Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
yourenottopical

How to answer free trade agreement DAs?

Recommended Posts

These are, I would imagine, generally politics disads, so obviously the first place to start is finding evidence that your plan doesn't link (i.e. they say popular plan causes free trade to pass, but your plan isn't popular, so you don't link).

 

But to really answer the specifics of Free Trade arguments, here is a really good place to start (I know, you'll say Wikipedia bad). I figure it's best to do the research yourself (rather than me telling you what to search for). And obviously, you aren't cutting a Wikipedia article, but what it says about people's responses to Free Trade will hopefully give you a starting block to understanding free trade, and responses you could be making. I always find that understanding what I'm searching for is really helpful. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_trade#Opponents_of_free_trade. The journal sources it cites are often worth looking at too.

 

Somebody else may be able to supply you with some fantastic cards however.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am utterly clueless as how to answer free trade agreement DAs.

I can find evidence, but i just have to know what to look for. I really need HELP.

Any advice?

 

Impact file, NDCA Evidence Project, Michigan Files, Free Trade Good/Bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strategically, it is never smart to rely solely on the impact turn out of the 2AC. This is because the block will usually put more time on the sheet of paper than you will. In most cases, they will have the politics disad (or whatever disad or K for that matter) fully blocked out, meaning they will have a ton of impact extensions and engage you on that level easily.

 

However, they will usually not have good link evidence. It will often be generic, "Aid to africa is popular", "helping others is popular", "Bush wants to give aid to Africa" or whatever. If you can find specific evidence for your case, you will be able to win the link turn and no link with an argument that you can claim your aid is unlike "most aid", which clearly links according to their evidence.

 

Likewise, you should try and engage them on the uniqueness debate. Like the impact level, they will probably be able to engage you back and often beat you back. However, if you can read one really good uniqueness card with clear warrant that you can control on the link level, they will be forced to read a uniqueness "wall" (multiple uniqueness cards) in order for them to win back the scenario. This sort of is a reverse time skew, because now the block, in order to keep this a viable pathway, now has to engage you on the uniqueness debate and win back that their evidence is superior, reestablish a link which is specific to the affirmative's case that has to be better than just "they are aid, this is popular", and then has to answer back your impact turn "free trade is really bad, i promise" and will probably read a different impact scenario. This means for them to go for politics, while you may have read 3 cards, they might have to read like 10 in order to keep the door open for them in the 2NR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just turn the motherfucker, if it's a Latin America FTA, say cocaine smuggling will happen. If it's a South Korea FTA, say uncertified Chinese products could channel through SK and find it's way to homes, in which this case would cause lead paint to kill babies, which deters our population, etc.

 

I'm joking on the SK one, but you know what I mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Likewise, you should try and engage them on the uniqueness debate. Like the impact level, they will probably be able to engage you back and often beat you back. However, if you can read one really good uniqueness card with clear warrant that you can control on the link level, they will be forced to read a uniqueness "wall" (multiple uniqueness cards) in order for them to win back the scenario. This sort of is a reverse time skew, because now the block, in order to keep this a viable pathway, now has to engage you on the uniqueness debate and win back that their evidence is superior, reestablish a link which is specific to the affirmative's case that has to be better than just "they are aid, this is popular", and then has to answer back your impact turn "free trade is really bad, i promise" and will probably read a different impact scenario. This means for them to go for politics, while you may have read 3 cards, they might have to read like 10 in order to keep the door open for them in the 2NR.

this is some good advice especially when it seems coming out of the 1nc that this is their strongest 2nr option.

 

if it's a relatively weak nb to their China CP and you think they're more likely to go for their China DA, then it makes more sense to just straight turn and not read any defense (that allows them to easily kick the da).

 

However if it's a likely 2nr strat and you're link turning, you still want to make good args like nonintrinsic, no spillover, internal link is non-unique, impact empirically denied, no brink, etc. these really help the 2ar leverage case. especially the no spillover claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am utterly clueless as how to answer free trade agreement DAs.

I can find evidence, but i just have to know what to look for. I really need HELP.

Any advice?

 

kritik ptx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure, but many if not most free trade das seem not to be tix. I know the FT I run links to solvency (uber-generic aid decreases free trade) and has an impact based on heg good.

 

If the FT looks like that, I would read non-U and/or no brink, since there clearly is aid to SSA right now and there is definitely no brink in the card, and then either link turn (if you have a free trade adv) or impact turn (just read heg bad). That way you get a really strong advantage out of it.

 

However, if you'd rather get into a tix debate than a heg debate, and if it is in fact a tix scenario, then go for it. And if you're really desperate you could always go for tix bad theory.

 

P.S. Your case should outweigh a free trade disad, as it can't lead to extinction, generally speaking, just nuke war. Read the impact, as it probably doesn't even say inevitable nuke war, and certainly not global.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Free trade is a politics scenario, hegemony is just an add on.

 

Your case should "outweigh" the disad since the 2AC and cross x will poke holes in the link and probability of the impact, but they should be doing that to your case with defense/turns or they'll capture it with a counterplan..so dont rely solely on "outweighing."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I grant that there is a political free trade disad, but not all free trade ones are. Tix link off of the passage of the plan, "during fiat" in a sense. The disad I've run links off of the sending of aid to africa, the actual solving. It says that aid denies or impedes free trade, not that your plan will change the political situation in any way. Economics and politics should be separated, especially when the types of arguments are different. Also, aid impeding free trade is a generic statement, not an up-to-the-moment card about how right now passing your plan will skew the elections, or change political capital, or whatever else.

 

And yes, decreased hegemony is just one impact I could use, but it's the default 1NC one in my file (with Khalilzad, naturally).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am utterly clueless as how to answer free trade agreement DAs.

I can find evidence, but i just have to know what to look for. I really need HELP.

Any advice?

 

 

Well, what is your Aff plan?

If you're plan is already in the squo then you can usually take out their uniqueness and possibly link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure, but many if not most free trade das seem not to be tix. I know the FT I run links to solvency (uber-generic aid decreases free trade) and has an impact based on heg good.

 

Free trade is a politics scenario' date=' hegemony is just an add on. [/quote']

 

Eebster i think your free trade DA probably has to do with free trade in the sense that US free trade will be affected by an increase in aid to africa.

 

1<3Topicality if i am corect, your thinking of free trade aggreement disads such as south korean or columbia free trade agreements. Which is slightly different.

 

So yes, both types of disads exist, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that's basically what I was saying, I grant that 'tix FT DAs are around, but not all FT DAs are tix. So yeah, mine has nothing to do with a trade agreement, just that sending aid is naturally antagonistic to free trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can write Generic blocks to any poltics senario so that if they say plan hurts polcap blocking fta you read your increases polcap block.

THen if they say boosts polcap alowing for the fta which is bad you read your plan decreases/ has no effect on block.

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...