Jump to content
JaredCroitoru

JaredCroitoru(aff) vs.MartyP(neg)

Recommended Posts

But don't you want "social improvement in all facets of life"

DID YOU EVEN READ STEINBERG???!!!

but

...

how can one make any decisions without esoteric argumentation at 350 wpm about ocean development

?

also

s/o to fools who read reid-brinkley in 8

and are white

and talk about deleuze 

and introna

lol

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but

...

how can one make any decisions without esoteric argumentation at 350 wpm about ocean development

?

also

s/o to fools who read reid-brinkley in 8

and are white

and talk about deleuze 

and introna

lol

To be fair Introna is life.  Definitely some of the greatest cards I've ever seen, and that's a fact.  Deleuze, eh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but

...

how can one make any decisions without esoteric argumentation at 350 wpm about ocean development

?

also

s/o to fools who read reid-brinkley in 8

and are white

and talk about deleuze 

and introna

lol

Lol, as if there are no Deleuzians that write about race and as if some of the more prominent anti-racist authors in debate (read: Moten) don't rely heavily on Deleuze.  

Edited by rteehas
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, I would love to judge. But, I did write this aff so I would probably be very biased. I'll try to be unbiased tho.

 

Second of all, this kinda is a camp file. I ran a local student-run camp in Boise this summer, and before one of the practice rounds, someone was like "I have this gay pirates aff, if we want to run it" and I was like "hell yeah I want to run that." It's changed a lot since then, but It started as a camp file.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, as if there are no Deleuzians that write about race and as if some of the more prominent anti-racist authors in debate (read: Moten) don't rely heavily on Deleuze.  

haha i get you

i agree

i'm just saying

dr. reid brinkley is talking about "HOW AFRICAN-AMERICAN POLICY DEBATERS NEGOTIATE REPRESENTATION THROUGH RACIAL PERFORMANCE AND STYLE,"

and i'm just saying when deleuze and guattari are like "yo, ecosophy, change our aesthetics" i don't see the connection

also i'm just teasing, i'm like #1 fan of levoswetz

you feel me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. What exactly is your "state bad" arg responding to?

2. I would love to hear an explanation of how a ballot aff is going to stop the persecution that my gay uncle experiences on a daily basis in San Fran?

3. How EXACTLY did I bracket out queers in my 1NC?

4. What happens if you have your violent revolt and it turns out you're wrong?  Won't innocent people get hurt?

5. It probably is in fact more fun to be a pirate than a politician.

6. Explain this "Dissent turns SS" arg

7. Give me a single line from your Appadurai ev that says what the card is tagged as saying

8- On the perm- What??

9- What makes you think I "ignore sexual oppression" in my K?

10- Your Hecker ev on FW says we need to stop academic theorizing and actually act to create tangible change.  Then what the hell are you doing here?  Because your aff seems like the exact academic theorizing that Hecker is criticizing for failing.

 

I might need one or two follow ups if that's alright.

Edited by MartyP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this framework block is a+

 

combines french speculative realist philosophers with an ACT UP manifesto from new york in 1990

lolol

 

who wrote this aff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. What exactly is your "state bad" arg responding to? FW INTERP  and the role of the ballot 

2. I would love to hear an explanation of how a ballot aff is going to stop the persecution that my gay uncle experiences on a daily basis in San Fran? Like an LBS EXAMPLE  of how the debate goes down we start with the arguement then we want to advocate for change in real-life , then thats when your Gay uncle starts to see the revolution we want then we create are personal advocacy abilities based off that. 

3. How EXACTLY did I bracket out queers in my 1NC? More towards the idea of how you negated it - your idea of how the Natives have a static identity

4. What happens if you have your violent revolt and it turns out you're wrong?  Won't innocent people get hurt?Restate the Question- What do you mean you're wrong"?

5. It probably is in fact more fun to be a pirate than a politician.

6. Explain this "Dissent turns SS" arg Thinking negating an arguement within a narrow-viewpoint

7. Give me a single line from your Appadurai ev that says what the card is tagged as saying : The warrants are being misunderstood , its much more towards the kritiks oversimplification of what is a "native " and even the term "Native " itself links you back to the kritik

8- On the perm- What??the 30% one 

9- What makes you think I "ignore sexual oppression" in my K?More towards how Your K is trying to classifying decolonization and the suffering of the those under these empire can not be solved by queering ,  you couldve test are method by just using Nieztche , Afropessism , how lack of Radicality or not Progressive enough , these are all different ideas of negating the 1AC

10- Your Hecker ev on FW says we need to stop academic theorizing and actually act to create tangible change.  Then what the hell are you doing here?  Because your aff seems like the exact academic theorizing that Hecker is criticizing for failing.

