Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
fdrobertson

This Forum Is Dead, Dead, Dead.

Recommended Posts

I had nothing to do in the last part of my study hall supervision so I thought I'd take a look at what was being talked about on cross-x.com

 

Well, nothing is being written about here.

 

Teams from here are heading to the TOC but no one is talking about anything.

 

Next year's topic is challenging and it might be nice to talk about traditional, criticai, and just whatever the hell kind of positions people think they will be running.

 

But no, apparently eveyone is on vacation from thinking. I do that occasionally myself sometimes but I need to do some thinking about next year's topic in particular, and that thinking generally is better when I can engage in conversation/argument/creative exploration of ideas with others.

 

So this is my suggestion--someone start writing about next year's topic and ideas you have. I know I like the idea of running one critical argument that I talked to Spurlock about a bit on Facebook a while ago--I think some French guy named Virilio is the writer, but I might have the name wrong.

 

I also think it would be intriguing to combine Virilio's general proposition that speed/efficiency is a tool of capitalist fascism with a criticism of speed/efficiency in policy debate practice. Many affs are going to bite into this criticism with regularity next year.

 

Sorry if I got the philsosopher's name wrong: I can't check Facebook while at school.

 

Fred

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get it Fred! I would suggest that those teams going to the TOC are probably discouraged from trolling on cross-x the week of the tournament by their adult leaders. They likely have a few cards to cut and maybe some blocks to write. However, I have some time as well and was curious. Who is everyone's favorite to win the TOC? And the second and perhaps more interesting is who is going to be your dark horse team? I happen to like Millard South as the favorite and as the dark horse if that is possible (hate if you want but I have biases)...aside from that I am rooting for SFL, U Chicago Lab, Winston Churchill and of course the funniest team in debate from OPRF. It should be a great tournament!

 

As for next year I am also excited about the critical approaches the topic offers. I think the Virillio argument is going to be really good. He talks pretty explicitly about the acceleration of our culture and the connection to communication is pretty explicit as well. Everyone knows that I am always looking for a reason to criticize speed and I think that argument should come out of Virillio literature pretty easily. I am also interested in looking into a Bataille argument that would be blended with a Burroughs speech about being elected commissioner of sewers. In fact I am going to make my candidacy public right now. I am going to run for Commissioner of Sewers for Omaha next year. Please vote for me.

 

I also love the idea of a bicycles aff that could have tons of different types of advantages both critical and more policy in orientation. This of course brings up the good ole states counter-plan. An argument I use to love but have now come to terms with the fact that it is pretty awful for the practice of debate. Maybe we should talk about something outside areas that are exclusive domain of the state or at least that a magical 50 state action could solve and avoid that super sweet politics disad. I just think states C-P has become a toxic argument that makes our resolutions really stilted in the way we think about them. We always get the Heg aff which makes most folks happy but only talking about infrastructure on military bases sucks. Hopefully, everyone decides that you can finally beat that c-p on a theory argument or something else. Hopefully, commissioner of sewers is a federal appointment. We shall see. I hope this gives you some stuff to talk about Fred. I tried pretty hard!!!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can i be your campaign manager? I have some ideas to run by you for catch phrases:

 

Dana Christensen: he knows his shit about shit.

 

DC: he can transport your pee.

 

Dana Christensen: the only candidate for commissioner of sewers who can grow algae in his ass.

 

Do I have the job?

 

Fred

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really do think Virilio is quite an interesting idea. Speed and efficiency are often simply bad things, especially when transportation itself offers such wonderful opportunities to meander and have more time instead of less.

 

I am looking forward to going to the TOC and Nationals in Indianapolis because we will drive to both places and debate van trips are almost always wonderful. Bunch of smart, creative people with time to talk to each other, listen to music together, tell jokes, laugh. Occasionally a future commissioner of sewers may have a little accident while gambling but it's all cool.

 

What bad can come of that?

 

Fred

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure Edina SS is a dark horse but I won't quibble.

 

Also, I am going to announce right now that Fred Robertson is my new campaign manager! With him on my side I am never going to lose. I am sure that my gambling history and ability to grow algae will also come into use...I hadn't considered them yet but now I think they are pretty much the center of my campaign. Now all we need is an opponent to "drag thru the muck." It will not be a clean campaign my friends but who wants a clean campaign for Commissioner of Sewers. I am going to be like that one monkey at the zoo who is fed up with fat ladies wearing fanny packs staring and pointing...I am slinging poo! Welcome to the new world order!!!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go ahead and support Dana for minister of sewers right now, so with 0% of precincts reporting I think it's pretty safe to call this one for Dana (and Fred)

 

Regarding next years topic - can i get a heg advantage from any of them there affs you were talkin bout? If so then sign SFL up!

