Jump to content
lolwut5

lolwut5 (A) v Theparanoiacmachine (N)

Recommended Posts

What's the word count limit? Idc what you want it to be, just set it 

 

 

1 - What is neoliberalism?

 

2 - Why vote aff?

 

3 - What does voting aff do?

 

4 - Is there a method to the 1AC?

 

5 - Why is extinction bad?

 

6 - Your aff makes a lot of claims about pedagogy - is it therefore a problem of ideology?

 

7 - How does an "eco-pedagogy" create an "inter-connectedness between the ocean and humans" - I guess, how do you NOT regard the ocean as an object with your "eco-pedagogy"

 

8 - Do you claim to solve the subject/object dichotomy or only the dichotomy between humans and oceans?

 

9 - Is there a role of the ballot within the 1AC?

 

10 - What is "the academy"

 

More questions later but that'll do for now 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the word count limit? Idc what you want it to be, just set it 

i'm getting 2398 for the 1AC, do you think 2500/1500 is good? :)

 

1 - What is neoliberalism? Neoliberalism is laissez-faire economic policies, like the ones that led to the great financial crisis of 2008, or status quo approaches to ocean development. 

 

2 - Why vote aff? You should vote aff if our pedagogy is good, because (and our last piece of Giroux ev talks about this) we think that we regain our agency when we "connect our knowledge with broader democratic concerns", and we think debate is a good space for critical resistance in the form of pedagogical imagination as such.

 

3 - What does voting aff do? Make me feel good. I guess, the ballot has no meaning, but the Aff is a good thing if you wanna hear about that... 

 

4 - Is there a method to the 1AC? I'm not sure what you mean by method?... ecopedagogy has a method, explained in the Kellner ev--current env education = BAD, we critique the 1.anthropocentric/mechanistic/instrumental SQ worldview 2. the political economy underlying current ocean dev 3. "big science and technology" harnessed without ethical/democratic vision. This -> individual transformation and collective action to make the world more sustainable and a better place to live in. 

 

5 - Why is extinction bad? Because living beings suffer and die. 

 

6 - Your aff makes a lot of claims about pedagogy - is it therefore a problem of ideology? Yeah, we make arguments about how there are attitudinal barriers. It's also obviously a material problem too. We think that both material organizing and changes in consciousness are key. 

 

7 - How does an "eco-pedagogy" create an "inter-connectedness between the ocean and humans" - I guess, how do you NOT regard the ocean as an object with your "eco-pedagogy" Because we view the ocean as a space (and NOT an object) of history/cultural and historical memory like our Steinberg ev describes, our argument is that this can probably lead to more holistic and less mechanistic policies than those of the SQ. It's as simple as regarding the ocean differently, I mean we can debate the merits of different views of the ocean. We also happen to think that neoliberalism/imperialism is bad. 

 

8 - Do you claim to solve the subject/object dichotomy or only the dichotomy between humans and oceans? We think that human ocean relations are a good starting point because that's what the resolution happens to be, but of course we think that we allow humans to live more harmoniously with nature in general. We don't make arguments necessarily about everyone suddenly abandoning the s/o dichotomy, because we think that's unrealistic, but we think that our pedagogy still accesses the human/human and human/nonhuman benefits of such a mindset shift

 

9 - Is there a role of the ballot within the 1AC? We think the role of the ballot is who has the best arguments at the end of the round. :) other ROBs tend to be arbitrary and self-serving

 

10 - What is "the academy" Higher ed, places of knowledge production more broadly

 

More questions later but that'll do for now cool beans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What's the word count limit? Idc what you want it to be, just set it 

i'm getting 2398 for the 1AC, do you think 2500/1500 is good? :)

 

yeah, but how do I check word count? lol

 

1 - What is neoliberalism? Neoliberalism is laissez-faire economic policies, like the ones that led to the great financial crisis of 2008, or status quo approaches to ocean development. 

