CON)My opponent has disguised humor for an argument.The Sith would not need Means, Money, or Money.The Sith would take the money from Democrats and Republicans once they have infiltrated their parties. This simply could be done by pocketing and skimming fundraising money.The Sith do not need an organized structure because they seek to dominate and control from the shadows.
My opponent is unfamiliar with subversion.Subversion has been used by the CIA, KGB, FSB, and countless other foreign intelligence agencies to reduce threats.One need not directly oppose when one can co-opt and render impotent.This is how the Sith operated in "fiction" and how they would in "reality." To infiltrate and co-opt secretly without notice.
I will let Mr. Bezmenov, a former KGB agent explain how subversion works in a thorough manner that I can not replicate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OUajti4zWk
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-01 10:42:41
| Speak RoundBlackflag (PRO)In the interest of my house, I would like to continue my path of arguments like originally intended. I issue a request for the opposition to explain how the Sith will infiltrate the major parties.
The benefit of having parties is clear. They provide voice and structure to minority or majority opinions. Through the democratic process, it is possible for said majority opinions, or minority interests, to be protected or even expanded upon. By the creation of more parties, you have more interactions in the legislature, meaning a more meaningful and democratic nation. If a party has 100 members, it still has a voice. Maybe those 100 members can swing a county vote?
It doesn't matter if their party is successful. It's the fact that the distributive membership lessens the power of major parties, and keeps like minded democracies from becoming one party authoritarian states.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-01 10:50:35
| Speak RoundDarth Vitiosus (CON)If the Sith follow the Rule of Two, one Sith Lord and Sith apprentice would infiltrate a political party.The Sith would subvert the Republican Party by becoming members, establish relationships, and eventually run for the Senate.The Sith would need to hold national office in order to control the Republican Party from within. The Sith's goal would be to change the Republican Party platform from within to suit their wishes and change laws.
The Sith lord then would recruit several acolytes who would infiltrate the Democratic Party.The acolytes would try to sabotage rivals within that party by destroying their political campaigns with gaffs and abusive advertising.The Sith's ultimate goal would be to turn the government into a totalitarian state with no parties. Republicans would be the biggest threat to this with their Libertarian streak.Therefore, they must be subverted first.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-01 12:32:06
| Speak RoundBlackflag (PRO)It sounds like a comprehensive plan. If not a terribly unrealistic one.
To effectively refute this point, we need to come to three conclusions. One, that many have tried, and failed to corrupt the major parties. Two, that while politicians can be corrupted, voting bases cannot. Last but not least, that the Sith in existence have no cards to play in their favor. You need means, money, and members. The Sith have none of that. What edge do they have that people far richer and more powerful didn't have before them?
The counter argument is faulty. Is it implausible for the Sith to create their own party, while also trying to corrupt the legislation of the other parties? If such a thing was possible? The fallacy is clear. My opponents case is that we must choose one of two options.The Sith aren't constrained to one path for political power.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-01 12:41:07
| Speak RoundDarth Vitiosus (CON)My opponent keeps reverting back to theoretical and imaginative circumstances when I have offered many practical examples of what has happened in "reality" thus far. The parties have been corrupted; this is why Occupy Wall Street happened and people chanted "Banks got bailed out, the people got sold out."My opponent also must of ignored Mr. Bezmenov's claims in the video I posted in this debate.Voting bases have been corrupted. The media and elites do it by encouraging behaviors that are not beneficial to the citizenry.Why does the average American in high school required to take an art class yet not a financial planning class? Art must pay well.
This one example of many Americans who stake the claim that the population is being corrupted and drowned out to the satisfaction of elites.Only the weak see the need to seek help not the strong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8WhT9BwpRs
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-03 00:14:04
| Speak RoundBlackflag (PRO)Let's go under the pretense that the parties and voter bases are corrupted, sparing us both the trouble of arguing it. Who is it that is "corrupting" the parties? People with the three M's, means, money, and membership. In the scenario's provided, MMM prevails. When it came to Panama, it came to means. When oil interests became attractive, it came to money. When it came to Occupy Wall Street and the Republican Tea Party, it came to membership.
