Congress Should Support democratic countries fighting against repressive, authoritarian, anti-democratic nations that are fighting against our interests, stealing our intellectual property, interfering with our elections, selling drugs to violent gangs, and trying to harm us.

Alternative ways of saying the same belief statement:

1. “The legislature should back free nations in their struggle against oppressive regimes that threaten our values, pirate our innovations, meddle in our democratic processes, fuel violence through narcotics trade, and seek to undermine our safety.”
   • Conclusion Score: 85
   • % Equivalency: 90%
   • % Strength: 75%
   • % Specificity: 80%
2. “It is imperative for the governing bodies to stand with allies that uphold democratic principles when faced with authoritarian states engaging in hostile acts such as intellectual theft, electoral disruption, and aggressive acts against our national interests.”
   • Conclusion Score: 80
   • % Equivalency: 95%
   • % Strength: 80%
   • % Specificity: 85%
3. “Support from our nation’s lawmakers is crucial for democracies resisting tyrannical countries that act contrary to our welfare, by stealing patented technologies, influencing our sovereign elections, and supporting criminal activities that threaten our people.”
   • Conclusion Score: 90
   • % Equivalency: 85%
   • % Strength: 85%
   • % Specificity: 90%

Objective Criteria for Assessing the Validity of this Belief:

1. International law and norms: Whether the actions of the authoritarian nations violate international law.
   • Pro/Con Score: 75
2. National security interests: How the actions of the authoritarian nations affect the national security of democratic countries.
   • Pro/Con Score: 80
3. Economic impact: The extent of intellectual property theft and its impact on the economy of democratic nations.
   • Pro/Con Score: 70
4. Election integrity: Evidence of interference in the electoral process by authoritarian nations.
   • Pro/Con Score: 85
5. Public health and safety: The impact of drug trafficking on the public health and safety of the population.
   • Pro/Con Score: 75

Unstated Assumptions:

1. The actions of the authoritarian nations are unprovoked and intentional.
2. Democratic nations have the resources and obligation to intervene.
3. There is a clear distinction between democratic and authoritarian regimes.
4. Intervention will lead to a positive outcome.

Shared interests:

1. Maintaining global stability.
2. Protecting intellectual property rights.
3. Ensuring fair and free elections.
4. Combatting international drug trafficking.

Underlying Issues:

1. Power imbalances in international relations.
2. Lack of enforceable international regulations against election interference and intellectual property theft.
3. The challenge of quantifying the impact of cyber-espionage and election meddling.

Top-rated solutions:

1. Forming international coalitions to address intellectual property theft.
2. Strengthening cyber-security measures to prevent election interference.
3. Increasing penalties for nations that violate international norms.

Key Resources:

1. “The Hackers of Damascus” by Stephen B. Wicker, which explores cyber-security in the context of international politics.
2. “Election Interference: International Law and the Future of Democracy” by Daniel Z. Epstein.
3. The reports and publications by the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) on piracy and intellectual property rights.

To develop a thorough understanding of this topic, it’s vital to delve into these suggested resources, engage with the underlying issues, and consider the shared interests and assumptions to form an informed opinion.