BERUBE RESPONDS TO BAHM ON RE-WRITING THE REZ

David M. Berube berube
Mon Sep 29 13:31:39 CDT 1997


I had hoped my brief discussion on critiques/kritiks.  Bahm's
response that the resolution is not the link to critique assumes the
resolution is a collection of words only.  The resolution embodies
ideas and concepts.  For examples, this year's demands the
affirmative to provide security assistance.  That provision carries
with it some conceptual baggage that is not easily shirked.

My assumption remains unresolved by Bahm's surface argument.

Toiling for a better world! Live the glory!
Join the Global Debate Congress Project

David M. Berube, Ph.D.
Dir., Carolina Debate &
Assoc. Prof., Speech Communication
University of South Carolina 29208
803-777-6663, fax 803-777-0055

>From  Mon Sep 29 13:44:12 1997
Message-Id: <MON.29.SEP.1997.134412.0400.>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 13:44:12 -0400
Reply-To: MWBRYANT at AOL.COM
To: Team Topic Debating in America <EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: Michael Bear Bryant <MWBRYANT at AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Camp Evidence and further decline
Comments: To: isaacw at ksu.edu

In a message dated 97-09-29 13:10:27 EDT, you write:

<< Finally, lets stop criticizing and start working to make debate a better
 activity.  Complaining all of the time without any suggestions about how
 to solve our problems really is a waste of time.  If you are advocating
 ridding the world of camps, good luck my friend.

 later,
 isaac >>

Isaac,

I can agree with your arguments against indicting camps for the problems in
modern debate. I have to strongly disagree with your conclusion that there's
no place for criticism. You have run kritiques, without alternatives, haven't
you? From the torrents of criticism, constructive proposals do emerge. In
dealing with some bureaucrats the secret seems to be to let them take credit
for the very proposals that they opposed before criticism made it apparent
that they could no longer oppose such items. Check out the early days of
CEDA-L and Tuna's "virulent" rejection of having anything to do with NDT .
Isn't it interesting that Tuna's recent PFD proposal closely mirrors the
demands of Scott Elliot back in the summer? It looks like SSDS won its battle
without ever having to fire a shot, though I doubt that PFD will solve the
deeper problems confronting unity in collegiate policy debate.

Sometimes the right to criticize is all that's left,

Bear




More information about the Mailman mailing list