No matter how my opponent spins it, it will always come back to means, money, and membership, something the Sith have none of. If the time ever comes for these "Sith" to show their dominance, what powers do they have to use? What advantage do they have that the tycoon's don't? Maybe the parties are corrupt, but it certainly isn't because the Sith "infiltrated" their ranks.
The Sith have no noticeable advantage to achieve their means.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-04 13:30:35
| Speak RoundDarth Vitiosus (CON)I will not repeat what I said earlier because I already responded to MMM. The Sith would merely take money from Republicans and Democrats. The Sith can infiltrate and corrupt with relative easy given the evidence I previously offered.
My opponent has also refused to offer any evidence to how the Sith would acquire MMM through starting a political party. Most third parties fail in the United States. There is not any evidence that a Sith party would be an exception.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-05 22:57:56
| Speak RoundBlackflag (PRO)Judges, I'll have you know, the opposition is continuing to do what he claims he wont stand for. Repeating himself.
I have made my arguments, and the opposition has done anything to refute them, therefore, I will not delay time restating what's already been affirmed. If my opponent believes his evidence is strong enough to skip adequate refutation, then I bid the judges to test him on his faith. I will continue on the initial line of reasoning I promised the readers, and the judges.
The Sith creating a party could lead to serious political reform. This is not the reform that occurs with one party, but multiple. Not only do we stretch our democratic muscles by introducing new viewpoints to the political scene, but we create competition. Parties are like a business, and when faced with competition, they adapt and better their "product. In this case being improved legislation.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-07 08:39:27
| Speak RoundDarth Vitiosus (CON)I have already refuted my opponent's claims back in the first round when I pointed out how creating a "Sith party" was incompatible with Sith philosophy.Therefore it can not be Sith.Don't be mislead by his constant attempts to deflect and ignore my points.Most importantly, let us remember he wants the Sith to form a party.In America, most third parties fail.How would the Sith succeed where are others failed?There are no theoretical or practical reasons for the Sith to even entertain any of his points. I have addressed each one of his primary points and refuted them.
1.The Sith are opposed to public appearances.TThe Sith would not form a party.
2.The Sith are opposed to democracy.Why would the Sith participate in the political process to make it "more democratic?"
3.The Sith would infiltrate other political parties, reform the system, and turn the democracy into a dictatorship.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-08 14:09:20
| Speak RoundBlackflag (PRO)1. The Sith can't progress any other way. I'm not proposing the Sith to change their beliefs, just the ways they carry them out. Adapt, progress, survive.
2. The CCP, Derg, and KIP all started as political parties. Democracy is one of the easiest ways to dictatorship. If the sith want a despot, they would have the best odds in congress.
3. Can they both form a party, and attempt to infiltrate the others? Again, what means do they have that tycoon's don't. The sith are as likely to corrupt the major parties as I am.
The point isn't for the Sith to succeed. The Sith wont succeed, because their beliefs are taboo and inane. Like many other third parties before them, they can inspire minor change. Small change on a local and state level. Even if they never succeed in one reform, they would be successful in drawing voters from the major parties, inspiring better legislation.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-10 13:39:40
| Speak RoundDarth Vitiosus (CON)I would challenge the voters to observe what my opponent said in Round 1 and look at what he said in Round 9.
Round 1: "2. Sith Followers forming a party would make us more democratic."
Round 9: "Democracy is one of the easiest ways to dictatorship."
Is my opponent for democracy or against it?
"3. Can they both form a party, and attempt to infiltrate the others? Again, what means do they have that tycoon's don't. The sith are as likely to corrupt the major parties as I am."
