[eDebate] Challenge to the Community

Andy Ellis andy.edebate
Wed Apr 4 17:43:01 CDT 2007


Thank you Omri, i do indeed feel more informed. But really this is the last
time...so sad...

On 4/4/07, Omri Ceren <ceren at usc.edu> wrote:
>
> OK. Now we're going to discuss "tone".
>
> When I said "seriously", it worked because I made your position seem
> obviously absurd and kind of stupid. I accomplished that by juxtaposing
> and re-characterizing your positions in such a way as to make you seem
> nonsensical.
>
> When you said "seriously", you followed it up by whining that "the
> debates you see are more ideologically determined and constrained than
> the ones i see." This, to put it mildly, failed to really provide the
> rhetorical umpff that you were looking for.
>
> Let's try this again (but, honestly, this is going to have to be the
> last time): the conceit by which you take it upon yourself to challenge
> the debate community to attack itself emerges from a combination of
> ignorance, smugness, and pretension that makes me almost feel bad about
> publicly mocking you. You need the debate community to be as dull and
> unnuanced as you are so that you can continue in this pathetic moral
> exhibitionism, where your desperate need to convince yourself of your
> own superiority comes together with an inchoate sense of what counts as
> political activism.
>
> You really should stop pretending that you have either the authority or
> credibility to challenge anybody to do anything. It's getting to be kind
> of sad.
>
> Omri.
>
>
>
> On 4/4/2007 3:26 PM Andy Ellis wrote:
> > Seriously? are you really saying people dont make that answer and win a
> > lot of debates on it? The debates you see are more ideologically
> > determined and constrained than the ones i see. And yes at least those
> > folks who debated milliken have a great legal knowledge to provide to
> > their campuses...
> >
> > On 4/4/07, *Omri Ceren* <ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu>> wrote:
> >
> >     Seriously? This year's Milliken affirmatives advocated using the
> USSC to
> >     address de facto segregation in school districts. You think that
> this
> >     means that they said that the "the law is the best way to end racial
> >     discrimination in education", and in response you petulantly
> chellenged
> >     the community to sue... itself. And you can't understand why this is
> an
> >     example of how you don't get nuance?
> >
> >     Seriously?
> >
> >     Omri.
> >
> >     On 4/4/2007 3:17 PM Andy Ellis wrote:
> >      > Also, what is it exactly that i am doing that you are elaborating
> a
> >      > community critique of?...like is this a criticism that goes andy
> >     ellis
> >      > is a wacko  or does it actualy engage the work being done on the
> >     ground
> >      > in baltimore to further this goal,if its the former i know that
> >     stuff if
> >      > its the latter, id like to hear your version of that
> criticism....
> >      >
> >      > On 4/4/07, *Andy Ellis* < andy.edebate at gmail.com
> >     <mailto:andy.edebate at gmail.com>
> >      > <mailto:andy.edebate at gmail.com <mailto:andy.edebate at gmail.com>>>
> >     wrote:
> >      >
> >      >     So tell me omri (and i dont ask this with the lazy
> revolutionary
> >      >     bombast i often espouse) what have you learned from a year of
> >      >     milliken debates that you are now using and working with your
> >      >     debaters on to address racial discrimination in education?
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >     On 4/4/07, *Omri Ceren* < ceren at usc.edu
> >     <mailto:ceren at usc.edu> <mailto:ceren at usc.edu
> >     <mailto:ceren at usc.edu>>> wrote:
> >      >
> >      >         No. You just don't get it.
> >      >
> >      >         There's actually a relatively robust criticism to be made
> >     of you,
> >      >         tracing how risk-free revolutionary posturing can hold
> >     the good
> >      >         hostage
> >      >         to the perfect while using aggressive smugness to
> insulate
> >      >         intellectual
> >      >         laziness. So for instance, no one of any intellectual
> >     care would
> >      >         claim
> >      >         to have seen the best debaters in the country claiming
> >     that "law
> >      >         is [the
> >      >         best method]... of pursuing racial justice in education".
> >     First
> >      >         of all,
> >      >         outside of a very precise use in pyschoanalytic critical
> >     literature,
> >      >         "the Law" isn't a meaningful category. There are multiple
> >      >         branches and
> >      >         levels of government empowered to enforce legislative and
> >     judicial
> >      >         decisions - and while I know that most of the debates
> >     that you
> >      >         saw this
> >      >         year didn't really think that those distinctions
> mattered,
> >      >         that's kind
> >      >         of my point too.
> >      >
> >      >         Anyway, like I said - there's a relatively robust
> >     criticism of your
> >      >         personal sensibility, political ideology, and
> interpersonal
> >      >         community.
> >      >         But I doubt you'd get it.
> >      >
> >      >         Omri.
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >         On 4/4/2007 3:00 PM Andy Ellis wrote:
> >      >         >  Uh right, i will continue to do the work outside of
> >     the legal
> >      >         structure
> >      >         >  and in it when necessary to increase minority access
> >     to and
> >      >         completion
> >      >         >  of college. I dont doubt the  efficacy of my methods,
> >     and sure
> >      >         i didnt
> >      >         >  see the same debates you saw but my term heard and i
> >     saw many
> >      >         teams
> >      >         >  adamently defending the necessity of using the law to
> >      >         challenege racial
> >      >         >  discrimination and i am simply asking those that made
> the
> >      >         claims to
> >      >         >  follow up on them.
> >      >         >
> >      >         >  Furthermore i understand debaters cant sue for other
> >     peoples
> >      >         >  inclusion(in a basic sense of the term i think there
> >     could be
> >      >         a claimant
> >      >         >  who suggested that they where damaged by the lack of
> >     minority
> >      >         inclusion
> >      >         >  in the community, but im probably wrong like you said
> >     im not
> >      >         in the
> >      >         >  highly technical debates) but there are legal cases
> and
> >      >         movements that
> >      >         >  debaters can contribute their skills and dedication to
