Instigator / Pro
7
1500
rating
11
debates
54.55%
won
Topic
#5447
The Metric System is Objectively Better than the Imperial System
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
0
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
0
Better conduct
1
1
After 1 vote and with 4 points ahead, the winner is...
Tickbeat
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
3
1500
rating
2
debates
0.0%
won
Description
Systems of measurement have long been diverse over the course of human history. However, during the enlightenment, a team of French astronomers measured the length and curvature angle of all of France, which allowed them to get the earth's dimensions, and ultimately lead to the invention of the greatest measuring system in history, the metric system. It's simple, it's logical, it's easy. But America, Liberia, and Myanmar, for one reason or another, have not adopted the metric system yet. And when it comes to America, it is almost too late for them to give up the imperial system that is based on people's feet. And some people still like the imperial system, but they don't have any good reasons as to why. Or, if they do, the reasons for the metric system are far greater than the reasons for the imperial system. So today, I am here to show you the beauty of the metric system, and why it is the best.
Round 1
Pro
#1
First, let's go over how each system of measurement works.
The Metric System
We start off with the meter. This is a unit of length, and by the way it was originally invented, it is one ten millionth of the distance from the equator to the pole. The distance from the equator to the pole is ten million meters, which is a fourth of the earth's circumference, so the earth's circumference is forty million meters. From there, if you were to take a cube where each side has a side length of a tenth of a meter, you have a liter, which is the unit for volume. Then, if you were to weigh one liter of water, you would have a kilogram. And finally, the temperature at which water boils at sea level is 100 degrees Celsius, and the temperature at which water freezes is 0 degrees Celsius. As you can see, these units follow one another, and the first unit, the meter, is entirely based on an unchanging measurement that is the earth. It will change eventually, but not in the lifetimes of several generations to come.
Then, after we have defined all of these units of measurement, we can create prefixes to describe quantities of these measurements:
Quecto = nonillionth
Ronto = octillionth
Yocto = septillionth
Zepto = sextillionth
Atto = quintillionth
Femto = quadrillionth
Pico = trillionth
Nano = billionth
Micro = millionth
Milli = thousandth
Centi = hundredth
Deci = tenth
Deca = ten
Hecto = hundred
Kilo = thousand
Mega = million
Giga = billion
Tera = trillion
Peta = quadrillion
Exa = quintillion
Zetta = sextillion
Yotta = septillion
Ronna = octillion
Quetta = nonillion
From there, you could apply these prefixes to any of the units of measurement that you like. We have the meter, and if you have one thousand meters, you put the prefix "kilo" before it, creating kilometer. A tenth of a meter would be a decimeter, and thus, we can now define a liter as a cubic decimeter. And a liter of water is a kilogram, but notice the prefix "kilo," which represents a thousand. So, a thousandth of a kilogram is really just a gram, which, since this is in three-dimensional space, results in a gram of weight being equal to a cubic centimeter of water.
The metric system is simple, it's logical, and it's easy, as you're just working with tens. Now, many calculations are merely a matter of moving the decimal point, and converting between units could never be easier. It's also based on things that are not variable, that being the size of the earth and its circumference, and things generally considered to be default, like water.
The Imperial System
The imperial system is not based on unchanging things within the universe, but rather, people's body parts. This is because that was all we had back in the day. Back when science was not nearly as advanced as it is today, nobody could base a system of measurement on something as precise as we can today. Instead, it was much easier to simply use their body parts, because these systems of measurement could allow them to have a ruler on them at all times. The foot is a unit of measurement equal to approximately the length of the average man's foot. It is also equal to twelve inches, and an inch is the length of three grains of barley laid end to end. A pound is a unit of weight equal to seven thousand grains. The ounce refers to several different units of measure, and it's not even consistent. And the mile is a unit of length equal to 5,280 feet. Where in the freak did people get that number from?
There are no prefixes for the imperial system, the units are based on rather random, arbitrary, and approximate things, and the numbers aren't even easy with one another. It is not working with tens, and calculations can be hard. The only logical basis it has is that you can use your body as a ruler, but your body is not the same as everybody else's body, so your measurements might not even match up with somebody else's. And now that we live in a day and age where technology is very advanced and knowledge in science is too, we don't need such approximate values, we have exact measurements, and that is the metric system. The imperial system can barely even be called a system, it's more like a set of random arbitrary values. The metric system is an actual system, because they all have correlation to each other, and there are prefixes that must be used to describe quantities.
