This is an updated version of my previous file to answer the Wilderson Kritik (and similar arguments that rely on theories of whiteness/anti-blackness). Changes in this update:
---*New* evidence â€“ including several cards from the past year
---Offense is modularized â€“ makes it easier to select and conceptualize distinct arguments
File should inclue everything you could possibly need to effectively answer this kritik. All of the evidence is A+ quality.
AT: Wilderson---2AC---Must-Read. 3
AT: Wilderson---2AC---Permutation Solvency. 5
AT: Wilderson---Policy Key. 9
AT: Wilderson---Totalizing/Inaccurate. 10
AT: Wilderson---Essentialist. 12
AT: Wilderson---Non-Falsifiable. 13
AT: Wilderson---Ahistorical 15
AT: Wilderson---Agency Turn. 16
AT: Wilderson---Agency Turn---Ext. 18
AT: Wilderson---Ontology Turn. 20
AT: Wilderson---Pessimism Turn. 21
Anti-Blackness Wrong. 22
Consequences Key. 24
AT: Social Death*. 25
Extinction OW... 31
*State Not Always Racist---Wall 32
State Not Always Racist---Ext. 35
State Not Always Racist---Hopelessness Turn. 40
*Not a Root Cause---Wall 41
Not a Root Cause---Ext. 43
AT: Afro-Pessimism- Yes Progress â€“ Clarke. 44
AT: Afro-Pessimism.. 46
AT: Afro-Pessimism.. 47
AT: End America. 49
AT: Revolution â€“ Backlash/Rollback. 50
AT: Revolution â€“ Backlash/Rollback. 51
AT: Revolution â€“ Canâ€™t Solve Domination. 52
Vague Alt Fails â€“ Reed. 53
AT: Author Bias/Epistemology. 55
AT: Ontological Blackness. 56
AT: Reparations. 59
AT: Negativity Alt â€“ hooks. 61
AT: Sexton. 63
K Aff 64
Coalitions â€“ hooks. 65
By DMLThis is an aff that I've had ready for a while but has never been read (not just by teams that I've worked with but by any team on the circuit). To keep the element of surprise in play I'd prefer not to post public information about it but I will answer any questions about it through PM that you might have prior to buying it (as long as you don't tell). This aff is strategic, surprising, and has a different angle on the topic that hasn't really been taken much advantage of this year by any big team.
Also it's a policy aff so it's NFLs-friendly.
All necessary blocks are there, the file is highlighted, and explanation is provided in the file, all for the price of $10. Again, let me clarify, if you are interested in the file send me a private message and I will answer any and all questions you have in confidentiality. You don't have to buy it to do this, and you don't have to buy it after PMing me--if you decide you aren't interested then that's fine. Of course, there's always the option of taking me on my word and buying the file without asking, but to each their own...
By DMLAn aff written for the TOC that never got to be broken. (Un)surprisingly enough there's only one card that actually has to do with transportation so this will be applicable for other topics beyond this one. The argument revolves around Felix Guattari's idea of ecosophy as a new form of philosophy that brings the personal in touch with the social and the environmental, and advocates a new form of transportation infrastructure that was never read in high school to my knowledge this year.
Even though the topic is drawing to a close, this file still has some of the best and most comprehensive framework answers that you will see. If you plan to read any kind of shifty non-fiat-y aff at some point this file is worth purchasing just for the framework and cap answers.
***Update: sorry to the 1 or 2 people that have bought this file in the past few weeks, but my interest in these cards has kinda faded, so I'm making it free now. Enjoy!***
NDCA, the TOC, and NFLs are coming up, and that means there are gonna be plenty of wacky new Ks to deal with - if you don't have a philosophy PhD, the next-best thing to throw back at them are some sick cards from 2013 about why the alt doesn't do anything. This file should help you do that. A solid majority of the evidence is from sources published since the conclusion of camp evidence production last summer; a fair amount is from this calendar year. Much of the file is cut from peer-reviewed sources. I'd say about 75% is already highlighted, and I've included some basic extensions for some things. I'm only charging $6 because I'm generous, but honestly, these cards are pretty sick, and the file's 120 or so pages long, so you should probably just buy it pronto.
