Why Debates are Awesome

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, we are tonight's entertainment!

Just kidding.

So much for entertainment (and the Joker).

But really, that's how it feels whenever I see a TV turned on. The anchors are always really happy, jolly, and they never go over about a minute. And because their coverage is so diverse, they give equal time to what Katy Perry did yesterday and the serial-killer/terrorist who has murdered thousands in a single week.

Really, this is statistical. The ratio of actual facts to commentary has gone substantially down, meaning that actual facts are covered less and less often, with ridiculous and unprovable assertions being the norm.

But that's the problem: it entertains, and that's what I'll cover in another blog post.

But for now, what do we do instead?

To put it simply, we debate.

It's that easy: you find a friend, agree to a resolution, prepare for as long as you feel necessary, and then jump right in. My brother and I do this, and it's super fun. You should try it. Seriously.

It makes you more knowledgeable to the everyday occurrences, and it makes you think.

Try it. Try it just once, and then try it again even if you don't like it. If you still don't like it, then find something you and your friend both care about (preferrably with different opinions) and have a formal debate.

If you can't think of any resolutions, here are some suggestions.

• National Security ought to be valued above Freedom of the Press
• That federal election law should be significantly reformed in the United States
• The United States Armed Forces need substantial change
• The Education system of the US needs significant change
• Restriction of civil liberties for National Security is justified
• The United States needs to stop intervening in foreign wars

That should be enough to get you through.

Seriously, though. Try this. Try this with anyone. Do a formal debate, an informal debate, an argument, anything. Something that will make you think.

That's probably the biggest problem with the general population: they don't like to think. It's hard work. It's time for you (and everyone) to wreck that curve.

Thank you for your time.

Left and Right in the Political Spectrum

Left, Center, Right. What do those things have in common? Well, there are too many similarities, so I'll just tell you about them: they are all words in the title of a game. But you know what else?

It's also part of a political labeling system that everybody uses.

I'll go over it briefly. There's not much complicated about it. (Just kidding, it's one of the most nuanced parts of politics ever.)

Let's start with the left, or liberalism. According to the world's smallest political quiz, "Liberals usually embrace freedom of choice in personal matters, but tend to support significant government control of the economy. They generally support a government-funded 'safety net' to help the disadvantaged, and advocate strict regulation of business."

For some odd reason, liberals tend to dislike civil liberties. I have no idea why. Either that or they keep mislabeling themselves.

Either way, liberals tend to dislike capitalism, or economic freedom, and prefer personal freedom. Not all liberals are like this, however. If you were to get into an argument with a liberal, ask him his position. It gets confusing.

And then there's the right. I'm skipping the center for now. But the right is conservative. And again, according to the world's smallest political quiz, "They oppose excessive government control of business, while endorsing government action to defend morality and the traditional family structure. Conservatives usually support a strong military, oppose bureaucracy and high taxes, favor a free-market economy, and endorse strong law enforcement."

Okay, I know there are some conservatives who don't fit into this category exactly, but this is pretty much true. Conservatives favor economic freedom, but not so much social freedom.

Let's take a quick review: liberals like personal freedom, and dislike economic freedom. Conservatives like economic freedom, but dislike personal freedom.

Again, not all liberals or conservatives fit into this mold, but that's the standard for each.

Now we take a look at the middle, the most interesting.

Let's start off with centrism. It's a simple concept; centrists are undecided. They like to be open minded, and like "practical" solutions to problems.

Now things get interesting, with the statist. Statists basically say "yes, you're both right" to liberals and conservatives. They like big government. They love it, they thrive on it, because they think it works. Here's what the world's smallest political quiz has to say about them (a lot):

Statists want government to have a great deal of power over the economy and individual behavior. They frequently doubt whether economic liberty and individual freedom are practical options in today's world. Statists tend to distrust the free market, support high taxes and centralized planning of the economy, oppose diverse lifestyles, and question the importance of civil liberties.

That's what statists are. All civil liberties gone. Basically, they're fascist; the government must do what it deems necessary.

We get to libertarianism. They agree with statists, but to an extent. This doesn't make sense until we look at the similarities.

According to the world's smallest political quiz, "Libertarians support maximum liberty in both personal and economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence."

