Debatable

The quarterfinals motion for this year's Debatable IV is about gender! Many trans people find their appearance a point of scrutiny in the public. All many of them want is to be treated like any other cis-person and to blend into everyone instead of being stared at. Some people "pass" for being cisgender, but most do not. The term "passing" might be problematic, implying that trans women are not really women and that trans men are not really men. Nevertheless, there is now a concept of "cis-passing privilege" that many trans individuals are aspiring for in the hopes that when they get that privilege, they will be able to lead normal lives.

 

This motion is about whether the trans community should accept or reject this trend. It reads: THBT the transgender community should outright reject the notion that transpeople must aspire for cis-passing privilege. We'd like to thank Hez Casasola for giving us some of their time and for contributing this motion.

 

00:00 Introduction2:16 What is cis-passing privilege?3:10 What does the pursuit of cis-passing privilege look like?4:36 What are the main issues of the debate?5:37 Framing for Government Bench8:32 Arguments for OG11:37 Arguments for CG15:35 What does it mean for the trans community to reject a notion that may empower some individuals? 19:00 What has the trans community achieved in empowering trans individuals who wish to pass as cis?20:21 Framing for Opposition Bench21:50 Arguments for OO24:04 Arguments for CO27:09 Advice for those who are going through gender-related struggles

TW: Mentions of murder and rape;

The theme for Debatable IV's open octofinals is Sociolegal! It is said that due process is nothing more, and nothing less, than the concept of fair play. In most jurisdictions, the right of a person to due process is protected with procedural rules. One of these rules is that a criminal case may only be filed by a prosecutor who finds probable cause that the accused actually committed the crime charged. Supposedly, the probable cause standard makes it so that prosecutors don't file baseless or frivolous cases. However, whether that actually happens is debatable.

 

That's why this motion reads: THBT prosecutors should use the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt instead of probable cause when deciding whether to file a criminal case against a suspect.

 

There is an infoslide: The standard of probable cause is met when evidence exists to prove that the suspect is more likely than not to have committed the crime. A finding of probable cause does not require the prosecutor to inquire whether there is evidence to secure a conviction or whether there is evidence that could exculpate or acquit the suspect. The standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt is met when evidence exists to produce moral certainty, not absolute certainty, that the accused committed the crime. Alternatively, it also means that no evidence exists so as to produce reasonable doubt that the accused did not commit a crime. We thank our Immortal friend Jesus Falcis (in DOTA 2 rankings!) for contributing this motion to our tournament!

 

00:00 Introduction

1:11 What is the current procedure for instituting criminal cases?

4:43 Why does the prosecutor have the ability to file the case?

7:18 What's the difference between probable cause and beyond reasonable doubt?

11:13 Is it all over when the prosecutor files the charge?

12:46 Framing on opening gov

16:22 Framing on opening opp

20:55 Arguing on opening gov

24:00 Arguing on opening opp

30:50 Extending on government side

36:31 Extending on opp

40:15 Advice for legal motions

42:16 REGISTER TO VOTE!

The theme for round 4 of this year's Debatable IV is economics! We are living in the middle of a recession because of the pandemic. One of the ways that central banks try to stimulate the economy is by setting "ultra-low" interest rates. Theoretically, low interest rates help stimulate the flow of money by encouraging lending and investment, but theory doesn't always match reality.

 

The motion reads: THR the policy of central banks to set ultra-low interest rates when facing severe economic downturns. Thanks so much to Nicky Solis for contributing this motion and post-debate analysis!

 

00:00 Introduction

1:24 Getting over your fear of econ

3:46 What inspired this motion?

4:57 What do central banks do?

7:51 What are interest rates?

11:33 How does the interest rate affect the economy?

13:16 When and why would rates be high?

15:59 Framing on gov

19:14 Are the harms inherent to ultra low rates?

24:18Will bank runs happen?

25:55 Extending on gov

28:26 Reframing on opp

32:36 Why would people follow the central bank?

