The
United
States
Constitution
has
been
amended
four
times
to
extend
the
rights
of
voters.
Many
choose
not
to
exercise
their
right
to
vote
because
of
the
jury
duty
obligation.
A
registered
voter
is
required
to
do
jury
duty
when
called.
Voters
try
to
evade
jury
duty
as
it
disrupts
their
schedule,
making
voting
a
hassle.
Additionally,
American
voters
do
not
vote
directly
for
the
presidential
candidate
of
their
choice.
Instead,
registered
voters
elect
the
Electoral
College
to
elect
the
president,
a
process
which
discourages
Americans
to
participate
in
voting
when
the
popular
vote
does
not
correlate
to
the
Electoral
College
results.
With
the
resolution
to
make
voting
mandatory
to
all
qualified
citizens,
more
Americans
are
represented
in
the
results
of
the
popular
vote
and
not
just
the
Americans
who
exercise
their
right
to
vote
at
every
election.
In
doing
so,
supporters
for
a
compulsory
voting
state
that
the
representation
of
Americans
will
be
further
coordinated
with
the
Electoral
College,
eliminating
the
chance
of
electing
an
unpopular
president
and
actually
increasing
the
interest
of
Americans
in
voting.
Nevertheless,
critics
of
the
resolution
argue
that
because
Americans
believe
that
voting
is
a
right
more
than
a
duty,
an
enactment
of
a
compulsory
voting
system
would
take
away
an
essential
freedom
of
a
citizen.
Many
Americans
are
apathetic
to
exercising
their
right
to
vote,
as
they
may
not
be
interested
in
politics.
Their
lack
of
voting
further
acknowledges
the
low
participation-‐voting
rate
and
shows
contentment
with
the
political
establishment.
As
science
progresses
and
genetic
modifications
become
increasingly
commonplace,
the
ownership
of
the
modified
genes
has
become
a
highly
contentious
issue.
The
modifications
are
original,
but
the
genetic
material
that
they
are
based
off
of
is
not,
and
there
is
the
additional
ethical
issue
of
patenting
the
genetic
material
of
people.
Supporters
of
a
ban
on
patenting
genetic
material
point
out
that
the
genetic
material
already
exists
and
that
the
innovators
have
done
nothing
but
rearrange
that
material.
They
also
believe
that
there
is
a
moral
hazard
in
patenting
and
profiting
from
the
genes
of
people.
Opponents
of
such
a
ban
argue
that
there
would
be
no
incentive
for
progress
if
innovators
were
not
allowed
the
rights
to
their
work,
and
that
the
potential
benefits
to
humanity
in
advances
such
as
cures
for
diseases
outweigh
the
potential
harms.
Opening
Session
5:30-6:00
California
Ballroom
Jessica
Du,
Governor
Welcome
to
Northern
California’s
2010
Spring
State
Convention,
“Life
and
Liberty:
Reimagining
the
American
Dream”
Prepare
to
embark
on
a
fun-‐filled
weekend
of
thought-‐provoking
debates,
entertaining
thought
talks,
and
other
fabulous
activities.
Also
you
will
have
the
exciting
opportunity
to
elect
your
new
leaders
for
next
year.
Keynote
Address:
6:00-6:45
California
Ballroom
Williamson
M
Evers
is
a
fellow
at
the
Hoover
Institute
at
Stanford,
California.
In
the
early
70s
and
80s,
Evers
was
a
member
of
the
Libertarian
party.
He
even
ran
as
the
Libertarian
Party
candidate
for
Congress
for
the
12th
District
of
California
in
1980.
Now,
focusing
on
educational
policy,
Mr.
Evers
is
a
fellow
at
the
Hoover
Institute
with
an
expertise
in
school
finance,
testing,
and
accountability
policy.
He
served
as
the
Assistant
Secretary
of
Education
for
Planning,
Evaluation,
and
Policy
Development
from
2007-‐2009.
Evers
also
worked
in
Iraq
as
a
senior
advisor
for
Education
from
July
to
December
2003.
Having
written
opinions
in
the
New
York
Times,
Wall
Street
Journal,
and
Christian
Science
Monitor,
Williamson
M.
Evers
is
trusted
name
in
the
world
of
educational
policy
development
Dinner
6:45-
8:00
Time
to
take
a
break
and
get
something
to
eat!