In addition to generic stuff (framework answers, alt takeouts, defenses of the aff, and so on) I've also thrown in some cards on all-too-common authors like Heidegger and Zizek as well as some answers to new and intimidating Ks like object-oriented ontology. Finally, I've included some previously undiscovered answers to annoying things like Kappeler and Deep Eco just because peoples' answers to these arguments tend to be irredeemably terrible in my experience, and I'm tired of voting for them.
Even if you're not going to nationals, a lot of these cards are cut from books and journals that probably aren't going to come up on some high schooler's search for "hegemony collapse outweighs zizek" at the 7 week next summer, so you should still check it out.
Table of contents:
Kritik Answers Updates 1
*State Good 3
2ACâ€”Radical Democracy 4
1ARâ€”Radical Democracy 6
AT: State Bad 8
2ACâ€”AT: FW General 9
AT: Unethical 12
AT: Anarchism 13
Pluralism Good 14
Pragmatism Good 18
Infrastructure Investment Good 20
Cede the Political/Perm 21
2ACâ€”Root Cause Bad 24
1ARâ€”Root Cause Bad 25
2ACâ€”Discourse Bad 26
1ARâ€”Discourse Bad 28
Discourse Bad 29
AT: Expertism Ks 31
2ACâ€”Predictions Good/AT: Complexity 33
2ACâ€”Predictions/Empirics Good 35
AT: Complexity 36
AT: Identity Politics 38
AT: Affect 39
AT: Foucauldian neoliberalism critiques 41
AT: Governmentality 43
AT: Kappeler 45
Permâ€”State Good 49
Permâ€”Strategic Innovation 53
Totalization NB 55
Growth Goodâ€”Poverty 56
Capitalism Sustainable 2AC 57
AT: Growth Unsustainableâ€”Resources 58
AT: Growth Unsustainableâ€”Commodity Prices 60
AT: Growth Unsustainableâ€”Production 61
AT: Growth Unsustainableâ€”Population 62
AT: Growth Unsustainableâ€”Food/Ag 63
AT: Growth Unsustainableâ€”Pollution 64
Bad Scholarship 65
Specificity Good 70
Ethics Perm 72
Eco-Pragmatism Perm 73
Science Good 75
Technology Good 77
Managerialism Good 80
Warming Apocalypticism Good 81
AT: Anthropocentrism 83
AT: Deep Ecology 85
AT: Env Justiceâ€”No Impact 89
AT: Env Justiceâ€”Impractical 90
AT: Env Justiceâ€”Poverty 91
AT: Civilization K 92
*Compassion Fatigue 94
AT: Disaster Porn 96
AT: Moeller/Compassion Fatigue 98
AT: K of Nature 102
â€œThe Actâ€ Bad 103
AT: Do Nothing 106
Anthro K 109
Ethics > Ontology 112
*Object-Oriented Ontology 116
Ethics DA 117
Epistemology DA 118
No Solvencyâ€”Correlationism 121
Heidegger K 122
My name is James Stevenson. I'm a graduating senior at the University of Puget Sound, where I debated regionally and nationally for four years, following a four-year high school career debating locally and regionally in Utah. I am currently an assistant coach at Bingham High School in Utah.
This is a comprehensive file to answer the increasingly popular Wilderson kritik which a number of nationally competitive teams have been winning on. It includes offense to commonly read alternatives, indicts to wilderson and his methodology, answers to "social death", and everything else you need to effectively answer this kritik. All of the evidence is extremely high-quality.
