Welcome to Round 1 of the Future of Europe E-Debate Competition!
The topic for the 1st debate is:
The President of the European Council should be elected by EU citizens.
In this debate The Da Vinci System (Affirmative) will face SchEUmans (negative).
The 1st debater of the affirmative team has 24 hours to post the 1st speech of the debate. Even if the speech is posted before the 24 hours expire, the 1st negative speakers’ 24 hours of preparation time will begin when the initial time expires.
Before posting please consult Guildelines and the Online Debate Guide.
Good luck to all teams!
I thank both team for this debate.
This was a tricky debate to adjudicate, probably the closest one in this round of debates, but ultimately I sided with the proposition team, The Da Vinci System.
Both teams bring very solid ideas and arguments to the debate, some explained well and given proper weight/impact, while others remain a little underdeveloped.
On the one hand, proposition presents some fairy broad arguments, about raising political engagement, making people feel like their voice matters in the EU, transparency of EU institutions and eventually creating a stronger EU identity. Opposition points out a lot of potential problems or risk with such a change, like populism becoming a factor in the elections, the tendency to vote for local candidates, or just feel unrepresented and expanding upon what this position means and why it doesn’t make sense to have direct elections for this role.
While I don’t feel that proposition fully tackles these problems in the second speech (“they have to be objective and impartial”, why and how does this happen? Or “they never elect a nationalistic politician or a radical one”, why not?), opposition also doesn’t fully impact on these ideas. Of course, potential downsides exist, but how likely are they? I do believe some of these claims and yes, there probably will be some problems, I’m not convinced of their seriousness or impact on society overall (what happens if a “populist” politician gets elected? What is the impact of expensive political campaigns, held every 2,5 years?). Opposition successfully casts a shadow of a doubt on the proposition claims, but doesn’t succeed in proving that the motion has more potential to create harm, rather than benefits.
This is a short summary of the debate and there are further intricacies that can be discussed, but overall I do feel that the proposition team, The Da Vinci System, wins by a small margin.
1st Affirmative: 23 (Content: 9; Style: 7; Strategy: 7)
2nd Affirmative: 17 (Content: 7; Style: 5; Strategy: 5)
1st Negative: 21 (Content: 8; Style: 7; Strategy: 6)
2nd Negative: 18 (Content: 7; Style: 6; Strategy: 5)