American Consumerism is the most positive aspect of the American lifestyle

consumerism: the concept that an ever-expanding consumption of goods is advantageous to the economy. (Random House Unabridged Dictionary 2006) Now before my opponent and i engage in debate, i would like to point out the following observation about the topic at hand. My opponent must prove to you, without a doubt, that the ability to have an "ever expanding consumption of goods" is the best thing about life in the United States, above all other aspects in the american lifestyle. This is his burden, and if he does not fulfill it, he should not win the round. Keeping this term and burden in mind, i will prove to both you, the judge, and to my opponent that american consumerism is in fact not the most positive aspect of the american lifestyle, but rather, is one of the most negative and could lead to the downfall of the american lifestyle. Let us first begin with the cause of american consumerism: capitalism. While capitalism has good intentions, and works exceptionally well on small scales, the current american capitalist machine has grossly overstepped its bounds, extending its reach into other countries and creating a global economy. Don't get me wrong, there are positive aspects of this, but the harms outweigh the benefits. It is easy to see that capitalism has created, and even teaches consumerism on a large scale. The two go hand in hand. Think of the impacts of these teachings. They teach us to be greedy. To step on our fellow man to get to the top. To never be satisfied with what we have. These are not warrantless assumptions, but can be easily derived from the above definition of consumerism. This idea purported to the american masses by corporate america has bred a society that cares solely about material goods. The fact that we outsource almost EVERYTHING that is bought in this country means that americans have no reason to be competitive in the international market. And we aren't. Our education system lags far behind other countries... we are both weak and stupid. See http://4brevard.com... if you don't believe me. Not only have we lagged behind in international education as a result of the capitalist / consumerist mindset, it hurts others around the world as well. Wal-mart and Nike hire children in third world countries, pay them almost nothing, and then move onto other countries to repeat it. Check out www.thecorporation.com for evidence of this... or just watch the documentary. To further back this point, i cite one of my OPPONENTS OWN ARGUMENT'S from a previous debate of his. "We're talking about global capitalistic institutions. In 1995 the military dictatorship of General Sani Abacha deemed hanging to be the necessary means to quell the articulate voice of poet Ken Saro-Wiwa and his eight fellow Ogoni activists.(http://www.commondreams.org......) What were these voices protesting? Shell Oil Company. Who paid off General Sani Abacha? Shell Oil Company." Our desire to consume goods, whether it be oil or cheaply made toys painted with lead paint (thanks china and american corporations desiring profit) hurts people. In fact, that last example (china) i cited directly effects and hurts american citizens. If our own consumerism can turn around and hurt us, how can it possibly be considered the most positive aspect of the american lifestyle? While american consumerism hurts us at home, it also hurts us abroad. The devastation wrought on the United States on september 11th, 2001, can be directly linked to american consumerism. They did not attack us because they hate our freedom. "They attacked us because we have constantly put the American economic interests and safety of our allies in the Middle East before the defense of our principles." (http://www.huffingtonpost.com...) More evidence can be brought up on this if need be. Now, judges, think about this. If we were attacked for our freedoms and such, then why were the World Trade Centers, a well known symbol of american capitalism, smashed with planes? Is this really the best aspect of our culture if it killed upwards of 3000 people? In my opinion, no.