Now I have a like/meh relationship with debatery people. They are often very bright, articulate, persuasive, and jetstreamed to be corporate lawyers or politicians. But along with that too often comes shnobbery, condescension, elitism, exclusivity. This video is a perfect mix – brilliant trust fund babies in bowties, arrogant quips, but some thought provoking arguments. Hearing the New Haven drawls is pretty hilarious too. Cause you know, that’s how you debate! Via Fora.tv, one of our fave bigthink sites.
here’s a 2 minute quip for the altruism side, I uploaded the whole video for those who can tolerate the stuffiest of American academics for the sake of decent opposing arguments. There’s lots of interesting free-market arguments on the other side too.
Here’s the full one. If you don’t have an hour to spare, the pro Wal Mart argue that they are a great symbol of innovation, low prices (and in turn an equality focused argument), and how they are good corporate citizens (with surprisingly absent discussions on unions). The opposing side say that due to their political/lobbying advantages, Wal Mart is a big perversion of the free market and ends up drowning out their local competitors because of this political posturing along with their aggressive business techniques (you know, less healthcare, no unions, full time employees living below the poverty line). It’s a tough egg to crack, kids. This seems to be postured as a very liberal vs. conservative debate. Liberals take issue with homogenization, loss of diversity, fairness, and community while the opposing view is completely focused on low prices and their benefits to the low income family. Priorities!