[fblike]
by Logan Scisco
Although I advise new coaches to extemporaneous speaking to recruit students that show an interest in history and politics, one thing that amazes me at tournaments is the lack of historical context that extemporaneous speakers use in making their arguments. It as if handling questions about North Korea, Sino-American relations, and domestic politics happen in a present-day vacuum where historical events are irrelevant to the narrative. Students often get “tunnel vision” when crafting their speeches because of the stress of prep time and the concern that one will not have time to fit all of their arguments in during the speech. They may also lack the needed historical knowledge to add proper context to their speeches. This strategy piece will explain how historical knowledge can aid a speech and provide advice for incorporating it into rounds.
How Historical Knowledge Helps
One of the ways that an extempers can impress their audience is to have a good command of their subject matter. Demonstrating one’s knowledge of the aims of the Chinese foreign policy and its impact on the Pacific can lead to higher ranks (assuming that the delivery of the speech is also up to par), but what can make the difference between impressing the audience and really making an impression is historical context. Analyzing events in the present is what a large number of extempers do. Bringing historical knowledge to the table can help you go another step and make you unique in a round. Unique speakers are the ones that win rounds and championships, so to be one of those you want to do things that your competitors are not doing so that you stand out.
A good example of how historical knowledge can help a speech is when you are analyzing a domestic politics question, especially one that centers on the midterm or presidential elections. When I competed between 2000-2004, the national political mood was relatively conservative. Bill Clinton was president when I began my career and it finished with George W. Bush. While Clinton and Bush had different domestic and foreign policy agendas, they both espoused a similar small government philosophy (or at least Bush did until September 11th). Keep in mind that it was Clinton that announced to the nation in 1996 that the “era of big government is over,” which is not something that you can envision a Democrat saying today. When assessing the strengths and weaknesses of candidates in the Democratic field that were attempting to win the party’s presidential nomination in 2004, I used history to convey to the audience why the Democrats needed to choose a candidate that would match the center-right political leanings of the country. To do so, I reiterated that in the past very liberal presidential challengers went down in defeat. My examples were George McGovern in 1972, Walter Mondale in 1984, and Michael Dukakis in 1988. I would make it a point in my speech to argue that the Democrats needed to avoid nominating a highly liberal challenger to Bush and then I would incorporate these three examples within the point. Similarly, until Barack Obama was elected in 2008, all of the American presidents elected since John F. Kennedy had come from the Sun Belt, which is economically vibrant region of the South and the Southwest. These presidents were Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan of California, Jimmy Carter of Georgia, George H.W. Bush (even though he was not born there) and George W. Bush from Texas, and Bill Clinton from Arkansas. Gerald Ford of Michigan did not factor into this analysis because he was not elected to the presidency. Another point that I would make in the speech would be that the Democrats did better when they nominated someone from this region, so it would be wise for them to do so again. I used the above examples as evidence of the “Sun Belt” trend in American politics. Judges were typically impressed by this use of historical knowledge and I got several glowing comments about it on ballots. Many of them remarked that it helped me stand out and differentiated me from the field.
Some topics lend themselves to more historical analysis than others. For example, if you have to talk about the media regulatory policies of East Timor, you are probably not going to know a lot about the history of East Timor media regulation and quite frankly, there is not a lot of information in textbooks that can help you either. However, a question like “Will China develop close relations with Japan over the next decade?” lends itself to some historical analysis. For example, you can discuss the enmity that has existed in the past between China and Japan. After all, Japan defeated China in the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895 and took over Taiwan and then invaded Manchuria in 1931 and devastated other parts of China during World War II. To this day, Japanese history textbooks gloss over the brutality that Chinese experienced at the hands of the Japanese during these conflicts, which is a significant point of contention between the two. Incorporating historical instances of animosity between both nations can work to your advantage by bringing a larger perspective to your analysis, while also impressing the judges that you have a solid command of world history.
Other topics demand historical perspective. For example, if you try talking about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without historical perspective then your speech is doomed to fail. It is important that you clarify why Palestinian refugees want to return to their homeland, how they were dispersed after the 1948 Israeli War of Independence, and then recap Israel’s other two wars with its Arab neighbors in 1967 and 1973. Having knowledge about prior peace proposals can also play in your favor if you are assessing the strengths and weaknesses of new peace plans. The same historical perspective is required for talking about North Korea and how the regime has flouted past international sanctions. The Korean War also adds context to the North’s hostile relationship with South Korea. On the whole, any time you talk about an international conflict, you really need to bring up how these conflicts have emerged over time and the historical grievances that exist on each side. Without this, your analysis will be superficial and potentially insulting to your audience.
Acquiring Historical Knowledge
Older speakers tend to incorporate more historical examples into their speeches than younger competitors because they have gone through more history classes. Older speakers may also be enrolled in Advanced Placement (AP) history courses like AP World History, AP United States History, and AP European History, where they are exposed to different events, situations, and ideas that still resonate in the modern world. Therefore, if you are in extemp, I would highly recommend taking these classes during your high school career. Not only will they help you in rounds, but they will also give you the possibility of earning college credit. If your school does not offer these courses, you may want to consider purchasing a college level textbook that can give you the historical perspective that these courses offer. Textbooks that I recommend looking at include Ways of the World: A Brief Global History by Robert Strayer, America: A Concise History by James A. Henretta, and Western Civilization: Volume II: Since 1500 by Jackson J. Spielvogel.
You can also gain valuable historical knowledge by choosing to read books in your selected field. Foreign Affairs has a list of book reviews at the end of each issue and extempers would be wise to look through those works and selecting ones that sound appealing and reading them. Similarly, a trip to the local public library would not be a bad idea in this regard either. If you live close to a college university, most will enable you to check out books if you pay a yearly fee as part of a “library friendship” program. University libraries keep up-to-date scholarship in a variety of disciplines and these can help you enhance your knowledge about certain areas of the world.
Also, the reason that I urge extempers to read think tanks and policy journals is because these can provide you with great historical examples and situations for your speeches. The International Crisis Group puts out lengthy reports that put all global “crisis” events into context. For example, if they do a policy briefing on Somalia they will usually provide a section in that briefing that gives a quick overview of Somalia’s troubled political, social, and economic history. If you opt to highlight parts of your files, I would highly recommend highlighting historical context more than any other part of the article. This will draw your eyes to the most relevant information when you are in prep. The Economist, while not a policy journal, is also helpful in this regard, especially in the introductory paragraphs of articles, and the obituary section in the back of each issue is also significant when finding out interesting stories about activists, leaders, etc. that have passed away. Opinion-editorials, especially those by noted columnists Paul Krugman, Pat Buchahan, Thomas L. Friedman, and others, are useful when mining for historical examples because most will use them when making arguments. You do not have to agree with the politics of the op-ed you are reading, but they can enhance your perspective.
In closing, historical perspective can enhance the analysis that you provide in your speeches. You do not have to dump large amounts of historical facts into your speeches, but aiming for 2-3 examples per speech is not a bad idea. These can be famous events (with dates) that link to the topic you are discussing. On some topics you may have a lot of historical evidence to incorporate and in other situations, not so much. Still, you should aim to educate your audience about your subject and how the topic of the question has arisen from history. Doing so will not only make you appear impressive in a round, but it can help you distinguish yourself from other competitors.