Argumentative Institutions

…and India’s quest to make it to the big league

In December 2013, the attention of thousands of students and professionals will be on India as it literally ‘holds the floor’ to host one of the world’s biggest student-run debate extravaganzas: the 34th World Universities Debating Championship (WUDC) 2014. Teams are already training for it—in logic, current affairs and complex theories of political philosophy.

Scheduled in Chennai on the cusp of this year and the next, the annual event is likely to see 1,400 students participate as part of 400 teams representing some of the world’s most prestigious institutions. Hosted by the Rajalakshmi institutions in Chennai, with the support of National Law School of India University (NLSIU), RV College of Engineering (RVCE) and the Oxford and Cambridge Unions, this competition could even mark the coming of age of debating as a discipline in India.

India’s most popular form right now is the ‘conventional style’ of debating: teams of two speaking for and against the topic, with ample time given to both for preparation. However, the WUDC format is the parliamentary style of debating. It mimics an actual parliamentary set-up, with the proposition being called the ‘Government’ and its first speaker being the ‘Prime Minister’. The ‘Opposition’ clashes with the ‘Government’ on the motion, with its first speaker called the ‘Leader of the Opposition’. The two widest sub-formats of this genre are the Asian (three on three) and British (four teams of two each) styles; the WUDC will use the latter.

The beauty of such a format is that the adjudicators are students too, and are also competing against one another in a parallel competition. There is 360º feedback as well, with speakers rating judges for their decisions (and reasoning for the same), so even the judges need to be on top of their game, lest a disgruntled losing team decides to take revenge. The parliamentary format is intense, dramatic and dynamic. Opposition teams interrupt speakers with cries of “On that point, sir!” in an attempt to disrupt their flow. Unique styles of speaking tend to emerge, which often makes for some entertainment. Indian debaters are notorious for wild hand gesticulations and moving around while speaking (‘The debater’s dance’, some call it).

Top Indian debaters, like RVCE’s Prasun Bhaiya and Kartik Sivaram, who won the Asian British Parliamentary Championships in 2011, are known for their witticisms, swagger and pooh-poohing of poor arguments. Impromptu rebuttal skills, they know, win contests.

Despite India’s self-image as an ‘argumentative’ country, Indian debaters have much to pick up by way of skills. “The world of an Indian debater is different from that of his counterparts in the UK, US and Australia,” says Harish Natarajan of Cambridge University, a veteran chief adjudicator, “One of the major stumbling blocks faced by Indian teams at previous editions of this tournament was their relative lack of exposure to competition from other debaters on the global circuit.”

Australian teams hone their characteristic fact-based approach in events like the Australs Championships. Similarly, the British teams sharpen their multi-pronged weapons of abstract principles at the Oxford and Cambridge inter-varsity debates. To take on such battle-hardy opponents, an Indian team that hopes to win must adopt an arsenal of as many devices as it can. “The tournament will be excellent in terms of exposure,” says Souradip Sen of IIT-Bombay, a successful debater on the domestic circuit, “Most Indian debaters, including me, would never have been able to afford to go for the WUDC in places like Berlin, Manila or Botswana. But will it have a lasting impact in terms of tangible improvement in the general quality of Indian debating? That remains to be seen.”

Harish points out differences in attitudes of academic administrations towards the discipline. In India, while some schools and colleges foster a competitive debate culture, it is still treated as something that looks good on a biodata, that’s all. Administrations have been reluctant to fund the activity. “This is the biggest hindrance to growth [of debating],” says a member of one of the few Indian teams at the WUDC held in Berlin last year, “Most universities don’t recognise this as an activity for which allowances should be made. No attendance, no subsidy, and only a small budget. It’s quite difficult to sustain it as an activity. It’s an expensive hobby.” The Berlin trip cost him Rs 80,000, and he typically spends around Rs 5,000 of his own cash on domestic meets. Change has been slow. Debate circuits have been expanding, and there are even parliamentary style debate contests in Delhi, Kolkata, Mumbai and Bangalore that offer prize money of upto Rs 1.5 lakh (in all). But by and large, it is still somehow seen as the domain of policymakers and parliamentarians.

In contrast, Pakistan is doing better in developing an active debate circuit. Raza Hassan, representing University of Lahore at an IIT-Bombay parliamentary debate held in December, speaks proudly of the existing support structure in Pakistan. “Schools and universities are encouraged to participate in parliamentary debating,” he says. “School teams have become as good as university teams since they have been debating against each other for so many years. National training camps have groomed these debaters to their potential. The outcome has been fruitful for all. Like university teams, school teams individually also attend international school debating tournaments. Such exposure at a younger stage has improved the circuit.”

India needs to make up for lost time. The Indian debating fraternity is eager to join global circuits and interact with as diverse a set of debaters as possible. Consider Chennai’s bid to play host, made to the World Universities Debating Council. Chennai promises accommodation at the super-luxurious ITC Grand Chola Hotel, social gatherings and performances every evening to showcase the essence of Indian traditions, and parties with unlimited alcohol. The organisers are also pulling strings to ease the granting of visas to international participants and subsidise their travel.

Teams are expected from as far as East Asia, Europe, Australia, South America and the Middle East, apart from Bangladesh, Burma, Nepal and Pakistan.

By the scale and sound of the preparations, the WUDC 2014’s organisers expect to make it every bit an extra- vaganza. With Chennai’s Rajalakshmi institutions having promised Rs 83 lakh in preliminary funding, and with sponsors being roped in, finance is no hurdle. What would impress spectators, though, would be the quality of the arguments made.

About The Author

Samhith Malladi