Dan Muszynski

The following is Dan Muszynski's response to the writing prompt:


I believe that ethnically performative critiques of policy debate are short-sighted, foolish, and absolutely doomed to failure. While I think ethnic diversity is generally good and desirable, I neither believe Louisville’s account of African-American under-representation, nor do I believe in what they propose as an alternative to the present system.

Generally, I do not think there is much disagreement that African-American students are statistically under-represented in policy debate in high school and college. Something like 12% of Americans share this ethnic background, yet far less than 12% of policy debaters are African American. Louisville-type arguers advance the explanation that these students are under-represented because of financial and educational impediments to inclusion. High school teams like Long Beach Jordan have, in the past, made claims that under-represented African-American students can’t afford the summer institutes, the travel costs, or the investment in research materials required to earn two bids to the annual Tournament of Champions. This argument seems at best to be a gross generalization and at worst racist. It also reveals that the core problem in minority under-representation is a problem of socio-economic status, and not one of race. Poorer kids can’t afford the expensive game, and under-funded schools can afford to subsidize it for them. There is nothing inherent about being African-American that dictates their under-representation. Underprivileged white kids have the exact same problems.

Louisville and other project-type teams have advanced an alternative for policy debate that requires the embrace of what is termed a “revolutionary black aesthetic” in order to deal with the alleged inherent racism of the game. I find this alternative preposterous. Consider a corollary. Short persons are dramatically under-represented in basketball. The average height of an American (according to Wikipedia) is five feet, nine point four inches. The average height of an NBA player is just under six feet seven inches, according to the NBA website. Does this mean that the game of basketball should be adjusted so that short people can more easily be incorporated? Consider another. People who are bad a chess are radically under-represtented in high-level chess competitions. These competitions tend to include only those who have spend years learning, practicing, and mastering the game of chess – and those who have had the incredible benefit of a life that allowed them to pursue the game of chess with an intensity not common to the rest of us. Should we lower the barrier of entry into high-level chess competitions in order to better include those who don’t have the unique set of opportunities that allow one to become a chess grandmaster? Consider yet another. Phi Beta Kappa radically under-represents people who have not gone to college. Obviously, not everyone in this country has the opportunity to attend college at all, let alone the opportunity to get into college, afford to attend, and then excel at academics. Should we require this academic honor society to admit those who don’t have the opportunity to attend college and earn good grades?

As is most likely obvious, I think the answer to all three hypothetical situations is “no.” Not every person has the same talents and opportunities, yet this does not mean that we should adjuct every activity and game such that anyone can do whatever they want. We aren’t living in the world of Harrison Bergeron. Yes, it is a shame that some people and some schools can’t benefit from the opportunities presented in policy debate. However, there is no reason to presume that the game itself should be changed in order to become something that it is not.

There are several other obvious counter-arguments. Were the game to change, there is no reason to think that all of the people who presently participate would be interested in continuing to do so. There is no real reason to assume that a black aesthetic is any more inclusive than anything else, especially when the notion of a racial aesthetic is so specifically exclusive. There is no reason to think that policy debate in particular is the only available outlet for this kind of competition. In fact, during the past couple of decades not one but two different alternative debate events have been created in order to lower the barrier of entry for students who wish to gain the benefits of competitive debate. There has never been a particularly compelling reason advanced as to why it is so uniquely important that minority students be steered into policy debate and not Lincoln Douglas debate, or Public Forum debate, or Paliamentary debate, or Student Congress, or any of the other formats. Of course, there is also the fact that minority students across the board are not under-represented. In fact, Asian-American and Indian-American students are dramatically over-represented. Additionally, there is no reason why the barrier of entry into the game of policy debate needs to be evaluated the way project-oriented teams seem to choose to do so. There are local leagues where research barriers are much lower, and only the most elite squads ever travel nationally. Why these teams decide to emulate only the specific subset of policy debate teams that they argue they cannot compete with is a complete mystery. They also conveniently overlook the existence of the Urban Debate Leagues.

Overall, I think the arguments made by these teams are spurious at best. I do not believe that they are made genuinely, and are in fact simply attempts to win debate rounds by playing on the shock value and/or guilt of the people who are adjudicating. The period of time in which the judging pool is willing to tolerate such clowning is growing short. I look forward to the day when these teams decide to simply debate about questions of policy.

Anxiety Now, Anxiety Now

With less than twenty-four hours before the project comes to a close, I have none of the essays or letters that people swore that they would write. It is very hard for a control freak, like myself, to be stuck waiting, without any way of controling the outcome. I wish I could psychically nag people or explain to them all of the advantages of participating in this project.

Perhaps the writing prompt is simply more challenging from inside of the community than from my perspective.

