Judge: Joe Leeson-Schatz (Binghamton University)
Resolution: RESOLVED: The United Nations should adopt a resolution decrying or demanding an end to the annual dolphin hunt in Taiji, Japan.
|Click to begin|
Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.
Posted at April 21, 2014 10:47:59PM EST by Zachary Zertuche
Johansson, Patrik. The Humdrum Use of Ultimate Authority: Defining and Analysing Chapter VII Resolutions. Department of Political Science, Ume University, Ume, Sweden. Nordic Journal of International Law 08/2009; 78(3):309-342. DOI:10.1163/090273509X12448190941129. http://www.researchgate.net/publication/233509486_The_Humdrum_Use_of_Ultimate_Authority_Defining_and_Analysing_Chapter_VII_Resolutions
Sivil, Richard. Studied at the University of Durban Westville, and at the University of Natal, Durban. He has been lecturing philosophy since 1996. WHY WE NEED A NEW ETHIC FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, 2000, http://www.crvp.org/book/Series02/II-7/chapter_vii.htm
Gilhooly, Rob. "New Japanese Method for Killing Dolphins Is Inhumane." Www.newscientist.com. NewScientist, 19 Apr. 2013. Web. 21 Apr. 2014. <http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23380-new-japanese-method-for-killing-dolphins-is-inhumane.html#.U1XCvlyz5g0>. /zzwc
Mansbridge, Philip. CEO of Care for the Wild International. "Why It's Capitalism That Drives Dolphin Slaughter in Taiji, Not Tradition or Culture." Www.huffingtonpost.co.uk. The Huffington Post: United Kingdom, 19 Feb. 2014. Web. 21 Apr. 2014. <http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/philip-mansbridge/dolphin-slaughter-japan_b_4814281.html>. /zzwc
Bookchin, Murray. Director Emeritus @ the Institute of Social Ecology. The Modern Crisis, p. 106-108. 1987.
Palmer, Mark J. Associate Director
International Marine Mammal Project "TAIJI DOLPHIN DRIVE HUNT IS NOT A TRADITION." Savejapandolphins.org. Earth Island Institute, 20 Jan. 2014. Web. 21 Apr. 2014. <http://savejapandolphins.org/blog/post/taiji-dolphin-drive-hunt-is-not-a-tradition>. /zzwc
Tokar, Brian. Faculty Member @ the Institute for Social Ecology, Founder of NorthEast RAGE. Capitalism, Nature, Socialism, On Bookchins Social Ecology and its Contributions to Social Movements, March 2008, Vol. 19, Iss. 1
Bookchin, Murray. Director Emeritus @ the Institute for Social Ecology. Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology, What is Social Ecology? 1993, http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/bookchin/socecol.html
Posted at April 22, 2014 10:47:59PM EST by Steven Dikowitz
Schneider, 08 (Nathan, August 11, 2008 Update and Thoughts http://vegan-abolitionist.blogspot.com/)
Deckha, Associate Professor, University of Victoria Faculty of Law, 10
(Maneesha, LL.B. from the University of Toronto and her LL.M. from Columbia University, Its time to abandon the idea of human rights, 12-10-10, http://www.thescavenger.net/nonhumans/its-time-to-abandon-the-idea-of-human-rights-77234-536.html, DOA: 9-19-13
Kyle Ash is the Legislative Coordinator for the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. He holds an LLM in International Law, an MA in Global Environmental Policy, and a BA in International Affairs and Political Economy. ARTICLE: WHY "MANAGING" BIODIVERSITY WILL FAIL: AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO SUSTAINABLE EXPLOITATION FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW Nonhuman Law, 2007, 13 Nonhuman L. 209
Kim, UC Irvine political science professor, 2009
(Claire, Slaying the Beast: Reflections on Race, Culture, and Species, http://aapf.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/kalfou.pdf
Bobertz, 1995 (Bradley, Assistant Professor of Law, University of Nebraska College of Law, legitimizing Pollution, Texas Law Review, 1995,URL, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/
HEROD 2004 [James, getting free, 7th edition, http://jamesherod.info/?sec=book&id=1
Posted at April 23, 2014 10:49:28PM EST by Zachary Zertuche
Kurtz, Anna. Oscarson, Christopher. Members of National Council of Teachers of English Conference on College Composition and Communication BookTalk: Revising the Discourse of Hate, 2003. ProQuest
Posted at April 24, 2014 11:40:54PM EST by Steven Dikowitz
Chimni 12 (B.S., internationally renowned legal scholar, Oregon Review Of International Law, Vol 14, Issue 17, Capitalism, Imperialism, and International Law in the Twenty-First Century, pgs. 31-32, published 2012, accessed 1/7/14)
Herod, 2006 (James, political activist, Columbia graduate, Strategies that have failed http://site.www.umb.edu/faculty/salzman_g/Strate/GetFre/05.htm)
Zizek in 1995 Slavoj, Ideology Between Fiction and Fantasy, Cardozo Law Review
