Jump to content
swagondeck

Round 563- Bannister (Aff) Vs Miro (Neg)

Recommended Posts

haha okay, that's fine... 

also: you're a monster for that Wikipedia use

 

two more: how does the judge voting neg "deterritorialize"? How does deterritorialization take power over space away from multinational corporations?

Joins our movement, refuses to be part of a collective, investing our desire in a collective like the state. It allows us to reclaim smooth space by nomadic thought -- we create public space, since you're winning that that takes power from these corporations, so are we.

 

finally do you claim to solve structural violence through the C/A?

Yes.

 

Edit: On number 2, I'm not going to change my Cross-X question, but it made it look like I was advocating investing desire into a collective. That was supposed to go with the refusal part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Actually, Snarf, I'm a bit confused. Do D&G have a clear view on "predictability"? From what I've read of Difference and Repetition, the negative view on this does not seem to be clear. Just because something is rhizomatic doesn't mean it can't be predictable, repetitive? DR says: "repetition is a

transgression. It puts law into question, it denounces its nominal or general character in favour of a more profound and more artistic reality." I'm sure you're right, but can you clear that up for me?
 
Edit: I guess one could say that we are "territorializing what they can do, restricting them"..

 

Perm do the alt is a previously unexplored line of flight that the predictability standard restricts. 

 

The standard doesn't "put the law into question", it IS the law (of the almighty voting issue Fairness with a Capital F). It doens't "create a more artistic reality", it restricts the chaotic explosion of arguments/sides to narrowly defined parameters. this argument is a negative argument and only a negative argument. Perm do the alt is basically post-modern artsplosion for argument theory.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, because Dan's name rhymes with Van, it means he supports automobility, turns case.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one more actually, i promise that's it.

 

So at this point (provided we win herod), the state will create space but it'll be striated, non-rhizomatic space? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one more actually, i promise that's it.

 

So at this point (provided we win herod), the state will create space but it'll be striated, non-rhizomatic space? 

No. Herod isn't the only card that takes out your solvency. But yes, if you win all the other arguments and the State actually creates the space, it will be striated.

 

Edit: Are we good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol i love the header... i'll hafta think of another clever thing for the 1ar.

 

is anyone judging??

Besides The Murph, nope. (Why did your other debate get so many!?!?)

 

Edit: I don't want to out-think another one :( I took hours of brainstorming to come up with that header (that's how I got the Van idea)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm at 1600 right now, is it okay if it stays like that and you can have 1600 for the 2nr? i could conceivably slim it down i guess... 

 

i'd take 1400 for the 2AR. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm at 1600 right now, is it okay if it stays like that and you can have 1600 for the 2nr? i could conceivably slim it down i guess... 

 

i'd take 1400 for the 2AR. 

I'd rather just stick with the 2200/1400 word limit, as I already posted my 1nr with that length, and I'm not sure how it would affect the overall debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how you combined words with punctuation so that they count as 1 word ;) Lol @ "solves,no" "before.Also" "empire,maybe"

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how you combined words with punctuation so that they count as 1 word ;) Lol @ "solves,no" "before.Also" "empire,maybe"

haha i didn't think you'd catch that... but i was pressed for words. it's probably not ethical, i encourage the 2NR to be only Punctuation Blend theory. 

 

edit: We need one more judge, does anyone want to? 

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...

×
×
  • Create New...