[eDebate] Judging Philosophies and Policy Debate

Sydney Howard nozikn74
Wed Sep 25 11:32:48 CDT 2002

I have been following some of the posts regarding a revolution back to 
policy debate and I want to put my note of support in for Jake, Jay, and 
whoever else feels that this activity has disassociated itself from policy 
debate.  Though I still have eligibility to debate, I don't -- the main 
reason why is because of the insistence and subsequent (and somewhat 
irrational) support of arguments that involve performance, music, and real 
world shunning of a team who doesn't want to play this "speech"-imbued game. 
  No longer are teams debating the policy implications of affirmatives, 
counterplans, and disads, but we are debating the morality and philosophy of 
nothing and everything all rolled in to one.  I think Ivan Susek put it best 
when judging one of my high school teams last year: "You are the reason I 
got out of debate."
I didn't enter this activity to get in an argument about the merits of rap 
music and why it makes a statement; I got in this activity to debate the 
merits of a TOPICAL plan, a counterplan, maybe a couple of disads, and maybe 
some theory.  If we want to talk about morals, philosophy, and value 
judgements, maybe we need to start Lincoln-Douglas debate in college.

sydney a. howard

"government is the great fiction through which everybody attempts to live at 
the expense of everybody else."
      -frederic bastiat

Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

More information about the Mailman mailing list