Mingle
with
your
fellow
convention-‐goers
while
you’re
standing
in
line
at
one
of
the
nearby
food
locations.
Check
your
map,
located
at
the
back
of
this
booklet,
for
ideas.
Make
sure
to
come
back
on
time
for
the
second
block
–
you
don’t
want
to
miss
anything
exciting!
State
Nominations
8:10-9:00
California
Ballroom
Teacher
Advisor
Meeting-Mandatory
8:15-8:45
Santa
Barbara
Regional/Chapter
Caucus/Key
&
Luggage
Distribution
9:05-
9:30
Chapters
will
not
receive
keys
until
they
have
submitted
a
completed
2009-2010
tax
form.
GCR
Salon
3
GGR
Salon
6
EBR
Salon
4
CVR
Salon
5
Night
Activities
Salon
3
Candidates’
Meeting
9:30-10:00
Want
to
get
more
involved
in
JSA?
Interested
in
campaigning?
Running
for
office
is
an
exciting
way
to
meet
people
and
take
on
a
little
more
responsibility!
If
you
have
not
already
declared,
but
are
interested
in
running,
come
to
this
meeting
to
learn
more
about
each
position
and
the
rules
for
elections!
All
candidates
for
state
or
regional
office
MUST
attend
this
important
meeting.
Salon
B
The
Junior
State
of
America
Spring
Concert
10:00-12:00
In
support
of
spreading
awareness
for
our
inspiring
activism
cause,
Northern
California
Junior
State
of
America
proudly
presents
Hot
Challenge
and
David
Elijah
Rose.
Deemed
as
one
of
Aaron
Axelson’s,
music
director
of
Live
105,
top
local
bands,
Hot
Challenge
brings
electropop
to
a
new
level
with
their
catchy
beats
and
songs
that
make
their
fans
just
want
to
dance.
David
Elijah
Rose’s
experimental
electronic
solo
project
is
projected
beautifully
in
his
recently
released
album,
μετά.
This
is
an
event
you
don’t
want
to
miss!
Newport
Beach
Game
Room
10:00-11:30
Socialize,
take
a
break
from
other
the
dance,
or
become
the
poker
king/queen!
Don't
forget
to
stop
by
this
JSA
classic
for
board
games,
cards,
and
more.
Ponderosa
Impromptu
Speech
Contest
10:00-11:30
Want
to
brush
up
on
your
spontaneous
argumentation
skills?
Love
to
hear
the
sound
of
your
own
voice?
Try
your
luck
at
the
impromptu
speech
contest!
Topics
will
range
from
serious
to
silly,
so
stop
by
to
watch
even
if
you
don't
want
to
speak!
Curfew
12:15
No
one
is
allowed
outside
of
his
or
her
rooms
past
12:15
am.
Saturday,
April
24,
2009
Breakfast
8:15-9:15
Regional
Nominations
9:20-9:45
GCR
Salon
3
GGR
Salon
6
EBR
Salon
4
CVR
Salon
7
Block
2
9:50-10:50
Salon
3
Assembly
All
Chapter
Presidents
are
required
to
attend
Assembly.
Salon
4
Historical
Resolved:
that
the
US
should
use
a
land
invasion
instead
of
a
nuclear
bomb
against
the
Japanese
in
World
War
II.
Pro:
Jacob
Angel,
San
Mateo
High
Con:
Kevin
Koh,
Northgate
High
School
Moderator:
Theresa
Gupta,
American
High
School
To
this
day,
the
nuclear
bombings
of
Hiroshima
and
Nagasaki
remain
the
only
offensive
use
of
a
nuclear
weapon
by
any
nation,
and
one
of
the
most
controversial
military
strategies
in
the
history
of
the
United
States.
Travel
back
in
time
with
us,
and
hear
why
some
believe
an
alternative
to
the
nuclear
bombs
should
have
been
used.
Critics
of
the
nuclear
strategy
contend
that
the
Japanese
were
going
to
surrender
soon,
that
U.S.
surrender
statutes
were
too
high,
and
that
the
nuclear
bombings
could
have
taken
place
in
less
populous
areas
so
that
non-‐violent
Japanese
lives
would
be
spared.
Defenders
of
the
bombings
stand
by
the
facts
that
the
United
States
did
give
a
fair
warning
when
it
asked
for
unconditional
surrender
and
that
the
Japanese
were
determined
to
fight
“to
the
death”,
and
also
believe
that
a
land
invasion
on
mainland
Japan
would
result
in
heavy
losses
to
American
soldiers.
