Jump to content
policykid27b

PRE FIAT

Recommended Posts

In before Ankur talks about how it doesn't exist.

 

But yeah, "Pre-Fiat" is a nonsequitor, it doesn't really make sense.

 

You're probably referring to an affirmative with discursive based solvency. The basic idea is that through the way you discuss the topic you do something good, rather than suggesting that you should win because the possible action you suggest the usfg should take would be especially good.

 

Others will soon answer in more/better detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

indeed. there is no such thing as pre-fiat because fiat is an assumption made in both policy and critical arguments. you cant have pre-imaginary assumption.

 

ill let others talk about critical advantages and true critical cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well they answered pretty well above that it is a total lie.

 

 

However, you are correct that if you run a K aff correctly you can cheat well and win lots of rounds. The thing is, all judges realize "pre-fiat" is just a blatant lie and an attempt to cheat.

 

So you need to adapt it.

 

You need specific evidence that discourse, discussion, those types of things have a real impact. IE by speaking and advocating for ending FGM we can have a real impact on the world, while their disad is just playing to the politics of fear and is a lie.

 

It can also be framed that the movement is more important than the plan- ie, in this round you can start a local movement that can engage the world- here is the first step to rejecting (_the root of all evil insert your scenario here_) and this is more important than pretending policy making exists.

 

Of course, thats by no means complete, but these types of strategic cheating are supported by the literature and are a sweet way to win rounds.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It can also be framed that the movement is more important than the plan- ie, in this round you can start a local movement that can engage the world- here is the first step to rejecting (_the root of all evil insert your scenario here_) and this is more important than pretending policy making exists.

 

 

the metaphorical condensation argument Zizek makes is pretty good for doing this. he cites some protests (strikes etc.), he says that small an particular demands can be universalized and lead to a global coalition for X cause. this coalition can always go and look back at the small demand that worked and say, we need to fight for them, or it is possible to win this battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

basically, you first want to assess what your pre-fiat advantage is. it is usually something like, you become less imperialist by listening to this. then adapt it so that it doesnt reference them. it comes out something like, we plan to solve for the west is best mentality by showing how horrible it is to the american public. so really, i think it would be easier to run as an irony case, saying that people have already heard the same song and dance before, and we need a more effective mechanism of delivery. so we will unite the american public against the common enemy of the neo-imperialist ideals by passing a bill exemplifying them. then everyone hates it. this allows for our aid to be a true hand-up and not a handout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pre-fiat on the aff is theory used to allow for a discursive advantage. The idea is pretty simple - by having the quality of discourse in the round (be it anti-capitalist or whatever) the aff has a positive effect outside the theoretical fiat framework. As such, the aff is going to try to claim that even if their policy proposal isn't good - the DAs outweigh perhaps - the aff ballot is still justified for their discursive advantage which does not rely on plan passage.

 

My advice is this: If you want to go kritikal on the aff, go all the way and dump fiat altogether.

 

My further advice is this: If you understand kritikal theory well enough to do this, get out of the novice division.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pre-fiat on the aff is theory used to allow for a discursive advantage. The idea is pretty simple - by having the quality of discourse in the round (be it anti-capitalist or whatever) the aff has a positive effect outside the theoretical fiat framework. As such, the aff is going to try to claim that even if their policy proposal isn't good - the DAs outweigh perhaps - the aff ballot is still justified for their discursive advantage which does not rely on plan passage.

 

My advice is this: If you want to go kritikal on the aff, go all the way and dump fiat altogether.

 

My further advice is this: If you understand kritikal theory well enough to do this, get out of the novice division.

 

yeah, basically all pre-fiat cases rely on the judge weighing heavily on education. if you run a kritikal aff, you want to stress that education is a key part of any round. i misspoke earlier, your case doesnt have to relate to the american public per se, but you can if you want to. you can win just by telling the judge that if they feel they have learned more from your case than from the opponency's bland, generic DAs, they should vote for you. (try not to overdo "Education is a voter," though. judges hate it when you are repetative)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pre-fiat doesn't make any sense in a logical fashion.

Fiat is a verb, sort of. Pre-jumping is not jumping.

non-fiat is a more realistic term.

It just means the plan never really happens, and it really doesn't, therefore you ignore the post-action merits and you look at what happens in the round (discourse, education, fairness, etc.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wtf difference does it make so long as the usage is clear? I actually prefer to have my kids say explicitly "adjudicate this argument (K, advantage or T) before considering the policy implications in the round." Or (for lay judges) "Consider this argument before you think about the potential benefits or harms of the plan - its implications are in the here and now."

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...

×
×
  • Create New...