The Instigator
Reasoning
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
wjmelements
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Libertarians Should Not Indentify As Capitalists

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
wjmelements
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/23/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,639 times Debate No: 12809
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (27)
Votes (6)

 

Reasoning

Pro

Many libertarians today identify as supporters of Capitalism, by which they mean a free market. This is a tactical error.

Libertarianism is a doctrine strictly opposed to the current economic system in the United States, which is commonly called Capitalism. As such, libertarians should not identify as Capitalists if they do not wish to confuse and dissuade many potential converts and allies.

Definitions:
Unfortunately, libertarianism can be a very difficult word to define accurately, so that it includes all of the famous libertarian scholars but does not include those that are widely-regarded as statists. Nonetheless, here is a very incomplete list of libertarians, so that we are on the same page:

Benjamin Tucker
Brad Spangler
Kevin Carson
Leonard Read
Murray Rothbard
Samuel Edward Konkin III
Sheldon Richman

Capitalism is purposefully not being defined as the purpose of this debate is to determine what definition of capitalism the libertarian should commonly use or even whether it should be part of his vernacular at all.
wjmelements

Con

I would like to thank Reasoning for finally doing a debate.

First, we must define capitalism. The term capitalism originates from the term capital [1], which, in economics, refers to the means of production not consumed in their use, unique from labor and land, in that land isn't man-made [2]. "Capitalism" developed from "capitalist," which referred to a person that owned such capital [1]. "Capitalism" was originally used as a term to mean "having ownership of capital," and communists used the term to describe the greedy class ideology of the bourgeois [1]. Regardless of the communist publications that used the word, it became more popular as a term to describe the system in which economic capital, the means of production and distribution, is privately owned [1][3].

Next, I shall address the resolution itself. The resolution is not, "Not All Libertarians Should Identify As Capitalists," in which it would be my burden to dismantle the definition of libertarian socialism. Neither is it "Libertarians should not identify themselves first as capitalists." Instead, it is my opponent's burden to demonstrate why no libertarians should identify as capitalists.

Lastly, I believe that for the purpose of this debate, the following names should be added to the shortlist in defining libertarianism:

Robert Nozick
Friedrich Hayek
David D. Friedman
Ludwig Von Mises

In addition, Kevin Carson should be removed because of evident bias on the topic at hand [4].

With that, the burden of proof lies on my opponent, and as such, he is to present his case first.

Source:
[1] http://www.spiritus-temporis.com...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Reasoning

Pro

I would like to thank the esteemed wjmelements for accepting this debate. It is truly an honor to be debating someone of his fine caliber.

The question is whether or not libertarians should identify themselves as Capitalists, supporters of Capitalism. I contend that libertarians should not, for both etymological and tactical reasons and also just to communicate more effectively.

We live in a most unlibertarian world. The libertarian is an ardent opponent of the status quo in the United States and other "western"countries. Therefore, if it can be shown then that the word Capitalism is generally used to mean this status quo and supporters of Capitalism are thought to favor this present condition, or at most relatively modest reforms to it, then a libertarian's identification as a Capitalist is confusing at best and misleading at worst.

This, in fact, can be shown.[1][2][3]

In fact, apparently our "Capitalist system" is under attack.[4] Now, if Obama is supposedly going to destroy American Capitalism that would seem to imply that what exists currently IS Capitalism.

Furthermore, libertarians have limited resources and need to use these scarce means efficiently. Libertarians could:

a. Convince others that what we have now is NOT Capitalism and that "Capitalism", in the sense of a free market, is the solution

or

b. Convince others that the solution is the free market.

As long as the result furthers the libertarian agenda, the path of least resistance should be taken.[5]

Next, let's examine the word Capitalism itself. What the libertarian favors is a free market and in the free market Capitalism is just one equal factor among many. It would make just as much sense to call what the libertarian favors Laborism or Landism, but this is not done and for good reason.

Let's examine a similar word: Mercantilism. Now certainly there would be merchants in a free market. But libertarians never describe themselves as Mercantilists. Indeed, Mercantilism is understood as a system of government granted privilege that benefits the merchant class. Following this construction, Capitalism should be understood as a system of government-granted privilege to the Capitalist class.