As you can see, it is very, very clear that the metric system is far more logical, because it is based on unchanging things in nature, and it's easy, because it's all tens, and is directly companionable with our base-ten counting system. The imperial system simply isn't. And so, the metric system clearly comes out on top as objectively better.
Though some people would still like to stick to their imperial system, they don't have any good reason as to why. They've simply been using it all their life, and their intuition is calibrated upon it. But that says nothing about the actual logical and mathematical integrity of their system, it just means they grew up with it. And some people simply apply their love of the imperial system to patriotism, and say that it is the American way. I am American myself, but I'm not a fool. I can clearly see that the metric system is better, and people who just say "U.S.A.! U.S.A.!" as an argument are setting themselves up for failure, and are grasping at colloquial phrases to make their point sound more sound. It's not.
Con
#2
Well, you use miles to see how far your car can travel right? And uses inches to measure how far is the height of the bolt, knowing if it's volume is enough to suffice within the collar (as in engineering terms). Metric is awful, mainly because metric is based purely off of the Imperial System but just rounding, if I was to be multiplying the square root of 3/4 of a foot, you will have to use the Imperial System to calculate it, as 3/4 of a foot equals 22.86 centimeters. The Metric System doesn't act like that, and since that the metric system counts by 10's we can't say that. You might just say two deca's, 8 deci's and 6. According to the metric system on the other hand, it equals 1.6666666...ft, which is a irrational number, which is a impossible measurement.
It's like a standard calculator, not precise, instead, rounded up, like how you said imperial is more accurate, which is necessary to many.
Round 2
Pro
#3
Who cares that the metric system does not easily align with a system of measurement that we shouldn't even have in the first place? I could easily just invent my own system of measurement and say the metric system doesn't align with that, but that doesn't make the metric system any less logical. There are an infinite number of possible systems of measurement you could create, so obviously they don't all have to align, because ideally, we should only be using the most logical and easy to use, and that is the metric system.
And, you don't have to use miles to measure how far your car can travel, that's the whole point. People everywhere else in the world use kilometers to measure how far their car can travel. And they use centimeters to measure the length of a bolt.
"Metric is awful, mainly because metric is based purely off of the Imperial System but just rounding."
This is not even remotely true. A team of French astronomers back during the enlightenment decided to create their own system of measurement, because the ones they currently had were not based on exact values, and were hard to convert between. They looked through a specific kind of telescope and measured the angle between two points along the surface of earth, which would allow them to measure the earth's curvature. It took them seven years to calculate all of this, but they got it, and they were able to measure the curvature of France and its length along that line. This then allowed them to calculate the distance of the equator to the pole, and the earth's circumference, and therefore diameter. This then allowed them to calculate the meter, when they took this distance, and divided it into ten million pieces, and one of those pieces is a meter. It had absolutely nothing to do with the imperial system, except for the fact that they needed their former units of measurement to state the length of the earth's circumference and therefore the length of a meter, but it was not based off of the imperial system. The metric system has nothing to do with the imperial system, so that is a flat out lie. It's not taking values from the imperial system and rounding them, you're getting this confused with conversion. You are merely talking about the difficulties of converting one system of units to the other system of units, which as I said is irrelevant, because I could easily just invent my own separate system from the metric system that does not easily align with it, and use that as an argument against the metric system. This is irrelevant. What is relevant is how well each unit within the same system converts to one another, such as kilometers to meters to centimeters, which is all just a matter of moving the decimal point. It's very easy.
Also, side note, 22.86 centimeters can also be 228.6 millimeters, or it can be 228,600 micrometers, if you really wanted to remove the decimal point. It could also be 2.286 decimeters, or 0.2286 meters. It could even be 0.0002286 kilometers if you wanted.
I'm not even entirely sure what point you were trying to get across, and I had trouble trying to understand what you meant. Your argument wasn't very clear, so I've tried my best to understand it as best as I can, and what I'm getting is that you're implying that the metric system is terrible because it does not align with the imperial system, but you could just as easily say that but for some other random system instead of the imperial system. You could even make up your own system and use that against the metric system. You could even go backwards and use the imperial system's inability to align with the metric system as an argument against the imperial system! As you can see, this is a terrible argument, and even if it weren't, they would all cancel each other out anyway, since the argument of using one against the other can just as easily be used as the other against one.
