The Visiting Debaters

Radio Record, Volume V, Issue 3, 31 July 1931, Page 6

The Visiting Debaters

©. one, hearing the broadcast of the ‘tecent debate from 1YA between a team from Oregon University and a team representing Auckland University College, will quarrel with the judges’ unanimous verdict in favour of the visitors. A well merited victory was achieved mainly by superior appreciation. and treatment of the chosen subject, which was "That Imperialism is a Menace." The: American team took the "affirmative; Mr. Miller. taking the lead. Plead~ ing for less petty nationalism and a greater understanding of internationalism, . the speaker claimed that Imperialism was the greatest curse of civilisation and the surest cause of war. Tt was based on an assumption of superiority-a belief that the people of a patticular nation were a chosen people." Even Heaven, said Mr. Miller, was tiot free from conscription by Impefialists, who not only desired to subjugate all their own people, but claimed God for their own side. Mz. Adams, leader for Auckland, suggested that the only sane way of judging the subject was to test the result which had attended its practical application. Unfortunately this speaker, as ‘did-the succeeding defenders, based his arguments solely on British Imperialism: in South Africa. He raised an ingenious plea that the development of waste land in Africa was brought about solely’ from humanitarian motives; settlers’ had at the back of their mind the satisfaction of over crowded European countries and not self-enrichment when.. they took over territory from native owners. Mr. Wilson, second speaker for the Americans, drew attention to the evils which followed in the wake of civilisation, propelled by Imperialist colonists; who tore down’ racial standards, principles, and institutions. Mr. Barker, an. Auckland speaker, chosen at short notice to replace an absent member of the defending team, obviously felt that the time allowed him for preparation was..inadequate, and proceeded to burlesque the subject. He certainly provided .some mirth, but must have cost his side many valuable points. The final speaker for the visitors, Mr. Pfaff, was pungent and vigorous. Reminding his opponents of the subject under debate, he proceeded to show, from the example of his own nation’s handling of Nicaragua, how Imperialism was working in a _ vicious and widening circle which was leading to the decadence of nations.

Winding up for Auckland, Mr. Rowe, nothing daunted by a reminder of the subject under debate by the last speaker, proceeded to show how valuable to South Africa was its settlement by the British Empire. Mr. Miller was allowed a few minutes in which to close the debate for the affirmatives. He summarised the points made by his side, and contended, qtiite correctly, that the opponents had not only been unable to negative a single one of these, but had been unable to advance a single point in favour of Imperialisation. As the speaker mentioned, ability to have remembered, and spoken on the actual chosen subject instead of swerving at a tangent on to the rights and wrongs of the British Empire, would have been more valuable to the Auckland speakers.. He might well have added that fewer personalities and a general seasoning of. ordinary politeness would have detracted nothing from the effect of their eloquence. The judges had no difficulty in arriving at a decision which gave the debate to the visitors by a margin of thirty-three: points. .