Debate #1

Overall, I believe that the debate went pretty good for the first one. I was on the pro side of supra nationalism so obviously I thought that we had the better argument and presented it better. The reason I say that was it seemed that the con side was contradicting themselves in some of the things they said. Some points that they would make would be points providing evidence for our side. Our main points were: less border control/ controversy, small economies working together, security of smaller countries, and allocating resources. I liked the way the debate was set up, but I wish there was more room for debate instead of just saying  your point then have the other side say something about it, then back to you. If there was room for actual back and forth without it having to be so organized, I feel that it may of been a little better. I do understand that it has to be organized that way or else it may get out of hand. The con side had a few good points, such as when they talked about if one country had a resource then why should they have to share it if they are in this supranationalism type of system. I believe that we made a good point back to that when we said that some our going to gain and some are going to loose, but that is just part of. The fact that they made statements about people loosing their cultural identity did not help the much. One of the girls used examples from different tribes and saying that one got tvs and it just made things go downhill. Well if they did not want these new technologies, they wouldn't have got them. I beleive that if you go to one of the tribes they are talking about and let them live in an American home for a month, they would say there is no way I am going back to where I came from. They would probably tell there relatives to come over and live with them. That's one of the points that I think the con side failed on. Overall, the debate went well and I enjoyed participating in it.