Wrong, my opponent isn't even legally illegible to vote.How could he corrupt anything but a local high school club ?My opponent is not even old enough to vote.We must also come to the conclusion he can not hold office either.This is a fallacy.
"The Sith can't progress any other way."
Refuted, see Rounds 4-7.
"I'm not proposing the Sith to change their beliefs"
Refuted, see Rounds 1-8.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-10 14:11:20
| Speak RoundBlackflag (PRO)My opponent still doesn't seem to understand, the Sith wont succeed in turning the government into a dictatorship. It isn't even possible, nor is there any chance it would happen if it was. Sith can indeed try to push reform on a local level, which is far more likely than the opposition's unsupported plan about infiltrating the major parties. The opposition is beating around the bush. The Sith will get more done as a party than a pack of unorganized basement dwellers.
As for my opponent's speculation on my age, I will ignore it, as it has nothing to do with the debate, and the point was that Sith really can only corrupt the major parties as well as I can, so I thank the opponent for conceding and affirming that point. Corrupting a party can be done in thousands of ways, but they all require means, money, and members. My opponent thinks they can do it without MMM. Prove it.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-11 00:56:36
| Speak RoundDarth Vitiosus (CON)The Debate Resolution: "Followers of the Sith Philosophy should start a political party in the United States"
My opponent thinks the resolution is: "Corrupting a party can be done in thousands of ways, but they all require means, money, and members. My opponent thinks they can do it without MMM. Prove it. "
My opponent has not only failed to support his burden of proof but he has gone on to negate it entirely.He did not support a single point relevant to why the Sith should create a party.He has gone on to ignore my points.I have refuted all of his.My opponent has jumped from contradiction to contradiction. Then he affirms a resolution that does not even exist. If you take time to re-read this debate, notice how he avoids the resolution all together at Round 7.It is safe to say my opponent lost this debate several rounds ago.There is no consistency on his part. Vote Con please.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-11 01:22:48
| Speak RoundDarth Vitiosus (CON)The Sith are opposed to such entities as political parties. The Sith are also opposed to public appearances as well as I explained earlier in this debate.
Even if the Sith were to establish a party, what is the probability they would succeed? Most third parties in the United States fail. The Democratic and Republican parties have been dominant since the 1850s. The Sith wouldn't be any different from the other third parties that have failed.
The resolution has been negated. Vote Con please.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-13 00:14:24
| Speak RoundBlackflag (PRO)I have fulfilled the burden required. The opposition has done nothing to refute my house's arguments, beside's dodging the point, and discrediting everything that couldn't be avoided. He dropped the argument that political parties make a nation more democratic. The opposition dropped the argument that the Sith can accomplish things on a small scale.
The opposition gave a counter plan. The floor should analyze whether or not he backed it up.
Return To Top | Posted:
2014-10-14 13:21:47
| Speak Round
Judge: nzlockie
Posted 
Judge: Pinkie
Judge: 9spaceking
Agreed.Posted 2014-10-15 11:24:30
Suggestion: stop commenting, the lot of you. This isn't going to resolve like this so let it be.Posted 2014-10-15 11:23:45
I can't bear frauds and neither can most people. In real life, they go to jail.Posted 2014-10-15 11:22:59
I can't bear dramatic internet people who can't act civil. If people were as rude in real life...Posted 2014-10-15 11:21:26
"I don't appreciate arguments that insult my character rather than my logic"
You don't, GOOD. You have no character or merit so of course you want us to ignore those.
"The fact that you keep referencing a unrelated event shows you aren't capable of discussing the topic at hand in a civil hand. If you can kindly explain what the moderation thing that happened 5 months ago has to do with anything"
"I don't know what you get from being rude,because that's not the kind of person I am,"
Hypocrisy continues to exude. He talks about what others are without care but refuses to discuss himself LOL
"Just so you're aware, defending my character in the debate isn't proper."
Nothing in the debate related to character, only to the capacity to vote and hold office. Read before you respond.