 

Is that the interpretation that the aff defends?

 

2 - Why vote aff? You should vote aff if our pedagogy is good, because (and our last piece of Giroux ev talks about this) we think that we regain our agency when we "connect our knowledge with broader democratic concerns", and we think debate is a good space for critical resistance in the form of pedagogical imagination as such.

 

3 - What does voting aff do? Make me feel good. I guess, the ballot has no meaning, but the Aff is a good thing if you wanna hear about that... 

 

4 - Is there a method to the 1AC? I'm not sure what you mean by method?... ecopedagogy has a method, explained in the Kellner ev--current env education = BAD, we critique the 1.anthropocentric/mechanistic/instrumental SQ worldview 2. the political economy underlying current ocean dev 3. "big science and technology" harnessed without ethical/democratic vision. This -> individual transformation and collective action to make the world more sustainable and a better place to live in. 

 

What is the "political economy underlying current ocean dev"?

 

5 - Why is extinction bad? Because living beings suffer and die. 

 

What is death?

 

6 - Your aff makes a lot of claims about pedagogy - is it therefore a problem of ideology? Yeah, we make arguments about how there are attitudinal barriers. It's also obviously a material problem too. We think that both material organizing and changes in consciousness are key. 

 

7 - How does an "eco-pedagogy" create an "inter-connectedness between the ocean and humans" - I guess, how do you NOT regard the ocean as an object with your "eco-pedagogy" Because we view the ocean as a space (and NOT an object) of history/cultural and historical memory like our Steinberg ev describes, our argument is that this can probably lead to more holistic and less mechanistic policies than those of the SQ. It's as simple as regarding the ocean differently, I mean we can debate the merits of different views of the ocean. We also happen to think that neoliberalism/imperialism is bad. 

 

Does that mean that the aff views the ocean as a basis for human cultural development?

 

8 - Do you claim to solve the subject/object dichotomy or only the dichotomy between humans and oceans? We think that human ocean relations are a good starting point because that's what the resolution happens to be, but of course we think that we allow humans to live more harmoniously with nature in general. We don't make arguments necessarily about everyone suddenly abandoning the s/o dichotomy, because we think that's unrealistic, but we think that our pedagogy still accesses the human/human and human/nonhuman benefits of such a mindset shift

 

9 - Is there a role of the ballot within the 1AC? We think the role of the ballot is who has the best arguments at the end of the round. :) other ROBs tend to be arbitrary and self-serving

 

10 - What is "the academy" Higher ed, places of knowledge production more broadly

 

Does "the academy" include the debate space? 

 

More questions later but that'll do for now cool beans

 

 

Old questions were added question in the quote 

 

New questions:

 

Why is the debate space uniquely key to challenging squo forms of pedagogy?

 

Is neoliberalism an autonomous entity?

 

Why is this round uniquely key to your aff?

 

1NC after these (after I wake up and get myself ready lol)

Edited by Theparanoiacmachine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that the interpretation that the aff defends? Well, see the thing is neolib is hard to collapse down to a sentence or two of explanation, so we don't defend oversimplification, but we'd hope you agree neolib is a general trend towards self-regulating market control of society. That seem fair?

What is the "political economy underlying current ocean dev"? We analyze that. It's not one thing, obviously there are different motivating factors, the "overuse narrative" is one that our Steinberg ev describes as an overarching thing, but we think analyzing specificity is good too. 

What is death? We don't take a stance on what death is. That's up to you to figure out. 

Does that mean that the aff views the ocean as a basis for human cultural development? If say, the Makah think it is, sure, our point is corporatization of the oceans has taken away the human element of the oceans, and we need to realize that prioritizing profit over ecological and human well being is bad. I don't think the Aff takes a stance on what development would occur post plan other than that it wouldn't conform to the neoliberal/technocratic kind we describe in the 1AC inherency. 

