Tony's Version - The Flaws of Competition: 1NC

The poet Ralph Waldo Emerson said in his poem The Rhodora that "if eyes were made for seeing then beauty is its own excuse for being." I believe that the same principal applies to excellence. Excellence itself is a motive to achieve, as well as a reason to help others through cooperation. Competition on the other hand is a flawed tool, and while it can be useful in some cases, it cannot be held superior to cooperation as a means of achieving excellence. The 19th century American author Edward Bellamy once said, "Competition, which is the instinct of selfishness, is another word for dissipation of energy, while combination is the secret of efficient production." This quote really sums up the philosophy of the negative in todays debate round. Competition is a selfish, inefficient tool in achieving excellence, while Cooperation is the key to efficient production. It is for this reason that I stand resolved: that cooperation is superior to competition as a means of achieving excellence. In this first negative speech of the round, I will first be presenting my own case, in which we will see the two main reasons why cooperation is superior to competition, then we will examine some of the flaws in the affirmatives case. C1 - Excellence without competition [The value I will be upholding in todays debate round is that of excellence itself. This is truly the highest value because really all smaller values like ____, human rights, progress, etc. are simply manifestations of excellence in a particular area.] Our lives are full of examples where excellence is achieved by cooperation rather than by competition. While competition can never function without cooperation, cooperation can stand alone: Vincent van Gogh did not enter the Starry Night in an art contest. The great symphony composers did not aspire for a top 40 music hit. Teachers measure success by the success of their students, not by their peers having less success. Firefighters measure success by lives saved, not by one firefighter saving more than another. Since both cooperation and competition are capable of achieving excellence, the round comes down to the key question of which is superior. This question is answered in my second contention C2 - Cooperation MUST be held superior to competition While competition is a powerful force, it is flawed in many ways, and in order to achieve excellence, competition must exist inside a framework of cooperation. This leads me to my first reason why cooperation is superior: Competition cannot achieve excellence w/o cooperation, but cooperation can stand alone, as illustrated by the examples in my first contention. I challenge the affirmative to present just one example where competition achieves excellence without cooperation. In every instance of successful competition, there are certain, non-negotiable aspects of cooperation which are held to be above the competition itself. In a sporting event, there are rules to protect the safety of the participants. In a trial, there are rules of ethics protect the integrity of the outcome. Businesses must follow laws to protect their customers, their investors and even their competitors. If competition was held to be superior to cooperation, then the logical conclusion would be that it is ok to violate these rules if it provides an edge in the competition. This leads me to my second reason why cooperation is superior: In a nutshell: Competition is a flawed tool, and is contained by holding cooperation superior. Common sense tells us that we cannot sacrifice safety, integrity or allow competition to go outside the careful boundary defined through cooperation. To allow this would create a hollow version of excellence that wasn't truly excellence after all. Now, I will examine the affirmatives case and discuss the flaws of competition there