Extintion First <3. 2
AT: Wilderson â€“ 2AC Must-Read. 3
AT: Wilderson â€“ No Socal Death*. 5
AT: Wilderson â€“ No Socal Death*. 7
AT: Wilderson â€“ Wrong/Bad Method. 12
AT: Wilderson â€“ Wrong/Bad Method. 13
AT: Wilderson â€“ Wrong/Bad Method. 15
AT: Wilderson â€“ Fatalism Turn. 16
AT: Wilderson â€“ Essentialist 17
AT: Wilderson â€“ Pessimism Turn. 18
AT: Wilderson â€“ Recreates Violence. 19
AT: Wilderson â€“ Link Turn/Coalitions Key. 21
AT: Sexton. 22
States Good/Redeemable. 23
States Good/Redeemable. 24
States Good/Redeemable. 25
States Good/Redeemable. 27
States Good/Redeemable â€“ Empirics Prove. 28
AT: Afro-Pessimism.. 29
AT: Afro-Pessimism.. 30
AT: End America. 32
AT: Revolution â€“ Backlash/Rollback. 33
AT: Revolution â€“ Backlash/Rollback. 34
AT: Revolution â€“ Canâ€™t Solve Doination. 35
AT: Root Cause. 36
AT: Root Cause. 37
AT: Root Cause. 38
AT: Root Cause. 39
AT: Root Cause. 40
AT: Author Bias/Epistemology. 41
AT: Ontological Blackness. 42
AT: Ontological Blackness. 44
I am an assistant coach at the University of North Texas. I debated for four years at Deer Park High School and four years and the University of Texas at Dallas where my accomplishments included: octo-finals of the NDT, a first-round bid to the NDT, 1st place at the UMKC tournament, octo-finals of GSU, octos at Harvard (twice), 2nd place at ADA Nationals, semis of Georgia, a Kentucky Rd Robin invite, and winner at the Arizona Debate Institute Fellows Tournament. I have judged over 40 rds on the transportaton topic and coached debate for four years, including working at the Jayhawk Debate Institute.
By TheStreetThis one goes out to the sewers. The aff has no plan text, but if one wanted to add one i'm sure you can make one. The affirmative is all about a personal INVESTMENT in the darker underside of our infrastructure, saying that while most conceptions of transportation infrastructure like to look at the top side of things and imagine the roads and what not as something we drive over... this aff looks underneath and understand it not only as transportation but also life support for those without homes. - FULLY ENDORSED BY Brian D. Gonzaba and ready to be run right now!
Beneath The Neon â€“ AFFIRMATIVE 2012-13
1AC 1/7. 3
1AC 2/7. 4
1AC 3/7. 5
1AC 4/7. 7
1AC 5/7. 8
1AC 6/7. 9
1AC 7/7. 10
AT: Topicality /Framework 1/3. 11
AT: Topicality /Framework 2/3. 12
AT: Topicality /Framework 3/3. 13
AT: FX T/XTRA T. 14
AT: Cede The Political 15
AT: Capitalism.. 16
AT: Speaking for Others. 17
AT: Nietzsche 1/2. 18
AT: Nietzsche 2/2. 19
AT: High Theory 1/4. 20
AT: High Theory 2/4. 21
AT: High Theory 3/4. 22
AT: High Theory 4/4. 23
AT:â€Do Somethingâ€ Counter Plan. 24
AT: Pessimism or Nihilism.. 25
AT: The Spread 1/2. 26
AT: The Spread 2/2. 27
AT: Disads/Nuke War Impacts. 28
AT: Hegemony Good 1/3. 29
AT: Hegemony Good 2/3. 30
AT: Hegemony Good 3/3. 31
K on K violence Overview.. 32
AT: Bataille. 33
AT: Kappeler. 35
AT: Black White Binary. 36
AT: Narratives Bad. 37
AT: Word PICS. 38
1AR Shively fw.. 39
1AR Smith fw.. 40
AT: Ontology Bad. 41
Permutation Module 1/2. 42
Permutation Module 2/2. 43
By X SpikeThis is the Welcome to New Vegas affirmative that was read at the UT Round Robin by myself and Hank Stolte. Although it was only read once, it has never dropped a ballot. The affirmative makes an argument about the nature of politics, subjectivity, and even debate. The affirmative contends that debate itself is nothing but a recycled set of different political building blocks; flows that reconstruct themselves in spaces that are considered "unique" because of their influence on students and their individual relation to thought, but that are actually more like empty museum halls. Each space doesn't actually influence us: encountering an SBSP aff doesn't teach us to oppose space militarization, it teaches us how to become technical and pick up ballots. The nature of the ballot and its relation to advocacy always-already complicates our ability to be authentically political, and so the affirmative chooses instead to conceptualize the space of the debate that the 1AC occurs in as refuse: something that denies the usefulness of the system as a whole and questions the nature of debate as something that produces pedagogical responsibility. Instead, the ballot becomes a bomb, an encounter with the selves in debate we construct as political agents and the selves outside of the room that are competitors and not politicians. The way that debate and its norms, rules and regulations construct our subjectivity is deemed problematic; something that segments and divides our essence and produces a self-hatred that teaches us to parcel out and destroy the wills and desires of our essential self in a compromise for ballots.