Con
#4
Well, I think you're true, but since I'm a con, these 5 rounds can't go to waste.
Now, here's where I'm getting at. I know I'll bounce around a little but here.
What is relevant is how well each unit within the same system converts to one another, such as kilometers to meters to centimeters, which is all just a matter of moving the decimal point. It's very easy.
Well, without the basic measurements from the Imperial System, how would you be able to convert numbers at all? Have you forgotten that you still use the Imperial everyday? They made it easier, but not precise like how the moon isn't a perfect sphere, so your estimating mainly off of the Imperial System. Which you said that it was pure trash.
And, you don't have to use miles to measure how far your car can travel, that's the whole point.
This is a massive lie. Tell me, when you buy a car, do you check for how many miles your car can run on a full tank? It seems not. I say go walk 5 feet, you would say "0.00095mi, or 0.000947mi?" but here's the thing, you're right, we are in the new age, and many sources back you up, so I admit defeat.
Round 3
Pro
#5
"Have you forgotten that you still use the Imperial everyday?"
Yeah, and? America needs to convert to the metric system because the calculations are way easier to do, and it can save a lot of time. However, it's really hard to do that, because at this point, America is calibrated on the Imperial System. It doesn't make it any less illogical and strange though.
"They made it easier, but not precise like how the moon isn't a perfect sphere, so your estimating mainly off of the Imperial System."
Well that's just a lie. The metric system is precise. You can buy a meter stick and it will always have the exact same length, give or take a few nanometers because of the atoms in the stick, but that's just a problem with the build of the stick, not the measurement. And, the Imperial System is just as precise as the metric system, as you can also go and buy a foot ruler and the same thing applies. It's just that one is based off of the earth we live on, which always has been just one entity, and the other is based on people's feet, of which, there existed over a hundred billion different entities, all with variable size.
"Well, without the basic measurements from the Imperial System, how would you be able to convert numbers at all?"
Who in the freak cares what system you used to use? If you switched to a more logical system, then that system must be adopted. It doesn't matter that we used to use the Imperial System, because most of the world now uses the metric system, and they're better off with it. We could have used any system imaginable before we invented the metric system, so this point is just irrelevant.
"Tell me, when you buy a car, do you check for how many miles your car can run on a full tank?"
Yes I do. But I'm not the only human in existence. I live in America where large distances are measured in miles, but if you were to visit anywhere in Europe, you would find that people measure large distances in kilometers. And America has the potential to switch to the metric system and begin measuring large distances in kilometers instead of miles, and I think that would be better, because the metric system is so logical and easy.
Side note: yes, I understand that most people would not tell you that something is 0.000947 miles away when they could just tell you that it's 5 feet away. The point is, in the metric system, you can, and it's not even that hard, just slap a new prefix on it and move the decimal point!
Con has made the decision to concede, but I still wanted to respond with regular force so that he can't make an argument when it's already too late to respond, and he could use me not responding as an argument against me. So, I made this response.
Con
#6
You make perfect sense, but we still have to keep the imperial system, mainly because it's the stepping stone, I use imperial sometimes when things get confusing, and it's hard to swap bad habits.
Round 4
Pro
#7
Con has now admitted that the Imperial System is somewhat of a bad habit. Also concession, so I have nothing more to add.
Con
#8
Yep. I lost cuz I was in the worst possible argument for a con. mainly because there is no proof of the imperial is better than the metric. but metric clearly has so many sources admitting that is superior to imperial.
Round 5
Con
#10
Okay, then if Casey_Risk wants to be a a-hole, then sure.
Imperial and Metric both have their benefits, they are used mainly of preference, but you can't force it as which one is bad or good. Knowing that Imperial had so many improvements, according to a masterclass article:
While most of the world uses the international system of units, aka the metric system, the United States has its own system, based on the old British Imperial System of inches and pounds. This becomes relevant in the kitchen when dealing with international recipes that use grams and Celsius.
Metric cannot do this task easily, as most of the household items you use today, needs to convert into metric.
Since both the US Customary and metric systems are taught in schools, many Americans feel there’s no need to switch over to metric. Liberia and Myanmar are the only other countries that have not officially adopted the metric system.
