3 votes

Speech and Debate help

I have an upcoming high school National Qualifier for Lincoln-Douglas debate..
My topic was just released

"Resolved: The United States is justified in intervening in the internal political processes of other countries to attempt to stop human rights abuses."

I have to argue both sides of this topic, and I knew you guys could help (especially with the negation side)

The more complex/intricate the argument the better. Linking an argument to a cited philosopher, philosophy, or theorist normally produces the strongest cases.

Example: Dependency Theory, Jean Baudrillard, nihilism



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Cyril's picture

Are you aware of Bastiat's The Law?

Are you aware of Bastiat's The Law?

For instance, on the "Superman Idea" and surrounding chapters?

http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html#SECTION_G063

Might help inspire yourself.

'HTH,

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

I won't do your work for you, but John Rawls'

A Theory of Justice should have something for you on the affirmative side with his whole, "pretend we are the least fortunate" looking glass.

With a little creativity, the ever present and overused in high school debate, Thomas Malthus, might have something useful on the negative. (letting people kill each other off is more "humane" from a utilitarian standpoint) Combine him with that idiot Bentham and you can make quite a punch, but I'll warn you, there is a LOT of material out there on these two, and the judges have heard it all. You'll need to have a creative approach or twist, and be prepared for the attacks on your sources. You might even scare yourself defending them. Don't lose your "center" on that one.

And as a former CX-er and one who dabbled in LD, congrats and good luck.