35:21 Usury Laws & the Opp alternative

36:30 How do low rates help the economy?

40:20 Future matterloading

43:01 How can debaters be more interested in economics?

The theme for Round 3 of Debatable IV is Science! The past couple of years have been defined by the importance of creating and communicating scientific knowledge. This motion asks us to question WHO gets to make scientific knowledge and why that might matter.

 

The motion reads THW priortize the funding of scientific research conducted by members of historically marginalized groups. We thank Dr. RJ Lim for contributing this motion!

 

00:00 Introduction

00:47 What inspired this motion?

1:50 What is the importance of Science debates?

2:46 What does priority funding look like? How are grants given?

4:35 Framing government side

6:43 Arguing for gov

12:30 Extending for gov

15:12 Reframing for opp

17:51 Arguing for opp

23:07 Extending for opp

25:16 Advice for science motions (Especially if you have no matter!)

The second round of Debatable IV 2021 is about the Philippines (and sports, too!).

 

Last March 2021, the Filipino-born chess super-grandmaster Wesley So officially attained American citizenship. He had previously left the Philippines to play on behalf of the United States. Around a month later, Filipino volleyball player Jaja Santiago was offered Japanese citizenship so she could represent Japan in the Olympics and the World Championship. This brought into the popular consciousness the question: should Filipino athletes stay in the Philippines if they do not get opportunities to thrive?

 

That's why the motion for this round reads: THBT Filipino athletes should never give up Filipino citizenship in exchange for sports opportunities abroad. We thank Akeem Fabila for contributing this motion and for giving us their insights.

 

00:00 Introduction

1:00 What inspired this motion? Wesley So and Jaja Santiago

3:00 Why are sports so important in Philippine culture?

4:37 What issues will come out in this motion?

5:50 Framing on gov

7:57 Arguing on gov

12:23 Extending on gov

18:05 Reframing on opp

19:26 Arguing on opp

26:45 Extending on opp

31:40 Advice for novices

The theme of Debatable IV 2021's first round is education! When we were in primary and secondary school, we would have to do the flag ceremony every morning as part of an effort to instill nationalism in the youth. Nationalistic education is debatable in and of itself, but it is especially debatable in the context of young nations that are recovering from strife and internal conflicts.

This begs the question: should we stop trying to instill nationalism in these schools? The motion reads: THBT post-conflict states should not instill nationalism through the education system.

 

We'd like to thank Mikkel Neri for contributing this motion and for this post-debate analysis!

00:00 Introduction

00:53 Why debate about education?

2:28 What is nationalism?

4:02 Why is nationalism instilled in education?

5:07 Arguing for government side

8:01 How to extend for gov

13:04 Reframing nationalism on opp

15:45 Arguing for opp

18:19 Extending for Opp

20:00 What's the matter?

21:50 Advice for Educ motions

To wrap up this Pride Month, we talk about Rainbow Capitalism! We discuss what it is, what it entails, as well as the issues and merits that go into this practice that corporations end up being a part of. We did this episode in collaboration with Miko Bombeo, who was kind enough to help us research and formulate the script for this topic!

In this episode, we talk to our dear friend Hezron about what carceral feminism and abolitionist feminism is. We discuss the pros and cons to the rising demand for carceral approaches in dealing with gender issues in society and compare the possible consequences to the most vulnerable.

In this episode, we talk about legal personhood being granted to bodies of nature, about anthropocentrism and ecocentrism, and about biodiversity. We want to thank Justin Guda for helping us research and write this episode! (Applications for the Debatable Grant are open at bit.ly/PIDC2021Debatable!)

For this episode of Debatable, we talk to Nori to discuss the different mental health struggles faced by the LGBT community. We discuss gender dysphoria, depression, as well as the complexities that come with exploring the self.

 

(Applications for the Debatable Grant are open at bit.ly/PIDC2021Debatable!)