Imperial is easy, metric on the other hand, no, it's not. I use metric sometimes, sure, but we have realized that all of the metric conversions is well, converted by Imperial. Kids learn Imperial before learning metric, because with metric, you must use the power of ten, but how would they know how to do that, if they could only factor simple numbers? They don't know what exponents are.
According to dailycalculators.com, Imperial systems advantages are;
- Cultural Heritage: The Imperial system has historical significance in many countries, including the United States and the United Kingdom. It is deeply ingrained in these cultures and is still used in everyday life, particularly for colloquial measurements such as height and weight.
- Familiarity: Despite its complexity and inconsistencies, many people are familiar with the Imperial system due to its historical use and prevalence in certain industries. Switching to the metric system may require significant retraining and adjustment for some individuals.
- Practicality in Certain Contexts: In some industries, such as construction and manufacturing, the Imperial system is still commonly used due to existing infrastructure, equipment, and standards. Switching entirely to the metric system in these contexts may be costly and impractical.
While the metric system advantages are:
- Standardization: The metric system offers a standardized and coherent system of measurement based on powers of ten, making conversions between units straightforward and intuitive.
- Global Consistency: The majority of countries around the world have adopted the metric system as their official measurement system. This promotes consistency in trade, communication, and scientific research on an international scale.
- Ease of Learning: The metric system is often considered easier to learn and teach, particularly for educational purposes. Its logical and systematic structure simplifies mathematical calculations and scientific experiments.
Oh! Brittanica got something to say too.
The biggest reasons the U.S. hasn’t adopted the metric system are simply time and money. When the Industrial Revolution began in the country, expensive manufacturing plants became a main source of American jobs and consumer products. Whenever the discussion of switching unit systems arose in Congress, the passage of a bill favoring the metric system was thwarted by big businesses and American citizens who didn’t want to go through the time-consuming and expensive hassle of changing the country’s entire infrastructure.
It's not trash, it's actually better than metric, considering that we are already aren't financially stable! How are we supposed to convert, if that means that most of our businesses would file bankruptcy because the customers don't understand which size is this?
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
I think Con was at a bit of a disadvantage here because they were playing devil's advocate. However, in my opinion, Con's rebuttals did not get to the actual point of the argument and were mostly unrelated.
So that's how long a troll argument can go on for. Honestly I thought it'd go on forever.
You never actually responded to anything, you just dismissed it, and thought that solved it.
How is that useless information? Explain to me why the information I provided has no use in our argument.
Alright. That is useless information.
We're not just calling it the metric system because we move one decimal point, though that is a big advantage of the metric system, the measurements are still different. One meter is not the same length as one foot, neither a centimeter nor a decimeter is the same length as an inch, and a kilogram is not the same as a pound. The units that the metric system contains have a logical basis on unchanging and precise things, though at the time, the French didn't know how much of an approximation "sphere" is for the earth's shape. But it still stands that the earth's circumference is 40,075km (a tiny mistake was made in the calculations of the meter, but it's better than people's feet...).
And, if you think that me saying "I'm an American myself, but I'm not a fool" is really just me saying that I'm better than the average American, then you must think that the average American is a fool. In which case, you either think that you are like the average American and are a fool, or are not a fool and therefore are above the average American, putting you in the exact same position as me. Your argument is not very sound.
The whole point behind the metric system is that it's simple, so no over complications, it's logical, so it has a logical origin and basis, and it's easy, because of how simple the system is. You're using this as an argument against the metric system, but you're only using the exact reasons FOR the metric system. Why would you want to unnecessarily over complicate a system of measurement? It is precisely the fact THAT it is so simple that is a reason to use it!
And, yeah sending your links is not going to change the fact that whether or not changing to the metric system would collapse the economy is irrelevant, because we're not talking about how hard it is for each nationality to convert to the metric system, we're just talking about which one is better by nature. Get that in your head.
Yeah, I was playing devil's advocate, but he and Casey can't stop shut their traps so I wrote it down here.
I'm done with this argument, I gave you facts and you simply ignored them.
