Ever wondered about those American debates where the debaters speak so fast that they can hardly be understood? Where a team will come into the debating room with large plastic tubs stuffed full of “evidence”? This is Policy Debate (also known as Cross-Examination Debate or CX for short), a debating style that originated in the USA and is the prevalent style in US universities and high schools. However, it is not used widely in Europe, where parliamentary debating is prevalent. It is primarily research- and evidence-based, thus encouraging debaters to put as much proof for their statements into a speech as possible. There is one topic (called “resolution”) for a whole year, or season, and they are often very detailed and specific in nature, as in “The United States federal government should substantially reduce the size of its nuclear weapons arsenal, and/or substantially reduce and restrict the role and/or missions of its nuclear weapons arsenal” which was the 2009-10 college resolution.

The American online magazine Slate now hosts a debate on the respective merits of policy and parliamentary debate. Framed as a book discussion of former debater Mark Oppenheimer’s autobiography “Wisenheimer: A Childhood Subject to Debate” and Michael Horowitz, winner of the collegiate 2000 National Debate Tournament, Oppenheimer and Horowitz argue over policy vs. parliamentary debate, but also what they have in common. In six short pieces, they engage in a lively debate on this issue and in such provide a good overview of different debating styles and the philosophy behind them. Many debaters from around the world including veteran Dutch debater Daniel Schut have already pitched in and commented on the article, extending the debate even further.

Florian Prischl / apf

This is how a “Policy Debate” sounds. Only pros may understand…