text stringlengths 0 9.69k |
|---|
When you bring in religious leaders in, people who are influential for all the reasons Aniket mentioned, they didn't contest it, creates an opportunity for people, for a protest movement to actually have a say and incorporate that legitimacy. So on one hand, you might have a religious leader who says, “Well, here's my ... |
</dpm> |
<dlo> |
All right, so let’s go with the frame we were given and start on overthrowing, right. Because that is the prerequisite for a lot of these issues. First thing you have to recognize is that we do talk largely about mass appeal, and it goes pretty unresponded by the government. The first issue here with the mass appeal is... |
Now, we get some argumentation here on a few things. First, we hear from OP, we hear from GOV that most of the authoritarian states we're talking about, are homogeneous. First of all, this isn't true. Even in the areas that they give us, like Pakistan, you still have divides, right? Even within the Muslim community bet... |
We think that there are really two broad religious groups out there. We have our more open, progressive, collaborative religious groups who we feel are more likely to work with our organization, work with our protest movements without us actively trying to integrate them, and we have our more conservative, less collabo... |
So looking at that first group, it makes sense to have a discussion about what active integration actually looks like, which we haven't really heard anything from governments because that's what this debate's all about, and we think that active integration looks like, you know, going to churches, making concessions, li... |
Sure, OG, |
<poi> |
if the super conservative population is 10% of the people, why would the, why would incorporating that. |
</poi> |
Got it, okay. First of which, these 10-15% is still a significant portion of the population. It's important not to disenfranchise them. You can also look back to whence I told you before about how they're the most vulnerable groups. If you're now having us replace this authoritarian regime with a theocratic Shiite regi... |
A few thing, first of all, we never actually hear, why the religious groups are going to want to side with us. If the authoritarians now are willing to work with these religious groups and we're trying to grab them too in the government world, they're asking us to view a sort of race to the bottom where it's a fight of... |
Additionally, we have this conversation about how maybe like statesmen or politicians will, and in case, it comes up later around this discussion of whether the fact that religion is going to seep in eventually, if we do have victory, it ends up becoming a very weird argument because the whole point of opposition is th... |
So at the end of the day, what is this case or what is this round really coming down to? First things coming down to is again whether or not we can actually end up overthrowing these groups. And it's important to realize here that not only is it not nearly a contest between one religion and the other religions at play,... |
Even the Sunnis and the Shiites in Pakistan aren't a monolith, and we can see this happening in the very example they were given to us of Poland, right. Where, although Poland had a reasonable democracy, or had a reasonable ,or fledgling one, what we're seeing now with recent elections is that it's on the verge of coll... |
So additionally, the main issue, though, that the government completely fails to encounter and that ends up being also very key for this overthrowing issue is the fact that the movement becomes so much easier to demoralize once you're attached to a religious figurehead. This part goes completely uncontested because whe... |
But when you go ahead and connect and make a single religious figurehead, that figurehead can be captured, killed, tortured, broad coerced. And just as it may be easier to moralize groups of people if you center around one figure, it's also that much easier to demoralize. The strength of our protest lies in its decentr... |
Thank you. |
</dlo> |
<mg> |
Panel two extensions mainly for me. First off, on legitimacy and why we exclusively can bring legitimacy to these movements which need it. Secondly, in terms of manpower and why we can amass more people. And I will identify some mechanistic links that were missed by our opening. But before I move on to rebuttals, thoug... |
I think that is crucial in today's debate and crucial for these movements' success. |
Okay, before I move on, several points of extraneous rebuttal. I think most of OO’s points are contingent on the idea of how religion will basically corrupt movements, right. I think one main thing that they pointed out is the idea that, okay, this idea of like a divine birthright of these religions will kind of transc... |
But even if this is not the case, right, note that at the end of the day, secondly, having a religion and believing that this transcends into something that is like a divine birthright are two different things, right. Just because I identify with something and believe deeply and connect with a belief and connect with o... |
Okay, secondly, that’s the second push that we get, is the idea that, okay, these movements will be easily shut down by authoritarian governments. Two responses, one, I think this is even worse on their side, right, because there's simply no legitimacy in these movements. There's no institutional power to back these pe... |
Okay, moving on to my substantives. In terms of my first extension, right, in terms of legitimacy we think that crucially, no house has identified the fact that religion itself can be a factor that holds people back from joining movements right why for instance take islam for an example, religious violence is not legit... |
</mg> |
<og> |
Okay, so I think we're going to win this debate in CO by first of all, giving a more accurate picture of how religion works in these countries and what specifically this integration is going to look like. I think CG fallout of this debate, the point of which they proved what could happen but don't actually show you the... |
I think they massively underestimate who has the power to control these narratives to begin with and who has that power to dictate their narratives and decide how religion will be interpreted in these events. How does religion work in these countries? Extending on massively from our opening because our opening has alre... |
But it's also crucial that they're often very, very divided. There's often huge religious conflicts within these societies, a lot of hatred and pain between these religious groups because they've been specifically fueled by those leaders of those authoritarian groups in order to maintain that soft power, because obviou... |
There are five mechanisms how they do this, descending from our opening, one, they specifically frame their, often their political party or their agenda around their ideology which is often religious. Therefore, religion and their state becomes inseparable. Therefore, if you're against this particular leader, you are ... |
