[eDebate] Challenge to the Community

Beth Skinner beth.skinner
Wed Apr 4 19:43:44 CDT 2007


To me, the larger point is that when we select law-focused, USFG-focused
resolutions one of the reasons people give is that it will help us to be
better advocates if we understand the intricacies of government action.  If
this is a good reason then we SHOULD ask how people are going to use a
season's worth of education in practical ways.  If the reaction is 'well, we
really can't accomplish change this way' then why do we keep selecting these
topics?  How many years does it take to learn the futility of activism
through state channels?  If the reaction is 'we're too lazy to do actually
do anything with the knowledge we gain' or 'I just like sounding good in
rounds when I read cool cards' then that is sad.  Millions of dollars are
spent each year on college debate.  Maybe there are better uses for that
money.

Beth

p.s. congratulations to Omri on making Andy seem like the reasonable one -
not a lot of people are capable of that



On 4/4/07, Steven D'Amico <stevendamico at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> does anyone else find this similar to Stalin arguing with Hitler? As an
> Italian I'll just side with whoever wins.
>
> On 4/4/07, Andy Ellis <andy.edebate at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 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
> > > --------------
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > eDebate mailing list
> > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070404/3e1c1ed5/attachment.html 



More information about the Mailman mailing list