Debate Tournament Commentary

Originally posted by Jamuhn

First, Native Americans were cannibals too, and still practiced it when Europeans arived. The final defeat of an enemy was to eat a prisoner.

Second, Turkey is considered a Western nation and certainly they are of a somewhat different race. Non-Western does not imply a different race. I mean, look at all the different races within America and Britain. Western has to do with philosophy regarding the different aspects of society and politics.

Not all Native American societies were canibalistic, therefore I only need one that wasn't to prove that Non-western socities can be democratic.

I am taking Non-Western to exclude societies derived from Europe. This is because the topic is poltical (democratic) therefore its reference to Westernism is in context and therefore political as well. I realize one could debate this, but a debate about semantics is very poor debate.

theLibra, what is your take on this?

Originally posted by ktprktpr

Not all Native American societies were canibalistic, therefore I only need one that wasn't to prove that Non-western socities can be democratic.

I am taking Non-Western to exclude societies derived from Europe. This is because the topic is poltical (democratic) therefore its reference to Westernism is in context and therefore political as well. I realize one could debate this, but a debate about semantics is very poor debate.

theLibra, what is your take on this?

I understand that, and neither were all Europeans cannibals.

So you consider Non-Western countries ones that are not politically derived from Europe or America or their subsequent westernized nations? Then, the question is reduced to, can a non-Western country become democratic without the aid or influence of democratic, westernized nations? If this is true, than democracy can be seen as a natural progression of politics, much like agriculture appearing simultaneously throughout diverse parts of the world.

Also, I don't think semantics make a poor debate, because if you don't know what the other person means to say, than you are not really arguing against them. Plus, you want others to know precisely what you mean when you are debating. Actually, defining key terms in a way favorable to myself has helped me win a lot of these debates.

Speaking from the prospective as someone who is part Native American we did have democracy. Although I won't name it due to this debate. I also on the last page showed the whole cannibalism thing.

Only two. :|

Originally posted by Odium
Only two. :|

Actually there were 3 large tribes mentioned. I only pointed out cannibalism because someone felt the need to point out Europeans practiced cannibalism. And if you want to mention a fringe element of one group, which became westernized, I pointed out the fringe element of another group that practiced it.

Tit for tat.

Rough Topic..........but we have had a couple of those thus far....

As for racist........not necassarily.........I can think of several directions to go with thelibra's position that would be tasteful and fairly accurate; read: given the right approach I could even the odds;..........I won't post it here though.......don't want to ruin thelibra's fun.

Again, I'm not fully on board with the racist angle........and arguing topics that test your logic/sense are really good mental exercises.....

Just my two cents.........


[edit on 24-7-2005 by MemoryShock]

The "Not Invented Here" Syndrome

Originally posted by Odium
Speaking from the prospective as someone who is part Native American we did have democracy.

One of my favorite Wikipedia pages mentions this (I'm a major fan of rule by consensus):

The promise of consensus decision-making

A lot of misconceptions regarding the pre-colonial inhabitants of North America are an artifact of the European assumption that other cultures were inferior, "savage" and therefore unworthy of study.

Just because European colonists were oblivious to something doesn't mean it didn't exist, however.

Its senseless to pretend that ATS is promoting a racist agenda. Why in the world would that be so, why would the 'pro' position here be the position of ATS more than the 'con'? Since when does ATS "Ignore Ignorance" rather than face it and deny it?

Originally posted by ktprktpr
The topic which theLibra and I are asked to argue is both RACIST (exclusionary of non-western societies) and extremely one-sided.

You are annoucing your withdrawl then?

I ask that a new topic be granted so ATS does not look like a neo-nazi site.

Its hardly racist, its a common topic that is discussed in society, with advocates in the non-western world.

Are you with me on this theLibra?

This is your topic. Thelibra will post an opening statement and you will respond within 24hours or forfeit the debate. Why are you u2uing us and making a public scene over this? We've asked everyone on a few occasions to discuss any problems with us, not make a drama bomb over it. You are the first and only person so far to have this reaction to this debate topic.

odium
Sorry but how can they even argue that topic?

Let us not pretend that there are no arguements for this out there. I won't start outlining them since a debate is currently underway. The debates have nothing to do with being 'correct', they're about constructing a good argument to defend your position. Rhetorical cunning has nothing to do with being right or wrong. Its a debate forum, not a research forum.

Oh man...

I'm in the same position theLibra was in when he started delving into the horrors of peak oil.

The situation with bird flu is ridiculous! They've got villagers out there slaughtering millions of potentially infected animals, and these folks are wearing nothing but hankerchiefs over their faces!

And the disposal methods... Ever wonder what a live chicken on fire looks like? How about shallow earthen pits filled with tens of thousands of live chickens in torn plastic bags? Or how about a stream choked with chickens... hehe hehe

Sorry, I had a Beavis moment.