Does "the academy" include the debate space? Probably not, but for this debate yeah we're pretending it is. You can read your silly University K and we'll Giroux impact turn you. ;) 

Why is the debate space uniquely key to challenging squo forms of pedagogy? Because it's the space you and me happen to be in.  

Is neoliberalism an autonomous entity? Neoliberalism is an idea, idk if that's an "autonomous entity," it's not like a magical unicorn goddess that makes the earth unsustainable, but it is a useful analytic for describing the way policies/plans/whatever cause the market to take over control. 

Why is this round uniquely key to your aff? Because this is the only round I've read this aff, and so 1. I gotta spread the knowledge yo and 2. I gotta start the movement

 

1NC after these (after I wake up and get myself ready lol) awesome. get some rest lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 - Your aff makes a lot of claims about pedagogy - is it therefore a problem of ideology?

I'm so down for a 1-off Spivak v. Cap debate.  I'll judge.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I'm so down for a 1-off Spivak v. Cap debate.  I'll judge.

 

 

i can judge too if thats cool w/ everyone
Edited by CharlieH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tomorrow morning!

 

Noob question but how do I check word count? 

 

use invisible mode + word count, click the bottom left of your word :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

use invisible mode + word count, click the bottom left of your word :)

I debate on a Mac, how would I find that?

 

1NC is ready but idk if the word count is passed or not lol 

 

Gonna say rn - it's a bunch of recycled evidence lul 

Edited by Theparanoiacmachine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I debate on a Mac, how would I find that?

 

1NC is ready but idk if the word count is passed or not lol 

 

Gonna say rn - it's a bunch of recycled evidence lul

 

Highlight all tags and relevant parts of the citation then go to

Find

Advanced find

Drop down arrow/menu

Highlight option

Select/find in main document (assuming it's a standalone speech)

 

In the word count at the bottom it should give you a fraction, the top number is the number of highlighted words aka the total number of words you'd 'read' in a speech if it was verbal (this is why you highlight tags and cites)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yolo

No Spivak? Automatic aff win.

Edited by MartyP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice 1NC. :)

GENERAL

-Status of the advocacies?

CASE

-Without an alternative, these are just alt cause arguments right?

-When this first piece of ev says Bataille is like just keep consuming, does that mean if consumption is bad Bataille thinks we should all kill ourselves?

-This ev is talking about Marxism---how is that the Aff?

-How does Baudrillard have any method besides "this is what I think yo"

-What if we agree 100% with the Baud's analysis of consumption being the driving force behind modern capitalism?

-How does resistance to capitalism strengthen capitalism?

1 OFF

-Link card: Is there a distinction between affect used to accelerate/decelerate productive processes?

-Does the 'digital capitalism' described in the Wiltgen evidence explain 

                       a. the exploitation/overuse of the oceans as narrated by the 1AC

OR                  b. anything other than changes in subjectivity in the digital revolution?

-Does the alternative result in any part of the affirmative?/Is it a floating PIK?

-How does exhausting debate resolve any of the case?

-More specifically, how does exhausting debate result in a citizenry able to mobilize knowledge production in the academy translating over to broader social movements?

-What does it mean to exhaust debate?

-If we prove that there is a material dimension (and not just a subjective dimension) to the harms the Aff describe, do we win?

2 OFF

-First piece of DnG ev says quote "the danger of a singular line of flight that chooses to not look for other lines of flight or stratum to achieve a seemingly benevolent end" -- this is confusing to me because I don't remember us anywhere claiming that we are the only way to resolve our harms, the whole point of ecopedagogy is 1. forming a critique and 2. developing alternatives to the system, we never actually prescribed any specific way to resolve the Aff. Resolve this tension for me.

-What is microfascism, and is the only link to the Aff that it (supposedly) prescribes one solution?

-Second piece of DnG ev-- when it says there are "unconscious libidinal investments," 1. what the f#$% does that mean 2. are you really saying that people desire their own subjugation 3. this ev seems to assume the barrier to class revolution is that people don't care, not that they are subjugated by people with guns... is that right?