 

Regarding the TOC;

 

Really no clear favorite this year, should make it fun... The group including (but not limited to) Woodward ss, greenhill su, hoflo gs, Edina ss, icw dh and Stratford js all have legitimate args as to why they would be the Vegas favorites going in

 

Because their is no clear favorite, I think almost any team could put together a run that lands them in a Monday afternoon debate, realizing and believing that is half the battle though...

 

(how's that for a politically correct answer)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what will happen at the TOC.

 

I think the policy side of next year's topic is honestly the best ground. I know we're all tempted to talk about the critical side of things in Nebraska, but this resolution reminds me a lot of the alternative energy topic in that it will facilitate discussion about policies that can realistically improve life for a lot of people. High speed rail may employ thousands, revitalize downtown areas, and decrease transportation cost for people who need it most. Bridges, roundabouts, and roads provide important transportation points for millions of people. Airport security makes life miserable for countless security theater subjects daily.

 

In other words... you might not need to read Virilio. There's a lot of leftist ground built in to the resolution already.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding next years topic - can i get a heg advantage from any of them there affs you were talkin bout? If so then sign SFL up!

 

Inherency-Republicans are against transportation spending.

 

CONTENTION TWO is Significant Harms

The first advantage is U.S. Leadership

 

1st, Roads are becoming crappy, in the future, only private companies will build roads, making us dependent upon private companies for transportation, allowing them to blackmail us.

 

2nd, All of our transportation workers are going out of work, transportation workers leaving and lack of infrastucture kill heg.

 

3rd, finally, our lack of roads undermines international perception of heg.

 

You have yourself a heg advantage... Seems familiar though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what will happen at the TOC.

 

I think the policy side of next year's topic is honestly the best ground. I know we're all tempted to talk about the critical side of things in Nebraska, but this resolution reminds me a lot of the alternative energy topic in that it will facilitate discussion about policies that can realistically improve life for a lot of people. High speed rail may employ thousands, revitalize downtown areas, and decrease transportation cost for people who need it most. Bridges, roundabouts, and roads provide important transportation points for millions of people. Airport security makes life miserable for countless security theater subjects daily.

 

In other words... you might not need to read Virilio. There's a lot of leftist ground built in to the resolution already.

 

I am not necessarily suggesting critical affirmative strategies, but that would be fine with me too. I was impressed by Westside's uprooted tree/David Lynch case, for heaven's sake. I'm open to pretty much anything.

 

But if people are going to run high speed rail, then Virilio as a criticism on the negative is certainly a viable option for teams that are open to such strategies, which I would think would include most teams in Nebraska.

 

I do think regular policy cases are hunky-dory. Clearly, that's what Lana and Yan ran all year. I like fixing bridges as a bigass topical as all get out aff case, because it is simply true that we need to do this.

 

But sewers are interesting too, as prospective Commissioner Christensen has noted, and as his campaign manager, I must support him.

 

Fred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generic Virillo is lame because there are no warranted link arguments, just claims about the nature of society which are more or less generally accurate. Virillo with specific links to the dangers of specific kinds of transportation from more technical types of papers would be awesome, but seems unlikely to exist in quantities sufficient to justify investing time in creating a Virillo file.

 

I really like the idea of a sewers affirmative (not sure if topical?). There's also K ground related to this, probably.

 

POO BAGGY!

 

Sorry for invading your region of the site, I'll go hide inside the Novice Center now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

knapp01.png

 

Generic Virillo is lame because there are no warranted link arguments, just claims about the nature of society which are more or less generally accurate. Virillo with specific links to the dangers of specific kinds of transportation from more technical types of papers would be awesome, but seems unlikely to exist in quantities sufficient to justify investing time in creating a Virillo file

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think Virillo is interesting, so if someone pulls it off I would be happy.

Edited by Chaos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An argument I use to love but have now come to terms with the fact that it is pretty awful for the practice of debate. Maybe we should talk about something outside areas that are exclusive domain of the state or at least that a magical 50 state action could solve and avoid that super sweet politics disad. I just think states C-P has become a toxic argument that makes our resolutions really stilted in the way we think about them.

 

While I happen to agree with your complaint about the magical thinking necessary for the 50 states fiat uniform action counterplan, I will defend the pedagogy behind the states-and-federalism debate. First of all, don't make the mistake of thinking that because it is an argument which seems old and dead to you that the same is true for students. I've judged sixty gazillion states CP debates in my life, but only the seniors on our squads have participated in them at all, and that only as 9th graders. Just like a good supreme court/ exec/ congress debate, these debates are real questions for advocacy groups, and good government education for debaters. I passed the AP US Government exam without taking the class pretty much because of the gov't education debate gave me.

I know it's boring for us, but I kinda feel like it's a debate everyone should have to deal with in depth.