Anyway, the situation is about as dismal as peak oil. I will be very interested to see what OTS pulls out of his hat, because I can't think of a single freakin' counter-argument other than NUKE ASIA, and I think that's pretty impractical, considering the net loss of life would be far in excess of what bird flu could do...

I've been trying to come up with counter points for the last hour, and that's all I've got..nuke Asia..can you believe it? Pathetic, no? Or maybe the situation is just that bad.

I pride myself on being able to play Devil's advocate, but this just knocked me for a loop. I can't muster a single decent argument for my opponent's position. For the sake of the debate I hope OTS can do better.

I guess I was totally wrong about my topic being more fair than the other...

I just want to go on record saying that the very subject matter of my debate topic offends me, and I'm half tempted to forfeit out of protest. You might have just as well told me to try and prove that whitey is superior to all the other races. Jesus F---ing Christ, people, where do you get this topic? KKK.com?!?!?! I don't WANT to win an argument where I have to take such a side.

I'm going to have to give this some thought. I may just give this round to Ktrptrprkprktprkrrtkrprkpr and spend my time doing something more productive than promoting bigotry.

I'm going to have to give this some thought. I may just give this round to Ktrptrprkprktprkrrtkrprkpr and spend my time doing something more productive than promoting bigotry.

(My emph.)

Like what? Reading blank pages in a data downpour, as your avatar is wont to do? I just noticed that..clever commentary or conspicuous coincidence?

I am not sure it is really that racist to be honest.

I mean, just look at the wording.

Non-Western Societies are incapable of democratic self-rule

Now, I'll ask you a simple question.

Is it more racist to believe that Democracy is the best and only method of self-rule?

Debated Heat

Originally posted by thelibra
I may just give this round to Ktrptrprkprktprkrrtkrprkpr and spend my time doing something more productive than promoting bigotry.

I certainly understand the sentiment, but I think any follower of the debate contest will understand that you don't get to choose your topic, nor that you necessarily agree with it simply because it was assigned to you.

You may even want to spell that out up front in your opening statement, if you like, then proceed to show us spectators what you've got. Other fighters have faced similar challenges so far in this contest -- although, admittedly, maybe not quite as controversial.

Up to you, of course, but I think you can make the case without believing in it (in fact, that's a traditional debate club principle) or promoting bigotry, and I personally don't think you should forfeit for a reason like this.




[edit on 7/24/2005 by Majic]

I really disagree that the topic promotes bigotry............

I just deleted two previous incarnations of this post because I realized that I was giving too much..........in this case, I'm the kid in the back of the room jumping up and down with his hand raised going, "Oh...Oh..Ooohh...I know, I know.."

There are definitely non-racist aspects to this debate........

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Like what? Reading blank pages in a data downpour, as your avatar is wont to do? I just noticed that..clever commentary or conspicuous coincidence?

The data downpour is all the information out there to be processed. The blank page is what everyone is faced with before they begin to place their thoughts upon it. There's more symbolism in it, and further details may be found amongst the downpour.

Originally posted by howmuchisthedoggy
Is it more racist to believe that Democracy is the best and only method of self-rule?

I don't believe governmental rule has anything to do with racism. I do, however, believe it racist to claim another race is incapable of anything other than certain rare medical conditions. For instance, I'd be hard-pressed to argue a case for sickle-cell anemia being prevalent in caucasions. But claiming that a people cannot achieve a particular state or ideological thought is absurd.

Originally posted by Majic
You may even want to spell that out up front in your opening statement, if you like, then proceed to show us spectators what you've got. Other fighters have faced similar challenges so far in this contest -- although, admittedly, maybe not quite as controversial.

Even with a disclaimer, I don't want my words to ever be taken as reason to fuel bigotry. If I'm going to do this, I'm removing race as a factor. I've already had one side of my family decimated to near extinction because the white man felt pretty much the same way as the debate topic at the time.

Anyway, if I'm going to parcipate, I've got work to do... thanks for the encouraging words, nonetheless.

memory shock
Were you thinking what I was thinking? How can one rule oneself, when one is being ruled by another?

WyrdeOne.........in a sense.....yeah.

I've sent u2us, but I'd like to make it clear that this is not a debate about one race over another - such an act would be stupid, plain and simple. Rather, it's a debate over whether a certain type of society can conform to a certain type of government. It's no different than if we asked you to debate whether "Western societies are incapable of sustaining a Communist system of rule," except that your debate is one that extremely relevant, NOT 50 years old.

Well, the opening statement is posted. I think I have found a way to argue the case that manages to keep the topic clinically seperated from race and religion.

And should I ever see my arguments in the debate quoted for the purposes of trying to prove any sort of racial or religious superiority, I will do everything in my power to make that person's life as miserable and brief as possible.

Since I'm charged with arguing the absuridity of this topic, my side carries no taint, possible or actual.

I have expressed my opinons in this thread and they still stand.

I will reply in the debate, because theLibra has convinced himself of a viable platform.

Where's the drama alert when you really need it?