Jump to content
daedradude102

list of disads

Recommended Posts

The affirmative cannot win. I present to you, the Capitalism Critique. You have now lost the game.

 

States counterplan solves poverty in general, so advantages will have to be smart. And it seems like every aff will be a CP for every other aff, so you better have a good aff strategy.

 

Also, poverty is key to heg (There have been studies!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all - this topic will have tremendous politics links.

 

States CP will check any aff that's not strategic in which social service it helps

 

Advantage CP's will be amazing on this topic too

 

Zizek and Statism will be awesome

 

Szasz is back

 

Critiques of who/what poverty is will be good

 

and, did i mention foucault will be representing strong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
isnt poverty more of an aff case. whos gonna say they dont wanna stop poverty?

 

 

Who ever said we shouldn't help sub-Saharan Africa? It's the same basic concept; no one really goes up there and says that we shouldn't help them (well I can't say everyone... there are always fun k's people find to run...) but it turns into a "You hurt them by helping them" or "There is a better to help people/You don't solve root cause" or in this case "States." Just because some one can't take the most simplistic answer (AKA poverty is great and we should all live in it) doesn't mean there is no neg ground

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
politics/case defense will be pretty prevelant I assume.

 

This is different than any other year...because?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is different than any other year...because?

lol

I guess that sounded like a silly comment, but off the back, most generic cases will be solving systemic harms - not escalating conflicts or energy crises. So easier to win util good/case defense with a disad against poverty affirmatives than against damien USEC, lol!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lol

I guess that sounded like a silly comment' date=' but off the back, most generic cases will be solving systemic harms - not escalating conflicts or energy crises. So easier to win util good/case defense with a disad against poverty affirmatives than against damien USEC, lol![/quote']

 

First of all, why can't systemic harms not operate in a util framework? They did on the UN topic AND health care topic...

 

and, a lot of aff's will claim both systemic and "big impacts".

 

 

I think a counterplan that says give the aff plan to all people, not just the poor, will be pretty big. That could actually be pretty fatal for aff....

 

because these things called "permutations" don't exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think a counterplan that says give the aff plan to all people, not just the poor, will be pretty big. That could actually be pretty fatal for aff....

 

that's just plan-plus...

 

if that was legit I would start running the give 1% extra incentive CP

Edited by lawlruschang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First of all, why can't systemic harms not operate in a util framework? They did on the UN topic AND health care topic...

 

and, a lot of aff's will claim both systemic and "big impacts".

Oh dang I forgot we dont have the complete caselist for next years topic yet :S

Was simply pointing out there is plenty of ground to run against ethics affs that have some deontological framework. Yes systemic harms can outweigh - I ran a trafficking aff last year - but great politics links also outweigh case in those instances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was simply pointing out there is plenty of ground to run against ethics affs that have some deontological framework. Yes systemic harms can outweigh - I ran a trafficking aff last year - but great politics links also outweigh case in those instances.

 

a link outweighs the impact an aff? I have never once heard a round being won on that - please enlighten us all on that.

 

also, why this resolution offers a lot of critical/ethical ground this resolution offers an awesome amount of policy ground as well (veteran affairs, soft power, economy, health care internals, etc.).

 

Just because people assume "POVERTY = ZIZEK" (Which isn't true - it will be VERY hard to read a pure zizekian cap bad aff on this topic because of zizek's critiques of poverty reduction programs) doesn't mean we should assume every case will be critical in nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
a link outweighs the impact an aff? I have never once heard a round being won on that - please enlighten us all on that.

 

also, why this resolution offers a lot of critical/ethical ground this resolution offers an awesome amount of policy ground as well (veteran affairs, soft power, economy, health care internals, etc.).

 

Just because people assume "POVERTY = ZIZEK" (Which isn't true - it will be VERY hard to read a pure zizekian cap bad aff on this topic because of zizek's critiques of poverty reduction programs) doesn't mean we should assume every case will be critical in nature.