Use the answer on 2 here 

 Thats CHill 

btw after the round could you give personal comments of how i Did - really curious how to run this aff better and better 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1. What exactly is your "state bad" arg responding to? FW INTERP  and the role of the ballot 

2. I would love to hear an explanation of how a ballot aff is going to stop the persecution that my gay uncle experiences on a daily basis in San Fran? Like an LBS EXAMPLE  of how the debate goes down we start with the arguement then we want to advocate for change in real-life , then thats when your Gay uncle starts to see the revolution we want then we create are personal advocacy abilities based off that. 

​C'mon, my uncle isn't going to see shit that's going on in some vdebate on cross-x.com.  We've had arguments like yours for a while and they never spill over, the revolution never comes.  What makes you think you're going to create any change outside of the round?

3. How EXACTLY did I bracket out queers in my 1NC? More towards the idea of how you negated it - your idea of how the Natives have a static identity

Sorry this is on FW

4. What happens if you have your violent revolt and it turns out you're wrong?  Won't innocent people get hurt?Restate the Question- What do you mean you're wrong"?

If the thesis of your argument is wrong.  Lets say for a second that your aff does in fact justify genocide.  But you're fed up with talking, and fairness, and good decision making.  Isn't that dangerous?

5. It probably is in fact more fun to be a pirate than a politician.

6. Explain this "Dissent turns SS" arg Thinking negating an arguement within a narrow-viewpoint

7. Give me a single line from your Appadurai ev that says what the card is tagged as saying : The warrants are being misunderstood , its much more towards the kritiks oversimplification of what is a "native " and even the term "Native " itself links you back to the kritik

8- On the perm- What??the 30% one 

Yeah.  How does that figure into my thought experiment?  It seems to be taking my alt very literally.

9- What makes you think I "ignore sexual oppression" in my K?More towards how Your K is trying to classifying decolonization and the suffering of the those under these empire can not be solved by queering ,  you couldve test are method by just using Nieztche , Afropessism , how lack of Radicality or not Progressive enough , these are all different ideas of negating the 1AC

What? That's not my question.  On the K you said I ignore sexual oppression.  How do I do so?

10- Your Hecker ev on FW says we need to stop academic theorizing and actually act to create tangible change.  Then what the hell are you doing here?  Because your aff seems like the exact academic theorizing that Hecker is criticizing for failing.

Use the answer on 2 here 

​But doesn't that mean that academic theorizing and stuff like that ISN'T in fact bad and why your call to immediate action isn't necessary

 Thats CHill 

btw after the round could you give personal comments of how i Did - really curious how to run this aff better and better 

Sure

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

1. What exactly is your "state bad" arg responding to? FW INTERP  and the role of the ballot 

2. I would love to hear an explanation of how a ballot aff is going to stop the persecution that my gay uncle experiences on a daily basis in San Fran? Like an LBS EXAMPLE  of how the debate goes down we start with the arguement then we want to advocate for change in real-life , then thats when your Gay uncle starts to see the revolution we want then we create are personal advocacy abilities based off that. 

​C'mon, my uncle isn't going to see shit that's going on in some vdebate on cross-x.com.  We've had arguments like yours for a while and they never spill over, the revolution never comes.  What makes you think you're going to create any change outside of the round?

 

  Ok Vdebate are usally testing ground for arguements , then once more people start actually thinking arguements from a ceratain postionality that appeals to them actually and slowly and graudually so type of revolution occurs 

- and im Sorry if anything at all seemed offense 

 

-

3. How EXACTLY did I bracket out queers in my 1NC? More towards the idea of how you negated it - your idea of how the Natives have a static identity

Sorry this is on FW

4. What happens if you have your violent revolt and it turns out you're wrong?  Won't innocent people get hurt?Restate the Question- What do you mean you're wrong"?

If the thesis of your argument is wrong.  Lets say for a second that your aff does in fact justify genocide.  But you're fed up with talking, and fairness, and good decision making.  Isn't that dangerous?

 

Thats not dangerous we want to change what is classifiedd fairness and good decision making 

 

5. It probably is in fact more fun to be a pirate than a politician.

6. Explain this "Dissent turns SS" arg Thinking negating an arguement within a narrow-viewpoint

7. Give me a single line from your Appadurai ev that says what the card is tagged as saying : The warrants are being misunderstood , its much more towards the kritiks oversimplification of what is a "native " and even the term "Native " itself links you back to the kritik

8- On the perm- What??the 30% one 

Yeah.  How does that figure into my thought experiment?  It seems to be taking my alt very literally.

 it take literally action 

9- What makes you think I "ignore sexual oppression" in my K?More towards how Your K is trying to classifying decolonization and the suffering of the those under these empire can not be solved by queering ,  you couldve test are method by just using Nieztche , Afropessism , how lack of Radicality or not Progressive enough , these are all different ideas of negating the 1AC

What? That's not my question.  On the K you said I ignore sexual oppression.  How do I do so? Attempts to classify all suffering and your link of omission basically much more trys to classify all opression in one blanket

10- Your Hecker ev on FW says we need to stop academic theorizing and actually act to create tangible change.  Then what the hell are you doing here?  Because your aff seems like the exact academic theorizing that Hecker is criticizing for failing.

