Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Calculus

Running Capitalism K

Recommended Posts

This is just not true. There are good capitalism not collapsing/no rev cards that were written very recently. Its not like you even need cards to beat an argument this stupid.

 

10 bucks says you are relying on those god-awful spartacus cards.

Thank you. The Cap DA idea is just not a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XD

 

 

thanks to that cap da, I call it a socialism da actually cuz that's our end goal, i managed to go 4-3 at ceda before losing my break round cuz i was an idiot and didn't do my 1nr correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XD

 

 

thanks to that cap da, I call it a socialism da actually cuz that's our end goal, i managed to go 4-3 at ceda before losing my break round cuz i was an idiot and didn't do my 1nr correctly.

Notice, your 1NR, not your 2NR. Your partner tooled you and never went for your arguments. Good debaters would a) laugh at your argument B) laugh at your inadequate explanation of it.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Notice' date=' your 1NR, not your 2NR. Your partner tooled you and never went for your arguments. Good debaters would a) laugh at your argument B) laugh at your inadequate explanation of it.[/quote']

HAHAHA good point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is rarely ever a good alternative that would actually solve for the Ks. It is the same idea as having a plan that claims to solve some really big random impact such as global warming. Finding good alternatives is really really hard. Generally, reject aff alternatives are good to have because then you can get out of the perm debate. However, it has its own downsides. If you feel that you can defend why rejecting affirmative would solve capitalism, then you should go with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this thread is making me rage

 

in terms of the rev disad, there are strategic ways to read this argument. the two central problems with the disad are that, 1. it is most likely terminally non unique, and 2. the aff has to have their heads so far up their asses if they can't make a good timeframe distinction. the problem with both the uniqueness and the internal link evidence you will be reading is that the aff will probably have more qualified authors that will cite things like empirical examples that the neg literature will not have. sure, you can read lots of unqiueness evidence with flaming rhetoric, but that evidence is probably not good, and is probably written by a reclusive college aged blogger who attended a lecture on robespierre that created some ideological revolution.

 

check the ndca caselist if you want our cites - U card is probably old though

Edited by Biggoron
  • Downvote 1

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...