DEBATE SEMINAR CA: Ariefinara Hernawan NUDC Kopertis IV, Bandung CA: Ariefinara Hernawan Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia Contact: FB: Ariefinara Hernawan Youtube: DebateVlog

Deputy Leader of Opposition GOVERNMENT OPPOSITION Prime Minister Leader of Opposition Deputy Prime Minister Deputy Leader of Opposition Member of Government Member of Opposition Government Whip Opposition Whip

The British Parliamentary System 4 teams, 2 sides: Government & Opposition There are two teams (consisting two speakers each) in each side: Opening and Closing. Case-building/preparation time is fifteen minutes. Seven minutes substantive speeches (POIs between the first and sixth minute).

TYPE OF MOTIONS PROPOSAL There is a problem that requires a solution. Example : ○ THW Intervene North Korea VALUE JUDGEMENT Debating whether a phenomenon brings benefit or harm TH Regrets the rise of consumerism

Role Fulfillment: Prime Minister The Prime Minister is the first speaker in the debate Setting up the debate A setup contains context, definitions, parameter/framework, stance, and model (if needed) A setup must be: Clearly linked to the motion as a whole Reasonable and debatable Arguments to support the setup

Role Fulfillment: Leader of Opposition If the setup brought by the Prime Minister is unclear, or the Prime Minister does not bring any setup, the Leader of Opposition has the right (and responsibility) to set up the debate. Declare the stance of the Opposition: Stick with the status quo (it is necessary to explain what status quo entails), or Bring a counter-proposal/counter-model Rebuttals for the arguments brought by Prime Minister Questioning your opponent is not considered as a rebuttal. Arguments

Definitional Challenge The Prime Minister might offer a definition in which it is hard to debate. When this happens, here is what the opening opposition can do: Think and check back : Hard to debate -> point out the unfairness of the definition, yet carry out as it is. E.g. THW Legalize Same-Sex Marriage-> Setting is only in Guatemala (Uncommon) Impossible to debate -> Leader of Opposition (and only the Leader of Opposition) may challenge the definition. THBT USA Should Implement Austerity Measures-> Setting is in the past -> Undebatable

Definitional Challenge: cont’d The Leader of Opposition may challenge the definition by: Explaining why PM’s definition is impossible to debate in Stating explicitly that the LO would challenge the definition Explaining the new definition and why this is a much more reasonable definition Bring arguments within the new definition

Definitional Challenge: cont’d ONLY CHALLENGE THE DEFINITION WHEN THERE IS NO OTHER WAY. CHECK FIRST. If the definition brought by the PM is unfair, but still debatable, point out the unfairness in it but proceed without changing the definition. Remember that a definitional challenge will change the debate drastically (and often times not for the better).

Role Fulfillment: Deputy Prime Minister and Deputy Leader of Opposition Rebuttals against the previous speaker(s) Arguments to further support the team’s case, deepening the level of analysis brought by the team.

CLOSING HALF

Role Fulfillment: Member of Government and Opposition Rebuttals Bringing an extension to the debate An extension is defined as anything that hasn't yet been said by that side of the debate An extension may consist of: New arguments which have not yet been made in the debate. New rebuttals. New examples. New analysis or explanations of existing arguments.

Role Fulfillment: Government and Opposition Whip Rebuttals Reduce the persuasiveness! Amplify extension material(s) brought by the member speaker Must not bring new matter New matter means completely new line of argumentation that has not been touched before. New analysis, precedence, and examples extending an established idea are allowed. Strengthening/deepening your member’s substantive is okay, provided that the substantive has already been analzed sufficiently in the member’s speech

IMPORTANT NOTE NO AUTOMATIC WIN OR LOSS IN THE DEBATE There is no such thing as automatic loss due to unfulfilled roles. Rather, you would most likely lose because when you don’t (a) bring any extensions as MG or (b) rebutting as OO, you’re missing out opportunities. Do not worry about labelling your substantive as rebuttals or argument, we value your analysis

PROPOSITION FIAT The government teams are allowed to assume that the policy will pass. It is NOT a valid opposition line to argue that a parliament will not pass the policy. A government team however CANNOT assume the way that other actors will react. Ex: THBT Russia should make a credible public offer to the United States for joint decommissioning of their entire nuclear arsenal the government can assume that Russia will make the offer. the government team cannot assume that the United States will accept the offer.

