Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Proposition: Jessica Mandeville (Wood River High School) vs. Opposition: ikeda kazuya (Unaffiliated)

Judge: Cate Morrison (University of Rhode Island)

Resolution: This house believes that the borders of nation-states should not prevent the movement of refugees.

  • Jessica Mandeville
    Jessica Mandeville
    vs.



    ikeda kazuya
    ikeda kazuya
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at April 17, 2017 10:08:02PM EST by Jessica Mandeville

    Citations

    Show

    Here's my case
    What would you do if you and your children could die at anytime because of war both from within and outside of your country.? You would protect your children and yourself, namely, by running to safety. This is what millions of families are experiencing around the globe. Then, if the country you were fleeing to did not accept you, just because you were using both your common sense and relying on the only options available… what then?
    This house believes that the borders of nation-states should not prevent the movement of refugees.
    (1: Refugee Crisis) This escalating refugee crisis has caught the interest of many global superpowers, mostly because of the several hundred thousand refugees who are trying to get inside their borders. Refugee ‘hotspots’ according to this administration are- Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Each of these countries have an enormous number of displaced citizens due to war, famine, oppression and drought. Being unable to stay in their own country, these asylum seekers go to ‘where the grass is safer.’ This entails having to go through several nation-states to get there, including countries that may be aligned with the very country they are trying to escape. For every country they pass through, a refugee must ask for asylum. It is unlikely they will receive it. For example, a refugee trying to escape North Korea, although North Korea is not mentioned above, they have two options: Go to South Korea, which is suicidal due to border control, or go through China which is allied with North Korea.
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/29/politics/trump-travel-ban-countries/
    (1a: humanitarianism) The most important reason that we should protect and support refugees is based in the eternal and indisputable idea of humanitarianism. Man must support man. We are all equal; it says so in the constitution.This idea of equality should be universal, especially since our own country exists because of people seeking refuge from persecution in their own countries. America has boasted and remains proud of this diversity, and it seems counter intuitive to change our stance based on fear. The people who began our country were not afraid. We are a country of refugees. Everyone and their ancestors who have become great in America were let into America. Why should that change now?
    (1b: Radicalization) If we were not to let refugees into our country, what would happen? The rejected refugees may be recruited by other countries intent on converting them to terrorists, often the very thing they were trying to escape. Georgetown University's Ann Speckhard, who studies terrorist psychology, says: "Experience from many conflict zones teaches us that the longer these refugees are left to languish in despair in camps, the more prone they become to radicalization." In other words, there are serious security downsides to not accepting refugees. They could become radicalized, or act on behalf of a radicalist group. http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/9/12/refugee-crisis-forces-eu-to-rethink-open-borders.html
    (1c: Children Alone) Even children are subjected to harsh environments beyond imagination. One example of this is Alhatem, 17, and his 15-year-old brother Hatem’s story. They left their family behind and went to Turkey from Syria. It took them two attempts to get in because the Turkish army was patrolling the borders to keep refugees out. After three weeks in Turkey, they got on a raft - and were at sea for three days without food or water. Eventually arriving in Greece. These are the lucky ones. They risked their lives by fleeing Syria, like so many others.
    http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/20/europe/child-refugees-greece/

    (2: Economic benefits) Reason.com: “but what about the impact of these new entrants on Americans? Economists have shown that immigrants generally increase the host country's overall gross domestic product (GDP).” Refugees will boost our economy. Economic growth makes unemployment rates go down. It also reduces government borrowing.
    https://reason.com/archives/2016/02/16/taking-in-refugees-is-good-for

    For these reasons, I urge a propositional ballot.

    Posted at April 19, 2017 09:08:58AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 19, 2017 09:03:01PM EST by Jessica Mandeville

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 21, 2017 09:17:49AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 21, 2017 08:58:26PM EST by Jessica Mandeville

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at April 22, 2017 06:16:43PM EST by Cate Morrison

    Category Jessica Mandeville ikeda kazuya
    Use of evidence: 3 3
    Delivery skill: 3.4 3
    Coherence of arguments: 3.9 3.4
    Responsiveness to opponent: 3.8 3.5
    Identification of key points: 3 2.7
    Comments: Case is clear--bring it through the debate and keep using the arguments, both in refutation and in weighing against the opposition. Reminding us of the arguments in the opening speech during your rebuttal would help fill out the time, and would help you to compare your arguments to the negative. The closing speech seems to go in a very different direction than the opening. Use this speech to really investigate your scenario in comparison to your opponents' position. When citing evidence, use the author or the institution's name, not just the URL (Reason.com). Opening case was a bit long, so the final economic arguments didn't get fully developed I'm glad that you recorded the rebuttal in a different room--it was hard to hear the opening constructive above the background noise. You do a good job of reconstructing your own case in the rebuttal, but we need more refutation of your opponent. This would also help you fill your speech time.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Jessica Mandeville

    Reason for Decision:

    Congratulations on your first round! I thought that the arguments on both sides were thoughtful and well-made in the constructives. In this round, I am asked to choose between two dark scenarios for refugees: One where movement is possible but difficult, and one where movement is not possible. The affirmative paints a compelling picture of the pressures causing the refugee crisis and the risk of inaction. The negative gives clear reasons why we should not presume that freedom of movement guarantees safety or security, where they may not be welcomed. Ultimately I am persuaded by the affirmative's claim that while movement may indeed be dangerous, refugees are fleeing nearly certain death. They have made a decision already. I would need the negative to provide me with a clear alternative that can accommodate refugees while not creating the disadvantages of migration. I think that the negative gestures toward such an alternative, but in this round, I require more explanation. I also think that the affirmative does a little more work responding to the negative's argument in a way that upholds their case (for example, that the reason so many have died in the Mediterranean is because we have made movement so difficult for refugees) Therefore, I vote affirmative. For both debaters: in those final speeches, tell the judge what you think this round comes down to. Your position is what, theirs is what, yours is superior because why...


    Add Comment

    Please Create an Account or Log-In to post comments.

    Connect with Binghamton:
    Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

    Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by:

    PHP MySQL SUIT