 

Well anyhow, until some aff realizes you actually gotta call out abusive cp texts, we'll be going for states against y'all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I happen to agree with your complaint about the magical thinking necessary for the 50 states fiat uniform action counterplan

 

Just as magical as fiating all members of Congress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fred -- I like bridge repair as well. I remember quite vividly the bridge collapse in MN -- I have quite a few relatives living there. Scary stuff, good econ/jobs adv... I like this idea as an aff or cp http://ecocentric.bl...tors_picks=true

 

As for critical aff's. I think there's ample room for criticism or (interpretation if you don't want to endorse the view) of the resolution. I'm intrigued with how public transportation infrastructure facilitates segregation (and not just in urban areas, reservations/rural areas too). And the time/space/reality combo seems relevant to transportation/movement.

 

As for the ToC -- shout out to all the Midwest teams. Millard South, SFL, MN teams, and of course, champions ICW all deserve a big congratulations on representing the Midwest well. I watched the quarter-final round ICW vs Woodward. Best 2nr vs 2ar I saw all year. There was a moment where it seemed some sort of issue had occurred with a flow not being present for Jeffrey -- he delivered the last 45 seconds off the cuff flawlessly. Very impressive. No suprise GBN met them there either -- that team is good, and they have a monster program helping them along the way. Very happy for both team's successes. They deserve it.

 

Special shout out to SFL: first and only appearance by a South Dakota team at the Tournament of Champions. Many tried to do it; you accomplished it. I know all the hard work it took-- that entire squad is a special group. The 4-3 record ain't nothing to scoff at. And they're not done this season. The style they're best at is coming up next. Hopefully, CJ Point and Bryant Yang can give that tournament a serious run next year.

 

BTW: Thanks to everyone for a great year. I appreciate all those who provided a helping hand and some guidance for me. Ya'll are the best!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fred: I wasn't sure if you'd seen Kevin Kuswa's article on Fordism which discusses Virilio -- this idea of "disappearing people" through social concentration (propogated by transportation) will likely be the I/L of our segregation affirmative.

 

Part 1: http://puttingthekin...infrastructure/

Part 2: http://puttingthekin...hor/kevinkuswa/

 

This small part of section 1 is good. I found an irony in the current use of the term 'ghetto after reading part 1 of this article. The fact we still refer to where we've disappeared people as the "ghetto" is not so coicidental. This segregation of communities is what allows for the structural violence that as abul would put it, "is an ongoing thermonuclear war..." Structural violence exists b/c people don't have to see it. We put it on an Indian Reservation or on the "wrong side of the tracks" like South Chicago.

 

" I suddenl y understood th at war was a space in the geometrical sense, and even more than geom etrical: crossing Europe from North to South, from the shelters of the German cities to the Siegfried Line, passing by the Maginot Line and the Atlantic Wall, makes you realize the breadth of Total War. By the same token you touch on the mythic dimension of a war spreading not only throughout Europe, but all over the world. The objects, bunkers, block-houses, anti-aircraft shelters, submarine bases, etc. are kinds of reference points or landmarks to the totalitarian nature of war in space and myth. (Virilio, 1997b, p10) Bracketing judgment on the ways war works through destruction, it also produces certain arrangements within and surrounding its space. This move–charting war as spatial–suddenly allows a project that treats the city as both the logistics and aftermath of warfare. Virilio (1997, p11) admits that the “city has existed for a long time,†but he also positions it as “there to bear witness to the human species’ extraordinary capacities for concentration.†So the way information circulates, both globally and locally, creates a humanizing framework that “de-concentrates†the continual reign of state terror and the literal “disappearance of people.†The torture (during and after Nazi brutalities) is equally hideous, for the expansion of the markets that followed the Allied victory against the architects of the concentration camps also ushered in the expansion of state intrusiveness. Until the Second World War–until the concentration camps–societies were societies of incarceration, of imprisonment in the Foucauldian sense. The great transparency of the world, whether through satellites or simply tourists, brought about an overexposure of these places to observation, to the press and public opinion which now ban concentration camps. (Virilio, 1997b, p89) As Virilio (1997, p89) comments: “These are qualitative differences….No longer the practice of the concentration camps, of German-style enclosure, but the disappearance of people. Sleight of hand. Social magic. It’s the society of disappearance.†This is not to diminish the significance or magnitude of the concentration camps, but to make an argument that the dehumanizing and machinic logic of concentration camps shares a number of traits with the dehumanizing and machinic logic of Fordism and capitalist exploitation propagated by state regulations and a monopoly of force (the military). In other words, concentration (as opposed to circulation) occurs alongside warfare, and both motions have been legitimized by, and assembled into, a state apparatus. When joined by mass production and globalizing markets, the state apparatus mutates in and through the military-industrial complex."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike,

 

What you just posted is amazing. I had never thought about exactly why it is so vile that people use the term "ghetto" so freely. Good lord, I hear that constantly at Millard West, and I call students out on how ignorant it is to use that term to categorize a whole place where people live, but I never realized how truly awful the implications are of this language. Thanks for the wakeup call.