Alright, so you are just admitting that you state your argument as sound, because it, well, that's how you feel. I'm sorry to offend you by telling you that everybody can use the powers of ten, and then saying that it's called metric. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. What? All we can do is say ok, rather than getting a pat on the back. Also, about the quote, you said that "I am American myself, but I'm not a fool." states that you are smarter than the "average American". Also, I have re-read your comment, you stated that "Also, you didn't cite any sources either, you just showed up quotes, but you didn't actually send the links to where they came from, which to my understanding is usually required to get source points.", I can list them if you want me to, but I've already did, so you can stop beating around the bush. "Aha! Just move the decimal one point and we can call it metric, so we can become original, even though we're taking unnecessary steps to an already simplified measurement."
*Imperial vs Metric: https://dailycalculators.com/The-metric-system-vs-Imperial-system
*Why the U.S doesn't use metric: https://www.britannica.com/story/why-doesnt-the-us-use-the-metric-system#:~:text=So%20why%20hasn't%20it,American%20jobs%20and%20consumer%20products.
*Why the economy would fail without Imperial, and the difference between metric: https://www.masterclass.com/articles/whats-the-difference-between-the-metric-and-imperial-system-plus-a-conversion-chart-for-imperial-and-metric-systems-of-measurement
If you never misquoted me, why not you bring up where the quote was, genius?
And, you're acting as if the fact that all you do is mainly just move a decimal point is a cause for "that's it?" But you literally just argued for precisely one of the best reasons TO use the metric system, because it is that simple. It's not a matter of "that's it?" It's a matter of, "that's it!" As in, "that's all I have to do, and that was really easy!"
And no, I don't have a personal bias of the metric system, I am American and grew up using the Imperial System, so I made the decision to favor the metric system out of my own logic and reason, because of how logical and easy it is to work with and use and calculate, making things move a lot quicker.
Also, you didn't cite any sources either, you just showed up quotes, but you didn't actually send the links to where they came from, which to my understanding is usually required to get source points.
And, while it is true that I might have been a little on the technical side in the quote of me you quoted, anyone who can understand all of my sentences well will understand that I actually do know what I'm talking about. And, I wasn't telling people not to use the sesquipedalian loquaciousness fallacy, though you shouldn't use it anyway, I was talking about the exact opposite: people using irrelevant and simple-minded phrases and sayings to make their point appear to be more logically sound. If I ask someone why they like the Imperial System better than the metric system, and they respond, "U.S.A.! U.S.A.!," then I know that they are just using patriotic phrases and sayings to give a little more gravity to their logic, when it's really just nothing. But that's far from a complicated statement, because it's just repeating three letters.
And of course, just because I didn't cite any sources or quote anything doesn't mean my logic is not sound. If you read my very first argument, you would see that I explained both the metric and Imperial System, and so you can see for yourself why the metric system is more logical.
"Imperial is better because metric is purely based on this, just to multiply 10^x to call yourself smart?"
First off, I never boasted about being smart. Again, you can >directly quote< me if you would like to prove me wrong on that. And, the whole point of the metric system is that calculations are really simple. You're describing that the metric system is really just 10^x...which is precisely the beauty of the metric system, because ideally it should not be so complicated, and it's not!
I'm believing Best.Korea more and more when he said that you're a troll, because this is the exact kind of thing that might happen between someone and a troll, it's just harder to spot on a website like this, where the whole point is to debate people. Either way, if you didn't give me a chance to respond in the debate, I'll at least respond here, because you're not getting away with that move.
Don't act all high and mighty now, and I never misquoted you, go take that disrespect crap somewhere else, because if you want to ruin the economy, go ahead, it's America's pleasure. If you have to have to convert a distance to metric, just say that you have a "pet peeve" and you truly just don't care about anybody else's opinions. Metric is worse, mainly because moving a decimal, aka, using an unnecessary step to convert a number by doing simple exponential factors, and calling imperial useless, makes me feel you just learnt what scientific notation meant. What's worse, is even if it might be "superior", it can't be used in every situation, so it's not irrelevant. Look, I came here to debate too, and if you think winning you do anything, I'm sorry, but this is casual, not ranked. "America could have been calibrated on any system, not just the Imperial System, and it would make it hard to convert to metric." you clearly waited to say this, which I was waiting for you to confess. You have a personal bias with metric, but you refused to give any resources that told me that it was better than imperial, but instead your source was "it's easy!". That's why I'm upset, because I could of had a good argument, but you sounded smart even though you had nothing to back it up. Of course, you can just round it up, but just moving a decimal? Come on now? Imperial is better because metric is purely based on this, just to multiply 10^x to call yourself smart? Listen to yourself. "Though some people would still like to stick to their imperial system, they don't have any good reason as to why. They've simply been using it all their life, and their intuition is calibrated upon it. But that says nothing about the actual logical and mathematical integrity of their system, it just means they grew up with it. And some people simply apply their love of the imperial system to patriotism, and say that it is the American way. I am American myself, but I'm not a fool. I can clearly see that the metric system is better, and people who just say "U.S.A.! U.S.A.!" as an argument are setting themselves up for failure, and are grasping at colloquial phrases to make their point sound more sound. It's not." This is my example, ad hominem, bandwagon, and absolutely sneaky use of sesquipedalian loquaciousness trying to tell people not to use the sesquipedalian loquaciousness fallacy.