Alright dude, whatever you want, I could care less, I'm not debating this topic next year, and I surely dont care what an immature debate coach thinks :S To say that teams haven't won disad/case with specific links is ridiculous. Because then the converse must be true, all systemic impact cases must have auto wins. Wonder what drives you to be so antagonistic. You dont look "cool" to make comments like "dude please enlighten me I have never seen a team win disad/case in my life"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
a link outweighs the impact an aff? I have never once heard a round being won on that - please enlighten us all on that.

 

also, why this resolution offers a lot of critical/ethical ground this resolution offers an awesome amount of policy ground as well (veteran affairs, soft power, economy, health care internals, etc.).

 

Just because people assume "POVERTY = ZIZEK" (Which isn't true - it will be VERY hard to read a pure zizekian cap bad aff on this topic because of zizek's critiques of poverty reduction programs) doesn't mean we should assume every case will be critical in nature.

 

In what articles/books does Zizek make this arg the clearest?

 

TO NEG REP: How am I a Faggot for asking a question to someone more informed and experienced than I am? Grow a pair and sign your shit.

Edited by lenin's ghost
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alright dude' date=' whatever you want, I could care less, I'm not debating this topic next year, and I surely dont care what an immature debate coach thinks :S To say that teams haven't won disad/case with specific links is ridiculous. Because then the converse must be true, all systemic impact cases must have auto wins. Wonder what drives you to be so antagonistic. You dont look "cool" to make comments like "dude please enlighten me I have never seen a team win disad/case in my life"[/quote']

 

Christos, you said "great politics links also outweigh case in those instances." which, means what exactly? That dis-ads no longer need uniqueness, internal links or impacts?

 

Aside from CP debates which will see a shit load of solvency deficit arguments, affirmatives on this topic have the unique benefit of controlling the uniqueness for most politics impacts (poverty reform key to temporary economic growth). Also, the link turn debate will be magnificently deep on this topic (if you're reading anything saying "plan kills capital" then you're just on the wrong side of the debate for these d/a's and anything saying "plan increase capital" won't have great uniqueness for any internals).

 

This topic really offers amazing politics debates in that sense - 'case links' will have to actually be warranted because affirmatives will control every part of those debates and the cp's won't solve a majority of the aff's arguments on politics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Christos, you said "great politics links also outweigh case in those instances." which, means what exactly? That dis-ads no longer need uniqueness, internal links or impacts?

Because links are the hardest to come across when winning politics - you can find all the Obama has PC/doesnt have but winning reasons why the plan guts his PC are much tougher to win.

 

But forget it, I initially made the comment because it seemed like some people were confused about what would be run. I dont want to get into a useless argument, especially when I'm very busy :s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Links themselves DON'T outweigh a case. Ever. There is ZERO impact to a position linking into a politics d/a. Your "debate phrase of the week" is stupid and has no meaning.

 

And, clearly you're busy - that's why you haven't made 5 posts in the last 5 minutes on crawsex.

 

i don't know why :S is your new favorite smiley but it's annoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think a counterplan that says give the aff plan to all people, not just the poor, will be pretty big. That could actually be pretty fatal for aff....

 

2 things could check the perm:

 

- poverty reps K as a NB (giving SS's to all doesn't conceptualize poverty)

- ptx links off of poverty

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait dude, you just made an amazing discovery, links dont outweigh case. I heard one of the varsity debaters on my team talking about how politics requires uniqueness and internals, and a terminal impact, is that true?

 

Kind of weird you stalk me and know how many posts I made (probably something mature coaches do so what do I know) but the posts were constructive comments in another forum since I was taking a break from school work. But I dont need to respond here anymore since the discussion is devolving.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
im just going to run a reject capitalism plan where we burn a dollar in the round

 

i'm sure committing federal offenses every weekend is a great way to resists teh capitalism...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...