-How does this K have any empirical/analytic validity?

-Successful nomadic forms of resistance? 

-Why doesn't 'perm do both' solve?

-Is this a floating PIK/can it result in the case?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also it's 2918 wordz.. a lil over the limit but that's OK :)

who cares, i shall take more for the 2AC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Spivak? Automatic aff win.

Spivak's criticism of anti-capitalist movements is, for the most part, centered around a Marxist methodology. I fail to see how a post-1AC world would be a Marxist society

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spivak doesn't link....

I disagree.

 

Spivak's criticism of anti-capitalist movements is, for the most part, centered around a Marxist methodology. I fail to see how a post-1AC world would be a Marxist society

While Spivak does go on extensively about a Marxist methodology, that's not all.  "Voting aff is an expression of solidarity with our ecopedagogical analysis" c'mon, Spivak expressly criticizes these sorts of totalitarian ethics that assume a homogenous subaltern, whether the working class, women, or those effected by ecological disaster.  Clear link.  Plus, all the stuff about creating movements is probably a link as well, Spivak also talks about how coalitions fail because they do not take into account ideology

Edited by MartyP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice 1NC. :)

GENERAL

-Status of the advocacies?

 

CONDITIONAL :D

 

CASE

-Without an alternative, these are just alt cause arguments right?

The Leonardo 03 evidence is says we should laugh in the face of oppression and exploitation as such and to consume if only to implode the system

 

-When this first piece of ev says Bataille is like just keep consuming, does that mean if consumption is bad Bataille thinks we should all kill ourselves?

Nah

 

-This ev is talking about Marxism---how is that the Aff?

 

Its not like guns blazing "I'M MARXIST FUCK W/ ME" but the method that you use to combat neoliberal pedagogy incorporates aspects of Marxism, for example your view of the ocean as a starting point for human relations as such

 

-How does Baudrillard have any method besides "this is what I think yo"

 

I don't quite understand what you're asking - Baudrillard's method is symbolic exchange and reversibility, he says that's what is lacking from the squo and is the reason why capitalist domination encapsulates the world into the Code of simulacrum 

 

-What if we agree 100% with the Baud's analysis of consumption being the driving force behind modern capitalism?

 

You can agree, doesn't get you out of the link doe

 

-How does resistance to capitalism strengthen capitalism?

 

this is like HARD AF to understand but I'll try my best - This ties back into the Bifo K, you give energy for the system to continue running, see the Code requires the death of the object and energy as such to continue running; we're gonna read some Robinson evidence in the block that talks about how movements CAN BE a part of the symbolic exchange from the start, but when if there's ever a telos (which is another link on the DnG K) then the code just redirects your struggles to the simulated real, which avoiding your frontal attack on the Code - it's kinda like your interpretation of neoliberaism is flawed, which is why your method won't work cuz you view neoliberalism as just some commodficatio of materiality, when it has evolved to territorialize semiotic investments (vacuous)

1 OFF

-Link card: Is there a distinction between affect used to accelerate/decelerate productive processes?

 

Nah

 

-Does the 'digital capitalism' described in the Wiltgen evidence explain 

                       a. the exploitation/overuse of the oceans as narrated by the 1AC

OR                  b. anything other than changes in subjectivity in the digital revolution?

 

It's more of a K of the performative value of the 1AC and how you are just another cog in the machine - it doesn't explain what you listed, but we'd argue that those forms of exploitation are contingent upon the Code because it is the Code that makes the simulacrum of Ocean

 

-Does the alternative result in any part of the affirmative?/Is it a floating PIK?

 

Nope, but we'd say that constant exhaustion lets the system die which means no more Code :D

 

-How does exhausting debate resolve any of the case?

 

It doesn't cuz your case is meaningless energy for the system 

 

-More specifically, how does exhausting debate result in a citizenry able to mobilize knowledge production in the academy translating over to broader social movements?

