[eDebate] Reparations. Bad Neg. Ground does not constitute ground

scottelliott at grandecom.net scottelliott
Wed Apr 16 22:55:47 CDT 2008

The "negative" ground on this topic is horrible.

There is negative ground on the propositions "Rape is bad," "We should not
commit genocide," "Racism is wrong" and "child molesting is evil." There are
certainly cards out there that can give the negatives some type of ground to
debate. However, I don't think the ground is good and I don't think people want
to listen to rape good debates.

These are NOT extreme examples by the way. Evey example, except for perhaps
child molesting, is exaclty the type of affirmative advantages that will be
claimed. Take Native Americans: Plan: Make Ward Churchill Chief of all Native
Americans and give the land back. Advantage One: Genocide Justice. Advantage 2
Racism Justice, Advantage 3 Blood Quantum and other policies result in total

Slavery: Advantage 1. Justice for genocide. Advantage 2. Justice for cultural
genocide. Advnatage 3. Racism bad. Advantage 4. Rape of slave women and the
myth of the hypersexual black female.

These are just two "middle of the road" cases that have evidence readily
available. Granted, there is some negative arguments out there. But, I don't
want to be on the negative giving the judging pools we have now.

Yes, I have read Ron Greene's article on switch side debating. I disagree with
the conclusions people draw from the article. THere are reasons why in a
competitive activity such as tournamnet debates switch side debating is good.
The McCarthyism and "every speech must be ethical" issues from the 1950's do
not apply to the 21st Century application of debate. Just one example, let's
say I choose to go negative at a tournament, then listen to the affirmative
give a speech that touches me. Do I just quit? Who wins the debate if both
teams agree with the argument "genocide bad?" Does the affirmative win just
because they were the first to speak? Do we end up with multiple rounds like
the Louisville round at Wake--where teams refuse to debate and just leave the
decisions up to a coin flip by the tabroom.

There are definately "wrong forum" arguments to the claims that switch side
debating is bad.  For the purposes of competitive debate tournamnets, switch
sides is good for the game.

Scott Elliott

More information about the Mailman mailing list