Jump to content
Guest silvermdc1

Peace Corps Strat

Recommended Posts

Guest silvermdc1

Whats your strategy for a Peace Corps case with a structural violence advantage?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to bet the plan text is along the lines of increasing the amount of persons in the Peace Corps. Who would have thought?

 

 

 

What is the impact to structual violence? Genocide? Civil War?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok most of peace corps affs text are funding based (which is completely topical)

and as 2 the impact of structural violence...THAT IS THE FUCKING IMPACT...its the impact to poverty...and its an oppression level impact most people usually read cuomo construction or martin militarism as terminal impacts...

i think the BEST strat 2 this aff (as most people know) is

1. bill and Melinda gate foundation fund the peace corps CP

2. tix--funding unpop (because thats usually in their inh. ev and the ev is just better on that side) and with a case structured like this i would read some util and a2 threat con in the 1nc

3. inflation

4. LOADS OF CASE some ex.

a. aids turn (peace corps ppl are very horney and skrew people and spread aids) its a quick extinction impact

b. alt causes 2 poverty

c. no ! to structural violence

d. negative peace good/positive peace bad

 

neg block

2nc: CP...TIX

1nr: CASE DEFENCE

 

2nr: CP...TIX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Against Peace Corps we always just run the development K. It completely turns case and the Escobar evidence is amazing. Affs usually have a hard time dealing with the development K even though they should be prepped out completely. The only answers the aff makes are usually development good/ they need help (even though its nonresponsive to the K) or case outweighs, but because they only claim structural violence the case doesn't outweigh easily.

 

I agree with the Gates CP, it solves the entirety of case plus a risk of the net benefit means you win assuming you can handle the theory debate. The only problem is that most of the time when people read structural violence, they read Gilligan '96 and it argues that poverty is far worse than any war. But just go with Util and you're good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest fizelly27

usually there is no solvency for structural violence. How does the Peace corps solve for hunger, murder and other things. Unless they have some great modeling evidence (society will model the peace corps) just run some generic peace corps cant solve for poverty and disease

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
usually there is no solvency for structural violence. How does the Peace corps solve for hunger, murder and other things. Unless they have some great modeling evidence (society will model the peace corps) just run some generic peace corps cant solve for poverty and disease

ok first things first...they dont claim to solve for hunger or murder...those are different arguments from structural violence...but the peace corps DEFINETLY solves for either the impact of structural violence through poverty or they actually solve poverty...by guess how...SETTING UP WORK STRUCTURES and teaching people to become like them

 

I dont think the aff can solve for structural violence without getting rid of the armed forces... And if they argue they do, game over lol.

Armed forces key to econ, biodiversity, heg etc.

WTF...1. no team claims to get rid of the fucking armed forces...NO ONE... and yes u can solve for structural violence without getting rid of the af...seriously dude...like i said solvency is as easy as taking one person out of the poverty...than you can access all of your structural violence impact...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont think the aff can solve for structural violence without getting rid of the armed forces... And if they argue they do, game over lol.

Armed forces key to econ, biodiversity, heg etc.

 

 

Most of the time when I hear this aff, they are reading this Shriver '01 card that says expansions in the Peace Corps are critical to show the US has a commitment to peace. This fosters global cooperation to solve poverty and structural violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most of the time when I hear this aff, they are reading this Shriver '01 card that says expansions in the Peace Corps are critical to show the US has a commitment to peace. This fosters global cooperation to solve poverty and structural violence.

 

Too bad the Shriver internal link got swamped by American foreign policy in the past 7 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most of the time when I hear this aff, they are reading this Shriver '01 card that says expansions in the Peace Corps are critical to show the US has a commitment to peace. This fosters global cooperation to solve poverty and structural violence.

 

 

yeah, usually there are 2 different solvency mechanisms for struct violence.

the first one is that the pcv's actually go to different countries to solve poverty/aids/etc, and can easily be beat with a good gates cp and $/ptx combo.

the other one is that the US must show a commitment to peace, (shriver card), which makes gates cp kind of useless, because we can't really show that we are committed to peace, but only if some other guy is willing to fund the program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Too bad the Shriver internal link got swamped by American foreign policy in the past 7 years.

 

 

yeah... US commitment to peace is kind of an oxymoron.

 

for every argument you make off that shriver card, you'll get 10 back.

that's why i don't think the whole peace corps --> global cooperation link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WTF...1. no team claims to get rid of the fucking armed forces...NO ONE... and yes u can solve for structural violence without getting rid of the af...seriously dude...like i said solvency is as easy as taking one person out of the poverty...than you can access all of your structural violence impact...

lol.

1. my aff took away the armed forces.

2. if the aff doesn't then there's a few problems... none of which are good for the aff

A) no solvency: violence is inevitable because the armed forces perpetuate peace (the lit on this is amazing)

B) no solvency: no country is going to be like "OH YEA PEACE IS THE SHIAAAAT!!" when the US maintains its means to the ends of war

C) turns case: biosomepower masking link style?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no team claims to get rid of the fucking armed forces...NO ONE...

 

We do too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yea but dude...if the cp solves structural violence and spending/tix...case becomes less important...lets u spend more time making sure ur winning the DA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes

2 words 4 u...NOT TOPICAL...last year (national service) it not only is extra topical because no where in the rez does it say to decrease the af or ban the mil...BUT it also decreases in the armed forces dispite the fact that it increases in the pc...next year (africa) the topic says to increase public health assistance...EXTRA T...

also banning the military is hard enough to win on the neg when you have time to answer every argument...but with the 1ar ur gonna b screwed...

THIS WOULD B MY STRAT AGAINST BAN THE MIL AND DIVERT PERSONS/FUNDS TO THE PC

T-extra t

cp-gates fund the pc and increase the number of people in the pc NOT FROM THE MILITARY

tix-plan would MOST LIKELY BE REALLY UNPOPULAR

militarism: military militaristic by putting them into the pc u make the pc militaristic...turns case...

hege good--military key to hege

CASE--REALISM UP THE WAZOO,

! defence

util

 

Can't you claim Nuke War-->structural violence on your disads?

i think the most strategic way to do that is instead of reading cards that are like nuke war cause structural violence cards that are like nuke war increases poverty...

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I really dont care about your strategy to that aff. I was answering for johnnyb.

just stating my peace corps strat

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 words 4 u...NOT TOPICAL...last year (national service) it not only is extra topical because no where in the rez does it say to decrease the af or ban the mil...BUT it also decreases in the armed forces dispite the fact that it increases in the pc...next year (africa) the topic says to increase public health assistance...EXTRA T...

also banning the military is hard enough to win on the neg when you have time to answer every argument...but with the 1ar ur gonna b screwed...

THIS WOULD B MY STRAT AGAINST BAN THE MIL AND DIVERT PERSONS/FUNDS TO THE PC

T-extra t

cp-gates fund the pc and increase the number of people in the pc NOT FROM THE MILITARY

tix-plan would MOST LIKELY BE REALLY UNPOPULAR

militarism: military militaristic by putting them into the pc u make the pc militaristic...turns case...

hege good--military key to hege

CASE--REALISM UP THE WAZOO,

! defence

util

 

So basically everyone else's strat that we've got blocked out to hell?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also banning the military is hard enough to win on the neg when you have time to answer every argument...but with the 1ar ur gonna b screwed...

Actually since it's a critical aff a fun little trick called "grouping" makes the 1AR pretty easy.

THIS WOULD B MY STRAT AGAINST BAN THE MIL AND DIVERT PERSONS/FUNDS TO THE PC

militarism

hege good--military key to hege

CASE--REALISM UP THE WAZOO,

util

Impact turns self...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...