In short, there is no reason to use the term Capitalism when libertarians can use the much more clear, straightforward term Free Market.

Response to Wjmelements:

Wjmelements lists a number of individuals that deviate from the libertarianism of the standard-bearers I selected at the beginning of this debate. For the purposes of this debate, they are not libertarians.

Wjmelements contends that Kevin Carson should be removed from the list of libertarians because he agrees with me that libertarians should not identify as Capitalists. This, however, is no challenge to Carson's libertarian credentials. In fact, I included libertarians who consider themselves to be strong proponents of Capitalism: Rothbard, Read.

1 http://www.gallup.com...
2 http://answers.yahoo.com...
3 http://www.fff.org...
4 http://www.libnot.com...
5 "We should encourage the flower of liberty whether its petals be red white and blue, or red and black." - Karl Hess
wjmelements

Con

I would like to thank Reasoning for his response.

My opponent has accepted his burden of proof, that he must prove that no libertarian should identify as a capitalist.

I contend that, while the libertarian opposes many aspects of the status quo in the United States, he does not necessarily oppose private property, and therefore there is not reason for one to refrain from identifying as a capitalist.

My opponent's argument that "it can be shown then that the word Capitalist is generally used to mean this status quo" fails because is not confirmed by any of his sources. Capitalism is only a part of the status quo, that part being the existence of private capital. The author listed in my opponent's fourth source is arguing that Obama seeks to replace the capitalist system (a system of private capital ownership) with socialism (a system of collective capital ownership) [1]. So, capitalism does not mean the entirety of the status quo. In fact, in my opponent's second source [2], capitalism is equated with economic freedom, which libertarians support, and a country is said to be more capitalist if it has a more privatized economy, something some libertarians support, and low taxation, something all libertarians support.

My opponent also offers a tactical argument, that libertarians should not call themselves capitalist to avoid the discussion of whether or not the status quo is capitalism. Indeed, such a choice would be efficient and would avoid unnecessary associations. My opponent's source [3] confirms that the more intelligent choice of words would be "free enterprise," whose approval rating is 25% higher than that of "capitalism," and whose definition is more specific to many libertarian's economic stance [4]. The question still lies, though, in whether or not libertarians themselves should denounce capitalism if asked, "Are you a capitalist?" The tactical answer is "Yes" as opposed to "No" because more potential converts support the word capitalism than oppose, and because to denounce the system of private ownership of capital would lead to a contradiction that would confuse many potential converts.

My opponent then makes an argument compares capitalism to mercantilism improperly. My Round 1 etymology of capitalism gives the reason why capitalism is capitalism and not landism or laborism. Further, the term capitalist is as distinct from crony capitalism [5] as Marxism is from Stalinism; people that identify as Capitalists are generally not supporters of Crony Capitalism as people that identify as Marxists are generally not supporters of Stalinism.

I agree to my opponent's definition of libertarianism, but I still contend that, in the context of this debate, Kevin Carson's beliefs should be limited to only defining what is libertarian and what is not and that his statements not be taken as indisputable truth.

In conclusion, because the definition of libertarianism presented includes private property ownership, there is no reason why libertarians should contradict themselves in proclaiming to be against capitalism. Capitalism is a part, not the whole, of the status quo, and while many libertarians seek to improve the current system, their improvements are themselves capitalist. To avoid or deny such a word, therefore, is silly. This negates the resolution. Thank you.

==Sources==
[1] http://www.libnot.com...
[2] http://answers.yahoo.com...
[3] http://www.gallup.com...
[4] http://dictionary.reference.com...
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Reasoning

Pro

I would like to thank wjmelements for his response.

"I contend that, while the libertarian opposes many aspects of the status quo in the United States, he does not necessarily oppose private property, and therefore there is not(sic) reason for one to refrain from identifying as a capitalist." - Wjmelements

Firstly, Wjmelements contends that libertarians oppose the present governmental-economic system in the United States. This is true.

He then, however, claims that since the libertarian does not oppose private property that therefore libertarians should identify as Capitalists. This is a blatant non sequitur. As I have shown previously there are a number of reasons both etymological and tactical to not identify as a Capitalist.

