Debate- Post 2

Following a viewing of a discussion panel which quickly turned into a debate with a biased mediator, we were split into groups for a similar debate. Not only did I find the topic educational, the act of debating was, perhaps, even more informative. During the debate we discussed the relationship between power and leadership. One of the more interesting ideas that came from the debate was the idea power is needed for leadership but power does not guarantee leadership which brought us to a discussion on the effective use of power. Naturally, from there, we progressed into how one defines effectiveness and whether morality should be considered. Very quickly it became apparent who sided with Kissinger and who sided with Albright. Some aspects of these concepts were present in debate teams’ organizational structure. For example, my team members were eager to participate and contribute, but restrained themselves from seeking authority over peers knowing they would fail and the team would suffer. Rather, we adopted a team dynamic based on a direct democracy where everyone could talk which was possible because we were so few in number. While I was coordinating with my team, I observed a drastically different dynamic in the other group. In this dynamic, knowledge was power and everyone was trying to display their power in hopes of becoming the leader. Our team did not have such a position, though we did have a director which I feel was a much more suitable position for the situation. I believe the benefits of our dynamic showed in our success in the debate if not in the actual argument in the structuring of our argument.