China should become a Federal Republic.

I will conclude in round 4, as per rules, but first I want to address a couple concerns and likely confusions my opponent may be having. My issue with my opponent's proposal is not that he is proposing Federalism. I have nothing against Federalism and I find it to be an excellent system of government. My problem is with the fact that my obviously politically well-informed opponent has become enamored with Federalism to the point that he sees it as a target or goal for a country that culturally, historically, and logically is completely incompatible with my opponent's proposed version of Federalism. Government is not a one-size-fits-all sock from the discount bin at the pharmacy. Government needs to be tailored to the country based on specific things. I will continue to oppose my opponent's attempts to inflict a McGovernment on the Chinese because he has *not adequately proven* that it is what China needs. None of his arguments have survived my first round rebuttals. When I said "for the purpose of the debate" , I meant that any explanation of federalism should be explained through the representative system, not that China should adopt the US system to the number. There is more then one form of federalism, and I did not want me and my opponent to be arguing a million different federal idealism's. So, for simplicity, I narrowed what may be explained in the debate to the representative system, as a rule, and not as a resolution. While I don't see the harm in duel interactions between the state government and centralized federal government, I am not oblivious to quite obvious differences. As for federalism, it is a one sock fits all kind of deal, and has been proved to work in 25 countries, with distinct ethnic, cultural, and political differences. Sorry for any confusion this may of caused my opponent, and I hope that clarified things for him and the audience. . http://www.youtube.com...CONCLUSION- My opponent has brought up several arguments regarding "republic" status, which is against the premise I set for the debate. - My opponent was more enamored with a anti US federal viewpoint, then focusing on the actual resolution. "China should become a Federal Republic"- My opponent has brought many of my sources in question, while he himself has used Wikipedia. Wiki articles are sometimes edited over a hundred times a day. - My opponent has continued to use the "mcgovernment" attack, even after I politely asked him to stop. Direct contradiction to his acceptance statement, that beliefs and values could be freely spoken and treated with respect. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Conclusion 2 - China is in a state of unrest, and my opponents proposed "change nothing" stance does little to help a nation with some of the highest political instability in the world. - Federalism would provide more rights to ethnic and cultural minority's, while weakening the influence and power of the centralized government. - Centralism is an absurd philosophy for 1.5 billion people, and puts to much power in the hands of so few, over so many. - China is not just "one culture", and currently, many peoples beliefs and customs get overlooked. - Dividing China into states, might alleviate seccession movements, as it gives unstable regions more rights to self determination, and self governance. - Chinese nationals do not care just about money and food, and many want more civil rights. To conclude, Chinas current administaration system is not working, and currently suffers from some of the worst unrest in the world. Doing nothing will not help anybody. Even though hardships may follow, I believe, through some simple reforms, China will pave the way for a better life for its citizens. Thank you for debating me Kleptin, and I appreciate your effort. Good luck to you in future debates.