3 ms·
There is an argument that "debate" in the manner performed by these clubs primarily trains people to think only in the ideological terms/framing given to them b
by dundarious 3y ago
There is an argument that "debate" in the manner performed by these clubs primarily trains people to think only in the ideological terms/framing given to them by their "betters". "Debate" in this sense is intellectually impoverished. Call it "rhetorics" if that's all you want -- it's useful, but it is more akin to Toastmasters than politics or political debate.
If there is to be any actual political thinking involved, then some challenge to the given framing must be allowed, or the framing must be capaciously defined. But it will still be mostly a lesson in rhetoric.
- lupire 3y agoIf you are a revolutionary/anarchist, why would you think that a organized debate league with a rigid rule structure is the hobby for you?
- dundarious 3y agoI'm not a revolutionary/anarchist and never have been. Does that answer your question?
- morelisp 3y agoUnlike the commenter, I was an anarchist when I did policy debate. What does my political orientation have to do with what kind of hobby I enjoy? This feels like an extremely conservative take, that hobbies and policy goals must have some kind of libidinal connection. More practically, do you think anarchists don't debate? Have you ever met a leftist?