This past Presidential election was the most contentious in my lifetime. Not only did it seem like Democrats and Republicans agreed on very little, it also seemed like there was actual animosity - maybe even hatred - directed to the standard bearers of the other party. Discussions about politics seemed to get heated in the most casual of settings. Articles were written in the popular press about the phenomenon, citing rifts developing within families and among coworkers. Perhaps what was lacking in the usual back-and-forth of political talk were the tools to parse arguments and to decide which position was the stronger or the weaker - perhaps what was lacking was a common knowledge of debate.
But then September rolled around, and something happened; the debates happened. While there was very little that Democrats and Republicans agreed on, one thing was clear to everybody: the debates between the two candidates turned out to be extremely important. Coming into the first debate behind in the polls, Kerry exited from the trio of contests in a dead heat with the incumbent. Several factors were responsible for the change in the polls, but perhaps the most important was simply that the majority of people who listened to the debates thought Kerry had won “on substance.”
Substance is something which was sorely lacking in our political discourse - but in the debates it was inescapable. Both candidates not only presented their narrative of the country’s issues (how we got to where we are, and what we should do next), but they also actually attempted to provide clash with each other’s arguments. This direct back-and-forth was missing from all other forums (campaign speeches, advertisements, documentaries, etc), and it served to remind everyone just how important debate is.
Debate is the only forum where you are actually judged on your ability to answer and win arguments - and thus it provides the most useful mechanism to decide between competing political visions, since it uniquely creates an incentive to answer arguments.
What are the alternatives to debate? Are there any? Absent a forum where arguments are resolved, what is the mechanism to diffuse disagreements? A little reflection on those questions forces one to realize that without organized discussions to resolve disagreements, and without a stated goal to come up with solutions to questions as provided in debate, people might be more apt to settle differences in political values violently. That’s not an overstatement - that’s history.
Given how much flux there is in organized scholastic debate - “flux” meaning new activities like “public forum debate”, and “flux” meaning criticisms of the very act of debating seeping into policy debate rounds, complete with rather radical alternatives to the traditional back-and-forth of policy debate - perhaps now would be a good time for debaters to take a step back and review the impact of debate on this latest era of political change in our country, and realize how important our activity is. Perhaps a review of how dramatically debate effected the election would help debaters to rededicate themselves to the more classic aspects of the activity - since it is now clearer than ever that good policy debate-oriented clash can actually change minds and effect political movements. Perhaps the current group of debaters should be educated as to who the coaches were in this year’s rounds of Presidential debates: on the Republican side there was Karl Rove, a former high school debater, and on the Democratic side there was Robert Shrum, a former college NDT-level debater for Georgetown, and a coach at Boston College. Knowing who the players are may help debaters understand that they are training themselves for a future on a greater stage... and hearing even presidential candidates arguing for change in the light of obstacles - for fiat - may help reinvigorate even the oldest conventions of our activity.
One thing came through loud and clear these past few months: debate is important. Debate is worth doing and it is worth teaching. The accomplished debater can sway those hostile to her position, and can win converts to his agenda. In a world where information comes at the individual in an unremitting deluge, debate can provide the means not only to filter information, but to reshape it as the debater deems appropriate. Congratulations to those of you who have dedicated yourself to this activity. Take a moment to appreciate what debate is, and help keep it strong.
