Jump to content
AdamM

Natives Aff

Recommended Posts

Have any of you ran into the Natives aff this year? I've hit it a couple times so I was wondering if anyone had any negative strategies to suggest. I was thinking T on "it's" because the reservations are their own soverign powers and technically not part of the the federal government.

Basically the plan text mandates funding the construction of better roads and transportation in the reservations, with the natives building it themselves, so the aff is stimulating jobs. I can specify further about the plan if anyone needs me to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll have it's T blocked out reasonably well, but I don't know what else might be viable for you. Some sort of CP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that's possible is to use a Heidegger kritik with a "give back the land" link. I saw it done that way recently against a natives aff, and it was just really interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a cool CP where the US repeals its plenary power over the tribes...ultimately giving them sovreignty over them selves. Most NA advantages stem from them having more freedom to govern themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds like it could be a viable cp, Lothar. And Heidegger would be good as well if I could find a strong enough link, espeically since I could use a lot of the cards I cut from last year's rez on that kritik. What about case specific args?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could also build an exclusionary counterplan which excluded certain tribes.

 

You could also run a coersion/control argument.

 

Both were run on the college topic.

 

The give the land back C/P or the Heidgger argument sound good.

 

In terms of topicality--I would run a combo of sub-sets and extra-topicality. Although not plan on going for it. They may also try to make T link to your K, which could backfire for you--if you don't have that blocked out.

 

As a side question--don't 95% of K's turn this argument?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What did Heidegger do to supplement the GBTL argument? That seems like an interesting combination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well theres the Obvious Colonialism K. I Saw an Interesting round of it Where Neg ran Case + Virilio And T In = Throughtout and T = Substantial. Neg Ended Up Winning On Virillo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What government mechanism would be involved beyond the department of transportation with this aff? Bureau of indian affairs? They have to work though these other mechs to deal with Native Americans & their public policy issues.

 

There is some decent ground there--in terms of Ks. The BIA is not well looked upon--at least historically--particularly in the K literature.

 

BTW, there is a really easy K to cut in 3 authors: Nayar, Nunn, and Porter.

 

You probably already have Nayar already.

Nunn is law links (Eurocentrism). Not spec to the issues.

Porter is how our law operates with respect to NA.

 

All of these 3 are on lexis law review.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a good criticism of building roads as a means to the state's assimilation policy. A few camps put it out. It's really between if you just want to outweigh it with a high magnitude disad impact or out left it with the K-- your choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...