 

Here's something I found from Drew Burk, the Virilio scholar/translator who I am trying to get to come to NDI for a day, with the help of Fremont Mills coach Jamie Saker, who has a connection with him through Jamie's work at the European Graduate School.

 

A Grey Ecology is Needed Now More Than Ever

 

 

 

 

Drew Burk

 

 

 

The time of an intellectual having an influence is over. Who has an influence? It is the climate.

-- Paul Virilio,
Grey Ecology

As we stare down the aftermath of another natural disaster, Paul Virilio's words, unfortunately, ring as true as ever. Within a world that is in a headlong rush into synchronized global emotion, we can begin to understand his concept of the integral accident. Yesterday, the accident happened somewhere, it was relegated to one geo-location. Today, the accident is integral, it runs the show. It happens here and there. Paul Virilio has been dismissed by some as a negative thinker who does not have the capacity to think past the destruction of World War II, where, as an 11 year-old child, "war became his university". Today, this university resonates with us to such an extent that we must begin to ask fundamental questions concerning the political economy of speed. According to Virilio, before the contemporary period one had time to prepare for war because strategists could foresee events. Today, within the dromosphere (the sphere of speed which produces the accident), the accident happens before we know it has happened. With any new invention, there is a loss. With the invention of the train, there was the train wreck. And so today, within a globalized culture, struggling to find novel ways of reducing dependence on fossil fuels and living within the aftermath of such fossil fuel disasters as the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, we must also have the courage to witness another "successful failure".

Japan, site of the end of the last world war, itself predicated on the successful failure of the atomic bomb, now becomes the disaster site of invention once again. The atomic age was ushered in with the advent of nuclear power, a ?more efficient' resource than fossil fuels. Hailed as an antidote to the depletion of out-dated energy sources, nuclear power also inaugurated the prospect of nuclear meltdown. As Hannah Arendt warned us so long ago, "miracle and catastrophe are two sides of the same coin". If we can begin to assess this tragedy that has spread through real-time networks, Paul Virilio's demand for a novel sort of ecology, a grey ecology for the man-made world of the dromosphere, can no longer be ignored. While the natural disaster of the tsunami belongs to the world of the natural climate, that domain where a green ecology can be examined in order to rethink the problematic of global warming, grey ecology makes it necessary to study and prevent the excesses of an almost fanatical human commitment to the idea of progress. A grey ecology signals the necessity to reflect, within the context of an accelerated culture, on the instant when "progress itself becomes propaganda".

Today, there is no malevolent dictator behind it all. The accident and its political economy of speed dictate the agenda. Consequently, we will need courage to recognize other accidents of the dromosphere. As the economy of speed leaves its destruction and rubble in every aspect of existence, as the workers of Wisconsin and elsewhere strive to demand a grey ecology within the man-made structures of governance, education, and excess wealth, we begin to see that catastrophe can be flipped on its head to provide for the miraculous. As the global networks share the pain and distress of all those suffering, whether in Japan, Libya, Egypt, or on any neighborhood street, we can perhaps begin to acquire the courage to demand a new ecology of progress. When scientists created atomic weapons at the end of the last world war, they were supposedly not in a position to understand their totally destructive nature. Today, as we continue our headlong rush into the future-present, as we desperately allow new inventive ways of extracting energy through clean-coal technologies, as we embrace without question novelty in the realm of instantaneous connection, we must also have the courage to face this medusa of progress with a critical mirror. Paul Virilio envisions no other way of proceeding than slowing down -- re-calibrating our position against the political economy of speed and unbridled "progress". Virilio is not against progress, but unlike our technological predecessors, who perhaps could not have anticipated that train wrecks parallel the invention of the train, that shipwrecks are the inevitable fallout of the invention of the ship, Virilio challenges us, in the name of the future that is already here, to rethink an ethics of progress and invention. A grey ecology is needed now more than ever.

----------------

Drew Burk is a doctoral candidate at the European Graduate School. He has translated the work of philosophers such as Paul Virilio, Jean Baudrillard, and Jacques Derrida. Burk is the translator of Paul Virilio's, Grey Ecology, New York: Atropos Press, 2010.

© CTheory. All rights reserved.

© CTheory. All Rights Reserved

I know that the majority of policy debaters and coaches are going to be dismissive of thinkers like Virilio, in the same way that so many "gods" of policy debate reject Spanos, mainly because Spanos is smart enough and honest enough to call out policy debaters for their disingenuous horseshit arguments (what else can be said about all the "hard hegemony" idiocy permeating machine policy debate?) but the day I start caring about what the majority of policy debate coaches and debaters think about such things is the day go out to pasture, and unless I also get to stand at stud, I hope that is no time soon.

Fred

  • Upvote 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...