Salon
6
Resolved:
that
Supreme
Court
Justices
serve
10
year
appointed
terms
instead
of
lifetime
terms.
Pro:
Michael
Endick,
Northgate
High
School
Con:
Indranil
Bora,
Lynbrook
High
School
Moderator:
Connor
Reed,
Alameda
High
Supreme
Court
Justice
John
Paul
Stevens’
recent
decision
to
retire
this
summer
has
revitalized
a
debate
as
old
as
the
Court
itself
–
whether
Justices
ought
to
serve
for
life,
as
they
do
now,
or
have
their
appointments
limited
to
a
set
term.
Proponents
of
this
resolution
believe
that
term
limits
are
necessary
to
ensure
that
the
bench
is
filled
with
Justices
with
modern
perspectives
on
the
Constitution,
and
that
life
terms
wrongly
allow
presidents
to
influence
judicial
decisions
for
decades
by
electing
a
judge
with
political
ideals
similar
to
their
own.
Opponents
of
the
resolution
argue
that
life
terms
allow
the
judges
to
be
apolitical
in
their
decisions,
as
they
would
not
have
to
vote
to
please
the
current
president
or
risk
losing
their
appointments,
and
that
consistency
of
membership
is
key
to
stability
and
effectiveness
in
the
Supreme
Court’s
decision
making.
Salon
A
Teacher/Advisor
Tricks
of
the
Trade
Led
By:
Daniel
Hudkins,
The
Harker
School
Jasmin
Gerer,
Alternative
Family
Education
Susan
Roughgarden,
Mercy
High
School
Margaret
Lane,
Castilleja
School
New
to
JSA?
An
old
pro?
This
session
is
a
time
to
share
and
learn
what
Teacher
Advisors
do
and
have
done
to
make
JSA
activities
and
meetings
exciting,
as
well
as
making
going
to
and
being
at
conventions
more
manageable
and
engaging.
Salon
B
Workshop:
Debate
101-
A
Focus
on
Subsequent
Speeches
Led
By:
Adam
Berman,
Director
of
Debate
Want
to
win
more
gavels?
Want
to
increase
your
confidence
and
ability
to
speak
extemporaneously?
Come
to
this
session
as
we
dive
into
what
makes
a
great
subsequent
speech!
Salon
C
Workshop:
How
to
Moderate
Led
By:
Martina
Lim,
Moderator
Extraordinaire
Come
to
the
moderating
session
to
learn
how
to
moderate
or
increase
your
skill.
Control
of
the
room
is
important
and
we
want
you
to
learn
the
skills
necessary
to
be
able
to
moderate
any
size
debate
or
meeting.
Salon
D
Thought
Talk:
Is
the
18
month
plan
for
Afghanistan
the
right
policy?
Moderator:
Micaela
Cirimeli,
Northgate
High
Obama’s
recently
announced
Afghanistan
policy
features
both
a
troop
surge
and
an
incremental
troop
withdraws
after
an
18-‐month
period.
Proponents
of
this
plan
argue
that
Obama’s
policy
not
only
helps
accomplish
the
United
State’s
military
goals,
but
also
prevents
any
possibility
of
becoming
entangled
in
an
endless
quagmire.
They
believe
that
both
a
troop
surge
and
time
table
are
necessary
for
the
long
term
stabilization
of
Afghanistan.
A
vocal
opposition
presses
two
chief
criticisms:
some
believe
that
the
troop
levels
called
for
are
either
too
high
or
too
low;
others
fear
that
announcing
the
withdraw
endangers
military
strategy
and
American
success.
Salon
7
State
Candidate’s
Forum
State
elections
are
just
hours
away,
and
all
the
candidates
for
Governor,
Lieutenant
Governor,
and
Speaker
of
the
Assembly
want
your
vote.
Come
to
the
Candidate
Forum
to
hear
them
explain
their
platforms
one
last
time
and
to
ask
any
questions
that
you
may
have
for
the
candidates
before
the
ballots
are
cast.
The
forum
provides
a
great
opportunity
to
become
a
more
informed
voter.
After
all,
the
future
of
Nor
Cal
JSA
rests
in
your
hands.