"My opponent's argument that "it can be shown then that the word Capitalist is generally used to mean this status quo" fails because is not confirmed by any of his sources. Capitalism is only a part of the status quo, that part being the existence of private capital. The author listed in my opponent's fourth source is arguing that Obama seeks to replace the capitalist system (a system of private capital ownership) with socialism (a system of collective capital ownership) [1]. So, capitalism does not mean the entirety of the status quo." - Wjmelements

Here Wjmelements makes a good point. Though the current system is called Capitalist it is far from the only kind of Capitalism. There are different kinds of Capitalism ranging from a more Free Market to a less Free Market. In fact, we could draw a spectrum with "Free Market Capitalism" on one end and State Capitalism on the other and place different countries at different points on this spectrum. Wjmelements could then contend that what the libertarian opposes is not Capitalism but State Capitalism and that while the current system is called Capitalist it is not Capitalism that is the problem, but the State.

However, one could also draw a spectrum from Free Market to Government Intervention, with no need to bring up the term Capitalism at all.

"My opponent also offers a tactical argument, that libertarians should not call themselves capitalist to avoid the discussion of whether or not the status quo is capitalism. Indeed, such a choice would be efficient and would avoid unnecessary associations. My opponent's source [3] confirms that the more intelligent choice of words would be "free enterprise," whose approval rating is 25% higher than that of "capitalism," and whose definition is more specific to many libertarian's economic stance [4]." - Wjmelements

Agreed.

"The question still lies, though, in whether or not libertarians themselves should denounce capitalism if asked, "Are you a capitalist?" The tactical answer is "Yes" as opposed to "No" because more potential converts support the word capitalism than oppose," - Wjmelements

My position is not that the libertarian should necessarily position himself as an opponent of Capitalism but that he should not label himself as it's supporter. Being a supporter of Free Markets should be enough.

"and because to denounce the system of private ownership of capital would lead to a contradiction that would confuse many potential converts." - Wjmelements

Again, my position is not that the libertarian should necessarily denounce Capitalism, as the word has different meanings and connotations with different audiences, merely that he himself should not identify as a supporter of Capitalism.

"I agree to my opponent's definition of libertarianism, but I still contend that, in the context of this debate, Kevin Carson's beliefs should be limited to only defining what is libertarian and what is not and that his statements not be taken as indisputable truth." - Wjmelements

Agreed.

"In conclusion, because the definition of libertarianism presented includes private property ownership, there is no reason why libertarians should contradict themselves in proclaiming to be against capitalism." - Wjmelements

Because Capitalism does not just mean private property ownership. Do u think 33% of Americans oppose all private property ownership?[1] Furthermore, for the purposes of this debate I am not claiming that libertarians should identify as Anti-Capitalists, merely not as Capitalists.

==Conclusion==

Capitalism, as a word, has bad roots and means different things to different people. Rather than to clarify, it obfuscates.

This fits Ayn Rand's definition of an anti-concept.[2] That is, that it is an unnecessary term that confuses rather than clarifies. If you mean Free Market, say Free Market. If you mean the private ownership of the means of production, say the private ownership of the means of production. After all: "The use of anti-concepts gives the listeners a sense of approximate understanding. But in the realm of cognition, nothing is as bad as the approximate." - Ayn Rand

The resolution is affirmed.

Sources:
1 http://www.gallup.com...
2 http://aynrandlexicon.com...
wjmelements

Con

I would like to thank Reasoning for his response.

==Summary==

The existing clash has reduced due to a large area of agreement. My opponent's rebuttal, summarized, is:
"My position is not that the libertarian should necessarily denounce Capitalism, as the word has different meanings and connotations with different audiences, merely that he himself should not identify as a supporter of Capitalism," because "Capitalism, as a word, has bad roots and means different things to different people. Rather than to clarify, it obfuscates."

First, there are situations within the context of recruitment in which the term capitalism has a vast array of libertarian associations which warrant its use.
Second, the context of the debate is not limited to the recruitment of new libertarians. It extends outwards to all realms in which a libertarian may or may not choose to identify as a capitalist.

