Jump to content
THEUbermensch

Critical Gitmo Aff

Recommended Posts

I know there were a few of these out there from the prison topic. I think SDI made a file, if anyone has it or something similar PM me lots to trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have Guantanamo aff and neg camp files from the detain without cause topic, from 2005 - 2006. PM me if that's what you want.

 

Edit: Don't PM me anymore. I made a post further down with links to the files.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have one from this year PM me if you want it. (Its highlighted and blocked out for the most part)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I care about T very much, but I'm curious, what's this aff's defense against T-economic engagement? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I care about T very much, but I'm curious, what's this aff's defense against T-economic engagement? 

A few things, Land is economic, giving back gitmo is a precursur to EE and that giving back land is economic engagement. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

precursur to EE

So effects?

 

Gitmo isn't good, at least the one that was put out by SDI. There will be no mindset shift, the politics link proves this. The US isn't going to suddenly become non-biopolitical and non-imperialist because we released a bunch of "terrorists" as we call them. The aff really isn't T, links hard to politics, and neoliberalism/cap probably solves case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phantom I'd like that backfile if you still have it.

 

I think the idea that teams will be going up there and saying we should disregard Guantanamo entirely in a discussion of our relation to Cuba because it isn't strictly economic engagement is probably a really good reason why this aff doesn't have to be strictly topical or topical at all.

 

Also in the real world of human rights and critical theory, it matters a lot less that there are 'mindset shifts' and more that we stop warrantlessly imprisoning and torturing people who are often completely innocent. Like even if the US doesn't completely stop being biopolitical (sorta not really Foucault's point anyway), that doesn't mean we should not criticize, resist, and try to overturn policies that are super fucked up.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one of those untopical things that will use college files...

if by this you mean this is one of those completely topical and core affs that will use college files...then you would be correct

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if by this you mean this is one of those completely topical and core affs that will use college files...then you would be correct

Except for that whole part of the resolution where it is not a <substantial increase in economic engagement> because it is a decrease, not increase, it's not economic, it's not engagement, and even if you win any of the previous it is not substantial.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except for that whole part of the resolution where it is not a <substantial increase in economic engagement> because it is a decrease, not increase, it's not economic, it's not engagement, and even if you win any of the previous it is not substantial.

substantial...that keeps me awake at night

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except for that whole part of the resolution where it is not a <substantial increase in economic engagement> because it is a decrease, not increase, it's not economic, it's not engagement, and even if you win any of the previous it is not substantial.

giving land to Cuba is EE

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

giving land to Cuba is EE

land is captial. if we give them capital, we are increasing from 0. Capital exchanges are clearly economic action and unless you plan on winning on a QPQ...then you better think of a better neg strat then just T for this aff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

land is captial. if we give them capital, we are increasing from 0. Capital exchanges are clearly economic action and unless you plan on winning on a QPQ...then you better think of a better neg strat then just T for this aff. 

#1: Trade with Cuba is not 0, agriculture and medical exports to Cuba do occur. We only pay 4,085 a month for Guantanamo, so ending the lease is not close to substantial.

#2 The evidence on why Gitmo is not topical is 10x better than it is, and labeling something as nebulous as "capital, therefor topical" blows the lid off the topic and definitely triggers the 'impacts' on T. http://openev.debatecoaches.org/bin/download/2013/Northwestern/Venezuela%20QPQ%20Negative%20-%20Northwestern%202013%206WeekSeniors.docx

 

Edit: Also, counterplans shit on this aff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I care about T very much, but I'm curious, what's this aff's defense against T-economic engagement? 

 land transactions are economic engagement 

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...