Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
gamer9190

Dedev as a critique

Recommended Posts

dedev isn't a critique.

 

What are you talking about? Dedev can certainly be run as a k.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
development discourse can be, but not the Trainer argument.

Others seems to diagree.

Okay, I have a long and storied relationship with this position, and have run and coached in a number of different forms. It think Chris is doing a decent job of describing the basics of what a dedev argument is trying to say, but I think saying that it isn't/can't be a K is short sighted.

 

Actually, Trainer’s work serves as an excellent way to kritik liberalism. His argument comes in two parts – he says that representative government is bad, and that modern economic practice is also bad.

 

Trainer quotes Rousseau on the matter of representation. “Representative democracy is not democracy and not acceptable.” Trainer doesn’t want control of issues regarding to local community to go beyond the local community. He doesn’t think that it is possible for a society to sustain itself where a polity grows so large that all of its citizens can no longer fit in the same room. Therefore, he doesn’t like states. Therefore, he doesn’t like state action. He thinks people should be able to participate directly in decisions that affect their destinies.

 

Trainer also doesn’t like trade. He thinks that people should make do with that comes from the eco-system in which they live. So, eat apples if apples grow near where you live, and don’t eat citrus if you don’t live where citrus grows. Trade is always bad for Trainer if it means that products of one eco-system are transported to another eco-system. He calls these areas bioregions. Lifestyles should differ according to what bioregion you live in. If you live in a rocky area, build your house of rocks, and if you live in a forest area, build your house of wood. Trade, Trainer thinks, makes us into consumers as a matter of socialization. Consumer culture is very bad. It puts us at odds with our bioregions. It sacrifices sustainability in the name of Growth. The constant need for economic growth makes states compete over scarce resources, keeping the world constantly on the brink of conflict, genocide, and instability. In the consumer society, there is no such thing as enough, there is only more. He says that we have to come to grips with the logical inescapability of the limits to growth argument. That means that we have to realize that the deck has been stacked against the Third World since the very beginning, and that it is simply impossible for the Third World to develop to the level of the First World. Therefore, true social justice is impossible to attain, because no matter how much Growth there is, it will never close the gap between the rich and the destitute – that gap will forever continue to expand. Therefore, we have to find a way for the rich people of consumer society in the First World to de-develop – to transition to a more basic existence in the interest of social justice. We have to live simply so that others can simply live.

 

Trainer’s alternative is to reject liberalism. Here, liberalism is not a synonym for Democrat. Liberalism is an economic arrangement of capitalism (meaning trade) between states which are (ideally) representative democracies. In place of this liberal order, Trainer would prefer what he calls the Conserver Society. In the world of the Conserver, we respect our bioregions and abondon sovereign nation-states. We live sustainably and don’t trade much outside our own region. We live on what we have at hand, not on what can be brought to market. He would argue that not only does this solve all the problems of nation states, but also all the problems of capitalism.

 

It is a powerful argument, with a wide variety of uses. It can be made into a disadvantage, where the uniqueness story is that the collapse of the market economy and the transition to the Conserver society is presently inevitable in the SQ, and that plan props up the order. It’s similar to a RiMal scenario in that way. You can also use it as simple growth bad impact turns. I’ve even had teams run it as a counterplan at times. But, the best way to access these scenarios is to run it as a K. Otherwise, you miss out on Trainer’s critique of representative democracy, and rely on arguments about the transition in order to win. If it is a K, you don’t have to win a specific transition scenario in order to win. It’s bigger, easier, and more strategic. Oh, and it solves case. All cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trainer reject his arguments about liberalism in his 04 book, i think.

 

Even so, Trainer levels a lot of attacks on our global economy and trade system, and calls for a transformation to this conserver society, what he is calling, in his more recent writings, "The Simpler Way." He accuses our economy of two things: first off, it destroys the environment and puts us at odds with our ecosystem, and second we keep the Third World down as their resources are utilized to create products to sell for the first world, instead of things like food to feed their starving people. For their trouble, they get extremely small wages and are barely able to buy bread in the marketplace. Trainer brings it to the conclusion that, either, a. we will collapse the biological foundations of our world in our support of more, more more, or b. the first world countries will kill each other in pursuit of increasingly scarce resources needed to fuel their affluence. Trainer calls this the "limits to growth analysis."

 

And, as I said, he advocates "The Simpler Way" or the "Conserver society." A style of living not dominated by trade or commerce or central governments, but based on the local community that, as dan said, supports itself through what it can make and build in its own region.

 

What's more, Trainer says that one of the best things that can be done to promote this ideology is to talk about it, debate about it, bring up the ideas. It's pretty solid set-up for an in-round, discourse solves kind of alternative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here is my argument for why it's a better impact turn/dis-ad/policy argument:

 

All of trainers arguments assume a world of policy simulation while the alternative functions outside in a different paradigm in which we judge action. That being said, the "alt" that trainer supports doesn't make your "links unique" which means you lose lots of rounds to "alternative don't solve".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
here is my argument for why it's a better impact turn/dis-ad/policy argument:

 

All of trainers arguments assume a world of policy simulation while the alternative functions outside in a different paradigm in which we judge action. That being said, the "alt" that trainer supports doesn't make your "links unique" which means you lose lots of rounds to "alternative don't solve".