Ponderosa
Activism
Simulation:
Unfair
Labor
and
Human
Trafficking
in
American
Agriculture
This
hands-‐on
simulation
intends
to
uncover
the
exploitative
nature
of
the
American
agricultural
industry,
and
demonstrate
how
trafficking
is
one
of
many
of
the
unfair
labor
practices
employed
by
the
industry.
Although
the
topic
of
this
simulation
is
serious,
the
simulation
itself
is
fun
for
participants
and
candy
is
involved!
Block
3
11:00-12:00
Salon
3
Assembly
All
Chapter
Presidents
are
required
to
attend
Assembly.
Salon
4
Resolved:
that
US
government’s
censorship
of
images
of
war
in
the
news
violates
the
1st
amendment
of
the
Constitution.
Pro:
Subhashree
Rengarajan,
Foothill
High
School
Con:
Marie
Rice,
Bishop
O’Dowd
Moderator:
Nick
Wallace,
Alternative
Family
Education
Recently,
T-‐shirt
makers
and
photojournalists
alike
have
been
chastised
for
using
information
and
pictures
associated
with
dead
soldiers.
Photos
of
dead
soldiers
have
been
shared
and
then
retracted
for
a
number
of
reasons.
Veteran
parents
claim
that
the
use
of
photos
of
their
children
is
offensive
and
should
be
protected
by
libel
laws,
and
army
officials
assert
that
the
sharing
of
these
photos
violates
national
security.
Defenders
say
that
these
pictures
are
clearly
protected
by
the
1st
amendment,
and
that
the
reasoning
that
the
pictures
endanger
national
security
is
faulty.
Additionally,
they
claim
that
parents
of
dead
soldiers
cannot
control
who
uses
pictures
of
the
soldiers
in
question.
Salon
5
Resolved:
that
the
US
authorize
air-strikes
on
Iran's
nuclear
facilities
if
Iran
does
not
halt
production
of
uranium.
Pro:
Govinda
Dasu,
The
Harker
School
Con:
Alex
Lee,
Lynbrook
High
School
Moderator:
Aaron
Alokozai,
Castro
Valley
High
School
Recently,
Iran
has
declared
itself
a
“nuclear
state.”
It
currently
possesses
the
ability
to
enrich
uranium
to
levels
past
20%,
and
many
believe
that
it
can
therefore
create
nuclear
weapons
using
existing
plants.
President
Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad
has
announced
that
Iran
will
continue
to
enrich
uranium
for
use
in
Iranian
hospitals,
as
part
of
radioisotope
treatments.
Dissenters
say
that
Iran
is
disguising
a
weapons
program,
say
that
if
we
do
not
remove
Iran’s
nuclear
program
or
severely
weaken
it
then
we
run
the
risk
of
a
nuclear
attack,
and
say
that
diplomacy
has
not
yielded
any
results.
Defenders
of
Iran
say
that
recent
nuclear
developments
are
peaceful,
that
no
evidence
of
weapons
manufacturing
has
been
found,
that
starting
a
conflict
with
Iran
for
their
use
of
nuclear
power
and
research
would
not
end
well,
and
that
diplomatic
efforts
have
not
been
exhausted.
Salon
6
Resolved:
that
the
US
double
its
reliance
on
Nuclear
Power
over
the
next
thirty
years
Pro:
Mallory
Craig-Kairm
Con:
Lisbeth
Perdue,
Central
High
Moderator:
Kathleen
Sun,
Lynbrook
High
School
Reliance
on
fossil
fuels
continues
to
be
a
source
of
controversy
among
the
American
public
due
to
greenhouse
gas
emissions
and
the
instability
inherent
in
relying
on
foreign
countries
for
our
energy
needs.
One
solution
proposed
is
that
the
government
build
nuclear
power
plants
to
reduce
our
dependence
on
oil.
Opponents
argue
that
while
nuclear
power
plants
produce
a
large
amount
of
energy,
there
are
drawbacks
to
using
them.
Opponents
point
to
the
exorbitant
capital
costs,
the
dangers
of
nuclear
management
and
nuclear
waste,
and
the
even
higher
cost
of
using
the
radioactive
fuel
efficiently.
On
the
other
hand,
proponents
argue
that
technology
that
would
allow
more
cost-‐efficient
radioactive
power
production
is
on
the
way,
and
argue
that
that
managing
nuclear
waste
is
not
as
difficult
as
the
skeptics
believe.
