Soapbox debate examines U.S. role abroad

Author: Cloe Shasha

On Nov. 13 the Parliamentary Debate team set up a wooden soapbox in the Ross Fireplace Lounge. In order to speak at the inaugural soapbox debate, students had to stand on the object. Two dozen Middlebury students with a wide range of interests participated in the first debate entitled, "Should America Be the World's Moral Policeman?"

The soapbox debates are intended to allow all students to discuss issues in an informal but structured environment. Vrutika Mody '10, a member of the parliamentary debate team, explained the purpose of the soapbox debates.

"We are trying to get rhetoric and public speaking on this campus," Mody said. "There are so many groups on campus that are so excited and interested in varied things. We wanted to find a common space where we could talk about a wide spectrum of issues. Students can run and stimulate discussion in these soapbox debates instead of relying on a panel of experts to dictate opinions and theories."

"I think that public speaking is an important skill for students to have," said Rachel Strong '08, who did not attend the meeting. "But I think that the students who would need to improve those skills would not be the ones attending the soapbox debates."

Mody led the 45-minute discussion and presented the structure and topic of the debate. By allowing only one student to speak at a time, the soapbox debates create an organized format for a logical progression of opinions.

Student Government Association President Max Nardini '08 initiated the series of responses to Mody's introduction.

"As much as I have a respect for state autonomy, I think there should be another party intervening in international crises," began Nardini. "There is no other way to stop genocide than with military action. Who is going to do that? There is no reason for which the United States should not step up to that role."

Daniel Roberts '09 expanded on Nardini's point.

"I feel that no other nation on any of these councils has the power that United States has," said Roberts. "When you are top nation in terms of military, democracy, money, then it is your duty to go into other countries and do what you see fit."

Debate Team Vice President Katie Hylas '09 changed the direction of the discussion by questioning our conception of morality and human inquiries.

One student replied to Hylas by noting that all of America's past interventions in foreign affairs have been irrelevant to morality because we act on selfish goals.

Mody stepped back up on the soapbox to shift the focus of the debate. She asked the group whether any country should have the right to morally intervene if it wants to.

"If we say that the United States has the right and obligation to violate the sovereignty of other countries, then other countries should be able to do that to us," stated Debate Team President Halley Ostergard '09. "For example, Europeans are aghast that we allow the death penalty. If we think we should be the world's moral policeman, then we should accept that other people can tell us that we are morally wrong in terms of our issues."

Some students reacted strongly against the idea of other countries' intervention in moral issues. One student felt that China, for example, has values that are too distinctive for moral judgement whereas the United States comprises a more diverse population and therefore more diverse values.

Moriel Rothman '11 expressed that a country's intention to intervene for moral reasons is the most important issue.

"If America were to be a policeman for morality in cases like the Rwanda genocide, that would be amazing," said Rothman. "But morality is not our current government's interest. The only military I would be willing to fight for would be one that would do things that were fully moral. I am comfortable saying that what happened in Rwanda was objectively immoral, and if the United States had intervened, I would be proud of America's military."

Morality, however, does not stand as a priority in the eyes of all students. James Moore '11 explained that he does not trust moral people because we can never know what someone believes. He trusts self-interested people because they are more predictable.

After 45 minutes, Mody wrapped up the first soapbox debate.

Topics for future soapbox debates are undecided. "The issues do not have to be related to current events," explained Mody. "We want these debates to be able to attract not only politically interested students, but also philosophy or science students regarding themes like stem cell research. The issue should be something critical and important that students care about."

Many students that did not attend, however, may not have known what the soapbox debates were for. Mary-Caitlin Hentz '10 saw a sign for the first one but assumed only members of the parliamentary debate team or SGA would attend.

"I go out of my way to attend discussions and seminars hosted by the science department," said biochemistry major Dave Ozimek '09. "But I cannot usually make time for other sorts of events."

Based on student responses to the idea of attending a soapbox debate, it seems as if the events could attract more participants if the parliamentary debate team explained that the debates are not limited to current events and issues. More students would feel compelled to participate if they understood that the debates could include their fields of interest.

Many students such as Benjamin Sosin '11 and Patricia Gomez '11 did not hear about the first soapbox debate, but strongly approve of the concept.

"I think the soapbox debates will bring a lot to this campus," said Gomez. "Participating in a debate is a learning process. It is also a way to exchange a range of viewpoints. Many people on this campus may feel that Middlebury students share a lot of the same opinions, but there is no way to know what people think until students express themselves."

Students left the discussion excited about the soapbox debates. Soapbox debates will continue biweekly on Tuesdays throughout the academic year. They are open to all interested members of the College community.