These arguments and definitions were offered at previous gatherings.
If you would like to make an argument at a future event, offer us an argument here.
-
Literacy Tests should be required for US voters
Proposal: “There should be more voter suppression, in the form of literacy tests, along the lines of the test given to people applying for citizenship. We don’t need more voters who are clueless about the Constitution.”
Challenge: “Age is arbitrary and a civics exam is subjective. Democracy works best when the vote is limited to those who are willing to pay a steep price for the privilege. The most valuable resource anyone has is time. Therefore, the voting privilege should be limited to those who have served the government (police, military, etc.) for at least 4 years for nothing beyond basic room and board.”
View the report for this argument here.
View a lightly-edited OCR scan of Jamili’s original notes here.
-
The US is not justified in initiating war, military conflict, or use of force with Iran without consulting allies.
Expanded Argument: “No major power is justified in initiating a war (or use of force). All military operations should be defensive and in consultation allies. We no longer live in a world where national interests can always take precedence over global interests. Global stability depends on alliances through diplomacy that can both protect and advance U.S. national security interests while supporting the safety of people throughout the world.”
View the report for this argument here.
View a lightly-edited OCR scan of Jamili’s original notes here.
We have been developing a format for drawing out, clarifying, and analyzing contentious in-person arguments. Ultimately, this format is more accurately conceived of as a collection of tools and tactics to encourage an honest and constructive exchange. The facilitator has a lot of discretion to change course and experiment depending on group dynamics.
The latest version of the Generous Argument Format can be viewed here.