Kovel 2002 (Joel, Professor of Social Studies at Bard, The Enemy of Nature, p 223)
Gibson-Graham, 2006 (Graham is Professor of Geography for Clark University, Gibson Prof. Geosciences University of Mass. Amherest,A Postcapitalist Politics, p. 53-54)
Johnston 4 (Adrian, prof philosophy U of New Mexico International journal of Zizek studes. Vol 1.0 The Cynics Fetish: Slavoj iek and the Dynamics of Belief)
Zizek, 02 (Slavoj, Senior Researcher at the University of Ljubljana Revolution at the gates p.169- 171)
O'Shea, Editor of The Socialist Alternative, 2005
(Louise , Understanding Marxism: Reform or Revolution?, Socialist Alternative, Volume: 91, http://www.sa.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=648&Itemid=106, Accessed: 7-9-9
Holloway 5 (John, Ph.D in Political Science from the Univ of Edinburgh, can we change the world without taking power. http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/5616
Posted at April 25, 2014 05:54:00PM EST by Zachary Zertuche
Reference to Zizek's solution to cap I used to non-unique his 9 arguments:
Zizek, Slavoj. Senior researcher at the Institute of Sociology University of Ljubljana. "Violence", 2008, p. 170-171.
This match has been completed. Show the Decision.
Submitted at April 28, 2014 01:14:59AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz
|Category||Zachary Zertuche||Steven Dikowitz|
|Use of evidence:||5.5||5.5|
|Coherence of arguments:||5||4.6|
|Responsiveness to opponent:||4.4||4.5|
|Identification of key points:||4.5||5|
|Comments:||I like your start with definitions and qualifying your evidence. Good job on leading with your framework as well. I also think you do a good job balancing speed and clarity for a more public format. A little too much "one, sub point a, sub point b, etc". Good impacts with Bookchin, etc.
Not as good at balancing speed with public format. But you're lucky you ended up with a judge who can flow in this round. You do a good job responding overall. I think you should do more impact turning against this strategy in terms of why capitalist solutions through mechanisms like the UN would be good. A lot of what you label as turns are either defense of offense that could be better developed. Isolating fewer pieces of offense and only making your best arguments given the time constraints of this format is better than just trying to put a bunch of answers on each flow.
Both worlds don't exist in a capitalist world frame since his alternative directly rejects that. You need to either be making more pragmatism arguments / capitalism good / etc. The he participates in cap as well is not a great argument. Do more direct weighing of impacts instead of brushing aside his impacts and just attacking the solvency.
|Nice with the speciesism discourse kritik. You also do a good job balancing speed with clarity in a public format. "Animals" "Dehumanization" "Rights Approaches"
You also have a good secondary argument about environmental lawmaking case turn as well. I like the cap k alternative. You could do more to explain how that would solve your speciesism/language kritik more.
UN fails isn't offensive. You do a good job at extending your links against the use of UN / single issue campaigns / cap and state links. You're also doing a good job impacting out the problems of consumerism and capitalism. While you have a lot of evidence on why the alt can work, examples in your own words would be beneficial as well. You also made the right strategic choice not going for the language k. You could have concluded stronger on your rights based approaches fail argument.
The decision is for the Opposition: Steven Dikowitz
Reason for Decision:
This is among the best online debates I've judged yet. Great performance by both.
I ultimately vote for the opposition since I think the proposition's closing speech spent more time on ad homs and bad defense instead of the offensive arguments that exist. The opposition reads a lot of evidence about how the denial of the alternative is what enables capitalism to survive and that rejecting will lead the way to a world beyond cap, which turns the case because the (as stated in the opening prop) wealth fuels the drive to hunt dolphins. However, if the proposition spent more time on not just the effectiveness of the UN but the value of reformist initiatives, working within the state, and using rights appeals that would be a better strategy. I think that's what the root of this debate is really about and more time on that would have radically changed the way I evaluated the round.
Again, great job to both of you. You did a very good job at bringing in elements of traditional competitive debate into an online format and made it very enjoyable to watch!