Debate Digest: Teacher-student friendships on Facebook, Law school, Balanced budget amendment, US debt ceiling deal.

Debate: Converting to a global peace economy

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)

Jump to: navigation, search

Revision as of 22:00, 28 February 2011

Would we be more secure if military expenditures were replaced with better management of our planet's resources?

Background and Context of Debate:

Global military expenditures in 2009 exceeded $1.5 trillion.[1] Better management could include and not be limited to: supporting farmers in converting from industrial-chemical agriculture to organic farming; developing clean, renewable forms of energy; extending Internet access to all citizens of planet Earth. This debate takes place in the context of the human population growing to about 7 billion people by April of 2012, which is also when close to 3.5 billion people will have access to the Internet.[2] Half of a population is frequently considered to be a quorum. It is unlikely that the United States, which accounted for $661 billion in military expenditures in 2009 by itself,[3] would approve a plan for demilitarization unilaterally. A global referendum could take place in April of 2012 that would demonstrate that it is the will of the people worldwide to convert to a peace economy. Some of the questions to be considered in this debate are: Are there better measures of national security than military might? Would transitioning from industrial-chemical agriculture to organic farming improve our security? Would developing clean, renewable energy supplies improve our security? Such questions and the pro and con arguments are presented below.

Are there better measures of national security than military might?
Pro Food insecurty is a main reason for popular uprisings taking place in a number of countries in early 2011. The global food price index rose to a record high in January of 2011.[4] Lester Brown, of the Earth Policy Institute, pointed in February of 2011 that the world is one poor harvest away from chaos. [5] Military forces, as in Libya in early 2011, are sometimes used to suppress popular uprisings. Military forces are poor protection against terrorists. The United States military offers poor protection if China, for example, would get better value by buying the United States than by invading it.	Con Click "edit" and write arguments here
Would transitioning from industrial-chemical agriculture to organic farming improve our security?
Pro Click "edit" and write arguments here	Con Click "edit" and write arguments here
Would developing clean, renewable energy supplies improve our security?
Pro Click "edit" and write arguments here	Con Click "edit" and write arguments here
Would extending Internet access to the entire human population improve our security?
Pro	Con
References:
Related pages on Debatepedia:
External links and resources:

Personal tools

Views

Search

Navigation

getting started

Other resources

Toolbox

Debate: Converting to a global peace economy

From Debatepedia

Revision as of 22:00, 28 February 2011

Would we be more secure if military expenditures were replaced with better management of our planet's resources?

Contents

Background and Context of Debate:

Are there better measures of national security than military might?

Pro

Con

Would transitioning from industrial-chemical agriculture to organic farming improve our security?

Pro

Con

Would developing clean, renewable energy supplies improve our security?

Pro

Con

Would extending Internet access to the entire human population improve our security?

Pro

Con

References:

Related pages on Debatepedia:

External links and resources: