Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest silvermdc1

DADT strategy

Recommended Posts

Guest silvermdc1

What would you run Against A DADT case with Heterosexism and Hegemony advantages?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CP repeal DADT, leave end strength where it's at. Solve heterosexism, and all you have to do is turn, or read a kritik of heg.

Or, a kritikal route: Foucault. Fucko is really strong against this case, because

A) It proves they don't solve heterosexism, because the plan isn't a shift away from heteronormativity, rather a shift to allow all sexual categories to be used by the sovereign.

B) It turns heg.

C) The alt solves case. Queer identity is constructed by what is "normal" and "abnormal", these are lines of difference that force normalization, and create self normalization.(people policing themselves) The alt questions these lines of normalization, and rejects them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

any military or heg strat is just as good against dadt as any other case.

 

i like the valdes intersectionality stuff. a bunch of it is on lexus to cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would run T against it bc:

1. Repealing DADT is not equal to the creation of a policy

2. The case believes that repealing DADT will= more gays and less discharges

Inadddition you could try runnig the Queer Theory K(PM if you don't have it), and possily a Gay Marriage CP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Run Foucault K saying that by categorizing people and enforcing their identity, they actually cause biopower and turn gays into killing machines for the government as well as suppress their individualism.

 

On top of that run an establish T, some hege bad cards (if you want, you can run it as a DA), and maybe a few more generic DAs to suck the time. Focus on the Foucault K in the block, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh ya - if you don't read intersectionality (because that takes out heteronormativity adv. for both sides) then run the boy scouts CP. it gets all offense of heteronormativity advantage on case and it's competitive through net benifits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

yeah, because biopower is low now...

 

Kritiks don't need to have uniquness. Biopower is bad no matter what, but their plan causes gays to join this "heterosexual killing club". It actually discrimitates against gays. That's pretty significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What would you run Against A DADT case with Heterosexism and Hegemony advantages?

 

malthus. the impact to heterosexism is genocide, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:

yeah, because biopower is low now...

 

Kritiks don't need to have uniquness. Biopower is bad no matter what, but their plan causes gays to join this "heterosexual killing club". It actually discrimitates against gays. That's pretty significant.

 

it doesnt force them to join, it just says that its your choice to join, and it doesnt matter what sex you are

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it doesnt force them to join, it just says that its your choice to join, and it doesnt matter what sex you are
no no, he has a point

 

if we let the gays into the military (which they are not a part of in the status quo) then the military becomes a "heterosexual killing club" that kills all heterosexuals. This is probably very dehumanizing.

 

I dunno, I usually just impact turn this K with a "straights bad" addon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah, because biopower is low now...

Don't laugh. I seem to recall a team from St. Stephen's reading uniqueness to the biopower and capitalism disads against us at St. Mark's when they decided they didn't want to answer framework or something. Sparticus 06 ftw!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
can't solve lesbian bating

 

no, but it solves the stereotype that boyscout masters are pedaphiles, which sort of evens it out. and there's decent evidence to answer back lesbian bating. and not all DADT affs run that anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Run a util framework and argue that putting gays in the military won't solve for the military being well militaristic. Generic cards that say putting gays in the military won't change the mentality or the goal of the military are useful. You can also run heg bad arguments and say that the root cause of why heg is bad is the affs increase in militarism. Also, arguing that militarism is the root cause of their heterosexism advantage means you turn case on both heg and heterosexism. All you need is a politics or some other disad and you should have it won easily, that is if they don't handle framework properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no, but it solves the stereotype that boyscout masters are pedaphiles, which sort of evens it out. and there's decent evidence to answer back lesbian bating. and not all DADT affs run that anyway.

 

No, I'm damn sure that pedophiles would flock in drones to join the BSA if it attracted gay teens already proficient in giving head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

very nice, synyrgy

 

but i have the evidence saying it deconstructs that stereotype haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it doesnt force them to join, it just says that its your choice to join, and it doesnt matter what sex you are

 

First of all, it doesn't matter because you are still helping the gay identity, therefor identifying them as "gays". As foucault explains, you can be gay because you're you but you can't be you simply because you're gay. Giving them the choice to say they are gay is already leading to increased biopower, but mostly the entire idea of the argument is to kritik the mindset of the 1AC. The 1AC's call for recognition takes the form of an affirmation of legal action on behalf of the excluded gays. But they fail to recognize the fact that the status quo is already attempting to solve for the Heterosexism impacts, working from the ground up. With the affirmative plan, there will be more violence and discrimination against gays than there is now. This is actually a good Kritik because, for the first time, Foucault actually has a good alternative: reject the identity (basically a very similar alternative to that of the Queer K).

 

My strategy against DADT is just a simple time skew. Throw 80 points on Foucault in the 2NC and you've practically won, because, really, DADT does cause biopower. Foucault himself would agree to that. At that point it usually becomes a theory debate: "they time skewed us! abuse! abuse! abuse!". One round we kind of lost the theory but one of the judges said he doesn't vote on theory anyways so he ended up voting for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just run offsets and turn hege and throw in some "pursuit of hege = heterosexist" cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First of all, it doesn't matter because you are still helping the gay identity, therefor identifying them as "gays". As foucault explains, you can be gay because you're you but you can't be you simply because you're gay. Giving them the choice to say they are gay is already leading to increased biopower, but mostly the entire idea of the argument is to kritik the mindset of the 1AC. The 1AC's call for recognition takes the form of an affirmation of legal action on behalf of the excluded gays. But they fail to recognize the fact that the status quo is already attempting to solve for the Heterosexism impacts, working from the ground up. With the affirmative plan, there will be more violence and discrimination against gays than there is now. This is actually a good Kritik because, for the first time, Foucault actually has a good alternative: reject the identity (basically a very similar alternative to that of the Queer K).

 

First, you have already demonstrated your misunderstanding of Foucault when you said "biopower is always bad":

 

- hospitals

- welfare taking away kids whose drug addict parents beat the shit out of them to give them homes

- social security

 

Almost every European state in the early 1900s exercised biopower. The reason that the Nazi regime became violent wasn't because it exerted biopower, but because its particular political circumstances (including extreme nationalism because of getting shafted in the Treaty of Versailles, a downspiraling economy because of huge war debt, etc) enabled a violent regime.

 

Not even Foucault makes a blanket statement that "biopower is always bad"--he says that because systems of power are inevitable, you have to find ways of resisting them. The idea that "giving them the choice" is increasing biopower is true in that it demonstrates the power of the state system, but it is also a good form of biopower like welfare or social security. Yeah, lifting DADT gives the state power over gay people's lives (which they already have now, creating the apartheid of the closet), but at least they are using that power for good and not for a mass genocide of queers. Your alternative still leaves those structures intact, and is therefore a less effective strategy of addressing biopower than the plan. Yeah, it really helps the gay people getting sexually harassed in the military when you tell them, "Hey dude, just dont identify as gay anymore, embrace yourself dude."

 

My strategy against DADT is just a simple time skew. Throw 80 points on Foucault in the 2NC and you've practically won, because, really, DADT does cause biopower. Foucault himself would agree to that. At that point it usually becomes a theory debate: "they time skewed us! abuse! abuse! abuse!". One round we kind of lost the theory but one of the judges said he doesn't vote on theory anyways so he ended up voting for us.

 

LOL. Making a bunch of bad arguments isn't a time skew, it just means the aff will win because they are actually debating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...