==Arguments==

1. A Rasmussen poll that didn't define capitalism found that "adults over 40 strongly favor capitalism" [1] (although it didn't give a statistic, the number is implied to be between 61% and 87%). Even more importantly, "Republicans - by an 11-to-1 margin - favor capitalism" [1]. Therefore, there is a target audience for libertarianism that loves the term capitalism, and using it would attract more supporters.

There is also reason to avoid the terms "free market" and "free enterprise." It is evident from polls that they imply a volley of government regulation. While 85% of American Democrats support Free Enterprise [3], "72% of Democratic voters say there is a need for more government regulation of big business" [2]. This overlap implies that the term Free Enterprise is not to be used with Democrats, for, in Ayn Rand's words, it is an anti-concept [4]. The term "free market" has the same problem [2]. "49% of Democrats" "favor a free market economy over a government-regulated one" [2], but the 72% statistic still stands.

Lastly, because "two-thirds (65%) of voters agree, however, that government and big business often work together in ways that hurt consumers and investors" [2], and because this statistic is even higher amongst Republicans [2], making the distinction between crony capitalism and libertarian capitalism would be a winning point for libertarianism.

2. There are other situations besides recruitment in which a libertarian may or may not choose to identify as a capitalist. This situations are part of the resolution, for the resolution does not limit the debate to recruitment.

One such incidence is a poll. As in the Rasmussen poll, the term capitalism may be undefined intentionally, and the libertarian would still be forced to either identify as a capitalist or not. The libertarian may use the dictionary definition of capitalism, noting correctly that the terms "State Capitalism" and "Crony Capitalism" were not used, and identify as capitalist.

Another incidence is a debate regarding the merits of capitalism. In the context of a debate, the resolution being "Capitalism is good," the free-market libertarian would side with and argue for the PRO side, seeing correctly that, unless capitalism is defined otherwise, the debate concerns the private ownership of capital. In doing so, the libertarian is a supporter of capitalism and identifies as a capitalist.

==Conclusion==
Because there are strategic incidences, both in and out of recruitment, that suggest that libertarians should choose to identify as capitalists, the resolution is negated. Thank you.

[1] http://www.rasmussenreports.com...
[2] http://www.rasmussenreports.com...
[3] http://www.gallup.com...
[4] http://aynrandlexicon.com...
Debate Round No. 3
Reasoning

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for this debate.

==Rasmussen Poll==

=Those over 40=
wjmelements:
"A Rasmussen poll that didn't define capitalism found that "adults over 40 strongly favor capitalism" (although it didn't give a statistic, the number is implied to be between 61% and 87%)."

And this proves my point! Adults over 40 certainly do NOT "strongly favor" the Free Market. This can be said with certainty. This proves that what is called Capitalism is not the Free Market and this shows why we should distance ourselves from Capitalism.

Those rebellious youth, red meat for libertarian recruitment, see that the current system sucks, though they may not fully understand why, and see that this system is called Capitalism and that their parents favor it and so they rebel against it. They agree with the libertarians! Why then do the libertarians make them their enemy by holding high the banner of the youths' oppression and exploitation? It is nonsensical.

=Republicans=
wjmelements:
"Even more importantly, "Republicans - by an 11-to-1 margin - favor capitalism"

Even worse! Libertarians have been trying to shake off the "pot-smoking Republican" label that has been pinned on them. They should be distinguishing themselves from Republicans! For Republicans, like people over 40, do NOT favor the Free Market. Republicans and libertarians are as different as night and day and trying to further confuse the two will bring libertarians nothing but woe.

=Supporters=

wjmelements:
"Therefore, there is a target audience for libertarianism that loves the term capitalism, and using it would attract more supporters."

It would attract supporters of the name libertarian, perhaps, but not of libertarianism. And that would not be a victory at all. In fact, it would be a setback as more non-libertarians would call themselves libertarians, thereby changing the popular conception of the word and damning it to the same fate as "liberal". There are plenty of people that identify as liberal, nowadays.[1]

==Free Market==

Then, my opponent argues that the term Free Market has the same problem that Capitalism does. That is, that it is not clear and does not in fact mean Free Market to everyone. To prove this he cites figures that show that some Democrats must claim to favor Free Markets and increased governmental regulation, at the same time.