The conflict between spread, k, and project style debate seems to me something that is fascinating on a philosphical level. Project debate is just outrageous enough for me to find compelling. My natural inclination toward that which is a living metaphor is stimulated by project debate. And yet I sympathize with the arguments against project style debate. Inside the debate round doesn't seem like the right arena for the argument. It is not part of the game. And if it is part of the game then winning a round diminishes the argument. And yet still, I am not a member of the community. I have no personal sentiments or significant time attached to the traditions and potentials of the game. The nature of the argument challenges people to somehow prove their lack of racism or gender descrimination. It is hard to address these issues without disproving your objectiveness. It just seems like a conversation that could be invaluable to high school debaters. I want more people to be able to look racism in the face and give it a hard time without breaking their backs to prove a lack of racism.

Texans need help, too

I received notice today that there are teachers in Texas trying to acquire similar letters in order to present a case for the importance of debate curricula in high schools by the end of December. They are looking for testimonials about the benefits of debate and how it affected your lives for the better reaching after high school. Ms. Natalie Cofey is the one who you should contact if you want Texan educators to be able to teach speech and debate and have it count for the curriculam and GPA :

Ms. Natalie Coffey
Senior Program Director
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
P.O. Box 12788Austin, TX 78711

You may e-mail your comments to Ms. Coffey at natalie.coffey@thecb.state.tx.us. If mailing your comments or objections, they must be received by THECB by December 29 to be considered.

The site I included above is the GPA Uniformity Advisory Committee's website. I hope the Texans have better luck than me.

Coming to a Close

I have to turn this project in after this week and I have to admit that I am a little dissappointed. When I conceived of this action project I had envisioned receiving something like twenty letters or essays and I looks like I may only receive three. I wanted to have a much thicker packet to mail to a much wider mailing base. Now I have to write a cover letter to include in the packets and I feel a little embarrassed. I have been trying to figure out what I could have done differently. When I was reaching out to groups on facebook and cross-x did it seem like I was trying to exploit people? Was I over estimating the ambition of people to contribute personal information to a blog they have no way of authenticating?

What was great was the opportunity to talk to high school students about their experiences with their debate teams. My simple questions were answered candidly and helped construct a narrative that described the growth process for a teenager involved in competitive wit. I felt like I was being introduced to a secret, allowed to feel out whether or not I wanted to be included. I thank everyone who helped me understand this activity.

Calling all high school debaters!

The purpose of this blog is to orchestrate a project that I have for a class. My goal is to raise the profile of high school debate. I believe that the drooping interest in the game and the diminishing funding for the game can be reversed if the internal drama of the game is promoted. There has already been outside interest in the game expressed by the press coverage and literature released about the conflict between traditional spread policy debate and K and Project strategies. I am not now, nor have I ever been involved in the game of debate, but I find this conflict fascinating and compelling. I believe that by demonstrating the scholastic advantages of high school debate involvement as well as the current internal debate involving class and race issues will prove to be interesting to people who can become advocates for the continuation of debate programs.

I propose to compile personal stories and view points about debate in general as well as the current turbulation and send the compilation to school boards, state and federal legislatures, and activist groups such as NOW and AACP in the hopes of spreading awareness and recruiting advocates. I believe that in order to approach the funding problems the demand for debate programs must be unignorable.

How to help:

Are you currently a high school debater? Were you once a high school debater? Write a letter or a essay and email an attachment of it to me at caroline.gauger@utoledo.edu. Each e-mail should include your name, address, and the high school at which you participate/d in debate. If you would like your letter or essay to be posted on this blog feel free to do so or indicate that wish to me in the e-mail.

To more letters the longer the mailing list so please help the future generation of debaters.

Writing prompts:

• Letters and essays to stay close to one-page in length.
• Address letters "To whom it may concern."
• Address your time within a high school debate program.
• Talk about your current profession or continued education.
• Talk about how debate affected the rest of your academic work or personal life.
• Discuss your favorite debate style: Were you a 400/min. guy? Did Foucault rock your socks? Did you ever ballroom dance with a chair to prove a point?
• Voice your opinion on what the future of policy debate should look like.
• Discuss any value you find in the strategy of Project debate.
• Address the value you think adolescents get from considering class and race issues that are raised by the Project phenomenon.
• Talk about whether or not you believe that there are other venues for adolescents to talk about race issues at the level that debate allows.

These are only suggestions. Every composition should be personal. I hope to demonstrate that not only does high school policy debate help develop critical thinking skills and accountability in teenagers, but that the current climate of debate is extra-valuable because the former structure of debate is being challenged. What ever the outcome, the game is being analyzed in a way that challenges participants.

My email, again is caroline.gauger@utoledo.edu. Please help me complete my class project while potentially making a difference in a community that gave opportunities to you.