“From wherever you stood, the opposing side offered respectable, credible views. In today's fractured culture the evening struck a blow for civility.”

- The Huffington Post

More praise for IQ2 US
Clea Chang

Clea Chang

In March, Yale hosted an “Intelligence Squared U.S.” debate on the proposition “Free speech is threatened on campus” featuring four prominent professors and writers who argued for an hour and 45 minutes. Afterward, the audience voted on the proposition, and 66 percent agreed with it. The debate got very little coverage, possibly because it was held on Super Tuesday, a night in which Mr. Macroaggression himself swept the GOP contests. But the event and venue were significant because Yale students had nearly rioted a few months before over a dorm master’s wife’s email that gently challenged the university’s warning that microaggressions might lurk in some Halloween costumes. The students accused Yale of failing to create a “safe space,” and some demanded that the dorm master and his wife resign or be fired. In December, she resigned.The Yale debate devolved into an argument about whether demands for free speech are actually attacks on “the left” in disguise. “We must consider the possibility that what is really happening is that the language of free speech has been co-opted by dominant social groups, distorted to serve their interests and used to silence the marginalized,” Yale philosophy professor Jason Stanley said. “All too often, when people cry for justice and represent that it threatens the free speech, what is really meant is just ‘be quiet.’”

The Constitution provides that "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States," and it goes on to grant Congress a robust-and fearsome-list of powers. James Madison assumed that "[i]n republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates," and he cautioned that the legislative department may tend to "draw all power into its impetuous vortex." But modern politics and law seem to tell a quite different story. With executive orders, administrative regulations, creative interpretations of federal statutes, and executive agreements with other nations, it may seem that the President, not Congress, is, in effect, wielding the most potent legislative power. Indeed, the Supreme Court is currently poised to decide whether President Obama's unilateral immigration actions usurped Congress's power and flouted his duty to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." But some argue that this is nothing new: they say that the President is not exercising legislative power; he is simply exercising his well-established executive discretion. Is Congress still the most powerful branch, or is this the era of the imperial presidency? Has the President usurped Congress's legislative power?

  • Michael McConnell 90px

    For

    Michael McConnell

    Director, Constitutional Law Center & Professor, Stanford Law School

  • Adam Cox 90px

    Against

    Adam Cox

    Professor, New York University School of Law

  • Eric Posner 90px

    Against

    Eric Posner

    Professor, University of Chicago Law School

  • Carrie Severino 90px

    For

    Carrie Severino

    Chief Counsel & Policy Director, Judicial Crisis Network

  • Reception: 5:30-6:15 PM
  • Debate: 6:30-8:00 PM
  •  
  • National Constitution Center
    525 Arch Street, Independence Mall
    F.M. Kirby Auditorium
    Philadelphia, PA 19106

  • CAST YOUR VOTE
  • Buy Tickets
  • {addthisevent}
Thursday, 05 May 2016 16:07

Hunters Conserve Wildlife

Whether in America’s state game lands or the African bush, hunting has become one of the most hotly debated issues in the media and online. Internationally, the killing of Cecil the lion triggered a firestorm of criticism over trophy hunting rules and regulations. Central to the debate here in the U.S. is the white-tailed deer. Its overpopulation has caused millions of dollars in property damage, over browsing in forests, and the spread of Lyme disease. Many believe that regulated hunting can be an effective way to manage healthy populations of deer and other wildlife. And with the funds raised from legal hunting—the purchase of permits in Africa, licenses and taxes here in the U.S.—hunters have contributed significantly to conservation efforts on both public and private lands. But hunting’s critics question whether big game revenues really benefit local communities and whether hunting could ever be a humane way to maintain equilibrium and habitats. Is hunting wrong? Or are hunters conservationists?

Wednesday, 04 May 2016 00:00

Hunters Conserve Wildlife

  • Antony Licata 90px2

    For

    Anthony Licata

    Editor-in-Chief, Field & Stream

  • Wayne Pacelle90

    Against

    Wayne Pacelle

    CEO & President, The Humane Society of the United States

  • AdamRoberts90px2

    Against

    Adam M. Roberts

    CEO, Born Free USA & Born Free Foundation

  • CatherineSemcer 90px

    For

    Catherine Semcer

    COO, Humanitarian Operations Protecting Elephants

  • Reception: 5:45-6:30 PM
  • Debate: 6:45-8:30 PM
  •  
  • Kaufman Center 
    129 West 67th Street
    (b/w Broadway and Amsterdam)
    New York, NY 10023 

  • CAST YOUR VOTE
  • Buy Tickets
  • {addthisevent}
Thursday, 07 April 2016 10:07

Eliminate Corporate Subsidies

The auto industry, agriculture, the energy sector. What do they have in common? These industries benefit from government subsidies in the form of loans, tax breaks, regulation, and other preferences. Critics from the left and right say that not only do these subsidies transfer wealth from taxpayers to corporations, they distort the markets and our economy. Proponents say that government has an important role to play in launching innovation via strategic investment, and its support helps American companies thrive. Do we need subsidies, or is this corporate welfare?

Wednesday, 06 April 2016 00:00

Eliminate Corporate Subsidies

  • JackAbramoff90pxV2

    For

    Jack Abramoff

    Former Lobbyist & Author, Capitol Punishment

  • KateGordon90px

    Against

    Kate Gordon

    Vice Chair of Climate & Sustainable Urbanization, Paulson Institute

  • MichaelLind90px

    Against

    Michael Lind

    Co-Founder, New America

  • Teachout90px

    For

    Zephyr Teachout

    Assoc. Prof., Fordham Law & Author, Corruption in America

  • Reception: 5:45-6:30 PM
  • Debate: 6:45-8:30 PM
  •  
  • Kaufman Center 
    129 West 67th Street
    (b/w Broadway and Amsterdam)
    New York, NY 10023 

  • CAST YOUR VOTE
  • Buy Tickets
  • {addthisevent}

As technology rapidly progresses, some proponents of artificial intelligence believe that it will help solve complex social challenges and offer immortality via virtual humans. But AI’s critics say that we should proceed with caution. That its rewards may be overpromised, and that the pursuit of superintelligence and autonomous machines may result in unintended consequences. Is this the stuff of science fiction? Should we fear AI, or will these fears prevent the next technological revolution?

  • AndrewKeen 90px

    For

    Andrew Keen

    Internet Entrepreneur & Author, The Internet Is Not the Answer

  • JamesHughes 90px

    Against

    James Hughes

    Executive Director, Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies

  • MartineRothblatt 90px

    Against

    Martine Rothblatt

    Transhumanist, Entrepreneur & Author, Virtually Human

  • JaronLanier90px

    For

    Jaron Lanier

    Computer Scientist & Author, Who Owns the Future?

  • Debate: 7:00-8:45 PM

  • 92nd Street Y
    Kaufmann Concert Hall
    1395 Lexington Avenue
    New York, NY 10128 

  • CAST YOUR VOTE
  • BUY TICKETS
  • {addthisevent}
Thursday, 03 March 2016 18:52

Free Speech Is Threatened on Campus

Protests have erupted on university campuses across the country. To many, these students are speaking out against racial injustice that has long been manifested in unwelcoming, sometimes hostile environments. But to critics, their demands have gone too far, creating an atmosphere of intolerance for opposing or unpopular points of view. Are the protestors silencing free speech, or are they just trying to be heard? And are the universities responding by defending free speech, or by suppressing it?