That's it. How is that like a statist? It's the polar opposite, true. But look at it this way: statists believe that both liberals and conservatives are correct. Libertarians believe that both liberals and conservatives are correct. They just disagree on what's correct about each.

Now the last bit: a recap, and finally, what does each philosophy mean for you personally?

First, we have liberalism. Economic freedom, no. Personal freedom, yes.

Second, we have conservativism. Economic freedom, yes. Personal freedom, no.

Third, we have centrism. Economic and personal freedom, "open-minded."

Fourth, we have statism. Economic and personal freedom, absolutely not. Government should be huge.

Fifth, we have libertarianism. Economic and personal freedom, absolutely. Government should be small.

What does each one mean? Well, all except for centrism and libertarianism, they are all statist, really. They all think government should be in control over your life. They just disagree on the details.

The left is more dangerous to your wallet, because it advocates high taxes. The right is more dangerous to your privacy, because it advocates governments have to know personal matters if they want to enforce them.

The statist is more dangerous to everything. They are fascist, end of discussion. We can see how well that worked out in WWII.

Finally, we are left with the two most interesting, centrism and libertarianism.

Centrism is an odd category. It almost seems that centrists have no philosophy, nothing which they can base any opinions on. If it seems like it will work, they do it. Which is essentially the same thing as statism, only much, much more dangerous, because it's harder to recognize. And because it can justify any power it wants, it can slowly deteriorate into fascism or anything it wants. A bad choice of politics.

That was really long, but finally we get to libertarianism. What does it mean for you?

There are lots of sub-views, but everyone who is a libertarian agrees that we all need to distrust the government. As Thomas Paine said in Common Sense, government is, at its best form, a necessary evil. We have to give it as little power as possible, while still maintaining enough power so that it can do its job. The libertarian knows that there are laws higher than governments, or no political system has any right to say it is the correct system. The libertarian is the best friend of both your wallet and your civil liberties.

I'll let you decide which is the correct system.

Left, Center, Right.

How to Start a Conversation

Imagine this scenario: you are at a party, and you want to talk to someone. Anyone. But you have no idea how to start a conversation. What would you do?

Well, I just gave you a hint. You would give them a scenario.

What does that mean? Basically, you would walk up to someone, ask for their attention, and give them a hypothetical situation they might find themselves in. And then see what their answer is.

Now, it takes a little more than just that. You'll want to have it at least worked out before hand what the scenario will be. But it has worked for me, time and time again, without me even realizing it, until recently.

To make sure conversation really does ensue, you should have some hidden meaning behind it all. For example, I like to use this one.

Imagine you have a gem worth a billion dollars. You want to put it in a bank to keep it safe and to gain interest, so you look at your options. When you look up banks online, you find a high-profile bank, just waiting for you to click on the link. You do, and there is a virtual tour of a bank, to your surprise. You check it out.

On the outside of the bank, you see a sign that says "This is a no robbery zone. All violators will be prosecuted." Already a warning about robbery? Fantastic!

However, as the tour heads inside, you notice that there are no security cameras, and as you make your way to the vault, you find that there is no lock on the vault door, and each safety deposit box is labeled with what's inside. And there are no cameras in the vault, either.

Feeling sure the bank must have missed something, you read the "About This Bank" page. You learn that the bank only occasionally has security guards about once a year, and there really are no security cameras, and there is no lock on the vault door, no locks on the safety deposit boxes, and all the boxes are labeled with what's inside.

Oh, and by the way, this bank isn't insured, and if your gem was stolen, the bank would not pay you.

Would you put your gem in that bank?

It shouldn't take you any more than two seconds. No, of course not! You would look for other options.

Sadly, however, this is the exact state of our public school system. And what's worse is that human life is irreplaceable, unlike the billion dollar gem you had.

And that usually gets me into a conversation about gun control, even with the strictest introverts.

This strategy works. Find a topic you care about, and turn it into a hypothetical scenario. It's a lot of fun, and it's sure to either get you in a debate (be prepared) or a conversation. 

Or, if they really don't care about the world around them (who cares about being informed, anyways?), they will reject you. But I've never gotten that. I can tell when someone would never care. Just walk up to people who you think would care.

Try it. It works. It's fun. Did I mention it works?

Thank you for your time.