Democracy: The God That Failed

MONARCHY VS. DEMOCRACYThe Resolution:This debate will not use the traditional approach of one resolution to be defended by Pro and attacked by Con. Instead, Pro and Con will each argue for separate and opposite resolutions:Pro: On balance, monarchy is superior overall to democracy as a system of government.Con: On balance, democracy is superior overall to monarchy as a system of government.This removes any possible asymmetry from the debate and fits in with the structure of the rounds.Definitions:Democracy – a form of government which is run according to the vote of some or all the citizens it governsMonarchy – a government that is run and controlled by one personBoth sides may specific a more specific form of the system government they are defending in Round 1 and may stipulate any setup that conforms to those definitions and to human nature (eg. "Everyone lovingly obeys the all-knowing, all-loving king" cannot be stipulated as part of the definition of monarchy).The question of what makes a form of government superior to another will be part of the debate. See "Arguments Vote."The Structure of the Rounds:Round 1: Pro posts the rules and details of the debate. Con indicates that he or she has accepted to debate.Round 2: Both sides present an affirmative argument for the resolution they are supporting. [8000 characters]Round 3: Both sides present a rebuttal to their opponent's resolution. [8000 characters]Round 4: Both sides present a defense of their resolution [4000 characters] and a summary of the debate explaining why readers should vote in their favor. [4000 characters] The character limits here do not need to be followed exactly, but the fourth round should be divided roughly in half.Round 5: An extra round is added in case a debater needs to miss a round due to unforeseen circumstances. Both debaters will post "blank round" in this round if no one misses a round.Technical Rules:Under this format, there is no possibility of employing several common unfair tactics, such as dropping arguments and picking them up later. However, a few details still need to be worked out to prevent any issues from arising at the end. Sources – Information taken from a source must be directly mentioned in the debate in order to count. Posting a link to an essay and adding "read this" is a way to gain extra argumentation outside the round and is therefore unfair. An external citation page is permitted. Sources must be listed either at the end of each round or on the citation page and are to be referenced with brackets [] or parenthesis (). Frivolous Arguments – Making twenty stand-alone arguments in the first round and then dropping all but three of them when it comes time to defend them is unfair because it prevents your opponent from presenting a focused critique of any of them. Excessive dropping of arguments previously presented as important may result in the loss of the conduct point (voter's discretion, see below). Forfeiting Rounds – There is no penalty for forfeiting one round provided that the debater notes in the comments prior to the forfeit that it is necessary. Forfeiting without notification is a rule violation, as is forfeiting twice. Semantics – All statements made during the debate must be interpreted in the most favorable manner possible. Tagging – Arguments must be tagged so that they are reasonable easy to follow and refer back to. Voting:Conduct:A violation of one of the rules listed under "Technical Rules" results in a loss of the conduct vote. If bother debaters violate a rule, the conduct vote should be tied. Excessive rude behavior, in either the debate or the comments, results in an automatic lose of the conduct vote regardless of rule violations. Violations of conduct cannot count toward argumentation (this is particularly relevant for rule violations).Spelling and Grammar:The use of poor spelling and grammar that detracts from the debate results in the automatic loss of this point. Otherwise, disregard minor typographical errors. This point may be awarded for exceptionally good writing and presentation.Arguments:In the first round, each debater will present a criterion for what makes a form of government "superior." This criterion must be defended and is subject to criticism. At the end of the debate, voters will consider whether, in light of criticism, they find each criterion to be valid. They will evaluate the debate according to the valid criteria. If both criteria are invalid, the argument points must be voted a tie. A debater may still win according to his or her opponent's criterion if his or her own is shown to be invalid. It will be the job of the debaters in Round 4 to explain why their arguments better conform the the criteria.Sources:The sources vote goes to whichever debater made better use of external material to defend his or her position. This does not necessarily mean hard data; references to philosophical arguments and the like also count. Voters should consider the number and quality of sources presented. If a debater violates the rules for sources, he or she cannot win the points for sources.The voting period will last three months.Votes that do not contain a meaningful evaluation of the debate of at least a few sentences and with direct references to arguments made within the rounds in the RFD may be countervoted.Acceptance:Before accepting the debate, you must post a comment indicating that you have read and understand the rules and that you wish to accept the debate. You may ask any questions there. The first person to post such a comment will be my opponent. Once an opponent has been decided, I will lower the minimum age to accept the debate (currently 99 years) and challenge that person directly. If someone with his or her age set to 99 years or older accepts the debate, it is an automatic forfeit of all 7 points.For those of your who remember me, I am sorry to say that I am not fully back. I will be coming back to the site every so often to debate, but I will probably post in the forums even more sparingly than before. I am starting college soon and I don't expect to have a lot of time on my hands, and the recovery in the forums is still very slow.