[eDebate] join Debate against War

Jake Stromboli infracaninophile
Sun Jun 25 19:22:00 CDT 2006

i believe that stannard has done an excellent job getting the ball rolling.

one tactical suggestion is that Debate against War not only specify the 
anti-war nature of debate and dialogue but also the constitutional 
connection to debate and that the Constitution itself was forged out of 
vigorous public debating by early Americans.   the secrecy of the current 
administration and their overt attempt to immunize the executive branch from 
the Constitution and the principles of debate are the backbone of the war 
and the creation of a military society in the united states.

i think that the idea of a Constitution Protection League as previously 
posted would serve this purpose and make a fundamental linkage between 
debate, peacemaking and constitutional principles of government.

lacking is a solid historical review of the importance of debate both as the 
process and the implied accomplishment of the creation of the Constitution.  
  the neocons are sort of good at historical analysis in the sense that they 
produce volumes of historical political science and philosophy in attempt to 
connect their movement to the founding fathers.  the content of that 
analysis, however, is mostly not so good and more like a machine gun fire 
approach.  the formation of policy and the role of debate in the formation 
of policy is radically different than it was in the founding father milieu.  
secrecy was viewed as a tool of oppression by the king and unrestrained 
public discussion the antidote.   the neocons are unique in their academic 
debating because irregardless of the content of their argument they have 
created a feeder system between the academy, the think tanks, the television 
networks, the newspapers, the military and the white house that basically 
neutralizes any honest attempt to have public debate be the foundation of 
our democratic society (the policy debate community participates in that 
array of forces described as a feeder system).   instead every possible 
effort is made to use public argument in defense of the neutralization of 
public argument.   "how dare you get angry about the centralization of power 
into the hands of the executive in a legitimate coup d'etat?  it is our 
argumentative right to defend the suppression of argument as an obstacle to 
quick and speedy measures necessary during a time of war.   if you don't 
like our news, then watch another station even though we control the content 
of all the stations through military murder coverups and restrictions on 
journalists which of course are necessary for national security reasons like 
everything else insiduous to democracy as framed by the founding fathers."

debaters have a unique calling toward the formation of the Constitution 
Protection League and a genealogy of debate and the Constitution would prove 
helpful in organizing and directing that effort.  the genealogy would prove 
effective in putting the neocons on the defensive in trying to defend their 
Constitutional heritage especially if it included relatively, easy critical 
attacks of the neocon political philosophy literature.

Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 

More information about the Mailman mailing list