Hello ladies and gentlemen!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUOytJZOL5g
You are now looking at the future of debating! The old way was boring anyways.
Skip to 20:00 for the actual substance
I was a #cruzmissile, but now I think I'm voting austin petersen.
Here's one more:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuWTbD-OYv0
Why do they talk so fast?
>>70083912
Too much crack my man.
This is called Policy CX, it is pretty fun and attractive to young people because of its fast pace, but after Novice debating it turns into the world's biggest shit show; where anyone that isn't black can't win because of "post colonial racial conflicts" or some shit.
I went to state two years in a row, lost both times to a couple of niggers touting nigger shit.
This is what it used to be like before the niggers took over.
https://youtu.be/dj4pQe11eZc
The first person is Sam Iola, friend of mine, he spits fire at the current debate situation since it makes winning the TOC impossible for anyone that is white.
>>70083912
It's called debate spreading, cram as many arguments as possible into a single time slot and see what the other team chooses to answer.
>>70084079
Ok so it was always bad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJvBwJ_h-UE
>>70084233
No, it was actually a breeding ground of intellectual discussion, but in the room it's about POLICY, debating REAL WORLD shit. Like how the USFG will improve transportation infrastructure.
It is really fun to get into as a hobby, and niggers came in with the oppression Olympics to fuck it all up.
Why do americans have to ruin everything? Is it the anglo genes?
>>70084641
Policy CX was the sole iteration made by Americans. Nobody else does it.
There is also Lincoln Douglas and public fourm if that is our fancy.
>>70084079
Debater here, this so much. Debaters are some of the most libcucked people on the planet, and judges wanna have their egos stroked by voting for black rights and feeling like they're making a difference in the world.
>>70084119
How the fuck can you debate if you cant understand them?
Fuck it, they should mix Spanish and other languages together. --- "Oh you cant rebuttal because you cant understand me? I win!"
This has to be the absolute gayest fucking shit I have ever seen. Its no longer a debate to come to a comprise anymore. Its all about being annoying and arrogant as fuck until you get your way. That's all this shit is.
>>70084780
I ran a white power aft for a year, just to fuck the shit out of post colonial arguments.
Shit was hilarious up until I got banned from a competition that disallowed me from attending state.
>>70084885
The problem is
A. You're not used to the fast past speech
B. You don't know the topic
C. You're hearing snippets of the argument rather than it as a whole
You need all three to actually understand. What you're listening to at this point are the rebuttals, where no new arguments can be submitted and there is a lot of rhetoric.
The opening statements are actual presenting of policy evidence.
>>70085061
Umm no. Its fucking stupid.
>>70085165
So you're just shit posting at this point?
You don't want to hear my whyte powah argument as a negation to post colonial niggaopoly?
>>70085061
here I'm going to fix what you said here to use as an example so you understand.
>theproblemisayourenotusedtothefastpastspeechbyoudontknowthetopiccyourehearingsnippetsoftheargumentratherthanitasawholeyouneed allthretoactuallyunderstandwhatyourelistening toatthispointaretherebuttalswherenonewargumentscantbesubmittedandthereisalotofrhetoricthe openingstatementsareactualpresentingofpolicy evidence.
^That's what its like. Imagine if everyone posted like that.
>>70085292
>soyourejustshitpostingatthispointgaspgasp
youdontwanttohearmywhytegasppowah argumentasanegationtopostcolonialniggaopoly
>>70085619
>>70085816
This is some professional shit posting
>I talk slow and can't understand them so it's all stupid hahahhaa right guys?
It's just a different type of debate, the reason it sped up is because the need for big arguments.
>>70084885
In the real world there's actually a disparaging term for this tactic, in any serious debate it's considered cheating basically.
>Debating opponents said that Gish used a rapid-fire approach during a debate, presenting arguments and changing topics quickly. Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education, dubbed this approach the "Gish Gallop," describing it as "where the creationist is allowed to run on for 45 minutes or an hour, spewing forth torrents of error that the evolutionist hasn't a prayer of refuting in the format of a debate." She also criticized Gish for failing to answer objections raised by his opponents. The phrase has also come to be used as a pejorative to describe similar debate styles employed by proponents of other, usually fringe beliefs, such as homeopathy or the moon landing hoax.
inb4 creationists, moon landing hoaxers and homeopathists get mad, do you really think this is a fair way of presenting your argument?
>>70086032
If they need to make such large arguments just give them more time to speak.
>>70083695
Funny, this is as much debate as call of duty is actual military operation. The goal of a debate is to create a synthesis, an emerging idea which is closer to truth than previous 2 or more points. The fact that there is a vote makes this a joke. Logic has no democracy, it has no race or victors. Logic is a tool of creation and not dick waving.
Why would white people continue to subject themselves to this? It's nonsense. It's not debate. Personally, I would leave this Policy CX bullshit and join another debating field where logic and clarity are prized.
