Our question(s)

What can we learn from this debate (in substance and style)?

Oxford Union

Oxford Union’s notable speakers
audience consists of invited speakers, guests, and members (Oxford residents, especially students paying £270–£340 for terms or lifetime)
1 minute ring from start and before end; double ring at tend
between bells, members (£270–£340) can make
- point of information to ask or clarify an issue, which speakers can accept or reject
- “points of order” objections to rules violations (e.g., slander and time)
audience exit via “aye” or “nay” doors as a vote (like House of Commons).

. . .

opponents
- long history of regressive ideas with a new label “woke”
- critics are hyperbolic; asking for kindness & respect
“too far”
- like legal rights of other groups (women, black, gay)
- and those who opposed those now regret it
cancel culture
- JK Rowling still has prestige, power, and money; it’s “accountability culture”
- anti-woke brigade cancel people (like Vladimir Putin)
it’s about power
- and asking for accountability of those that punch down

. . .

. . .

. . .

satire (argumentum ad absurdum)
- references (Habermas, Freire, Marx, Halperin, Foucault)
- woke/academic jargon (appropriation, privilege, critical consciousness, estrangement)
analogy
- Marx’s “socialism” to “social equity”
- “dictatorship of proletariat” to “dictatorship of anti-racism”
(satirical) embrace of Ibram X. Kendi
- Federal Bureau of Anti-Racism
cannot go too far: “must be perpetual, otherwise becomes the status quo” – Freire

. . .

humor
- Hogwarts reference
- satirical(?) self-deprecation: “looks great in tuxedo”
autobiographical
- authority: book critical of CRT and “groomer” behavior
- quod erat demonstrandum (Q.E.D., “which was proved”)