It is indeed true that the term, in the popular imagination, is not as crystal clear as would be ideal. Because of this, the libertarian may pick a different term other than Free Market to show his commitment to, well, Free Markets. For instance, the term Freed Market has been gaining a bit of traction lately and is used to distinguish the true Free Market from the Republican "Free Market". Nevertheless, the term Free Market suffers from much LESS confusion than does Capitalism and should therefore be preferred between the two.[2][3] Furthermore, Free Market has a more positive connotation.[2][3]

==Libertarian Capitalism==

Wjmelements:
"Lastly, because "two-thirds (65%) of voters agree, however, that government and big business often work together in ways that hurt consumers and investors", and because this statistic is even higher amongst Republicans, making the distinction between crony capitalism and libertarian capitalism would be a winning point for libertarianism."

It is certainly important to point out that what we have now is not a Free Market, indeed. In fact, the main problem with the terms Free Market and Capitalism result from such a confusion. However, as stated in Round 2, libertarians have limited resources and the path of least resistance should be taken.

Free Market means what it says on the can and is viewed more favorably than Capitalism. Though the libertarian could try and save the term Capitalism, which did not originally mean Free Market anyway, by calling what he supports libertarian or laissez-faire Capitalism and contrast it with the present Crony or State Capitalist system, he need not and quite frankly it is more trouble than it is worth. All he must say is, "I support Free(d) Markets and oppose the current (State) Capitalist economy".

==Conclusion==

Capitalism is a Randian anti-concept. It does not clarify, it obfuscates. The word means different things to different people but is generally linked with the current economy of the United States, in particular.

The libertarian, who opposes the current economic system in the United States, as he is a champion of the free market, should therefore distance himself from the term. By calling himself a supporter of the Capitalist system, the libertarian immediately makes plenty of radicals his enemy, despite the fact that they have much more in common than not. There are plenty of terms that are more agreeable, clear and do not have as polarizing an effect, such as Free(d) Market.

The resolution is affirmed.

==Sources==
[1]http://www.gallup.com...
[2] http://www.rasmussenreports.com...
[3]http://www.rasmussenreports.com...
wjmelements

Con

I would like to thank Reasoning for this debate.

==Strategy for Americans Over 40==
Because Americans over 40 favor the term "capitalism" over "free market" and associate it with freedom and anti-communism, using the term "Capitalism" can help with libertarian recruitment. I did not argue that the term "Capitalism" should be used across the board, as my opponent portrays by mentioning the youth. For the youth, the term "capitalism" should be avoided, but this one case is not reason for the libertarian to abandon the word in its entirety.

==Strategy for Republicans==
Using the term "capitalism" relates the concepts of political and economic freedom to Republicans, and they are very open to the term. My opponent's objection that the term capitalism would only attract too many Republicans and produce a "pot-smoking Republican" label is minor in relation to the benefits of recruiting Republicans. Most of the Republicans that would be recruited would likely not be pot smokers themselves, so my opponent's concern is also illegitimate. My opponent's other concern that using the term "capitalism" would cause a confusion between libertarians and Republicans is non-sequitur.

==Supporters and Libertarian Capitalism==
It is assumed that the libertarian cause is attempting to recruit, and in recruiting, seek not just to change the name, but the beliefs of their targets. Otherwise, the Libertarian Party would grow to contain 70% of the population and they'd have no ideological backing. Therefore, it is necessary for libertarians to take time to define their economic beliefs. Taking the "path of least resistance" is simply not an option. Still, it becomes necessary to use words in presentation, and if "capitalism" gives the audience the best connotations, it should be used. Using the term "free market" is not a Northwest Passage that allows the libertarian to avoid detailing his economic views. As already presented, and conceded by my opponent, "free market" is as misunderstood as "capitalism."

Using the term "freed markets" would require the same explanation as "free markets," as the definition of "free" is vague in modern perception.

==Free Market as a Better Phrase==
There are imaginable circumstances, presented before, where capitalism is a better term than free market. The fact that free market is a better phrase in multiple circumstances is not a reason to abandon the term capitalism across the board.

