Democratization

***Note to voters: Some of the previous links in my R2 arguments don't work. Please look at the comments section for the correct links if this is the case for any future rounds.My RefutationsPro: "Let's now take a look at what Con DROPS"Never state what your opponent has conceided unless it's the last round. The only reason why I didn't clash with all of your arguments was because I wanted to make my rounds shorter than 10 000 characters was for the convenience of the voters. Thus, I will respond to your arguments that I didn't touch base with in the previous round.Pro: "Democracy constrains abusive rule and bad government"Pro actually contradicts himself here; he's stated that I didn't address this point but yet he claims that I'm "cherry-picking" with this example. In fact, I addressed your argument with the scenario in Egypt, and stated that this isn't always the case. Hence, this proves my point that democracy is not a perfect system that should be "promoted" in all countries. I will now bring up more examples since this is still round 3. Turkey, Russia, Ukraine, Brazil, and Columbia are all "democratic" by definition. According to the Marriam Webster dictionary, democracy is classified as: "a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting." All these countries apply to this definition, but all of them restrict fundamental rights that citizens ought to have. For example, Ukraine's government is riddled with corruption; bribery is often a way of getting government action. Not only that, but freedom of speech is denied. [1][2]Pro: "There is a positive correlation between freedom and democracy"In 1999, 120 nations were democratic with only 35 of them guaranteeing electoral rights (see link below).3.https://www.hawaii.edu...Pro ought to change his statement because many democratic nations don't guarentee their citizens fundamental freedoms such as freedom of speech, and are in fact oppresive to their citizens. According to The American Economic Review articles, they failed to find any correlation between political/ civil rights and democracy. Interestingly enough, Ades and Di Tella (1998: 987) conclude, (Case 2002, Hicken 2001, Rock 2000, Pasuk and Baker 1998, Ammar 1997), they agreed that "corruption rose in both countries following democratization as the collapse of centralized networks of corruption gave way to more corrosive and decentralized corruption free for alls." Even then, democratic countries like Columbia and Brazil have widespread corruption.[1][3]Promoting Democracy"This type of process can be nonviolent. We can also look at such examples as Estonia's Singing Revolution for examples of how government's can be overthrown with virtually no deaths." I find this point absurd. Is Pro asserting that the U.S. should come into non-democratic country and get Americans to start randomly singing banned songs in that country? If this is Pro's vague idea of promoting, this obviously isn't going to work. Promoting has always been imposing with the U.S., which is War. Pro states that my example of Egypt is cherry-picking, but mentioning Estonia's Singing Revolution is even worse.More points that Pro's asserted that I've dropped:Pro: "The more powerful the government, the more abusive it can be"This doesn't necessarily work in your favor; there's plenty of powerful democratic governments that've been a i.e. Russia, Turkey, Columbia, Ukraine, Egypt, etc."Democide has killed more people than from all 20th Century wars combined"What Pro defines as "promoting" democracy is extremely vague. He asserts that it can be a gradual, peaceful process encouraged by the U.S. Are you saying that the U.S. should come into a country like North Korea and say, "hey, we've got some petitions from American citizens saying that you should adopt a democracy." No, it never works like that because "promoting democracy" is always done by war which accounts to an inconceivable amount of deaths. In comparison, is war really that much better than democide?"Democracies tend not to fight one another, promoting peace"This is irrelevant; whether or not democratic countries fight other democratic countries doesn't mean that the U.S. has a moral obligation to "promote", which is usually impose, democracy on other countries. If a country doesn't consent to the U.S. invading their country to establish U.S. democratic ideals, the U.S. has absolutely no right to.Moral Obligation to ActPro states that he doesn't advocate for the promotion of democratic ideals, but for the promotion. But again, Pro's idea of promotion is ineffective an vague. War would be the most effective way of imposing it, but has also resulted in moral wrongs as I've stated in R2.The U.S. has no moral obligation to invade another country to "promote" ideals the Americans think are superior. Number 1, countries need to consent to his. Number 2, this is usually done by war which is also immoral. Does the U.S. really have a moral obligation to do this?"Governments that violate their people's human rights lose legitimacy"I find this statement quite ironic because the U.S. has also violated their citizens rights. The CIA has a plethora of allegations of Human Rights Violations including waterboarding, rape by prison guards, andpolice brutality. "A 2010 memoir by Wilbert Rideau an inmate at Angola Prison from 1961 through 2001, states that "slavery was commonplace in Angola with perhaps a quarter of the population in bondage" throughout the 1960s and early 1970s." The U.S. Department of Defence even acknowledges that an American citizen was held in Guantanamo Bay, a horrific American military prison where detanees are often tortured. The point is, who are we to decide? [5][6][7]"Sovereignty is no barrier to action"Many countries wouldn't allow the U.S. to just come in and promote their ideals, thus leading to war inevitably. Do you really think authoritarian regimes are just going to causually let the U.S. in?"The Int'l Community ought to respond to mass Human rights violations"However, this isn't about the International community, this is about the U.S. which has no reason to invade a country to impose ideals that they think are superior.My ArgumentsBenevolent DictatorsCastroPro points out that Cuba hinders freedom of expression and association, but the other democratic countries also do this as I've stated before. Many authoritarian regimes are just as good as democratically elected ones in the fact that they provide benefits that the citizens want. Pro also talks about how I've conceided a numerous amount of points, but he's conceided the Cuba's infant mortality, healthcare, and literacy rate is comparable to democracies.AtaturkPro states that he was a democratic ruler, but the wikipedia article specifically stated that he established a provisional government. The very definition of provisional is arranged, which is a non-democratically elected government. Nevertheless, Pro conceids that he was a good ruler.TitoPro's criticism is also applicable to democratic leaders such as Vladamir Putin who has been criticized for being authoritarian.[8]Pro's definition of "Promote" is vague and ineffectiveMy opponent asserts the promoting democracy can be a peaceful and gradual process encouraged by the U.S. He even says it can be like "Estonia's Singing Revolution." Again, these points are absurd, the U.S. isn't going to an authoritarian country, and get their soldiers/ citizens to start singing to protest against the government. Moreover, the U.S. has not right to promote ideals that they think are superior. The reality is that democracy really isn't superior and can be as just as corrupt as a dictatorship.ImperialismThe U.S. is absolutely a hegemon. The U.S. is the most powerful country in the world. The only interest America has in going in "promoting" democracy is for America's own benefit. My opponent claims that the U.S. intervening in Iraq was for safety reasons, but there were no WMDs found.[9][10]I rest my case....Sources:1.https://www.hawaii.edu...2.http://www.merriam-webster.com...3.https://www.hawaii.edu...4.http://www.un.org...5.http://en.wikipedia.org...6.http://www.nytimes.com...7.http://en.wikipedia.org...8.http://www.sida.se...9.http://www.mapsofworld.com...10.http://www.globalresearch.ca...