The US Federal Goveronment should abolish 99%of its functions

No government vs. Republican government: My opponent claims that a government wouldn’t govern us any differently because it is composed of more humans; she fails to address how under a constitutional republic humans would keep other humans in check, and as long as these forces are separate they balance out. Her assumption would be true if we were being governed by 1 person, but this is not the case. The case for limited government: Theoretically speaking the government could just grant themselves these powers back, but the job of a democracy is never over, we were never intended to stay in one place, so after we eliminate these unconstitutional powers we will learn from our mistakes and fix them. We can start by making anyone who wants to grant new powers to the government ineligible for any Federal Office. We can also specify that the government only has these 2 functions and cannot be granted any more powers. Asking why we should work with limitations on the government because the government broke hem last time is like asking why we should study math because last time you tested you failed. A real solution is to learn what went wrong and fix it. The case for centralization: There is something about centralization which provides an advantage, when the Ottomans invaded Constantinople they won, despite the fact that they were besieging a city with more men than them, which you never do according to the Art of War, because the Ottoman Soldiers were far more disciplined and organized than the Romans. My opponent also makes a case about the Semai, who were destroyed by the British because they couldn’t defend themselves. This reminds me of the George Harrison Assassination, you see Harrison was assaulted by an assassin, so he started chanting “Harri Krishna” hippie-love-peace songs, which didn’t do anything but almost get him killed. He got saved because his wife picked up an iron rod and started beating the assassin with it. So obviously total pacifism doesn’t work, Ecclesiastes 3:18: “To everything there is a season, A time for every purpose under heaven, A time to be born, And a time to die; A time to plant, And a time to pluck what is planted; A time to kill, And a time to heal; A time to break down, And a time to build up; A time to weep, And a time to laugh; A time to mourn, And a time to dance; A time to cast away stones. And a time to gather stones; A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing. A time to gain, And a time to lose, A time to keep, And a time to throw away; A time to tear, And a time to sew; A time to keep silence, And a time to speak; A time to love, And a time to hate; A time of war, And a time of peace.” The case for capitalism: Capitalism has lifted millions out of poverty and has proven to increase people’s quality of living by massive margins, so unless my opponent thinks that people should be poor, starving, and having a low quality of living, she should be a proponent of capitalism. Obcourse society naturally develops to become better, but thus far over 10,000 years of recorded history we are yet to see a better system arise, so I doubt one will develop. http://www.economist.com... http://www.cnsnews.com...