Proponents
point
to
France’s
long
history
of
nuclear
power
generation
and
the
recycling
of
nuclear
fuel
that
is
currently
illegal
in
the
United
States.
Portland
Resolved:
that
the
US
government
institute
a
tax
on
carbon
emissions
Pro:
Robby
Gill,
American
High
School
Con:
Elizabeth
O’Neil,
Bishop
O’
Dowd
Moderator:
Mat
Pang,
Bishop
O’Dowd
Regardless
of
the
validity
of
recent
climate
change
research,
there
has
been
a
call
by
American
citizens
to
reduce
carbon
emissions
and
use
cleaner
forms
of
energy.
The
benefits
of
having
a
cleaner
energy
program
include
a
healthier
environment
and
a
better
standing
in
worldwide
diplomacy.
Carbon
taxes
would
provide
an
incentive
for
companies
to
lower
emissions
by
making
carbon
emitters
pay
more
and
by
allowing
companies
that
use
cleaner
methods
to
pay
less.
Additionally,
regulation
of
these
taxes
by
the
government
would
be
simple
and
stable.
Opponents
to
a
carbon
tax
have
said
either
that
the
carbon
cap
and
trade
system
is
superior,
or
that
the
tax
would
make
US
corporations
uncompetitive
in
the
global
market
place.
Salon
D
Resolved:
that
California
privatize
its
education
system
Pro:
Sarah
Siskind,
Piedmont
High
School
Con:
Jeannie
Wu,
Pinole
Valley
High
Moderator:
Addie
McDowell,
College
Preparatory
School
With
California
facing
another
large
budget
deficit,
one
solution
being
proposed
is
to
privatize
our
education
system.
Advocates
for
this
option
argue
that
public
schools
are
fiscally
inefficient
and
wasteful
while
at
the
same
time
are
not
as
effective
at
educating
students
as
private
schools.
Proponents
cite
the
success
of
charter
schools
and
the
innovation
and
financial
savings
seen
by
successful
charter
schools.
Opponents
of
privatization
argue
that
access
to
free
public
education
is
a
hallmark
of
American
society
and
that
privatization
would
privilege
the
wealthy
and
restrict
the
access
of
the
poor.
Critics
of
privatization
also
cite
that
over
half
of
all
private
schools
are
religious,
a
concern
many
parents
have.
There
are
also
concerns
about
the
ability
to
manage
the
curriculum
and
enforce
educational
standards
on
private
schools.
Lunch
12:00-1:15
Time
to
take
a
break
and
get
something
to
eat!
Mingle
with
your
fellow
convention-‐goers
while
you’re
standing
in
line
at
one
of
the
nearby
food
locations.
Check
your
map,
located
at
the
back
of
this
booklet,
for
ideas.
Make
sure
to
come
back
on
time
for
the
fourth
block
–
you
don’t
want
to
miss
anything
exciting!
Block
4
1:25-2:25
Salon
3
Resolved:
that
the
federal
government
permanently
nationalize
the
banking
system
Pro:
Kevin
Spevak,
Berkeley
High
School
Con:
Ellen
Stark,
Maria
Carrillo
High
School
Moderator:
Su-Yee
Lee,
Northgate
High
The
recent
financial
crisis
has
resulted
in
widespread
doubt
regarding
the
effectiveness
and
reliability
of
a
privatized
banking
system.
Supporters
of
a
nationalized
banking
system
point
out
that
government
already
bears
a
large
portion
of
the
risk
and
costs
of
banking
system
failures,
so
it
would
only
be
logical
and
fair
for
the
government
to
control
the
system
as
well.
However,
others
believe
that
nationalized
banking
would
be
far
less
efficient
and
more
bureaucratic
than
a
privatized
system,
and
although
temporary
shifts
of
control
may
be
necessary,
permanent
nationalization
would
cripple
banking.
Salon
4
Supreme
Court
Hearing
From
Northern
California’s
Winter
Congress,
seven
pieces
of
student
proposed
legislation
were
passed
through
to
become
JSA
law.
Now,
the
Supreme
Court
will
hear
Bill
207:
A
Bill
to
Legalize
Marriage
Equality,
regarding
its
constitutionality.
The
Sponsor
of
the
bill
will
argue
against
the
Solicitor
General
regarding
why
this
bill
should
remain
as
JSA
law,
with
the
Supreme
Court
Justices
questioning
both
debaters.
