Positions

This position holds that video games do not cause violence. It argues that no reliable link has been found between violent games and real-world violent crime, and that frequent gaming in fact brings measurable cognitive benefits.

Violence is an inherent human behavior like joy and excitement. It cannot be avoided, but it should be numbed down in situations that require violence. It is necessary for introducing justice laws to prevent people from committing unjust harm in fear of the violence that might be inflicted on them.

This position holds that voter fraud is not a myth. It argues that fraud is a documented crime with real convictions — double voting, ballots cast for the dead, absentee-ballot schemes — citing the overturned 2018 North Carolina congressional race as proof it genuinely occurs.

War may appear to be the only option when two powers are at odds with one another, but the unintended consequences of war are always grievous and enduring. Therefore, war is always unethical.

This position opposes banning bottled water. It argues that bottled water is a vital safe supply where tap water is unreliable or during emergencies, and that removing it from shelves would push people toward sugary, less healthy drinks rather than reducing consumption.

This position holds that we are not living in a simulation, arguing there is no evidence for the idea. It points to the immense obstacles facing any future civilisation trying to build such technology, and to claims that a simulated reality is mathematically impossible.

This position holds that we cannot live without oil. It argues that oil is the backbone of the global energy supply — which renewables cannot yet replace at scale — and that many of its by-products, woven into countless everyday products, have no viable non-oil substitutes.

This position holds that there is no responsibility to use contraception. It argues that nature should be allowed to take its course — that we may choose to intervene but are under no obligation to — and notes that contraception is in some sense unnatural and never wholly reliable anyway.

This position holds that responsibility does not truly make sense. It argues that because human beings are bound by the laws of nature, we lack the genuine freedom required to be responsible for our actions—and observes that people are reluctant to own their priorities in any case.

Traditional antique items may be falling to the wayside, like containers and trading cards, but we are in an age where we are creating new items which will--as the items age--redefine what the world considers to be an "antique." Our current tech will become tomorrow's outdated but still fondly-remembered antiques. And of course, we are still producing things like knick-knacks, toys, and collectibles; even if those items look way different than antiques from our past. We have not stopped creating antiques; we are simply defining new ones.

Borders protect nation-states and ensure that governments can take care of their citizens. The cultural and economic gains possible from open borders are not worth the safety and economic risks that will occur if people freely migrate between nation-states.

This position holds that the Electoral College should be kept. It argues the system increases fairness by stopping campaigns from focusing only on a few densely populated areas, ensures every state is valued, and that abolishing it would be too difficult in any case.

This position holds that the monarchy should be kept. It argues the monarchy is a valuable part of British public life—drawing in tourists, serving as a key source of the country's soft power abroad, and carrying a cultural and ceremonial value worth preserving.

Everybody needs to have the right to privacy. Just as people should have their private information protected in the real world, they should also have it protected on the internet.

This position holds that the death penalty should not be abolished. Its arguments contend that it delivers justice for the gravest crimes, deters offending and saves lives, gives victims' families closure, and affirms the value of human life by punishing murder with the ultimate penalty.

This position holds that daylight saving time should be scrapped, arguing the costs outweigh the benefits of an outdated practice. It contends that clock-changing disrupts religious observance, favours some industries over others, and no longer serves its original purpose.

This position holds that we should not legalise all drugs. It argues that drugs are dangerous and that people need legal protection from them — that legalisation would escalate addiction epidemics, increase drug-related crime, and wrongly normalise drug use across society.

This position holds that we should not phase out fossil fuels. It argues that they remain too important to abandon, that replacing them would be prohibitively costly and slow, and that phasing them out would do serious damage to the job market and the wider economy.

Languages change, shift, and die throughout human history. Preserving a dying language is not worth the effort it takes to record, preserve, and teach endangered languages to younger generations.

This position holds that wearing fur is wrong. It argues that fur is an affront to animal rights — the industry massacres animals for clothing — and that a complete boycott of fur is the only effective way to bring that industry to an end.

This position holds that Western liberalism is needed more than ever. It argues that liberalism is a cornerstone of healthy democracy that can adapt to a changing world — and that the alternatives now on offer are dangerous ideologies that make its defence all the more urgent.

This position holds that white fragility does not exist. It argues the concept is a flawed thesis that actually undermines meaningful conversations about race—calling it patronising, oversimplified, and self-contradictory, and contending that the idea itself is a racist construct.

This perspective believes that racism does not exist in a vacuum. Racism is predicated on systemic oppression; something is racist because it deepens existing racial inequalities. Whites are the primary beneficiaries of society's norms and institutions. Therefore, they cannot be victims of racism.

This position holds that white people should not wear dreadlocks. It argues chiefly that doing so is a form of cultural appropriation, and adds practical objections — that dreadlocks can make it harder to get a job, attract others' judgement, and be unhealthy for the hair.

White people can be just as disadvantaged as black people. There is no deliberate policy that seeks to afford white people additional privileges and by many measurements, white people are struggling as much, if not more, than their counterparts in other minorities.

This position holds that Winston Churchill was not a hero. It points to his war cabinet's role in the Bengal Famine, his support for area bombing of German cities, his advocacy of poison gas against rebellious peoples, his documented racism, and the myth-making that sanitised his image.

This position holds that working from home is not better than traditional office work. It argues remote work has real drawbacks—it can be lonely, makes it hard to unplug, and misses the serendipitous moments and face-to-face contact that build teamwork in a shared office.

Due to the current circumstances created by the coronavirus, many families are locked down at home. Therefore, mothers and fathers alike are being forced to both parent and work from home 24/7. As both parents are working from home, and under the assumption the time they spend child-rearing and working is roughly equal, there is then an equal chance of being interrupted by their children.

This position holds that you cannot trust a recovered drug addict. It argues that the behaviours of addiction — above all dishonesty — tend to persist after the drugs are gone, and that a recovered addict always remains at risk of relapse, leaving their reliability permanently in doubt.

This position holds that you should not give money to beggars, because you can never be sure what they will do with it. It argues that once cash changes hands you lose all control over its use — and that it may be spent on drugs, alcohol or gambling rather than genuine needs.

Some critics believe young adult novels expose adolescents to adult themes they may not be ready for. Authors of young adult novels do not fulfil their responsibilities to protect their readers from amoral or psychologically traumatic content. Other critics believe adults should be ashamed to read young adult novels, claiming they are dull and uninspired with predictable themes. Young adult novels should not be read.

Astrology is a superstition that has no scientific basis. Its roots can be traced at least as far back as the Mesopotamian civilisation of the third millennium B.C. Today, astrology remains a popular delusion. It has trickled down to everyone, found routinely in newspapers and magazines.

This position holds that zoos are ethical and good. It argues that they conserve endangered species, give animals advanced medical care and longer lifespans, support valuable research, and educate the public about wildlife — all while offering an enjoyable day out.

This position holds that AI will not take all our jobs—there will always be work for humans. It argues capitalism keeps creating new opportunities for labour, that displacement by technology is historically normal, and that exponential growth never lasts forever.

This position holds that VAR does not enhance football. It argues that the game thrived for over a century without technology, that it does not need it now, and that video review simply does not fit the free-flowing structure of a football match.

The mountain of evidence against the efficacy and scientific credibility behind homeopathy outweighs any potential "benefits" or proven results that homeopaths claim to harbor. Pseudo-science is pseudo-science for a reason.

This position holds that surrogacy should be illegal. It argues it commodifies human life and children, exploits women often driven to it by economic need, can leave the child in an uncertain legal status, and that prospective parents should adopt children in need instead.