Presented at an MIDP Workshop on the 16th of March and CFS IIU Malaysia. I thought it went rather well.

1. Opposition Strategy
Beat Govt Case
Build Good Opp Case
Opp Win

2. Opposition has the
responder's advantage.

3. HOW WILL
TIHS DEBATE
BE JUDGED?

4. Set criteria for debate
● team who wins is team who can show..
● this debate is about ..
● standard for change is ..
● this is NOT about ..
● Sometimes will need to negotiate with Gov
team. Don't set unreasonable criteria.

5. Manage expectations
● what is our role in this debate?
– present a better solution to the problem
– show you why their solution makes things worse
– show you the status quo is better than their solution
– show you more harms than benefits from their
position
– show you more positive values in our position
compared to theirs

6. BEAT THE
CASE IN
FRONT OF
YOU

7. Their Case Approach Your Case
Confusing Make them take Clear and simple,
larger burdens win by being more
understandable
Too Soft Broaden/deepen Clear strong
problem, show not approach. Might
addressing problem. have to go hard, but
Comparable to SQ. not always
necessary
Too Hard Celebrate. Attack Clear middle
attack attack. approach. Win by
being sane.
Just nice Don't do any of the above.

8. EVERY OPP
CASE IS
REACTIVE

9. Have principle opposition
● Oppose principle. From principle have case.
● Build strong but fluid arguments
● Build case from principle statement,
– Opposed to governments bailing out companies
– Gov should help people directly, not sustain poor
companies (poor company, not entire industry)
– No bailouts, but give welfare to people, retraining,
move to different industries (only if industry dying,
not just company)
– More efficient, easier, less waste

10. Have a philosophical contention
● Isolation vs Engagement
● Top-down vs Bottom-up
● Carrots vs Sticks
● Big Govt vs Small Govt
●

11. Competing Philosophies, not
just Solutions
● Isolation vs Engagement
● Top-down vs Bottom-up
● Carrots vs Sticks
● Big Govt vs Small Govt
● …..

12. Apple vs Android ?
● Closed vs Open
● ….

13. WIN CONTEXT,
WIN THE
DEBATE

14. Where/When/Who this debate
relevant?
● How to change leader of regime where
– Most of the people are educated and well
informed, rich natural resources?
– Discontent young population, have jobs but
decreasing quality of life. Getting impatient. ?
– Leadership craves international recognition. Wants
to be leader for the region ?

15. Make problem fit solution fit
problem
● How to change leader of regime where
– Most of the people are educated and well
informed, rich natural resources?
– Discontent young population, have jobs but
decreasing quality of life. Getting impatient. ?
– Leadership craves international recognition. Wants
to be leader for the region ?

16. GAMEPLAN

17. POIS
● Attack from DAY 1
– Make govt increase burden self – take positions,
will they also do this and that and her?
– Ask for data to back up claims
– Don't ASK for clarification. Clarify.

18. Pressure on DPM
● Burden to clarify and defend case and your
arguments – create a hole in the middle. Make
clear demand on DPM to react.
● Use stock rebuttals – slippery slope, backlash
to make many quick attacks.
● Put pressure on model or lack of it.

19. Pressure on GWhip
● Attack DPM's matter or defense. DLO is very
strategic, decide which line of argumentation
to continue.
– e.g. Poor defense of stock backlash can be
expanded into larger line of attack
● Want to be able to accuse Whip of “saving the
day at the end”, so give whip things to clarify,
but also make clear arguments Whip must
respond to. Highlight LO arguments dropped

20. OPP WHIP
● Must coordinate with reply. Else reply will be
repetitive.
● Attack more than build. Always. Way too late
for you to build.

21. Anything else?
●
●
●

22. ● Slideshare.net/loganimal
● demonstration