> >     and
> >      >         furthermore
> >      >         >  if through those super high end debates you saw
> >     provide the
> >      >         training
> >      >         >  they promise then it seems as if you can figure out
> how to
> >      >         uses cases on
> >      >         >  your campus as entree points to legal justice
> movements.
> >      >         >
> >      >         >  or maybe all those things i heard in debates where
> >     just lies
> >      >         and nods to
> >      >         >  racial inclusion?
> >      >         >
> >      >         >  On 4/4/07, *Omri Ceren* < ceren at usc.edu
> >     <mailto:ceren at usc.edu> <mailto:ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu>>
> >      >         <mailto: ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu>
> >     <mailto:ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu>>>> wrote:
> >      >         >
> >      >         >     Andy,
> >      >         >
> >      >         >     Surely you should be leading this effort, what with
> >     all of the
> >      >         >     topic-specific research that I'm sure you did this
> >     year.
> >      >         And with all
> >      >         >     the high-tech policy rounds that you judged and
> >     scouted.
> >      >         >
> >      >         >     Omri.
> >      >         >
> >      >         >     On 4/4/2007 9:55 AM Andy Ellis wrote:
> >      >         >      > So after a year of hearing debates about how the
> >     law is
> >      >         not only
> >      >         >     a good
> >      >         >      > means of pursuing racial justice in education,
> >     but the
> >      >         best method, i
> >      >         >      > have a challenge to offer. Use the skills that
> >     you have
> >      >         acquired in
> >      >         >      > debating about the law to craft a strategy that
> >     uses the
> >      >         law to
> >      >         >     increase
> >      >         >      > meaningful minority participation in the
> >     community. The
> >      >         NCAA has been
> >      >         >      > sued for admissions requirements that preference
> >     test
> >      >         scores and
> >      >         >     gpa, if
> >      >         >      > there is precedent in that or other cases there
> >     should
> >      >         be a case
> >      >         >     to sue
> >      >         >      > your university or your debate team or ceda or
> >     the ndt,
> >      >         if they have
> >      >         >      > those standards. But dont let my suggestions
> >     limit you,
> >      >         many many
> >      >         >     many
> >      >         >      > of you have researched and learned a whole lot
> about
> >      >         using the
> >      >         >     law to
> >      >         >      > fight for racial justice in education, you im
> >     sure can
> >      >         come up with
> >      >         >      > something on your own.
> >      >         >      >
> >      >         >      >
> >      >         >      >
> >      >         >
> >      >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >      >         >      >
> >      >         >      > _______________________________________________
> >      >         >      > eDebate mailing list
> >      >         >      > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> >     <mailto:eDebate at www.ndtceda.com> <mailto:eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> >     <mailto:eDebate at www.ndtceda.com>>
> >      >         <mailto: eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> >     <mailto:eDebate at www.ndtceda.com> <mailto: eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> >     <mailto:eDebate at www.ndtceda.com>>>
> >      >         >      > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> >      >         >      >
> >      >         >      >
> >      >         >      >
> >      >         >
> >      >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >      >
> >      >         >      >
> >      >         >      > No virus found in this incoming message.
> >      >         >      > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> >      >         >      > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.26/746
> -
> >      >         Release Date:
> >      >         >     4/4/2007 1:09 PM
> >      >         >
> >      >         >
> >      >         >     --
> >      >         >
> >      >         >
> >      >         >     --------------
> >      >         >     PhD Student, USC Annenberg School for Communication
> >      >         >     Email: ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu>
> >     <mailto:ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu>> <mailto:
> >      >         ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu> <mailto:
> >     ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu>>>
> >      >         >     Mobile: 412-512-7256
> >      >         >     --------------
> >      >         >
> >      >         >
> >      >         >
> >      >         >
> >      >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >      >         >
> >      >         >  No virus found in this incoming message.
> >      >         >  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> >      >         >  Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.26/746 -
> Release
> >      >         Date: 4/4/2007 1:09 PM
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >         --
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >         --------------
> >      >         PhD Student, USC Annenberg School for Communication
> >      >         Email: ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu>
> >     <mailto:ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu>>
> >      >         Mobile: 412-512-7256
> >      >         --------------
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >      >
> >      > No virus found in this incoming message.
> >      > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> >      > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.26/746 - Release Date:
> >     4/4/2007 1:09 PM
> >
> >
> >     --
> >
> >
> >     --------------
> >     PhD Student, USC Annenberg School for Communication
> >     Email: ceren at usc.edu <mailto:ceren at usc.edu>
> >     Mobile: 412-512-7256
> >     --------------
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.26/746 - Release Date:
> 4/4/2007 1:09 PM
>
>
> --
>
>
> --------------
> PhD Student, USC Annenberg School for Communication
> Email: ceren at usc.edu
> Mobile: 412-512-7256
> --------------
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070404/84438975/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list