 

That's another link - "mobilize knowledge production" is exactly what we're critiquing cuz it just serves to give energy to a system that is already dying 

 

-What does it mean to exhaust debate?

 

It means STOP GIVING ENERYG TO THE CODE via Debate 

 

-If we prove that there is a material dimension (and not just a subjective dimension) to the harms the Aff describe, do we win?

 

Nah, cuz your aff doesn't resolve anything of that - I mean it's one thing to PROVE oppression, and it's another to solve it ;)

 

2 OFF

-First piece of DnG ev says quote "the danger of a singular line of flight that chooses to not look for other lines of flight or stratum to achieve a seemingly benevolent end" -- this is confusing to me because I don't remember us anywhere claiming that we are the only way to resolve our harms, the whole point of ecopedagogy is 1. forming a critique and 2. developing alternatives to the system, we never actually prescribed any specific way to resolve the Aff. Resolve this tension for me.

 

I mean, there's obviously more links but it's just that your method to get methods forecloses other methods (that has to be the worst link in existence tbh, but w/e lol)

 

-What is microfascism, and is the only link to the Aff that it (supposedly) prescribes one solution?

 

Micro-fascism are molecular black holes that people carry within themselves because of libidinal investments that were turned in on themselves; the State is anti-production which means it halts production, DnG view desire as revolutionary because of its ability to produce different assemblages, it is only when it is turned in on itself that micro-fascism props up, creating binaries as such 

 

Nah - 1st - Telos

 

2nd - Tautology 

 

3rd - Ideology

 

4th - You maintain the squo (explained in the block ;)

 

5th - Other links I'll read in the block

 

-Second piece of DnG ev-- when it says there are "unconscious libidinal investments," 1. what the f#$% does that mean 2. are you really saying that people desire their own subjugation 3. this ev seems to assume the barrier to class revolution is that people don't care, not that they are subjugated by people with guns... is that right?

 

Yeah; the evidence explains how there are unconscious libidinal investments (investments of desire) that can exist alongside a conscious revolutionary investment; the first link card talks about how it's VERY easy to claim to be anti-fascist (or anti-cap as such) on the molar level but not see the molecular fascism brewing with you - y'all are a politics of ressentiment breh

 

Nope, people literally desire their own repression 

 

-How does this K have any empirical/analytic validity?

 

DnG based their theories off of a reading of Marx, Freud, Bergson, Spinoza, Lacan, etc. that's your "empirical backing" ; besides, philosophy ought not be used for scientific perfectionism, that only destroys its essence; we have some sweet evidence that answers your "the k has no empirical backing" if you make that argument 

 

-Successful nomadic forms of resistance? 

 

None, cuz they haven't been tried; besides our K is about the here and the NOW

 

-Why doesn't 'perm do both' solve?

 

You incorporate the State-Appropriated War Machine via the links explained above, it should be noted that DnG conception of the State refers to not just the geopolitical entity, but is rather something like a chamber of resonation in which all micro political institutions resonate to produce a society of control (macro-fascism as such)

 

-Is this a floating PIK/can it result in the case?

 

Nah, WE IS A BETTER MULTIPLICITY 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

this is like HARD AF to understand but I'll try my best - This ties back into the Bifo K, you give energy for the system to continue running, see the Code requires the death of the object and energy as such to continue running; we're gonna read some Robinson evidence in the block that talks about how movements CAN BE a part of the symbolic exchange from the start, but when if there's ever a telos (which is another link on the DnG K) then the code just redirects your struggles to the simulated real, which avoiding your frontal attack on the Code - it's kinda like your interpretation of neoliberaism is flawed, which is why your method won't work cuz you view neoliberalism as just some commodficatio of materiality, when it has evolved to territorialize semiotic investments (vacuous)

 

419698.gif

  • 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...

×
×
  • Create New...