We have proclaimed the death of debate: in its place, only the starfish that we call the 1AC.
By twoACSPS is by far the biggest aff on this topic, but most teams read evidence that is at least a couple years old. This file includes evidence from 2012 that is high-quality and will allow teams to retire some of their old NSSO evidence. These articles are pretty hard to find and unless you have access to some pretty expensive journals, you aren't going to be able to cut them yourself.
In my opinion, these A+ cards that you can use in half of your debates for the rest of this year is worth the price, but as an added bonus I've included answers to common negative off-case positions and case arguments against this aff.
Every single card in this file was cut by me for this topic - this isn't recycled camp file crap.
I've included a paper version along with a paperless version.
PM if you have any questions.
My name is Brad Meloche. I just finished my fourth year debate at Wayne State University. Over the last four years I have reached the elimination rounds and received speaker awards at multiple local and regional tournaments. In 2012 I qualified for the National Debate Tournament. As a four year debater for Groves High School (MI), I reached elimination rounds at Harvard, New Trier, and East Grand Rapids, as well as having great local success. As a coach for Seaholm High School, I have coached debaters to the elimination rounds of multiple national tournaments, including the 2011 NCFL national tournament. I also coached and judged at the 2011 Tournament of Champions for Brother Rice High School.
2012 SPS Aff Update 1
Multi-Purpose Must-Read (1AC) 3
Key To Hege 4
Solves Econ/Military Leadership 5
Solvency â€“ Feasible 6
AT: Solar Cell Production Hurts the Environment 7
Oil Impact â€“ Eurozone/Global Econ 9
Oil Impact â€“ Laundry List 11
Oil Impact â€“ Election Add-on 13
Ext â€“ Oil Key to Reelection 14
AT: Russia Oil 15
A2: Solar Radiation 17
A2: Volcanic CO2 18
A2: Lomborg 19
A2: Easterbrook 20
A2: Warming Good â€“ Horseshoe Crabs 21
AT: Ethanol Adv CP 22
AT: Wind Adv CP 23
AT: DAs 24
AT: Launch DAs 25
AT: Geo Orbit DA 26
By Marty McFlyHey everybody,
This is a short file. Last year a new study about the effects of nuclear war on the Earth's climate was released that debaters may use to support "spark" type arguments about nuclear war being good. This file contains answers to that. The cards in this file are very recent. The file is organized into a 2ac frontline and has some extensions. I've even highlighted the frontline cards for you. It should be used to supplement spark answers you already have in your backfiles. I wouldn't go into a round with this file alone, but the newer cards offered in this file may take "spark" teams off-guard and give you the upperhand. It always helps to have cards reflective of the newest science in spark debates; this file can give you that and at an extremely affordable price.
My name's Jacob Justice. I'm a 3rd year debater for Wayne State University, where I've broke and won speaker awards at multiple regional tournaments. I debated 2 years in high school for Dexter High School in Michigan. I'm currently a coach for West Bloomfield High School and last year I coached Brother Rice High School at the TOC.
By downward747Fully scripted out/carded Bleiker perm argument designed to be used with any critical or policy based affirmative against both critiques and policy strategies you'll face from the neg.
Table of Contents
This is just a toolbox file for any Lacanian conspiracy theory aff you want to read - arguments are generally about disrupting drives for narrative closure in the national imaginary. If you have any questions PM me.
