Their position is not built on Reason, therefore you cannot use Reason to argue them out of their position.
I can’t get past the kid speaking at 3,000 words per minute. Whatever his argument is becomes incomprehensible to these old ears.
Peaceful coexistence with these people is not possible.
Prepare yourself.
L
This will not end well.
The rate of our cultural spiral is hard to comprehend...but take the Roger Stone arrest as a sign of what's to come.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/07/mao-little-general-horror-cultural-revolution
Thousands of teenage hands rocketed skywards as the Great Helmsman stepped down from the rostrum in Tiananmen Square to greet the shock troops of his revolution. It was the summer of 1966 and Mao’s Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution – a catastrophic political convulsion that would catapult China into a decade of heartbreak, humiliation and deadly violence – was under way.
Wow....that was NOT debate. It was emotional outbursts presented with no facts.
If this continues in the education system we are F’d. IMO, It’s going to take a national calamity affecting every citizen in this country before sanity is restored.
That was a very tiring listen.
High School debate circles should not allow Social Justice Warriors to serve as judges.
I would like Socrates to reach out from the grave and bitchslap those fools.
These kids are preparing for adulthood and these horrible leftists are everywhere. Mind as well realize it early and !earn how to fight.
JoMa
Too much hand waving — looks like a comedian.
The asian-american teacher is a real dick.
When I debated I the late 70s, you we judged on your speaking and communication.
We are in trouble when white people lecture us about how we are all racists because a racists should not lecture people on racism.
Every Democrat is a violent totalitarian thug.
BM
“Psychological violence”...what a bunch of pu***es
One of the many blessings in my life was participating in high school and college debate teams. At tournaments like the one where the debate in this article took place, each participating team provides a judge that the tournament organizers assign to judge the various debates. I judged many dozens, maybe hundreds of high school debates, and it was very simple to let what the debaters said determine who did the better job of debating (and that was the explicit bottom line, preprinted on most ballots, in deciding which team won the debate). If one team ignores an argument posed by the other, and the debaters asserted a particular impact for that argument, the judge would have clear reason to accept the assertions of the only team that discussed that argument, even if the judge had strong personal feelings about the argument.
I watched this a while ago. What was most disturbing to me was at the end where they were in an office? or somewhere and expressing their frustration and questions to a couple of three adults. What was scary was that the consensus seemed to be that they would have to change the rules of debate in order to accommodate the social justice movement. They were saying things like “We’re in new territory here”. And “We’re going to have adapt to this new paradigm”. The debate is already lost when you can’t have civil debate because someone objects to the topic.