+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Debate and diplomacy in history

Debate and diplomacy in history

Date post: 18-May-2015
Category:
Upload: history-day-in-mn
View: 10,897 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
2011 Theme discussion and explanation
Popular Tags:
20
History Day Workshop September 28, 2010
Transcript
Page 1: Debate and diplomacy in history

History Day WorkshopSeptember 28, 2010

Page 2: Debate and diplomacy in history

This is a brand-new themeContrary to past History

Day rules, interpret this theme as “Debate AND/OR Diplomacy”

Staff encourages students to include connections to both, if possible

Page 3: Debate and diplomacy in history

Debate: A discussion involving opposing points;

an argument

Page 4: Debate and diplomacy in history

Debate A discussion involving opposing points;

an argument Deliberation, consideration

Page 5: Debate and diplomacy in history

Debate A discussion involving opposing points;

an argument Deliberation, consideration A formal contest in which the affirmative

and the negative sides of a proposition are advocated by opposing speakers

Page 6: Debate and diplomacy in history

To be a “debate,” a topic needs to be more complex than a disagreement

Debate implies large issues, long-term discussion of opposing sides, and impactful consequences

For example, students and teachers can disagree about school dress code, but can debate about students’ rights to use dress as a method of free speech (Tinker v. Des Moines)

Page 7: Debate and diplomacy in history

Most debates, disagreements and arguments involve controversy

The difference is that debates must have a historical significance

Use the postscript “Successes, Failures, Consequences” to define the historical significance and impact

Page 8: Debate and diplomacy in history

Physical debates: Kennedy/Nixon, Lincoln/Douglas, other

presidential debates. Instead of focusing on the mere presence of these debates, focus on the substance behind the debates.

Ideological debates: Subjects debated within communities or

nations. Change, or non-change, is a motivating factor behind participants’ efforts. Ideological debates may be resurrected throughout history.

Page 9: Debate and diplomacy in history

Pick a social/political/economic issue and find points in time when it was debated.

Women’s Suffrage

1848 1869 1872 1890 1912 1919

Declaration of Sentiments Split from Susan B. Anthony’s arrest Merger of AWSA andAlice Paul forms 19th amend.

abolitionists NWSA militant NWP passed

Page 10: Debate and diplomacy in history

Modern debated issues: Find the origin or similar topics in the past

Current debate may become a part of the impact, but define the debate in historical terms

For example: Gays in the military Women in the military, women in combat Blacks in the military, separate companies Compulsory draft, conscientious objectors Young people in war, unable to vote

Page 11: Debate and diplomacy in history

Places to look for debates… Court cases (the context of the court case will

generally demonstrate debate). Gideon v. Wainwright

Medical controversies (as new issues arise, new technologies are discovered, changes in social viewpoints). Methods of polio treatment

Within a movement (methods, leadership, warring factions). Different methods of Malcolm X and MLK

Governmental change (look for the source of the change, act, amendment, leadership shift). Alien and Sedition Acts.

Page 12: Debate and diplomacy in history

Diplomacy The art and practice of conducting

negotiations between nations, as in alliances, treaties or agreements.

Page 13: Debate and diplomacy in history

Diplomacy The art and practice of conducting

negotiations between nations, as in alliances, treaties or agreements.

The conduct of the relations of one state with another by peaceful means.

Page 14: Debate and diplomacy in history

Diplomacy The art and practice of conducting

negotiations between nations, as in alliances, treaties or agreements.

The conduct of the relations of one state with another by peaceful means.

Tact, skill or cunning at dealing with people.

Page 15: Debate and diplomacy in history

Generally, diplomacy is defined as international relations

But diplomacy can also be conducted by sovereign nations, nations in a civil war, within governments, between defined interest groups

Define diplomacy as an organized gathering with a resolution in mind. The goal of diplomacy is an outcome

Diplomacy is not always equal.

Page 16: Debate and diplomacy in history

When looking at current diplomatic topics, look for other diplomatic events between the same countries, or similar issues between different countries.

For example: U.S. hikers hostage in Iran Iran-Contra British hostages in China, 1960s Iran Hostage Crisis, 1979 Iranian Coup D’Etat, 1953

Page 17: Debate and diplomacy in history

Places to look for diplomacy… Treaties between nations, sovereign

nations, or large collections of nations. Geneva Conventions

Agreements (as resolutions to end wars or conflict, aid allies, forge alliances). Surrender at Appomattox

Federal Acts (intended to resolve or deal with controversies). Cherokee Removal Act

Page 18: Debate and diplomacy in history

Debate often precedes or succeeds diplomacy

Debate can lead to diplomacy, and diplomacy can spark debate

For both to be included, students must be able to argue that the discussion before or after diplomacy is actually debate, or that the agreements surrounding debates are actually diplomacy

Page 19: Debate and diplomacy in history

Students’ “main point” will likely be either debate or diplomacy, and the other will fall in the context or impact section.

For example, the main topic might be the Three-Fifths Compromise, which is diplomacy. But the preceding debate over slaves’ status and the following debate regarding slavery itself would be, respectively, context and impact.

Page 20: Debate and diplomacy in history

This is not the debate team. In other words, the student is not part of the argument and should not be projecting opinions.

Students must be objective and should not join in the debate.

It is necessary to address both sides of the debate. In order for it to be a debate, there must be two or more sides. Both must be understood and explained.

Do not make a debate into a tennis match.


Recommended