Points of Information Maximum length of a POI: 15 seconds. Don’t badger the speaker into accepting your POI. Do not cut someone in the middle of his/her POI. A POI may be repeated if the speaker in front asks for it

STANCE AND MECHANISM Stance is about what you’re proposing or what you’re trying to prove THW Set Truth and Reconciliation Commission to the victim of 1998 Stance : Setting up TRC and prohibits people from going to trial TH Regrets the rise of Choice Feminism Stance : To prove that the concept of choice is bad in achieving the goal of feminism Example: That cigarette advertising should be banned. The structure of a team’s argument could be as follows: 1. State an argument in favor of the topic: Cigarette advertising should be banned because it entices young people to smoke by making cigarette smoking look like a glamorous activity. 2. Explain the argument: Young people see images of sports heroes and models endorsing smoking. They are insecure and in need of some affirmation, so they turn to cigarettes, assuming they will achieve the happiness they believe the sports heroes and models enjoy. This is how they will get addicted. 3. Use examples: Cigarette companies aggressively advertise in glamorous sports like Formula One. Marlboro spends $50m a year to ensure that McLaren team can have ‘Malboro’ plastered all over its livery. Their product is seen on the drivers and models that parade around like advertising billboards trying to sell their products, often to kids who are impressionable. 4. Tie the argument back into the topic: So as you can see, cigarette advertising entices young people into smoking by giving them glamorous images to aspire to. Cigarette advertising is therefore dangerous and it should be banned.

ARGUMENT An argument can be philosophical or practical. Both arguments should be equally valued by the adjudicator. An argument should answer : 1. How is the argument true ? In Practical Argument : explaining how the argument can work to achieve a goal In Philosophical Argument : explaining how there is a right or responsibility to fulfill 2. Why is the argument important ? Comparing why your argument is more important than opponent’s argument

Types of Argument Urgency WHAT problems in status quo that need a quick response from goverment ? Show WHY status quo is not enough to solve the problem WHAT harms could occur toward the actor involves in the debate if government didn’t use aff’s proposal NOW, Conclusion: Gov failed that’s why should use this mechanism

Types of Argument Justification (philosophical ground) Why the rights that you want to defend is important? WHY your proposal will not harm other actors ? Even if it is harmful to other actor, WHY is it still justifiable to do ur proposal ? Comparison of rights,

Types of Argument (Impacts) Effectiveness What is you objectives? State it clearly How each of your mechanism can achieve each objectives? Compare your effectiveness with status quo mechanism Benefit or Harm Explain problem in status quo in detail to related actor (main or secondary actor that you want to protect) or certain concept How is your proposal will bring betterment / harm in status quo

Building Rebuttal Argument attacking opposing team’s argument, by showing that it: is based on a flaw evidence (error of fact, invalid analogy, logically unrealistic, unreliable data) is irrelevant to the proof of the topic stand on the wrong ground or violate certain principal involves unacceptable implications should be accorded little weight Some important elements of rebuttals : Apply the principal of A-R-E + Link Back Cluster your rebuttals appropriately; provide sign posting! Prioritize to attack the main argument Do not merely question; prove other wise! Rebuttal is any argument that logically tends to the conclusion that the opposing team’s arguments should be accorded less weight that is claimed for them. Rebuttal can be conducted for example by: showing that the opposing argument is based on an error of fact or an erroneous interpretation of fact showing that the opposing argument is irrelevant to the proof of the topic showing that the opposing argument is illogical showing that the opposing argument, while itself correct, involves unacceptable implications showing that the opposing argument, while itself correct, should be accorded little weight Organization of rebuttal: It is not necessary to rebutt every single point and fact raised by the opposition. Single out their main arguments and attack those first. Savage their theme line and show how it falls down - and show why yours is better! You should rebut by both destroying the opposition's arguments and by establishing a case that directly opposes theirs.

Some notes Team Rank: 1st ranking got 3 points 2nd ranking got 2 points 3rd ranking got 1 point; and 4th ranking got NO point Total points from 7 preliminary rounds will determine whether your team will break in the Elimination Round Main break: Octofinals Novice Break: Quarterfinals No low point win, best speaker may come from losing team

Final Words: Debate is not about technicality, it is a package of diverse ability to creating, analyzing, structuring, and narrating an argument supported with strong knowledge of issue(s) that is assessed holistically. This is why score in BP is not broken down into the infamous Manner-Matter-Method. Note on equity, be considerate with using certain terms/words and referring to certain groups of people