Nigeria Should Adopt the Swiss Cantonal System of Government

I will be Kritik-ing today's debate: Premise: The pro side is arguing that Nigeria, whose government is a Federal Presidential Republic, adopt the Swiss Cantonal System of Government. This is inherently wrong, as my opponent and the resolution is flawed. First, the resolution is flawed in that the word adopt, gives the connotation that it is going to be a peaceful and alright. This is not so. And secondly, my opp. assumes that as well. Getting that out of the way, my main argument is that the adoption of the Swiss Cantonal System of Government would lead to death and utter chaos of Nigeria that would leave it similar to Somalia. Link: According to Good Ole Wikipedia (I didn't want to separately provide the links, forgive me)" There exist several religions in Nigeria, helping to accentuate regional and ethnic distinctions. All religions represented in Nigeria were practiced in every major city in 1990. However, Islam dominated the north and had a number of supporters in the South Western, Yoruba part of the country. Nigeria has the largest Muslim population in sub-Saharan Africa. Protestantism and local syncretic Christianity are also in evidence in Yoruba areas, while Catholicism dominates the Igbo and closely related areas. Both Protestantism and Catholicism dominated in the Ibibio, Annang, and the Efik kiosa lands. The 1963 census although controversial, indicated that 47 percent of Nigerians were Muslim, 35 percent Christian, and 18 percent members of local indigenous congregations. If accurate, this indicated a sharp increase since 1953 in the number of Christians (up 13 percent); a slight decline among those professing indigenous beliefs, compared with 20 percent; and only a modest (4 percent) rise of Muslims. There are many types of Muslims, but the majority of Nigerian Muslims are Sunni, most of whom are Maliki, Shafi'i or Salafi. " Cantons, In the Old Confederation until 1798 in German, French and Italian in the online Historical Dictionary of Switzerland states that "The 26 cantons of Switzerland are the member states of the federal state of Switzerland. Each canton was a fully sovereign state " Also Wikipedia states that "About half a million Muslims and Hindus were killed in communal riots following the partition of British India. Millions of Muslims living in India and Hindus and Sikhs living in Pakistan emigrated in one of the most colossal transfers of population in the modern era. Both countries accused each other of not providing adequate security to the minorities emigrating through their territory. This served to increase tensions between the newly-born countries. Protests and Riots, to change the government." And lastly, according to History, there have been no peaceful transitions between governments, i.e. Bolshevik Revolution, numerous East European countries, Cuba. Those Cards basically states a couple things: 1) Multiple Religions, inside a third world country leads to conflict 2)Canton's create multiple separating individual sovereign states , " Each canton was a fully sovereign state." 3)There has been no peaceful revolution to change governments, as there is no such thing as an "adoption" of a government (You can't just change a government, its not like changing your clothes, it more like changing your entire life style and the life style of your kids). Impact: TWO MAIN PROBLEMS 1. There has never been peaceful transitions in governments, much less to think Africa is capable of it, theirs just too many problems with dictators, corruption and overall violence. Thus, there would be death and a power struggle over who would be the leaders in the new government, as it can be seen in the Chinese Civil War ( Take your pick, the Mao Era or Old Pre Gunpowder one) as well as many other. There would be death and a power vacuum to be acquired by a dictator, leaving Nigeria in a worse condition. Democracy doesn't work in Africa, according to NewsWeek" In Rwanda, President Paul Kagame has become a darling of the West for leading an economic renaissance in a nation traumatized by the 1990s genocide. But in upcoming August elections, Kagame looks set to duplicate his implausibly high 95 percent victory in the last vote and is pressing charges against an opposition leader for "divisionism," namely downplaying the genocide. In Uganda, President Yoweri Museveni, who denounced dictatorship in Africa when he took power in 1986 and was seen as another great democratic hope, has said he"ll try to extend his 24-year tenure in presidential elections next year. In Gabon and Togo, the deaths of long-serving autocrats Omar Bongo and Gnassingb" Eyad"ma has meant elections in which power was smoothly transferred"to their sons. Disastrous polls in Nigeria and Kenya in 2007 were worse than those countries" previous elections, and current trends show little hope for improvement. Mauritania, Guinea, Madagascar, and Niger have all had coups since 2008, while Guinea-Bissau has been effectively taken over by drug cartels." Overall Democracy doesn't work in Africa, much less Nigeria, and there would be a power struggle that would leave the people of Nigeria in shatters. 2. Lets assume it gets implemented: In the Cantonal System in Switzerland, there are multiple individual states, and in Nigeria, there is just one big country. Creating these individual states would lead to death and destruction in Nigeria, as there are many ethnic and religious groups that would not want to be in the same state. For example, the Muslims and Hindus in India hated each other, and when the British Partition occurred, about a half a million people were killed. Muslims and Christian do not like each other, i.e. the crusades, the whole "I hate America" by the middle east terrorist groups, the slaughter of Christians in the Kenyan Mall. Thus, the logic would be that, in the migration of people to different states, there would be conflict which would not happen if we just left the already functioning system of government in Nigeria. Even if you don't believe that, my opp states that" In order for our union to work, sections of Nigeria with richer resources would need to be willing to magnanimously share their resources over a period of time (say, over the next 30 to 50 years) over which state economic autonomy would increase. "This is wrong, as there is big conflict over resources especially in Africa (Blood Diamonds, the Civil War in Congo) plus the Nigerian government isn't fit to distribute resources to different areas, as according to the Corruption Index, African is seen as the worst in the world for corruption. Overall, either death in migration or death in lack of resources and power struggle over resources as well as corruption OR leave the government to itself. Alternative: Reject the Pro side, as changing governments for Nigeria would leave it in a shape comparable to a homeless man. People would die, thus you cannot vote Pro if in any sense you value life and common sense. Overall, reject the pro. This is my first Kritik, so if its not a proper one sorry, I'm just trying to get practice.