The United States Federal Government should not continue to encourage patriotism in schools.

Now, on to my argument. First, I am going to refute my opponents arguments paragraph by paragraph. Then, I am going to extend on my own arguments. In my opp. first paragraph, he agrees with me that patriotism is a contirbuting factor to Nazism. While he says that patriotism destroyed Nazism, the fact still remains that my opponent agreed with me about a negative impact patriotism taught to the young society can bring. This has proven my resolutional statement already. Therefore, withy my opponent agreeing with me, the pro has automatically won the debate. Yet I will still continue. The next paragraph my opp. writes "if America chose purposely not to instill love and beauty into the youth of its own people what will we have to rely on? " This very sentence only helps my case. You will find that word "instill" is in that sentence. By definition from . http://dictionary.reference.com... or dictionary. com, the word instill means: Instill-To introduce by gradual, persistent efforts; implant. teach and impress by frequent repetitions or admonitions; By my opponent saying that patriotism should impress patriotism by persistent efforts, his argument is ruined. This is exactly how Communism was spread through the children in Russia. By persistent efforts, children were utterly brainwashed into believing Communism. Now nobody should be brainwashed by anything. Now I have presented plenty of evidence proving the detriments of patriotism, but my opponent has not except for patriotism has only partially fixed the problems it has created. My opponent goes on to say that without patriotism a country would not survive. I am neither agreeing or disagreeing with this statement. However, I am not arguing about how bad patriotism is, but how very destructive it can be by teaching it to students and particularly those whose won't be able to understand completely. Next my opponent says that "refusal to teach patritosim in the classroom simply because it may lead to totalitarinism is ludicrous. The US government has been teaching patriotism for years and there has never been any instigation of a regime remotely similar to Nazism or Socialism. In fact the hostlities that were taught in the early days are currently fading away. " Now along with the fact that my opponent cannot prove that there are no radicals invoking such terrible idealisms, the reason for there being no uprising is because this is not a third world country (yes Germany and Russia were third world countries). The United States is very stable and isn't ruled as an empire like Germeny and Russia were. There are key fundamental differences between Communist Russia and Nazi Germany agianist the U. S. Therefore that argument falls. The next paragraph that my opponent states is a complete misunderstanding of what I intended (and stated) was patriotism's role with Nazism. I stated that Hitler had been instilled patrioitism when he was young. This was in the second arguments in the first round. The Nazi policy didn't directly promote patriotism, but through instilled learning when Hitler was young, he believed that citizens should love and praise the Motherland (which the def. of patriotism states "devoted love to one's country"). The next three paragraphs don't even apply since my opponent was misunderstood in his third paragraph. Then in my opponent's seventh paragraph, in a summsrized version, my opponent writes that patritotism is entirely different for Nazism even though my opponent does not have any evidence to prove this fact and it doesn't even apply because that is not what this debate is about. He then writes about how "without Patriotism society cannot function without love and happinness for ones nation the country cannot function. " Now taking away the repitition, my opponent says that without patriotism, acountry cannot function. I will neither agree or disagree, but it does not apply to the debate because the resolution isn't A country can survive without patriotism. Rather it is Resolved: The United States Federal Government should not continue to encourage patriotism in schools. Then he says that the younger the students are, the better it is to teach patriotism. Also he says that Ameriaca is the "feared all powerful superpower" it is today because of patriotism. Now my opponent can say what he wants to, but without evidence, these are just empty words. I, myself, have presented two sources proves that patriotism taught in schools is detrimental to the student and all of the history of Nazism, Socialism, and Communism that I have spoken of can be found in such biographies as "Inside the Third Reich" by Albert Speers and "Communist totalitarianism; keys to the Soviet system" by Bertram David Wolfe. As a matter of fact, nothing that my opponent has stated throughout round one has a source at all. Right now, all of my opponents arguments are nothing but pure opinion, which is another reason why the pro has won this debate argument thus far. Anyways, continuing with my opponents argument. Next, my opponent challenges me to name one great civilization that flourished without teaching patriotism in schools. My answer to this is that there are several great civilizations that flourished without the government teaching patriotism in schools. There was Rome, Babylon, Persia, Greece, Macedonia, Aryan civilization, Mogloian Empire, Aztecs, Incans, and the Mayans to name a few. Remember, the key rise to power with these civilizations wasn't patriotism being taught to the young society. Anyways, my opponent continues on by saying that if the government doesn't teach patriotism to students, then they won't be able to learn it. Well this isn't a problem that the pro has has to deal with. I, the pro, has to merely prove my resolution, and not solve the outcome of it. The federal government shouldn't be teaching the students patriotism because of how it fails drastically and confuses the young society. My opponent claims through his opinion that patriotism teaches you to feel happy, secure and confident with your nation. This is a flat out lie because patriotism teaches love, devotion, and loyalty towards a nation. The last claim in this paragraph and I qoute "DarkFire would have you beleive that Patriorism teaches children to hate those who dont love America when this is obviously not true according to DarkFire's own definition of Patriotism it teaches love and support of ones country not hatred of those whom oppose it. " In other words, just beacuse people love their country doesn't mean that people won't hate other countries is basically what my opponent was trying to say out of his statement. This is a completely and unoquivically false statement. Everyone who is reading this debate knows the falsidity of what my opponent stated. Therefore every argument my opponent has made in this paragraph falls because of the reasons stated above. Finally, in his conclusive paragraph, my opponent's statements in his conclusion have fallen because of his defeated arguments in the above paragraph. The opponent's arguments fail because ALL of his arguments are nothing but opinion. I won't repeat my arguments from the first round, but I believe that I have proven the three arguments in my first round sufficiently with evidence, quotes, and sources. To my opponent, I hope that you see your flaws from arguing against me in this debate. I hope that the voters see that patriotism being encouraged by the USFG to students in schools can produce serious detrimental flaws. Thank you for your time.