You have completely missed the point, and misquoted me. First of all, I never said that the Imperial System is trash, I just said it was less logical and harder to use than the metric system. Second, if I can't drill this into your skull any harder, it does not matter how hard the convert from Imperial to metric is in America, because that wasn't even what the topic of this debate is talking about. The topic of this debate is which system of units is better, not which country would have a harder time converting their systems. America could have been calibrated on any system, not just the Imperial System, and it would make it hard to convert to metric. You're focusing on irrelevant factors, and making useless arguments because of that.
This is obviously bad conduct on ChristianIsEdging's end. He waited until I was incapable of responding in order to make any kind of reasonable argument, rendering my response to such non-existent.
and dawg, didn't you say that autism is a disease??? You plan on doin something with this debate but I havent seen you said crap.
I know, but how the heck are you supposed to win this??? I ain't no troll, I want to debate too but I'm forced to debate casual. I like trolling but I like helping boost others ego as well since I don't want one.
There is no shame in being a troll. You already upset casey or maybe she is just on her period, but its funny either way.
First of all, you started a debate arguing that children should be shown PH videos in school. I think it's more than fair to call you a troll. Second, don't waste time by accepting a debate just to drop some weak, borderline nonsensical arguments and then just give it all up round two. Put some actual effort in! Otherwise, you're just disrespecting everyone's time.
Also, I literally just challenged Tickbeat on this very topic and plan to attack the debate from a completely different angle, so that disproves your contention that this debate would have been forgotten without someone half-assing a defense.
Also, to further mention, I only posted that because I wanted me and a stranger to have access to ranked arguments, there is no real debates within casual, it's just makes no difference what so ever.
First of all, I'm am not a troll. This website is dead as a fly that was hit multiple times by a flyswatter. Also, if it wouldn't of been for me accepting this, this would have been forgotten, besides, I actually found evidence, but still, it's a lose-lose argument. "Whether the metric or imperial system is better depends on various factors1. The metric system offers advantages in terms of standardization and global consistency, while the Imperial system retains significance in certain contexts and cultures. For specific applications, such as drill bits, metric or imperial may be preferred based on hole size."
"I suppose there aren't almost any people who genuinely disagree with me on this, and if they didn't, they'd know they probably wouldn't have enough logic to back up their claim, so this might be a while..."
I would agree with you here, and I think that's why the person who accepted this debate is clearly a troll. Just look at their debate history. Right now they're trying to argue that PronHub should be shown in schools.
That being said, I think there is an interesting argument to be made for the Con position here. I don't know if I'll actually win, but I'd like to try. If you start a new debate on this topic with me, I promise not to troll, forfeit, or concede. My only precondition is that you increase the argument time to at least one week and the voting time to at least one month.
I will test my ignorance with this.
I agree. The only argument I can even think of for the imperial system is that maybe, MAYBE, it is slightly more accurate and that it is more natural than the metric, but that is it.
Just to be clear,
Imperial Standard means Imperialism and "conquer all enemies" and "spread the Imperialist light throughout the world".
Can you change topic to:
"Democratic system is objectively better than the Imperial Standard"
Can you change topic to:
"Democratic system is objectively better than the Imperial Standard"
With you as Pro???????
I suppose there aren't almost any people who genuinely disagree with me on this, and if they didn't, they'd know they probably wouldn't have enough logic to back up their claim, so this might be a while...