Machiavellianism- NHSD 2005

Machiavellianism – National Health Sciences Debate ‏2005

The NHSD is finally over. Sitting here in front of the computer, mentally and physically exhausted, I am unsure of how I am really feeling. But I’ll run through the 3 exciting days and this will definitely be a memorable tournament, hopefully not the last one.

Before I go on, it will be good to mention, that this year, I had a new teammate, Prasad Palani Velu from semester 1. Although I felt bad in the beginning that I was singled out from my senior friends, a few hours later that day during selection, I felt, it would not be too bad. My instincts somehow told me that I would be able to debate with this guy. He was somehow similar (with my amazing psychoanalytical capabilities, I’m never wrong) in attitude and character as me, so I though I’ll give it a shot. Days after that followed by me gruelling Prasad and just dictating notes after notes and arguments after arguments of what I have learned so far. We set arguments and cases, prepared rebuttals and even had our own one-to-one debates. Every single attempt to just make sure that the both of us were ready for the tournament. Although most of the training session we had was good, I must say there were awkward moments as we were BOTH somehow perturbed by our unfailing similarities in thoughts, words, action, and if I could add, history. Albeit I didn’t really take it too hard upon myself, I guess there were points when my junior here did. But never mind that.

Day 1
TH would support Malaysian’s Women rights to choose.
OG – SUT 1
OO – UiTM 2
CG - IMU 3
CO – UiTM T 1

The round was all right except for the fact we had an adjudicator who was clearly an idiot when it comes to adjudicating. He claims that I should not come out with a point since I was the whip (never mind I was the government whip,) and gave us third place. Then, he claimed that we spoke to loudly (ok, so Prasad was just a little itsy bitsy loud, SO WHAT?) and hence his decision. Idiot number 1. Then again, and I thought it was a blessing in disguise (later)

TH just loves playing doctor (humour round)
OG – IMU 3
OO – KYC
CG – UKM 3
CO – UiTM 4/5??

Being a humour round, I was a little shaky, plus I was still pissed over round one. P & I decided we will talk about sexual role-play and how playing doctors is the best. Little did we know the disaster that was coming our way. After setting our case, the opposition, having being caught off-guard started saying its not morally acceptable bla bla bla and the fact that he took about 200 P.O.Is wont hurt either. Then his second speaker just thought he would let the whole world know he was innocent, young, and that talking about sex is not in context of the debate. If that wasn’t so bad, the 1st speaker of the closing opp just came out rebutting everybody in the room (including his side!) and started his personal attacks on my side: he lashed at my tie, saying its like hell, then he asked the closing government why his accent was like hell too. Boy, the look on Reasad’s face (adjudicator) was scary. He was pisssed. Apparently, this speaker claims he is Muslim and that talking about sex is offensive. But later, by the 6th minute, he claims that French maid role-play is better than playing doctor. Idiot number 2. (Note: Never, never EVER comment harshly on VASAN’s tie or ANY of his belongings!). I won’t even attempt explaining what the opposition whip did. Oh, and we got the same crappy adjudicator (yes idiot no.1) in this room. And he claimed his dissatisfaction when he saw us. Thank God Reasad was chair! Oh, and another funny thing, when this girl from the government bench was giving her speech, the guys from KYC (yes, the innocent ones) kept standing up for P.O.Is, not until she went like “ Sit down, virgins!!”. Hilarious. Totally hilarious.
No brainer, IMU 3 won.

Day 2

TH would allow doctors to advertise on all facets of media.

OG - MMU1
OO - IIUMC 1
CG - IMU 3
CO – IMU 1

This room was a toughie, cos as you can see, all the team names end with a 1 except for ours, and it was bad that we had to oppose our own team. The debate was pretty good, I think P & I came up with a marvellous extension, the whole idea on Health Tourism. We were pretty weary, but we won this round. With due respect to YP and Ad, I must say, you guys put up a good fight. Funny thing is, we had, yes, the same adjudicator AGAIN!! (Yes, idiot number 1). Again, thank God, Pravin, the CA (Chief Adjudicator) was chair.


TH worries that globalisation is creating a Prozac nation.
OG – IIU G 1
OO – UiTM SA 1
CG – UKM 1
CO – IMU 3

If that room was a toughie, this room was hell. P & I were, yes, in the top room for that round, against all those people who eyed for the semis. IIU G 1 made a pretty wrong definition, they didn’t talk about Prozac at ALL, and we had to debate on Intellectual Property rights on AIDS drugs and its distribution to third world countries. P& I scrapped our plans 3 times before coming with our final extension on abuse and monopoly. Being in that room at that time, all I wanted to do was get 1st or 2nd so that we can get through finals. To our surprise, IMU 3 got 2nd, after UiTM 1, which brought us straight to the semi-finals.


Day 3
I never knew this day would come. IMU 3 was in the semi finals.

TH would deny organ transplant to substance abusers.

OG – IMU 3
OO – UKM 1
CG – IIUMC1
CO – MMU 1

We had a good case set up, we had a good fight. We had all our friends there to support. We had everything that could bring us to the finals. BUT, not until we had an adjudicator who believes that organ donors can decide who should receive their organs. Meet Idiot number 3. The idiotest of all idiots. Fact is, we lost this round, and MMU 1 and UKM 1 got to the finals to meet UiTM 2 and UM1. Crap, we were so close. But, as Pravin said, in his eyes, we were finalist. And that was something that made us feel better.

I’m not going to even talk about the finals, but it’s worth to note that UKM 1 won, and MMU 1 got last. That’s good enough.

The tournament turned out to be pretty good. Both for IMU as a whole, and for me as well. Looking back at it, I am happy that I was able to debate against some of the best Malaysian debaters, and have overall good rounds. Being one of the top ten best speakers wouldn’t be too bad to mention (Sheena was 3rd best speaker!! yay!!). What was more important is (and I mean it!) that I was able to spend time with my debater friends (in no particular order) Adeline, Sheena, Yee Pei, Hai Liang, Elena, Rahman, Alvin, Priya, Rasyidah and Yee Shiong, and must say, it has always been great, and we have really reached so far. (Though I must agree we have much more to catch up on!).

One thing for sure, it was the whole experience with my team mate (I thought this deserved a separate segment) Prasad Palani Velu. It was a great experience, the similarities worked to our benefit, and I must also thank you for portraying yourself well and doing your best in bringing us the wins that we got. (Now, don’t get all air-headed!)

At the end of the day, I still wonder why do I debate. Why do I put my academics aside just for debate? That needs a whole volume to explain. Probably not this time. Now it’s back to the NERVOUS SYSTEM. Damn it.

********photos will be up soon***********