Use the answer on 2 here 

​But doesn't that mean that academic theorizing and stuff like that ISN'T in fact bad and why your call to immediate action isn't necessary

 

No its much more of are search for a middle ground , we first debate , theorize then create are real change 

 

 

 Thats CHill 

btw after the round could you give personal comments of how i Did - really curious how to run this aff better and better 

Sure

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

dr. reid brinkley is talking about "HOW AFRICAN-AMERICAN POLICY DEBATERS NEGOTIATE REPRESENTATION THROUGH RACIAL PERFORMANCE AND STYLE,"

 

The dissertation isnt entirely about that. There are multiple parts. The part that most debaters read in round is about how some debaters cant connect with traditional policy debate because of the violence they deal with. That section isnt necessarily specific to blacks in debate but more to just marginalized bodies in general. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The dissertation isnt entirely about that. There are multiple parts. The part that most debaters read in round is about how some debaters cant connect with traditional policy debate because of the violence they deal with. That section isnt necessarily specific to blacks in debate but more to just marginalized bodies in general. 

As long as they're talking about me, I should probably clarify.

The section of the glorious Dr Shanara Reid-Brinkley's dissertation that we read in debate is indicting the standard "policymaking stance" that comes in debate. We never learn to be activists, we learn to be war hawks throwing around terms like genocide and extinction and 350 wpm without blinking an eye. While the overwhelming majority is about black debaters, that part is specifically her kritik of policy debate writ large and has nothing to do with the actual alternative(s)(?) she proposes throughout the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

who wrote this aff?

 

 

 

Captain Asher and Captain Kyle would like to thank the following Co-Conspirators:

Jamie, Edward Teach, Nathan Jeschke, The Ron Paul Revolution, Nancy Kurshan, Johan, Pilot G-2s, Amanda, Jerry Rubin, That one hot British judge from Whitman, Harvey Milk, Jared Croitoru, Kurt Vonnegut, Canwen, our parents, David Rovics, Andy, The Beatles, Regner, Jack Kerouac, Paul Krassner, Captain Jack Sparrow, Ellie, Malcolm X, Captain Brittnay, David, Evan, Stan, Abbie Hoffman, The Terrorists, Arturo, and Miss Mahler.

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Debate has the power to spread ideas, and offers a space to affirm or negate certain types of speaking. Voting for an affirmation of pirate heterotopia shows the debate community and everybody who sees your ballot that you embrace this position and to you, this is what the debate space should represent. Lindsay VanLuvanee, explains:

VanLuvanee, Lindsay, Debate coach at ISU, 2011

Debate is a discursive activity and through wins and losses rewards and reprimands certain types of speaking. The debate community has never been too formalized about their eligibility standards, rather, in this community, it is largely about the audiences expectation, who speaks with credibility, who is eligible for the outrounds. Eligibility standards in debate are reinforced through embedded and often unquestioned cultural norms about what constitutes “good” and “bad” debate, connected to assumptions about credibility, “power,” speed, presence, and tradition. We are graded according to idealizations of the proper debate subject that, rather than being reasonable, appear practical, because of how we distribute success here through the ballot. The assumption that debate provides a space for commonality and agreement about the terms of the discussion ignore the various ways that debaters must negotiate their own subjectivity in order to speak in the first place. Many here have forwarded a belief in “objective standards of fairness” but this leads us to ask: “fair for who?” in the end, objective standards of fairness are better understood as culturally embedded norms about which subjects meet dominant standard.

 

 

Just wondering, where did you access this ev. I googled the text and there were no search results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been trying to figure that out myself. I got this card from a friend, then found out that I couldn't find the source. I don't use it anymore, but that friends insists it's not falsified. If anyone can figure out where this card's from, please inform me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been trying to figure that out myself. I got this card from a friend, then found out that I couldn't find the source. I don't use it anymore, but that friends insists it's not falsified. If anyone can figure out where this card's from, please inform me.

It might be from an email or some form of correspondence that isn't public

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wondering, where did you access this ev. I googled the text and there were no search results.

It might be from a video. I'm pretty sure Georgetown AM used a card from Wilderson's speech at the Irvine RR in Quarters(?) at NDT.

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...