Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rs80606

Mainstream Affs

Recommended Posts

I didnt say that the aff didnt link to anything, i said it was a sweet aff...

 

you functionally said in your posts that states, tix, foucault (countermemory alt), and spending would'nt work and that it was suceptitable to a T on increase and vagueness...yea what a terrible aff

 

speaking for others - plan just gives funding for language programs (at least mine does in a nutshell) and leaves how the program is run to the tribe itself, also lots of the authors are natives themselves specifically the solvency advocates

 

self-determination bad - how would this be bad, what author can you cite that says that native american self-determination is bad in a non-racist way with a good warrant

 

Tribe K - this is, in my view, one the stronger args against this and all natives affs

 

Native American CP - cp is the status quo, they do run their language programs themselves now, big solvency deficit, doesn't access racism, or decolonization aspects of the case.

 

the Tribe K and US off the Planet are two of the best args i've heard on this aff, but again, not saying it links to nothing, just that it's a great aff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there someone who advocates using Learn and Serve America for indigenous language teaching? Does that person advocate teaching indigenous languages in schools or in another setting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

self-determination bad - how would this be bad, what author can you cite that says that native american self-determination is bad in a non-racist way with a good warrant

 

The K exists. As I recall, someone managed to twist Ward Churchill cards into saying this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Service Learning from Mich...No its not Learn and Serve America its parts of Americorps...

 

guarantees a solid case debate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there someone who advocates using Learn and Serve America for indigenous language teaching? Does that person advocate teaching indigenous languages in schools or in another setting?

 

Joan Herrman in 98. The article is called "Whoy Sze Kiunalth: Teaching our Many Grandchildren." The gist: LSA programs can assist in teaching indigenous languages and indigenous culture to the younger generations, SO LONG AS THEY PROVIDE FUNDING FOR TRIBAL ELDERS TO DO IT FOR THEM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The K exists. As I recall, someone managed to twist Ward Churchill cards into saying this.

 

theres no way its ward churchill, he advocate the us off the planet arg.

 

he definitly wouldnt say that natives cant be self-determinate and must always bank on the US to save them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
theres no way its ward churchill, he advocate the us off the planet arg.

 

he definitly wouldnt say that natives cant be self-determinate and must always bank on the US to save them

 

I said somebody TWISTED Ward Churchill cards into saying that. As I recall, they found Churchill saying something that fit into a general "self-determination bad" argument, and used it. There's a difference.

 

In any case, you can find literature that says just about anything. I should know--I cut cards for this case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joan Herrman in 98. The article is called "Whoy Sze Kiunalth: Teaching our Many Grandchildren." The gist: LSA programs can assist in teaching indigenous languages and indigenous culture to the younger generations, SO LONG AS THEY PROVIDE FUNDING FOR TRIBAL ELDERS TO DO IT FOR THEM.

 

Thanks for the cite. How does the case access the racism and decolonization advantages?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The case is the USFG repenting for its inherently racist and colonialist assimilation programs (look up the Dawes Act). By the USFG attempting to undo the damage it's done to Native Americans, hopefully racism against Native Americans will be reduced. That's the gist of it.

 

(Rifles through 1AC to find specific card...) Jon Reyhner 96 (edited by Gina Cantoni in some journal) states that it is the duty of the USFG to repent for crimes against NAs...and I'm pretty sure that Littlebear 96 figures into this somehow, but I was the 2A for most of camp, and the neg almost always took it for granted that the case solved racism and colonialism, and I believe I've lost the card...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really appreciate your explanation.

 

What I'm wondering is why "national service" is necessary at all. Why not just counterplan with "The USFG will repent of its treatment of Native Americans by changing its economic distribution policies to increase the amount of money available to Native Americans for indigenous language training." Then run a net benefit saying Learn and Serve America (or whatever) is bad. Or a net benefit saying that using programs designed for non-Natives (like Learn and Serve America) to benefit Natives is condescending.