Two, they often recruit the military based off religious faith. They say that, hey, they use a narrative that they are not only defenders of the state, but defenders of the faith. They have this commonality between them and the shared purpose that is much higher than themselves and any form of political values. |
Three, they often pay a lot of religious elite, religious members through things like private privileges in order to get them to vocalize their support and often stand behind these leaders to begin with. They often use their private benefits or their policies to privilege certain individuals and say, “If you back my re... |
Four, finally, they do also divide and conquer rules within their own populace, which in order to fuel resentment between these different sectors, because the minority groups aren't just oppressed, like OG talk about; they're also being actively demonized. These repressed minority groups are specifically framed as bein... |
Therefore, why is this bad for political movements? I think, political movements within authoritarian regimes have two main obstacles they need to overcome. I think one is internal divisions because obviously having a divided group within yourself just means you are less powerful as an opposition. But also two, a unite... |
Therefore, why is it bad the point in which you introduce religious leaders? Because I agree you are going to get some buy-in as OG talked about from those that buy into the faith. We're also going to go, it's also going to come at the cost of a huge turn away from most everyone that doesn't buy into the faith because ... |
Therefore, I think it's also important to note what type of religious leaders these guys probably actually look like and what kind of leaders they'll probably be able to integrate, which I also appear, why? Because I think it's just one very unlikely you're going to integrate religious leaders that support the governme... |
I think if you are going to get any sort of religious leaders from that religion, they're going to be much lesser leaders that, like, in the face of a much higher authority standing against them, probably going to have much minimal impact. There's no point getting one priest to stand out against the Catholic government... |
What I think is more likely to happen, though, is therefore you get religious leaders from those minority religious groups to begin with. They have far less to lose, they have far less state, and they're probably more negatively affected by that government and have a greater incentive to take that government down to be... |
Therefore, why is this a bad thing? I think it specifically strengthens the narrative that authoritarian regimes used in order to maintain soft power to begin with. Because now, again, and this is why CG can’t really get their harm, can’t get their benefits to begin with about how like, you claim legitimacy through rel... |
They're saying an attack on us is an attack on the faith, the leaders are specifically able to often depersonalize these protests and say, “Look, they're not attacking my government, they're not attacking my policies, but they're attacking me because of my religious beliefs and how I want to protect our faith.” |
And specifically, the point in which they have religious leaders they can point out, I think this becomes far, far worse and far easier to do so on this side of the house. The things want to know who controls the narrative, it's not these individual religious leaders, but specifically governments who have one, media co... |
Therefore, the impact, so this is probably threefold. I think only three. One, probably get more likely that those elite religious leaders will likely vocalize their support, empower the government, which will fuel further dissent, so all their followers will be like, "No, we actually support this government," to begin... |
Therefore, they have a much more shared common goal, and that goes beyond the individual self, I think, which this probably looks like things like greater repression of peaceful protest and far greater military impact. |
I think finally, just get a more divided process. The point of which you're never going to get full buy-in from the population at the point in which you introduce religious divide. I think it's probably bad because you get less band power and just a far less effective protest. |
So for all those reasons,I’m proud to oppose. |
</mo> |
<gw> |
Panel, we see three examples of people like Dietrich Bonhoeffer. We've seen three examples of genders, these examples of Gandhi; that the sheer power that religious institutions and religious leadership, through its sheer magnitude of having support and buy-in, can grant these movements success. |
We show you better than any other team does, why we managed to get success for these movements and why we managed to oppose ourselves to authoritarian regimes. First, I'm going to give you some examples of like how, what is it, how like the other teams haven't meaningfully engaged with our extension. And then I'm going... |
So first of all, no team is meaningfully engaged with our point on manpower, organization, and resources. Rachel showed you very clearly how engaging with these religious institutions and religious movements will give you greater amounts of manpower to the tipping point where you can actually overthrow these regimes. A... |
We always, we also showed you how organization works in these movements and how organization is more able to happen within the framework of religious institutions, where they are more of a basis for organization as compared to other sort of very, very diverse movements that you kind of have and trying to overthrow auth... |
And we also talked to you about resources, which is something that nobody managed to touch. So now let's look at the best case that we have, and in the best case that the opposition games gave you, we still win, because we still have the pluralism amongst religious groups because these groups have greater incentives to... |
So what's wrong with this argument? First of all, fundamentally it isn't necessarily true since these groups often have common incentives. For instance, even in Pakistan, which is a much-used example in this debate, people don't necessarily vote on religious grounds because even within religion there is enough diversit... |
So what does this mean? This means that there would be, like, if you can incline people to converge on a common interest, this doesn't necessarily mean that there's enough sort of commonality for the kind of oppression and the kind of harms that CO tell you to exist. |
So what does this mean? This means first of all that these states don't usually have a single majority large enough to have a monopoly on state power and claim any of the harms that like CO give you about military and state convergence on power and narratives to actually manifest. |
But even if they did, the competing institutions who aren't a majority of these other religions are still larger because like this majority isn't big enough to be decisive, so what happens as a result? What happens as a result is that they can mobilize to such a large tipping point of people that they will not succeed ... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.