 

Explain that last statement to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it means this when you run Trainer as a critique:

 

Link/Impacts - you increase economic development throughout the United States/Third world. That's bad => genocide and massive war. (which is sweet because it assumes the affirmatives impact framework [third world wars => nuke war in the 2NC so they get zero impact cal. against you btw] while give a descriptive account of the affirmatives solvency/plan action based off historical economic study.

 

Alternative - this round matters because economism is supported by the individual (which works well with a marxism k, but not these forms of impacts). You see, you get no alternative solvency for your links/impacts because you don't provide a world in which they don't exist. (endorsing anti-economic theory doesn't solve genocide). So, like i said, Alt. don't solve is devastating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it means this when you run Trainer as a critique:

 

Link/Impacts - you increase economic development throughout the United States/Third world. That's bad => genocide and massive war. (which is sweet because it assumes the affirmatives impact framework [third world wars => nuke war in the 2NC so they get zero impact cal. against you btw] while give a descriptive account of the affirmatives solvency/plan action based off historical economic study.

 

Alternative - this round matters because economism is supported by the individual (which works well with a marxism k, but not these forms of impacts). You see, you get no alternative solvency for your links/impacts because you don't provide a world in which they don't exist. (endorsing anti-economic theory doesn't solve genocide). So, like i said, Alt. don't solve is devastating.

 

I see what you mean. But running this as a DA is horribly non-unique. Development and capitalism is the status quo. Impact turns work, but I feel like there's so much more that can be said about this position. The only way to really access the full impact of this is with a kritik, I think. The problem is accessing an alternative that solves, given the framework of the impacts.

 

...This probably isn't the right topic to discuss this in. :)

Sorry to derail the topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see what you mean. But running this as a DA is horribly non-unique. Development and capitalism is the status quo. Impact turns work, but I feel like there's so much more that can be said about this position. The only way to really access the full impact of this is with a kritik, I think. The problem is accessing an alternative that solves, given the framework of the impacts.

 

...This probably isn't the right topic to discuss this in. :)

Sorry to derail the topic.

 

Lol. your uniqueness problem is easily solved for by finding arguments saying 'econ is about to crash'.

 

If you want, we can talk about via aim:

pi123581321

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even so, Trainer levels a lot of attacks on our global economy and trade system, and calls for a transformation to this conserver society, what he is calling, in his more recent writings, "The Simpler Way." He accuses our economy of two things: first off, it destroys the environment and puts us at odds with our ecosystem, and second we keep the Third World down as their resources are utilized to create products to sell for the first world, instead of things like food to feed their starving people. For their trouble, they get extremely small wages and are barely able to buy bread in the marketplace. Trainer brings it to the conclusion that, either, a. we will collapse the biological foundations of our world in our support of more, more more, or b. the first world countries will kill each other in pursuit of increasingly scarce resources needed to fuel their affluence. Trainer calls this the "limits to growth analysis."

 

And, as I said, he advocates "The Simpler Way" or the "Conserver society." A style of living not dominated by trade or commerce or central governments, but based on the local community that, as dan said, supports itself through what it can make and build in its own region.

 

What's more, Trainer says that one of the best things that can be done to promote this ideology is to talk about it, debate about it, bring up the ideas. It's pretty solid set-up for an in-round, discourse solves kind of alternative.

 

Does anyone know why his books are so expensive? On Amazon, they're around 50 dollars for a 200 page book, but they look like they're full of good stuff. Are they worth it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can get them all through just about any academic library system. Before you go shelling out hundreds of doillars for out of print or overseas warehoused books, call your local library and see if you can get them through a public library ILL. If you can't, go to a university library and see if they are there. Most universities have some option under which non-students can buy a membership and use the library. At my school, that subscription costs 25 bucks, so it's cheaper than buying the books. Once you are holding a copy, you can scan it or even photocopy it for a fraction of the cost of buying it.

 

In Nevada City, the pickings seem pretty slim for that. You've got Phillips School of Massage, but I've heard their library isn't very good. However, the odds get better if you head to Sacremento. Cal State Sacremento allows non-students to purchase library access. http://library.csus.edu.proxy.lib.csus.edu/content2.asp?pageID=473. Trainer isn't in their catalog, but they would be able to get them via inter-library services. The Sacremento Public Library might be able to get them via inter-library loan too.

 

Check out the California Libraries Catalog. Fourteen libraries in CA have The conserver Society, for example: http://firstsearch.oclc.org/WebZ/FSFETCH?fetchtype=fullrecord:sessionid=fsapp4-54726-feuckhsz-2mpe0d:entitypagenum=5:0:recno=17:resultset=2:format=FI:next=html/record.html:bad=error/badfetch.html:entitytoprecno=17:entitycurrecno=17:numrecs=1. Surely, you can find these books without shelling out fifty bucks a pop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trainer's Abandon Affluence is going for about $5 on Amazon, so I'm not sure what y'all are talking about.

 

Either way, Dan is right. Go to your local library. Most major library systems should be able to get it for you. Bring the ISBN to your local branch and talk to them about getting it shipped.

 

If that doesn't work, go to a college library. They often have access to different materials through their own ILL system.

 

And worst case scenario, search WorldCat, enter your zip code, and see where the closest copy is to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the book we're referring to is one he wrote last year, Renewable Energy Cannot Sustain a Consumer Society. Fifty bucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the help guys. Going to the library was my next course of action, but I didn't know you could buy subscriptions to university libraries and stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
definition of irony, huh tomak?

 

Nope. That would be reading it as a pdf off a MacBook.

 

(Yes, I saw this in a round. The girl also had a Starbucks Frapaccino next to her.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...