Script - WUDC 2012 GF: TH supports nationalism PM

WUDC 2012 GF: TH supports nationalism

PM: Kiran Iyer (Monash B)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adPe9h5w6Kk

Well, ladies and gentleman, it's an absolute pleasure to speak for Monash University on the Opening Government for the fifth consecutive World's Grand Final. And we are particularly excited at this moment because this is a topic which we entirely believe.

The nation state, ladies and gentleman, is artificial concept, but it's a beneficial concept. At Monash, we gonna prove two key things to you.

Firstly, that the nationalism and the nation state have more benefits than harms.

And secondly, we'll show you that nationalism is superior to alternative conceptions of collective identity, such as class, such as religion, such as sexuality, if that does exist. That it's also superior to no collective identity, ladies and gentleman. Those are the key premises that we are going to be advancing at Opening Government. We are not going to be comparing nationalism, in this debate, to a theoretical cosmopolitan utopia, because that simply doesn't exist. What we are going to do is look at nationalism as it exists now, and compare it to other forms of identity as they exist right now.(ここで重要なのは、自分たちのケースのまとめが綺麗に行われていること。これを最初に述べておくことで、自分たちのゴールをわかりやすく説明できるし、ジャッジが自分たちの後の話を理解しやすくなる。)

I'll have three key arguments as Prime Minister.

Firstly, I'll explain to you why nationalism is a critical, unifying framework.

Secondly, I'll look at why nationalism helps promote essential sacrifice, which is crucial to the state.

And thirdly, I'll look at how nationalism is the most inclusive framework of collective identity that exists.

So firstly, why nationalism is a critical, unifying framework. So what exactly do we mean by nationalism?(ここむっちゃ大事。そもそも題材となるnationalismとは何か？っていうのをfactとして説明することで、全argumentの基盤を作る。) We mean nationalism essentially is based on a belief in the strength and the power of the nation state. It's premised on a few things. It's premised on labeling on specific commonalities even when you have a range of differences between other members of the state. It's based on supporting the collective endeavor of your country, their economy, their healthcare system, their education system. It's based on sharing a joint future which is ultimately based on cooperation, or if not cooperation, at least tolerance for the other members of your state, ladies and gentleman. We of course recognize that the level of feeling associated with nationalism does not apply uniformly. We recognize that often in new state, it take time to develop that type of strong national identity, which is so essential for all the benefits we believe in. But we believe nationalism is something which does reinforce itself over time. As more and more people opt into this, it’s harder and harder to opt out that shared collective identity, it's harder and harder and harder to opt out that common belief that your country is important, ladies and gentleman.

So why is this so significant? We believe it's absolutely fundamental for population to succeed and to drive benefits. We say, ladies and gentleman, particularly for countries driven by sectarian descent, say hypothetically a country like Rwanda in the 1990s, the preoccupation with ethnic divide was incredibly corrosive, and the only way this kind of country could move beyond that is through a collective identity based on the nation state, based on the recognition that the differences, based on the ethnicity, based on sect, ladies and gentleman, are less important than the commonality of being part of the same nation. This is particularly important if you look at context, say, such as post-apartheid South Africa, ladies and gentleman. We say for post-apartheid South Africa, it was so crucial to be able to unify behind South African rugby team, a national team which represented every member of that country, ladies and gentlemen. That was absolutely essential to moving beyond these conflicts and recognizing their limitations.

Moreover, we believe that conflict often build when nationalism breaks down. So when country become driven by sectarian divide, like in Yugoslavia, once national identity becomes corroded, that's when the worst harms happen in terms of having collective identity and reduce conflict. I'll take Opening.

POI: Sir, but the problems are exacerbated at the point where nation states feel as if they need to tie national identity to ethnic identity and cleanse anyone who is not part of that national identity.

It's not our burden in this debate to defend extreme ethnic identities and polarizations within state. The key premise of our case is that nationalism, which is purely about commonalities, is the ideal which is most important of a harmonious and peaceful society.(これはsupportとかregret系のモーションで超大事な発想。まぁ全てのモーションに大事だけど。今回で言えば”Nationalism”ってのには幾つか種類があって、今回のOGとCGが押してるcivic nationalismとか、あるいはPOIで言われたみたいにナショナリズムが民族主義と強く結びついた”Ethnic naitonalism”のようなものもある。必ずしもGovはOppが言ってくるような種類のNationalismをsupportする必要はなくて、自分たちが規定したNationalismをsupportすることができる。これはBurden Controlにも超大事だよ！まぁもちろん自分たちの規定がUnreasonableじゃないって設定に基づくけど。)

So second argument, why does this enhance the likelihood of sacrifice. We believe, ladies and gentleman, human computation relies both on trust but also on willingness to sacrifice for other members of your community. No thank you. And that's because not all individuals have the same capacities to ensure that other members within the society are protected. So a good example of this is war, ladies and gentleman. On the Opening Government, we don't always support war, but we recognize that it's sometimes necessary, when it's because of resources, when it's because of defending your country itself. We say when wars are necessary, they're more likely to have support within the country, more likely to be effective, once you base this on national identity, ladies and gentlemen. We say when you make that difficult choice to go to war and risk your life, you have to believe in something that's worth risking your life for. We think it's absolutely fundamental to have that national identity, that national belief to power you to make those choices. That's much more likely than if your only identity is constructed around your religion, around your family, around your class, where we don't have any reason to actually mobilize for the collective well being. That's harmful.

This is important also in the context of public service, ladies and gentlemen. We say one of the key drives for people to enter public service, to make sacrifices in terms of their pay, in terms of their conditions and to work really hard to the benefit of their country is when they believe that they're sacrificing for something that matters. That occurs when that's based on this cohesive national framework that people want to sacrifice for, want to put this energy into. That's when you get all of those benefits through a national identity being constructed. That's sturdy enough to power those kinds of sacrifices.

So my final argument, ladies and gentlemen, is why nationalism is the most inclusive framework. We recognize, ladies and gentlemen, that there are other ways in which identity are shaped. We recognize that religion, like class, like social strata, ladies and gentlemen, are all significant ways which individuals form bonds with other people, and some of them share the same benefits of our plan. The key difference with nationalism, ladies and gentlemen, is it's much easier to opt in and it's much easier to opt out(上の話とコントラじゃね？って気はする). If you want to be part of a particular community, you can make that choice to live in that community, or to move away from that community, ladies and gentlemen. You can't do that with something like religion, or something like class, ladies and gentlemen, because other people within that class won't recognize your attempts to be part of that particular identity. So you have a greater capacity to actually be part of an identity and get that certainty, and get that collective benefits of being in that identity, true nationalism rather than true divisive identities like religion, which are much harder both in terms of internal recognition and in terms of the external recognition, ladies and gentlemen. This is both viral and more and more harmonious. When you consider the huge movement of people from border to border, it's crucial to have identities which aren't constructed by immutable characteristics, like your religion or your class.

So ladies and gentlemen, we believe that nationalism isn't perfect, but it's the best form of identity generation. It carries major benefits for the state. It's the most inclusive framework. We're proud to propose.