"The comment section is a perfectly acceptable place to air our my annoyances."
Those aren't annoyances; those are arguments related to the debate.
Posted 2014-10-15 11:18:55
The fact that you keep referencing a unrelated event shows you aren't capable of discussing the topic at hand in a civil hand. If you can kindly explain what the moderation thing that happened 5 months ago has to do with anything, I'll count it with a shred of merit.
Just so you're aware, defending my character in the debate isn't proper. The comment section is a perfectly acceptable place to air our my annoyances. Posted 2014-10-15 11:07:33
Tophatdoc, apparently you're more interested with keeping up a vain appearance of being the resistant internet badass, rather than cooperating with me. I would really appreciate it if you stop the vanity and listen to what I'm saying. I don't appreciate arguments that insult my character rather than my logic. Is it fair to request you don't make them in the future?Posted 2014-10-15 11:05:33
Childish insults? Again, SO SAYS the person who committed a crime, fraud.Posted 2014-10-15 11:04:53
DEBATE SECTION:
"Wrong, my opponent isn't even legally illegible to vote."
"As for my opponent's speculation on my age, I will ignore it, as it has nothing to do with the debate, and the point was that Sith really can only corrupt the major parties as well as I can"
COMMENTS SECTION:
"I can actually hold office in Pennsylvania. I can also vote in about 20 states."
"I'm not arguing anything related to the debate."Posted 2014-10-15 11:03:13
Not stop with your childish insults and give me a mature response. Is it unreasonable for us to get along?Posted 2014-10-15 11:00:47
I'm not arguing anything related to the debate. I'm asking you to treat me with some decency and respect. I don't know exactly what I did to you, so I'm left to conclude that you lash out at me based on personal issues or spite. Posted 2014-10-15 10:59:49
Rude? Again, SO SAYS the person who claimed to be an EDEB8 moderator. What morality do you have to tell anyone what to do on this site? I forgot you think your the moderator lol.
I should encourage the judges to deduct points from you for trying to argue in the comment section instead of the debate section. This isn't the first time you have done it. I will recommend in the future for you to be punished for your behavior. Posted 2014-10-15 10:57:03
I'm going to strongly encourage judges in the future to issue point deductions for this kind of thing. I don't know what you get from being rude, because that's not the kind of person I am, and I'm hoping that's not the kind of person you are either. Posted 2014-10-15 10:52:37
And what are you going to do about it? This isn't the debate section. Try reading before you comment. Posted 2014-10-15 10:42:32
Tophatdoc, this is the third debate with you where you've resorted to attacking me rather than the debate. Frankly, I'm a little sick of it. Posted 2014-10-15 10:38:37
You can't hold national office......just sayingPosted 2014-10-15 10:36:09
Just saying...Posted 2014-10-15 05:56:36
I can actually hold office in Pennsylvania. I can also vote in about 20 states. Posted 2014-10-15 05:56:05
No problem, use as much time as necessary. I will try to do my response tomorrow some time. Posted 2014-10-04 16:50:01
Sorry for the wait, I've been pretty lazy. Ready to attend, and possibly finish this debate tonight.
Now to look for an appropriate rebuttal...Posted 2014-10-04 10:45:21
Nope, nzlockie and I did a edeb8 vs ddo quick debate before that.Posted 2014-10-01 11:33:50
The extension to 900 characters was a good improvement as well. I think the lowest I could realistically go is 300, and for a troll resolution.Posted 2014-10-01 09:58:44
This is going to be an epic quick debate. This is the second on the site I believe.
http://www.edeb8.com/debate/Hezbollah+is+more+powerful++than+the+Islamic+State+of+Iraq+and+Syria/#tdebatePosted 2014-10-01 09:57:27
ThanksPosted 2014-09-30 13:33:03
I am blushingPosted 2014-09-30 13:32:49
This is a great debate. Keenly following this.
Posted 2014-09-30 13:25:37