Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Maury

Topical K affs

Recommended Posts

1. Are there any this year with a "solvency advocate" like there was for positive peace peace corps or TIPS last year.

 

2. Are there any without solvency advocates that are close to T?

 

3. Has anyone encountered one that wasn't put out by a camp/ showed a lot of innovation.

 

4. For the above, include the qualifier "that isn't solved by an agent CP"

 

After 2 national tournaments and countless more hours reading judge paradigms, there seems to be a concensus among judges that an aff can either a. claim critical advantages but still defend plan passage, b. be marginally T but still defend the plan, or C. be T and not defend the plan. The aff I ran at st.marks was none of the three (found under westwood XM), So I am trying to figure out an aff that meets at least some of the above criterion.

 

If you have an idea you want to explore, but don't want to make it public, you could potentially PM/email/ AIM me and I'd more then likely be willing to do work with you.

 

-Murray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The zizek arv aff has a solvency advocate, and the gag rule edelman aff kinda has one. (i've had a bit of lacanian tunnel vision for the past few months)

 

What were your thoughts about the landmines zizek aff I ran at memorial?

 

For anyone interested, its a landmines aff with a cap bad advantage. The basic story is plan is an identification with the abject, namely landmine victims (i feel this may be a bit of a stretch) becasue they have been wronged by capitalism (ie big corporations making and selling landmines for cheap). The identification with landmine victims is a metaphor around which larger struggles to capitalism can condense.

 

(not trying to hijack the thread)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think going the landmines route is pretty tricky because a lot of people don't think it's T. If it was, then it should/would be the aff of choice for a lot of people. Securitization, refugees, nietzschean stuff, capitalism, responsibility, shame, etc.

 

Sadly, the A-strat for landmines tends to be T, and it tends to be winning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Child soldiers, dude. Child soldiers...

 

You can run affs like reparations or ipr, just tack on some "ignore their disads judge" kritikal contention at the bottom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think going the landmines route is pretty tricky because a lot of people don't think it's T. If it was, then it should/would be the aff of choice for a lot of people. Securitization, refugees, nietzschean stuff, capitalism, responsibility, shame, etc.

 

Sadly, the A-strat for landmines tends to be T, and it tends to be winning.

 

We run landmines with a positive peace advantage. I can give you the cites if you want, although positive peace is only one aspect of the aff (it's also got a biodiversity/environment advantage).

 

As to T, we've had ten aff rounds so far this year. Teams have gone for T in six of them.

 

So, yeah, it is the A-strat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Child soldiers, dude. Child soldiers...

 

You can run affs like reparations or ipr, just tack on some "ignore their disads judge" kritikal contention at the bottom.

 

As far as affs are concerned, we've been critical all year and actually had our success with an ewaste aff with an enviro adv+neo lib bad+consumerism/social reponsibilty.

 

However i am intereted in the child soldiers aff i actually conjured the idea up during the summer but ignored it.

 

We run landmines with a positive peace advantage. I can give you the cites if you want, although positive peace is only one aspect of the aff (it's also got a biodiversity/environment advantage).

 

As to T, we've had ten aff rounds so far this year. Teams have gone for T in six of them.

 

So, yeah, it is the A-strat.

 

Landmines with pos peace. do tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The zizek arv aff has a solvency advocate, and the gag rule edelman aff kinda has one. (i've had a bit of lacanian tunnel vision for the past few months)

 

What were your thoughts about the landmines zizek aff I ran at memorial?

 

For anyone interested, its a landmines aff with a cap bad advantage. The basic story is plan is an identification with the abject, namely landmine victims (i feel this may be a bit of a stretch) becasue they have been wronged by capitalism (ie big corporations making and selling landmines for cheap). The identification with landmine victims is a metaphor around which larger struggles to capitalism can condense.

 

(not trying to hijack the thread)

Edelman's GGR is solved by alternate actors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Edelman's GGR is solved by alternate actors.

 

True the Edelman GGR aff is pretty good, just that edelman never talks of GGR or Africa specifically, but it can be spun well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, that wasn't critical it had a hegemony advantage. I think they put like two positive peace cards in it but it's definitely not critical. Atleast on the level of other affirmatives described on this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The zizek arv aff has a solvency advocate, and the gag rule edelman aff kinda has one. (i've had a bit of lacanian tunnel vision for the past few months)

 

What's the thesis of the zizek ARV aff? Did a camp put it out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does anyone have this "critical" child soldiers aff. Because I know no camps put it out.

 

The UNT child soldiers aff is the only actually K version i've seen, the rest are soooooooo not Kritikal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lol, that wasn't critical it had a hegemony advantage. I think they put like two positive peace cards in it but it's definitely not critical. Atleast on the level of other affirmatives described on this thread.

that was a second way to run it...if u look at the aff...its actually pretty long...the thing is that the us key is us has a moral obligation to do it and the hege advantage is off of us soldiers not wanting to fight child soldiers...but i guess its dece

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That evidence isn't very good though. The "critical parts" on phycological disarm don't mention child soldiers once, and actually talk about global physce numbing, which would link to the plan.

 

 

But meh, I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That evidence isn't very good though. The "critical parts" on phycological disarm don't mention child soldiers once, and actually talk about global physce numbing, which would link to the plan.

 

 

But meh, I guess.

 

If you're reffering to the Mich file you're right its not really that good, look to the UNT version for some good cards, but it talks about girl child soldiers specifically,, but i fear it is too K for you. multiple chuckles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can either not defend the plan or you can be topical. I think trying to do both creates WAY too many theory problems, and you can't get good ground offense. Running a DnG aff that wasn't topical, we lost every round we lost but 2 on T.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's some great Borders evidence for Landmines if you dig hard enough, and you could also do a critical disability thing with Landmines.

 

Sex workers aff with a queer theory advantage also has potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think going the landmines route is pretty tricky because a lot of people don't think it's T. If it was, then it should/would be the aff of choice for a lot of people. Securitization, refugees, nietzschean stuff, capitalism, responsibility, shame, etc.

 

Sadly, the A-strat for landmines tends to be T, and it tends to be winning.

 

Well, it depends on the plan text. Some people are like "I hear the word demining, therefore: PUBLIC HEALTH: DEMINING IS NOT PUBLIC HEALTH, and they completely and totally ignore the idea that some plan texts say that they will increase victim assistance, teach the locals, etc. I guess you might get extra T, but Extra T can suck it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, it depends on the plan text. Some people are like "I hear the word demining, therefore: PUBLIC HEALTH: DEMINING IS NOT PUBLIC HEALTH, and they completely and totally ignore the idea that some plan texts say that they will increase victim assistance, teach the locals, etc. I guess you might get extra T, but Extra T can suck it.

 

If the Aff loses Demining=/= PHA, they'll lose the impact debate on extra topicality every round, assuming a competent negative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...