 

Now, if there is evidence saying "Learn and Serve America solves for indigenous languages" that would be great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be Herrman 98; Fizzoley copied the card on the thread about squirrels. It explicitly states that LSA funds==preserves "our...Athabascan language"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The case is the USFG repenting for its inherently racist and colonialist assimilation programs (look up the Dawes Act). By the USFG attempting to undo the damage it's done to Native Americans, hopefully racism against Native Americans will be reduced. That's the gist of it.

 

(Rifles through 1AC to find specific card...) Jon Reyhner 96 (edited by Gina Cantoni in some journal) states that it is the duty of the USFG to repent for crimes against NAs...and I'm pretty sure that Littlebear 96 figures into this somehow, but I was the 2A for most of camp, and the neg almost always took it for granted that the case solved racism and colonialism, and I believe I've lost the card...

 

Does this aff have any good answers to a states CP? Why not just go through the states? It doesn't have to be federal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I ran this case, I made the argument that on account of plenary power, the USFG was the source of 99% of Native American pain, and that hence only the USFG can atone for the wrongs done to Native Americans; if the states did it, the USFG's moral obligation to repent for the nasty stuff it did to Native Americans...because it, and it alone, had the power to deal with Native Americans. Quoting myself: "If the states did the plan, the tribes would say 'Thank you, but shouldn't Uncle Sam be doing this? I mean, it did do a lot worse things than you guys.'"

 

Another issue is that plenary power is, conviniently for the aff, a double-edged sword: while it's true that the USFG's plenary power meant that it was the only one that did the Native Americans any harm, it ALSO means that the USFG is the only organization that knows how to deal with Native American tribes.

 

Of course, the above is all bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also the trust doctrine gives exlusive authority to deal with tribes, which is not bullshit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenary power and the trust doctrine are part of the same idea, and I agree, it's not bullshit. The arguments I was making in-round that I reiterated above were all bullshit, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I said somebody TWISTED Ward Churchill cards into saying that. As I recall, they found Churchill saying something that fit into a general "self-determination bad" argument, and used it. There's a difference.

 

In any case, you can find literature that says just about anything. I should know--I cut cards for this case.

 

 

Churchill's getting fired from UC for 911 Essay/Fictionalizing research. Author indicts ahoy. Just FYI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question .. it seems that LSA funds are necessary to solve the case .. but how does increasing people do this? or, how does increasing people in LSA's language programs solve for NA violence, colonialism, etc.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the plan would increase funding for language programs or something like that, the way LSA get it's 1.4 million participants is service-learning, which means everyone in the program set up via the funding would be service-learning or a teacher under LSA.

 

there is plenty of ev that talks about languages being key to culture and identity and even some that says revitalizing indigenous knowledges is key to decolonization.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does this aff have any good answers to a states CP? Why not just go through the states? It doesn't have to be federal.

 

 

state action can't solve the impression of the USfg being racist or colonialist

 

im wondering how this aff is not extra topical, let alone topical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I understand it right, it seems topical to me. Plan provides funding and logistics for more participants in Learn and Serve America. Participants must meet criteria set by the tribes, who are the LSA grantees. The mission of the program is to teach indigenous languages to Natives.

 

There could be a problem with the solvency evidence. I wonder whether the more dogmatic advocates (that is, those who write the best evidence) really support another Federal program to "help" Natives. LSA grants come with strings attached which would be counter to the decolonization type of arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no you supports school like immersion programs in which the participants would be the tribe members who would technically be in the program b/c they are service-learning, at least thats how i see it.

 

there is evidence from native tribe members that say that federal funding is needed but they need to leave the implementation to the tribes which the plan (at least mine) does.

 

i dont think the grant arguement hurts the decolonization part, but it does hurt solvency b/c there are plenty of advocates that say the plan's a good idea but grants suck ass cuase to establish a good program it takes a long time and a 1 year grant is too unstable. does anyone know of a good way to give money to tribes though LSA outside of grants?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...