Resolved: Countries ought to prohibit the production of nuclear power

Don’t settle for being a good debater. You can be great. Click here to visit my Debate Academy to get personal coaching, purchase briefs, and more.

Resolved: Countries ought to prohibit the production of nuclear power

I can’t even begin to describe how terrible this topic is. If this is any indication of what’s going to be upcoming, then it’s going to be a terribly rough year. We have to debate it, though, so let’s see what we can come up with.

Definitions

Countries – It’s important to note that this refers to a country’s government. A “country” has no ability to prohibit or permit anything. Rather, its government does. Don’t get bogged down in what this term might mean. It’s pretty obvious.

Ought to prohibit – This is the crux of the case. The resolution is asking a question of what a country should, so your framework must answer the question of how we determine what a country should do, or more specifically, how we determine what a country should prohibit.

Nuclear power – This includes nuclear power in all its forms. The resolution does not specify just nuclear weapons, so if you’re advocating for a prohibition, you’re advocating for a complete prohibition. The neg, however, does not need to fully negate all forms of nuclear power. As long as some nuclear power is permissible, the negative is fulfilling it’s burden of negation.

Case Positions

Affirmative

1. Security – Any government’s first obligation is to the security of its people. Nuclear power has time and time again shown to be destructive, whether used in weaponry or as civilian energy. It does not provide enough utility to offset the security concerns either. Because it harms security, nuclear power ought to be prohibited.

2. Economics – Particularly when it comes to energy productions, government must do what is in the economic interests of the nation. Nuclear energy has proven to be a poor investment. The up front construction costs, along with other costs, are not offset by the energy production provided, especially considering that nuclear reactors do, at some point, need to be decommissioned.

Negative

1. Progress – A government’s obligation is to promote the progress of its society. The best way to achieve progress is through moral conflict, and the promotion of nuclear energy causes just that. Allowing nuclear power production to continue will spur research into alternative and sustainable energy sources by forcing people for confront harsh realities about society’s energy needs and the dangers associated with meeting those needs through the use of nuclear power.

2. Security and MAD – In a nuclear world, the only way to truly ensure security is through mutually assured destruction. As long as everyone has nuclear weapons, nobody will use them because all governments are self interested parties concerned with their own preservation. Therefore, to be the most secure, governments ought to encourage the development of nuclear weapons rather than prohibit nuclear power.

I hope that helps. Good luck!

Advertisements

Leave a question or comment here

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s