[eDebate] resolved: you are complicit w the war and you have no argument in defense

Jake Stromboli infracaninophile
Wed Jun 21 23:53:17 CDT 2006


and the reason why debaters should restart their discussion of the 
resolution and suppress their complicity with the war is?

can you formulate an argument in defense other than the provision of cause 
for censorship?

censorship and war are good.

the resolution is worthy of discussion with a murder being committed in the 
adjacent classroom.

you have 3 great positions so far if you could only formulate them into an 
argument.

let me help you.   you need to say that mass murder is not happening in iraq 
and that the resistance is in its last throes with imminent US victory and 
that debaters are bureaucratic administrators removed from responsibility 
for the policies that the system generates.   you make the argument and then 
you provide some reasons to back it up and then you are doing something 
besides whining like a chickenshit little boy who is making the case for the 
resolution look bad because his little boy case has no argument for it.   
you could even get historical and claim that mass atrocities with stuff like 
napalm didn't happen in vietnam and that would get you on the ballot for 
prime minister of iran and bar you from the attendance of world cup football 
games.

can anyone in the "dabait" community make a public defense of their 
prescribed activities during a war that involves mass murder?   proponents 
of this war like the stubborn vietnam diehards are either naive or sick with 
the combination possible.  opponents of this war need to reconsider real 
quick whether classroom discussion is a sufficient measure of opposition at 
this stage with over 100,000 iraqis dead especially given that the main 
purpose of their opposition at the tournaments is to win debate rounds and 
use mass murder for competitive ends and not to actually end the murder no 
matter how much emotion you can stir up in your speech for the cause.   
also, the nefarious possibility looms that if withdrawal does not happen 
quickly enough more wars could be started to nullify the possibility of any 
end to war for decades and basically make any future debate about war a 
total sideline show of irrelevance.    how can you possibly accept the 
framing of your supposed opposition to the war into the abstract confines of 
a competitive game?  do you really think that winning a debate round with 
the argument that the iraq war is bad will have any effect on the war other 
than a possible attitude change from an audience member?  what risk is 
involved in that?  is debate research on the resolution time effective when 
it is so consuming for most participants and directly trades off with 
possible time put into organizing a sit in on the campus?

what is the primary reason to learn debating?   i remember old quotes about 
the prerequisite of debate for democracy to function.   is democracy 
functioning when the republican party 1) suppresses the ability of 
journalists to obtain information in iraq through access restrictions, 
leaking of misinformation and military cover ups, 2) thereby distorts the 
possibility for a real debate about the war, and 3) steers the congressional 
debate about the iraq war in the direction of party loyalty and OFF TOPIC 
mobilization of fear relating the iraq war to 9/11 despite no correlation 
ever proven between saddam and 9/11?

no democracy is not functioning and we are sliding down the slippery slope 
toward a modified fascist government.   the republican party loves that 
debate is happening in classrooms at college tournaments in the milieu of 
experts because they get to make the argument that they are not completely 
100% suppressing debate and that the modicum of debate necessary for a 
democracy to function is happening at those tournaments.  at most, the 
opponents of the war deliberately restricting their opposition to classroom 
discussion are providing cover for an administration under assault for 
suppressing public debate.   the competitive focus skews debaters from 
questioning the historical role of debate in society and they become locked 
down into a world of blinders where the only debate they know is the one 
previously defined for them.

i suggest that since we are in the midst of the first major war with mass 
casaulties since vietnam that the terms and conditions for the possible 
legitimacy of the competitive debate structure have been altered and those 
who are truly advocates of debate will rethink what is happening and realize 
that they are being directly insulted and ridiculed by the administration.  
it is possible that major historical events will void the importance and 
relevance of tournament debate.   if this war is not one of those events, 
then tournament debate is among the most successful cooption tactics ever 
invented.   your total attitude of business as usual implied in your request 
that i shut up and the resolution talk recommence is a major factor in the 
demise of your own activity.

the debate community desperately needs to find a strategy of self-defense.   
i think that a public demand for the clarification of the terms and 
conditions necessary for adequate debate in democracy is unavoidable.   a 
sit in is the best possible means for this demand because it further 
reinforces the free speech demands of the debaters and reestablishes the 
terms and conditions for adequate debate in democracy by rejecting the 
status quo.

the community has devolved into a sick state of abstraction where evidence 
about the iraq war is more often viewed through the lens of its economic 
value for possible sale then it is through the lens of the victims of 
murder.   planet debate and other evidence whores are normalizing a devil's 
bargain that complements the republican strategy to extricate debate from 
influence on public policy and transform the major function of debate into 
numbing the perpetrators.

thank you and goodnight...

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee? 
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963





More information about the Mailman mailing list