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: kyara huff (Shorin Global) vs. Opposition: Alondra Mendoza (Unaffiliated)

Judge: Min Seob Lee (Kyunghee University)

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

  • kyara huff
    kyara huff
    vs.



    Alondra Mendoza
    Alondra Mendoza
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at April 17, 2017 08:43:04AM EST by kyara huff

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 19, 2017 12:39:48AM EST by Alondra Mendoza

    Citations

    Show

    12/11/2016, Actualidad, URL: https://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/225840-mujer-refugiados-abuso-austria-alemania

    12/05/2016, Actualidad, URL:https://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/225295-alemania-refugiado-violar-ahogar-joven

    Soeren Kern, 08/19/2016, El manifiesto, URL:http://www.elmanifiesto.com/articulos.asp?idarticulo=5413

    Nina Werkhäuser,05/23/2016, DW, URL: http://www.dw.com/es/los-refugiados-una-enorme-inversi%C3%B3n/a-19278317

    Posted at April 19, 2017 11:38:44AM EST by kyara huff

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 21, 2017 12:40:51AM EST by Alondra Mendoza

    Citations

    Show

    El Siglo de Torreón, 04/11/2017, URL:https://www.elsiglodetorreon.com.mx/noticia/1330493.incendio-arrasa-con-campamento-de-refugiados.html

    El país,02/22/2016, URL:http://internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2016/02/21/actualidad/1456068378_388905.html

    Posted at April 22, 2017 11:30:53PM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at April 23, 2017 08:52:40AM EST by Min Seob Lee

    Category kyara huff Alondra Mendoza
    Use of evidence: 3.3 3.5
    Delivery skill: 3.3 3.5
    Coherence of arguments: 3.3 3.6
    Responsiveness to opponent: 3.3 3.6
    Identification of key points: 3.3 3.5
    Comments: These are the points what you could have been improved.

    1. If it is truly beneficial that we accept refugees as foreign workers to national economy, why governments in the status quo prevent borders? Didn't the governments of developed countries really know the economic benefits?

    2. How 'education' and 'increasing police force' can prevent crimes of refugees? Are the causes of 'crimes of non-refugees' and 'crimes of refugees' the truly same?
    These are the points what you could have been improved.

    1. If we need to prevent the crimes in developed countries, why it is ok to left refugees in dire situations like dictatorships, internal war and other humanitarian crisis?

    2. Is 'cultural background' real cause of crime like sexual assault, terror and others? Is it really more serious problem than the crimes by native citizens?

    The decision is for the Opposition: Alondra Mendoza

    Reason for Decision:

    If proposition speaker uploaded Proposition closing video, I could give more comments which help your future debates. But I still need to explain why I gave this debate to opposition.

    1st, in the case of economic benefit/cost, when the government speaker talked about the benefits from refugees as foreign workers, opposition speaker neutralize the point by saying the supports to the refugees. Unless both speaker provide comparison between benefit & cost, I cannot give clear win/loss about this point to any side.

    2nd, in the terms of 'saving people's lives, it was good set-up from the proposition speakers, but when this debate goes to mainly about benefit/harm about developed countries rather than 'which way is better to save refugees themselves', this point could not become decisive point of this debate.

    3rd, in the case of crime, although opposition side gave somewhat extreme cases like sexual assault, terror and others, the response from the proposition speaker was mainly about 'we can solve the problem by education and increasing police force'. The response from the opposition was, 'it is not easy to change the human nature' and no response from the proposition in this point. Plus, just increasing police force without regarding 'cultural aspect' didn't gave me certainty to prevent crime.

    Thank you very much for reading this decision.


    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