By BryanGortHere is the SKFTA answers section with impact turns from my thursday file. I separated this out in case people wanted to buy these but not the full file. If you bought my thursday file, this file is repetitive, do not buy both!
2AC – Non Unique – SKFTA 2
1AR – NO SKFTA 3
A/T Obama will bundle and pass all the FTAs 4
Colombia FTA Won’t Pass 5
SKFTA – TAA Uniqueness Thumper 6
SKFTA – A/T Vote Coming 8
SKFTA – A/T Solves War 9
A/T SKFTA solves relations 11
SKFTA Bad - War 13
SKFTA Bad - Warming 14
SKFTA Bad – US-Japan Relations 15
SKFTA Bad – US-Japan Extn 16
SKFTA Bad – A/T Key to the Econ 17
This is a scrap of using the Empire Kritik as an affirmative this year for the US' WMD in Turkey. It's completely kritikal. The only regular, policy, non-kritikal card is the inherency. Interesting to look at and I'm sure some of you can develop it further. The best is the advantages and the AT's. Here's the TOC:
Inherency: US WMD in Turkey 3
Harm: (Nuclear) Deterrence 4
Harm: (Nuclear) Deterrence (2) 5
Significance: Complete Domination 6
SUGGESTED PLANS 7
Solvency Framework 8
Advantage: Biopolitics 9
Advantage Impact: Biopolitics 10
Advantage: Hegemony 11
Advantage Impact: Hegemony 12
Advantage: Militarism 13
Advantage Impact: Militarism 14
Advantage: Imperialism 15
Advantage Impact: Imperialism 16
AT: Reject Solvency Framework 17
AT: Politics-Based DA 18
AT: Spending DA 19
AT: Courts CP 20
AT: Agent CP 21
PS - the solvency framework is that you and your teammate are the multitude.
Table of Contents
A sneaky comparative advantage affirmative. Basic 1AC - no AT's included. Plan story: move troops from somewhere else (Turkey, Iraq, Kuwait) to the Manas Air Force Base in Kyrgyzstan because it solves K's economy, a weak central Asian NATO, and Afghanistan terrorism. Advantages: democracy and human rights.
Table of Contents
Pretty self-explanatory. Needs bulking up and AT's, but the solvency evidence is valuable.
Table of Contents
Linguistic imperialism is the spread of a language or languages that are subtractive, i.e. destroy/kill other languages. English is the "Killer language." In Japan English is mandatory, compulsory education, crowding out and destroying many other minor languages. The United States military presence aids this.Lots of LI-specific advantages. Included terminal impact cards for them. Many more AT's can be found by the Japan Aff's put out by the camps - I didn't include them in the file. Style: hybrid between kritikal and comparative advantage affirmative. Possibly a great affirmative - will still link into some of the generic disadvantages - it really depends on the specific plan you decide to implement.
By BryanGortTable of Contents
This is a small update file for CFLS. It has many aff answers to politics and a small neg file. Definitely worth 4 dollars. All uniqueness evidence and aff answers are from this week. It's in .doc format.Thanks and good luck
By KuntalThis affirmative features some of the best evidence on the topic, with advantages that are both germane to poverty and designed to answer most process/advantage counterplans. This file includes responses to common T violations, case arguments, disadvantages, and counterplans.
The plan rules on the grounds of the Airey v. Ireland decision of the European Court of Human Rights that all persons living in poverty are entitled to legal counsel for civil matters. The argument is that citing a foreign court enhances our Supreme Court's credibility to engage in the global judicial dialogue which shapes court systems around the world. This credibility is necessary to sustain international human rights movements, combat proliferation, strengthen democratic movements, and even solve for global warming. The other advantage (specific to legal counsel) is that persons living poverty that are at risk of housing foreclosure need civil counsel to protect against predatory lending. These foreclosures risk crippling the global economy.