==Non-strategic Situations==
My opponent does not address my Poll case and my Debate case, each of which are enough to negate the resolution by counterexample.

==Conclusion==
In the context of strategy, there are conceivable situations in which one would prefer the term "Capitalism" and it would be foolish to avoid it.
Outside the context of strategy, there are un-contended situations in which libertarians should identify as capitalists.
Therefore, the resolution is negated. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 4
27 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Agnapostate 6 years ago
Agnapostate
@wjmelements

The definition seems to be prevalent within mainstream economics, and isn't simply a heterodox term. A capitalist is an owner and renter of capital.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 6 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
i don't know of any actual classes, though I know of fictional ill-defined ones. I know of a profession called "Venture capitalist," but you need the first term to describe the profession too. ^_^.
Posted by wjmelements 6 years ago
wjmelements
@Agnapostate

That's the Marxist interpretation of the word capitalism. Most don't view it that way.
Posted by Agnapostate 6 years ago
Agnapostate
In my opinion, there's a far simpler reason that the group popularly called libertarians in the U.S. shouldn't identify as capitalists: They usually aren't. So-called "libertarianism" seems to be more popular amongst students and academics more than anything else, and "capitalist" is hardly interchangeable with "supporter of capitalism." It is an actual class position, not an ideological one.
Posted by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
I think most people who think about politics recognize that the United States has a mixed economy, neither strictly capitalist or strictly socialist, or strictly anything else. Pro had the burden of proof and wrote the resolution, but could not come up with a definition of "libertarian." Con argued that at least some people who self-identify as libertarians consider themselves to be capitalists. So why should those people not say so? Pro didn't have a compelling case.
Posted by Danielle 6 years ago
Danielle
PRO'S ARGUMENT -- Since there are so many kinds of capitalism including sociocapitalism; and because people today are deluded into thinking that we have primarily capitalism (when we don't); and because Democratic politicians pretend they support capitalism and "free" enterprise; libertarians should clarify they support a free market to disassociate their beliefs from the misinformation people associate with the term capitalism, which is supposed to refer strictly to private means of production. He also contends that this would be best for recruiting other libertarians.

CON'S ARGUMENT / RFD -- Because many people associate good things with the term capitalism, it's best to keep the title for recruitment. Ultimately Con wins this argument. Pro made an excellent point, but from a debating perspective this contention only hurt his case. He's right in that ignorant people misuse and misunderstand the term capitalism, but if your main purpose is recruitment (which he did advocate several times) then it's best to use a term people generally consider good which Con pointed out.

Also, Con mentioned that the fact that just because FM is a better phrase in some circumstances is not a reason to abandon the term capitalism across the board, since many libertarians DO, in fact, advocate capitalism. It may have a negative connotation, but to pretend they advocate something else or don't advocate the *true* meaning of capitalism would be pretty pointless. I believe Con successfully demonstrated conceivable situations in which one would prefer or welcome the title capitalist.

I'm left nonpersuaded a libertarian should abandon the term, and I'm unsure why they couldn't just say "I'm a free market capitalist?" If someone told me that I would probably respond with, "Was there any other kind?" which I think only demonstrates Con's point :P was a good effort by Pro with some great points (!), but from a judging debate pov Con wins.
Posted by LiquidLiquid 6 years ago
LiquidLiquid
The voluntaryist label is useful for a reason.
Posted by Reasoning 6 years ago
Reasoning
"This debate is interesting but totally irrelevant to libertarianism."

It is admittedly irrelevant to libertarian theory. It is not, however, irrelevant to libertarian strategy.
Posted by LiquidLiquid 6 years ago
LiquidLiquid
This debate is interesting but totally irrelevant to libertarianism.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by FREEDO 6 years ago
FREEDO
ReasoningwjmelementsTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Vi_Veri 6 years ago
Vi_Veri
ReasoningwjmelementsTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
ReasoningwjmelementsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Danielle 6 years ago
Danielle
ReasoningwjmelementsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by mongeese 6 years ago
mongeese
ReasoningwjmelementsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by wjmelements 6 years ago
wjmelements
ReasoningwjmelementsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03