[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

RE:JASON JARVIS/racist discourse and debate

Since I am finding myself simply repeated ignored arguments, I will stop
doing so. 

The questions seems to be these.

1. Does debate have real world applications? Of course it does. It certainly
will affect all of those in the round. It is key to understand that debate
IS a game. It isnt trivial, but what is being discussed has implicit and
explicit guidelines to follow. The ballot of the round DOES NOT HAVE TO BE A
LEGITIMIZATION OF ISSUES, rather arguments. Issues like racism are occurring
everyday, everywhere. I unlike some people, am glad to see such issue being
discussed in a realm which allows for the theoretical examination of methods
of solvency and advantages/disadvantages. It seems that Mr. Madrid would
rather have such issues not discussed, regardless of the positive
implications. To what level can racism be ligitimized in a debate round
which is frther than it actually is in society? I see no propensity for
additional harm.

2. Would voting against a team supporting racism discourse be wrong? I would
say yes. If the other team thinks so, and a kritique is run, vote on the
kritique. But if both tems engage in the discourse, the judge shouldnt mold
debate into what he or she simply desires. Let it mold itself. As I had
indicated previously, debate is not here to serve as a safe haven for the
judge or debater, free of any non-friendly ideas. Simply put, if you feel
that strongly, dont subject yourself to possible dehumanization by judging.
While I feel that such discourse can only benefit everyone involved, if you
feel that such discourse is harmful, dont listen to it. Good luck, though.
Overall it is hard to avoid.

3. Is racism a "black thing?" Certainly not. First of all, no one ailve
today has experienced the type of discrimination the slaves had to suffer,
and any parallel drawn between the two is certainly insulting and racist in
itself. Everyone experiences discrimination, whether or not it is because of
race or skin color. My friend is from Egypt, and was told he is ineligible
for a minority scholarship, since he isnt black. He is certainly
African-American, first generation. More so than most people calling
themselves African-Americans. He has experienced racism. I have been an
eyewitness to racism.

4. If we all agree that racism is bad, WHICH WE ALL DO, what is the best
course of action to fight it? Mr. Madrid would advocate the suppression of
racism discourse in debate rounds. I say that only hides the issue which
allows for the perpetuation of racism in society. Lets just pretend it isnt
there, and it will go away. I say we must talk about it and support
discourse to try and find a solution. IF the mere discourse on racism
actually in the real world legitimizes racism at the same time, then good.
Only after it is legitimized can we begin to fight it. Simply punishing
racist discussion with a ballot wont do ANYTHING for helping the actual
problems, if that is what is concerning anyone. If you, as a debater, think
racism is bad, address it and try to find a solution. If you, as a judge,
think racism is bad, allow discourse that may arrive at some theoretical
solution. The theoretical benefits outweigh the theoretical costs. 

Mr. Madrid has reitterated one point continuously: by him sitting in a round
and listening to racism discourse, he has had his psyche damaged and has
been dehumanized. The ballot is the only way of righting this wrong.  I
think his ballot is just as prejudiced as the very racism he is fghting, and
no progress is made.

I will gladly answer any responses to any of thispost (corry to have to
condense so many other posts into one.)

Matt Kuss
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page