秋と言えば？そう、秋Tです。
今回はQUDSの歴史に残る記念すべき大会、9/22,23に行われたJPDU Autumn Tournamentについて4年生のmomoさんことSenran Taoさんにブログを書いてもらいました！
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
First time for me to write this blog, sorry for the inconvenience, but I have to write in English, hope you guys will be patient enough to read …
(Do make sure you read carefully otherwise I will OKO)
Chapter 1:
21st, September, 2018, I finished my 集中講義 at some kind of fishery research center which was very far from Hakata, traveled all the way to Hakata, took a night bus.
22nd, September 2018. Arrive 7:10 a.m. in the morning. “It was a tired trip, and I still have plenty of time before the registration stars, better to relax in Onsen” I thought. Then I went to the Onsen at the underground of Kyoto tower. After that, grabbed a breakfast at McDonalds, then took off for the debate venue.
For people who are interested, find the following link: https://www.keihanhotels-resorts.co.jp/kyoto-tower/floorguide/spa.html
Everything was so fine until I found that the bus to the campus was much slower than what Google map have told me. Therefore, I almost rejiochi, and Hung sama was OKO.
Chapter 2:
Without further ado, let’s come to the hondai
Using ABP as practice, the team work of Hung-Momo has become much smoother.
OO 1
THR the social emphasis of charity/volunteering as a virtue
We decided 2 things very quickly:
1. Provide the matrix of judging this debate: This debate is not about in definition is charity/volunteering virtues or not, but about this “virtue-fication” of charity a good thing to the society or not.
2. Understanding the trade-off: people being cohered to donate VS the poor getting more money.
Some ideas came after that:
1: To mitigate trade off:
1.1 With the existence of virtue, people get internal satisfaction when they donate, even if they will not donate otherwise.
1.2 Coherence is not inherently bad, all virtues are cohesive, burden push gov to oppose all kinds of virtues.
2: To maximize benefit using stakeholder analysis
2.1 People who internalize it as virtue: donate more
2.2 People who do not care of charity but just what to gain fame (such as millionaires) will only donate on our paradigm.
2.3 (didn’t say but can be possible extension) talk about what will be the situation of charity institutions.
This is basically how we won, other teams failed to take down our case.
R2 OG 2
THS active racebending which is favorable toward socially underprivileged race (i.e., African American, Asian).
First, problem identification, underprivileged race need reparation and representation.
Solvency: How do we define “active racebending which is favorable toward socially underprivileged race” and how does it solve the problem
We were slaughtered by Jamie from CO, by providing alternatives like making new movies like Black Panther instead of substitute white actors in “white movies” by black people. That is when we realized this motion is not about having representation or no, but about which side can have better representation.
We lost to CG because we failed to identify the real trade-off in this debate. You can tell in comparison with R1 where our case was built on the core trade-off.
For people who are reading, learn a lesson from this!
R3 CG 3
THW abolish all regulations against service industry (such as sanitary condition of the hotel or additional car license for cabbing) except for those related to immediate impact to one’s life.
This round has been quite messy on the line of what kind of regulations are related to immediate impact to one’s life. We got 3rd because of lacking extension. Gov case was mainly about poor people are losing access to the market. We did a vertical extension on why the current standards are very likely to be bad due to structural problems. But it seems like it didn’t add much weight to the debate. We beat OO thanks to the POI given by Hung sama. Engagement daiji!
Regarding on possible extension, I think CG can talk about how the market will actually look like in AP. Please learn something about “Niche Market” or “market segment” on that.
R4 CO 1
THBT the environmental movement should abandon the narrative of personal responsibility in favor of one which emphasizes institutional accountability.
First: this is a trade-off motion, which side can better achieve the goal of environmental movement (i.e. protection of environment).
Stake-holder analysis: The actor who is capable of changing environment: people, company, politicians
Our OO talked about changing behavior of each induvial. Correctly pointed out by OG, due to the “tragedy of common” (if you don’t know about this, stop reading and search it now!), people would never change.
We then focused on the core interest of companies and politicians, explained companies change on market need, and politicians change on public will. Explained how people’s change in ideology have to come before to incentivize companies and politicians.
Here, we analyzed the core interest/ true incentive of capable stakeholders. Next time when you want to find our mechanisms, please try this! Note it down on your note book right now!!!
QF CO 2
TH, as White group in South Africa, would declare the formation of violent rebellion against the government in case they amend the constitution.
In this round, we didn’t really have any positive extensions. But we successfully explained how the AP world will be very bad and against the interest of the White group as a whole.
As a IR(?) motion, domestic and international are two aspects to be analyzed.
Don’t have much to say for this round, but engagement daiji!!!
SF OG 2
THBT Feminism movement should not celebrate Mohammed bin Salman.
Three arguments we run form OG:
1. In principle, why FM should not celebrate MBS
2. In practical, why MBS will be better incentivized
3. In practical, why celebrating will legitimize the MBS’s representation and why that is bad
1 and 3 were not well constructed. 2 was clashing with OO (Jamie, again), and we failed to engage with OO on the point that they said MBS is already doing his best.
Thanks to the hanging principle argument 1, we won against Baba’s team form CO who also suffered from the tsuyosa of Jamie.
GF OO 1
TH prefers the world with one unified currency.
It has been very fortunate for us to get OO in this round. But at first, we were a bit confused. It is hard to visualize the AP world. But luckily, we somehow figured it out the necessity of an independent currency, and why those necessity cannot be substituted in Gov paradigm. It seems hard, but it really just required the basic knowledge on domestic monetary policy and the power imbalance analysis which debater often run. Learn broadly can help you win from opening. (While learn deeply can help you to secure or steal win from opening).
Chapter 3
Especially to my kohais in QUDS
In the end of this blog, I want to say something really honest. Luck contributed a lot in getting this national champion, but in order to get some achievement, you need to be prepared for the arrival of Luck. That is to say to have to improve to the extent that your best possible performance can win against other people’s worst possible performance.
I achieved that minimum requirement by studying more than 100 debate lectures online or offline, going to a lot of tournaments and accumulate a lot of knowledge by reading or watching.
So, if you really want to improve yourself, you have to spend time, not necessarily in the same way with me, but in some way. You might not get the same result in the end, but I assure you it worth it, and your effort will finally payoff in one form or another.
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
QUAとして出場したmomoさんとHungさんがnational championになりました(/_;)
momoさんはGrand Final でのBest Speakerにも(;_;)すごい…
ブログ更新者もこの知らせを聞いて感動の一言に尽きました！！
LINEグループがいくつもの”偉業”スタンプで埋め尽くされました！(笑)
ナショチャンの力を借りながらこれからもディベート頑張っていきましょう！
↑ChampionなHung様とmomoさん
↑QUの歴史が生まれた瞬間を目にした方々