- Dictature is better than democracy !

The first part of this round I will be finishing my argument on ROUND 3 My opponent talks about, how in democracy the voters can't reach a rational decision, but this is not how it works. In democracy it is majority rules, there are going to be many people who still don't agree with the decision after its passed. This shows me that my opponent doesn't even understand how democracy works. My opponent also says that voters can vote wrong person. He his implying that it should be someone else who decides what is best for us. This is another reason, why dictatorship is terrible, I believe no one should run my life, except for me.(of course I still can't violate the law) You asks me if we really have freedom of speech, then why is Julian Assange in prison. This is another example showing that you don't know what your talking about. First off Julian Assange isn't in prison, he is in the Embassy of Ecuador in London. Secondly He isn't even wanted by the United States, he's wanted by Sweden charged for is hacking and sexual assault by Sweden. For someone who claims that he want the truth, your not really good at getting it. You say that the government won't control your life and that people can control there government through revolution, yet this is true, it isn't always the case. The fact that you says this shows me that you doesn't understand what a real dictatorship is, you states that "leader is afraid of the people, just the same as the people are afraid of the leader." Let's look at North Korea, a place that you says you would be alright if the leader was your dictator. The government in North Korea rules with an iron fist. The government has caused the starvation of thousands of its own people, they imprison many innocent people, because of out rages laws, like the three generations law(which states that anyone who commits a crime, the government has the right to put both there son and grandson in jail.), and now there's a law telling people, what kind of hair cut they are allowed to have. Life in North Korea is not good, yet why hasn't there been a revolution? The answer is simple, everyone in North Korea has been brainwashed. Starting from when they are little kids to when they are adults, they are told about how good the government is and that they need the government. Government tells them what they can and can't look up on the internet and what they can and can't listen too on the radio. The government keeps them isolated from the rest of the world, so communism is all they know. They don't know about democracy and capitalism because the government doesn't want then to know. The people of North Korea are slaves and they don't even know it. This is why the government would control your life in a dictatorship. You say that democracy is a lie, but it is dictatorship that is a lie. Even if you weren't brainwashed, what are you going to do to revolt against the government. Most likely you won't have any guns or weapons to help you. The government is going to be armed with thousands, maybe even millions of soldiers. You act like revolutions, is a simple thing. Were I live leaders can be controlled through elections. You say that the voting of a new leader, won't change anything, yet bad polices get changed all the time. You say that you wouldn't mind if Kim Kim Jong Un was your leader, as long as he doesn't rule the same way as he rules North Korea. In a dictatorship you don't get to choose how he rules. He is the law, he can do what ever he wants with no consequences. In a democracy if you do't like the way its ruled you can leave the country. Good look luck trying to leave a place like Cuba or North Korea. You seem to have a very false idea, that you would have freedom in a dictatorship. I will now begin my debate on round 4 My opponent asks me, if your rights are protected the same way as the people who are richer then you in capitalism? The answer to this is yes. Capitalism offers everyone the opportunity to become rich, you don't have to be born in a wealthy family to become successful. My opponent is probably going to disagree with this statement, so let me give you some examples. Gardner Rich & Co(Chris Gardner) Started out homeless WhatsApp(Jan Koum) Was once living on food stamps and welfare checks. Starbucks(Howard Schultz) Grew up in a housing for the poor Flex-N-Gate(Shahid Khan) Started out washing dishes for only $1.20 per hour Forever21(Do Won Chang) Started out as a janitor My opponent states "The president has no reason to violate the law because he can do whatever he wants just like in a dictatorship". Let look at Andrew Johnson who was impeached after violating the Tenure of Office Act. Bill Clinton was impeached on two charges, one of perjury and one of obstruction of justice. Richard Nixon resigned before he was impeached over the Watergate Scandal, named for the burglaries at the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel in Washington. These are some good examples of why the president is not above the law. You say that even dictators are not above the law and has too obey a set of parliaments, but this is rarely true. Most dictatorships do not have parliaments and the ones that do, end up getting rid. Lets look at Joseph Stalin again. Let me prepare an example. Hitler is responsible for about 11 million deaths due to Nazi camps. Stalin had around 20 million non combat deaths. Now does this really sound like he was following a parliament. I will also add that a lot of his deaths where caused by famine. This is another problem with a dictatorship. In most dictatorships it is left to the government to distribute things such as food. My opponent seems to idolize a figure known as Josip Broz Tito. I do agree with him that Josip Broz Tito is at the top of the very short list of good dictators, but his rule came with a very big coast. The big coast that led the federation into decline was the whole single party system, a system that Josip Broz Tito believed in. This single party system meant that it wasn't how good you were at your job that got you higher on the social ladder, but how loyal you where to the party. This made the whole system very ineffective. You says that its not easy to find a good leader, but not impossible. The odds of getting a good leader are greatly against you. An economic system that is completely depended the leader, isn't a good system. Most likely you will argue this by saying democracy is the same way, but this would be false. In many forms of democracy, there is a type of constitution(which states what the government can do any) and the separation of power. This means even if there is a bad leader elected, many of his policies can be over ruled. The power the leader has is also limited by the constitution. You seems to be very aggressive on his belief that the United States fakes terrorist attacks in order to go to war. I would love to see evidence on this, if you have any. In a number of video, audio, interview and printed statements, senior members of al-Qaeda have also asserted responsibility for organizing the September 11 attacks. Authorities in the United States and Britain also obtained electronic intercepts, including telephone conversations and bank transfers, which indicate that Mohammed Atef, a bin Laden deputy, was a main figure in the planning of the 9/11 attacks. You say that everything that leads you up to the belief that the U.S. fakes terrorist attacks is based on simple logic. Logic is based on evidence, evidence that not only has been collected by the U.S., but also by other governments and private journalists, media, and investigation groups, some of which don't even like the U.S. Of course non of this will convince you, so maybe we can take a psychological approach. They way you talk about the U.S. it is clear to me that you have developed a hate at the country. This emotional hate has made it so your whole argument is based around your own biased opinion and ignorance. You have simply decided to ignore facts and real logic. This part of the debate has driven a little bit off topic, so lets get back to the debate. My opponent wishes me to lay down an example that democracy is for real. For this example I will be using a country known as Singapore. Singapore has a very limited government, it is actually ranked second on the scale for global counties that have the most economic freedom. Singapore has a big zero tolerance police on political corruption. It is the people that control the government, yet there economy is doing great, and it continues to grow. Hong Kong(not to be confused with China, Hong Kong is classified as a world city independent from China) has very limited government, and studies have showed that there economy has been very slowly declining, since Chinese government is slowly taking it back.(http://www.heritage.org...) Another problem with a dictatorship, is it often favors systems like collectivism over capitalism. Let me explain to you why this is bad. In collectivism the government gets involved in the free market, this gets ride of things like competition. Competition is when businesses compete to be the best. This means that business must create ways to make there product better then there competitors, by figuring out cheaper ways to produce there goods which would lower the price and ways too make there goods more efficient. This is how innovation is made, the creation of doing something better. When the government controls the free market you loose these things. Another idea that most dictatorships favor, is the idea that there is a fixed amount of wealth. Therefore the wealth should be distributed equally among the people. This sounds like a great idea, but in reality it isn't. There isn't a fixed amount of wealth, wealth is created. I don't thing the government should be allowed to tell you how much money your aloud to make, as long as you make it legally.