By PKennedyTable of Contents
This is a theory file I put together that contains the 2AC for most of the theory arguments you could ever actually need in a debate. It also has the 1NC for a couple of arguments that are generally useful. The intent of this file is to counteract two problems that I have seen in a large number of high school debates: 1.) Theory blocks that are much too long and contain useless arguments; 2.) Not knowing why a situation you haven't seen before is cheating. This file allows you to put a foot down on the largest theory questions of the day.
By PKennedyTable of Contents
Hot off the presses, economy updates! These are the most crucial updates every weekend, and if you haven't done any, this should get it done. The evidence this week is especially good, given that both sides of the debate have some good arguments.
Table of Contents
For 4 dollars, you won't ever lose to this argument again. This file is a comprehensive answer to the PIC or PIK out of "persons in poverty" and means testing. It includes a prepared 2AC, scripted 1AR extensions with more evidence and 1AR add-ons, as well as an offensive 2AR overview. This is not just a random assortment of answers to the PIC. It's a comprehensive strategy that makes sense and is designed to defeat all aspects of this argument. It includes:1. Crafty permutation arguments that make the counterplan not competitive (backed up by evidence)2. Evidence proving the counterplan would ultimately result in targeting because of the nature of social services3. Answers to their link and internal link claims about targeting being stigmatizing/neoliberal/biopolitical4. Solvency deficits about why the CP can't change the structures of means testing and persons in poverty5. Solvency deficits to Universal social services (trade-off disad/means testing key)6. Impact take-outs7. Disads to the CPQuestions? Email me at jaipaulrekhi at gmail dot com.
Table of Contents
Must have for the Cal and Harvard tournaments. File has evidence from the last 3 days including:A. Lots of ev saying social services now- answers the "HHS budget will be the same as last year" and budget freeze and social service cuts now-- winning these args make it very very hard for the neg to win link uniqueness. B. Really good answers to the NASA trade off disad. C. Really good and recent all purpose politics answers. Evidence is really good. It's highlighted. There's scripted 1AR extensions and really short 1AR cards to read too. Email me if you have any questions at jaipaulrekhi at gmail dot com.
Table of Contents
Must have for upcoming tournaments. This file contains evidence from the last few days (Feb 1-3) about the status of social services and the DHHS. These cards will make it nearly impossible for the Neg to win on any generic disad that links to all social services like politics, spending, trade-offs, etc. The ev is really good. It's highlighted. There's scripted 1AR extensions and really short 1AR cards to read too. Email me if you have any questions at jaipaulrekhi at gmail dot com.
Table of Contents
This file is a must have for all teams that will be useful throughout your debate careers. It is a highlighted and blocked out (2AC, 1AR, and 2AR) to beat all kritiks that think we should focus on the ontological elements of advocacy, text, language, and thought- so everything except for the objectivism "k". This file is all offense against ontology focus. This means two things for you: First- You won't lose because they said "ontology comes first which makes your aff irrelevant"Second- And more importantly- If you win this portion of the debate, it comes before their link and impact arguments because its a framework question. It is functionally the same as winning the theoretical framework debate, except its more compelling because its doesn't sound like you are whining about how the K team has "abused" and "silenced" you. email questions to jaipaulrekhi at gmail dot com.
Table of Contents
This argument is an awesome answer to almost every kritik. There is a generic 2AC to read and then a specific 2AC to read vs certain kritiks. The argument is a permutation with a solid net benfit. It's that we should combine the plan (including representations) with the alternative because a politics of undecidability is better than picking either side. The evidence says that we should gesture in opposite and contradictory directions at the same time because it allows us to intervene in a practical political manner while at the same time maintain a perpetual uneasiness about our politics so that we can open up new possibilities for the future. This allows us to re-create epistemologies and correct injustices potentially caused by the plan. The net benefit is that refusal of the perm engages in a violent politics of decidability which eliminates the possibility of politics and ethics. There are blocked out 1AR extensions to most of the arguments. This is an extremely powerful argument to read against any ontology kritik as well as fear kritiks, lacanian/zizekian kritiks, and kritiks of signs and language. It's blocked out and highlighted and ready to go. At less than $4, its a steal. Any questions, email me at jaipaulrekhi at gmail dot com.