Kristin
M.
Perry
v.
Arnold
Schwarzenegger
is
the
current
case
in
the
US
District
court
challenging
the
constitutional
validity
of
Proposition
8
that
will
affect
same
sex
marriage
laws
across
the
United
States.
Perry
v.
Schwarzenegger
parallels
the
JSA
bill
and
the
evidence
used
for
the
district
case
will
be
vital
to
determining
the
constitutionality
of
Bill
207.
Although
Judge
Walker
of
the
district
case
has
postponed
closing
arguments
until
he
has
time
to
review
the
evidence,
JSA’s
Supreme
Court
will
have
a
decision
by
the
end
of
the
block!
Come
join
us
for
our
first
ever
Supreme
Court
Hearing
on
this
highly
controversial
bill!
Salon
5
Resolved:
that
the
US
establish
a
policy
of
open
immigration
provided
that
all
immigrants
register
with
the
INS
before
entering
the
US
Pro:
Kate
Sylvan,
Pacific
Collegiate
School
Con:
Connor
Reed,
Alameda
High
Moderator:
Kayla
Grueneich,
Bishop
O’Dowd
The
illegal
immigrant
population
of
the
United
States
in
2008
was
estimated
by
the
Center
for
Immigration
Studies
to
be
approximately
11
million
people.
Some
believe
that
costs,
delays,
and
inefficiencies
in
processing
visa
applications
and
work
permits
contribute
to
the
number
of
immigrants
who
immigrate
without
authorization.
As
of
2007,
there
was
a
backlog
of
1.1
million
green
card
applications,
and
the
typical
waiting
time
was
three
years.
Opponents
of
open
immigration
strongly
believe
that
immigrants
create
difficulty
for
the
United
States
by
contributing
to
overcrowding,
straining
social
services,
and
lowering
Americans’
standard
of
living
by
working
for
lower
wages.
They
also
argue
that
illegal
immigrants
are
more
likely
to
be
exploited
by
employers
who
do
not
follow
regulations
on
pay
and
working
conditions.
Proponents,
on
the
other
hand,
note
that
people
are
already
entering
the
country
illegally
in
enormous
numbers.
They
believe
that
more
open
immigration
would
be
good
for
the
global
economy,
because
it
brings
workers
to
where
infrastructure
and
knowledge
are
and
allows
the
U.S.
to
become
more
competitive.
Is
it
time
for
immigration
reform?
Salon
6
CROSSFIRE:
Resolved:
that
President
Obama
permit
harsher
interrogation
techniques
in
order
to
prevent
terrorism.
Pro:
Jacob
Angel,
San
Mateo
High
School
Con:
Micaela
Cirimeli,
Northgate
High
Moderator:
Hussein
Elbakri
For
years,
the
United
States
has
gone
back
and
forth
over
the
issue
of
whether
to
sacrifice
the
rights
of
prisoners
in
return
for
information
that
can
be
used
to
save
lives.
In
this
global
age
of
terror,
the
CIA
has
been
accused
a
number
of
times
of
using
torture
in
order
to
learn
the
whereabouts
of
other
terrorists.
Supporters
of
harsher
interrogations
argue
that
the
government
should
do
whatever
they
can
in
order
to
save
innocent
lives,
and
that
as
long
as
the
interrogations
happen
on
foreign
soil,
American
law
does
not
apply.
Those
opposed
to
these
practices
say
that
the
United
States
should
not
practice
torture
of
any
form
because
it
is
morally
wrong
and
it
creates
more
terrorists.
Salon
B
Thought
Talk:
Has
the
advent
of
Globalism
done
more
harm
than
good?
Moderator:
Jason
Yu,
Northgate
High
School
In
his
book
The
World
is
Flat,
Thomas
Friedman
explained
that
due
to
new
technology
and
an
increase
in
overall
accessibility,
the
entire
world
has
become
a
single
global
community.
This
has
caused
the
distribution
of
jobs
and
capital
to
places
previously
unreachable
by
the
western
world.
Supporters
of
globalism
argue
that
people
from
all
over
the
world
can
now
achieve
their
dreams
instead
of
being
confined
to
their
local
communities.
However,
detractors
argue
that
this
change
has
also
spread
hate,
created
increased
poverty,
and
created
an
environment
of
materialism.
Has
globalism
been
a
positive
or
negative
change?