Politics in Humanitarian Aid
Negative Case
Resolved: Placing political conditions on humanitarian aid to foreign countries is unjust.
Core Value: Consequentialism
Value Criterion: Preserving Global Stability
Humanitarian aid to foreign countries has been product to many consequences, and it is with this that I must stand in firm negation to the resolved. As such, I present my core value of consequentialism, defined as the doctrine that morality is to be determined only by the consequences of an action. I present my value criterion of preserving global prosperity. In order to preserve global prosperity, political conditions must be placed on humanitarian aid to foreign countries in order to reduce global consequences of humanitarian aid. It should be noted that my points are of a current timeframe and the current effects of humanitarian aid. I also reserve the right to state any definitions or evidence at any time, if my opponent seeks information, just ask.
Contention One: Humanitarian Aid is Subject to Root Issues
The continent of Africa and nearly all of its countries have become dependent on European humanitarian aid. This means that the countries of Africa have no political check and thus must rely on the hegemony of European nations. As the ability of these African countries, for example, to be free from self-dependence forms large inequalities of power, it leaves the door open for modern humanitarian aid to see its consequences become much more severe, especially opening up the door for colonialist actions by donor antagonists or violent actions such as those from rebels against French hegemony in Mali. Placing political restrictions on humanitarian aid to foreign countries creates the political check between the recipient countries of aid, such as those in Africa, alleviating the consequences and even the need for strong and prevalent humanitarian aid, even increasing the effectiveness of aid.
Contention Two: Colonialism is Spawned from Humanitarian Aid
The giving
Resolved: Placing political conditions on humanitarian aid to foreign countries is unjust.
Core Value: Consequentialism
Value Criterion: Preserving Global Stability
Humanitarian aid to foreign countries has been product to many consequences, and it is with this that I must stand in firm negation to the resolved. As such, I present my core value of consequentialism, defined as the doctrine that morality is to be determined only by the consequences of an action. I present my value criterion of preserving global prosperity. In order to preserve global prosperity, political conditions must be placed on humanitarian aid to foreign countries in order to reduce global consequences of humanitarian aid. It should be noted that my points are of a current timeframe and the current effects of humanitarian aid. I also reserve the right to state any definitions or evidence at any time, if my opponent seeks information, just ask.
Contention One: Humanitarian Aid is Subject to Root Issues
The continent of Africa and nearly all of its countries have become dependent on European humanitarian aid. This means that the countries of Africa have no political check and thus must rely on the hegemony of European nations. As the ability of these African countries, for example, to be free from self-dependence forms large inequalities of power, it leaves the door open for modern humanitarian aid to see its consequences become much more severe, especially opening up the door for colonialist actions by donor antagonists or violent actions such as those from rebels against French hegemony in Mali. Placing political restrictions on humanitarian aid to foreign countries creates the political check between the recipient countries of aid, such as those in Africa, alleviating the consequences and even the need for strong and prevalent humanitarian aid, even increasing the effectiveness of aid.
Contention Two: Colonialism is Spawned from Humanitarian Aid
The giving