No. 21: National Political Debates Are Not Team Sports Either
October 16th 2008 18:51
Riding and Talking
It could be the same now, but I remember back in the 1950s, our Tennessee elementary school teachers would often divide the classroom into teams. Frequently there were two teams; each lined up the participants on two opposing walls. Sometimes the desks were rearranged so they formed a circle. When each child's turn arrived, he or she would walk to the front of the line or into the middle of the circle. The teacher would fire off questions on geography, spelling, current events or, at times, arithmetic.
Each participant would feel all alone, and usually got very nervous leading up to his or her time for questioning. His or her fellow team members were supportive, but the opponents usually could only offer sneers and disruptive gestures behind the instructors' back. If we gave the right answer, we felt relief and vindicated. If we were wrong, we usually felt sad for not only ourselves, but for our team members also. This teaching approach served to make us more adaptive and confident in front of others.
Throughout high school and into college/university life, our speaking abilities were honed even better by speech classes and, perhaps, debating through the debate teams. Many of you can probably remember when you learned very valuable information gleaned from team debates. I remember forming my first positions on the Vietnam War in 1964 at a Rollins College debate in Winter Park, Florida. This was months before our nation's troop buildup for that war.
Most people, with whom I have spoken on the subject, agree with me and say they watch the major political debates to learn, and to form opinions and positions. They and I could care less who "won," or who "lost."
Somewhere back in recent time, some media person must have had arrested development in high school or early college. He or she offered up to an anonymous media outlet the proposal to rate political debates as a "win/lose" venue.
I can see this media meeting now: "I propose to you, that if we rate these debates as a "win/lose" we can increase our sales and ratings by associating these debates with team sports! People will want to take sides with their candidate/ team and further their favorites' agendas. They will tune into more debates, or buy more newspapers/magazines, just to see if their team was the winner or the loser." You can imagine the rest of the board or committee members shouting a collective "Yes! Yes!. Let's do it. Let's get going..."
I submit that, especially in presidential and vice presidential debates, the issues and agendas are much too critical to treat as non-essential team sports. To true thinkers and leaders, the purpose for these debates is to convey or extract information that can enhance our decisions and catalyze our choices.
Treating these most valuable informational times as mere competition is to trivialize what should be taken as opportunities for showcasing the candidates' veracity, statesmanship, stability, appitude, positions and agendas and for discovering the same.
In my opinion, I could care less who "wins" or "loses" a debate. I will leave that up to the pundits as they drive ratings and sales. The real answers will come after the elections.
Like Jack Webb from the old "Dragnet" t.v. series would have said: "Just the facts, Sir, just the facts."
Please stay safe, alert and keep it between the lines...
| 56 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
