Jump to content
Miro

LD Switching

Recommended Posts

Hello y'all!

 

There's a possibility that next year I may not have a partner, in which case I'll probably be doing LD debate. Thus, I just had some questions about LD debate in general/transitioning between the two. Here goes:

 

How difficult is it to transition between policy and LD-- I know that they both have spreading (in progressive circuits) and stuff, but I don't consider myself the best theory debater and I know LD has a lot of that?

 

How necessary is it to go to camp for competitive success/is it impossible to have competitive success as a first time LD'r if I've had success on the policy natcir?

 

Would I be able to get away with this whole LARPing thing/ and Ks and just apply backfiles and stuff that I already have?

 

Does anyone know how progressive the circuit is in maryland and/or VA?

 

Thanks!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the transition between ld and policy is not that bad- most people in ld read das, cps, and ks that are not as well developed so it sounds like would not be very much of a problem for you. If you happen to get into T debates, it sounds like you should be fine. However, with theory, you might have a problem. In the LD nat circuit, theory is used heavily and often. Often you will hear theory spikes in the 1ac, and 50% or more of the rounds will somehow have theory involved. Be prepared, LD is a different animal when it comes to theory- RVIs are fair game and are pretty much the excepted norm. metatheory is not uncommon either as a response to theory, and most of the theory debates you will have will be very muddled and unclear. 

LARPing is fine, although you will not have as much time to develop your position, and you will have to read util justifications in the aff, but you should be fine

you will have to learn how to answer ld frameworks if needed, but that shouldnt be a problem for you.

ks, backfiles, stuff you already have will probably be fine, although you will have to go for significant on case arguments a lot.

 

as for the maryland/VA circuit I don't know much being from Texas, however somebody from my lab was from VA and he did complain about the lack of circuit tournaments in your area. I know there is Wake, and Walt Whitman/capitol, but other than that you will probably more often than not have to travel to NY/NJ area or New England to get circuit tounaments. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Top Tips:

1) - You need better K links - sadly most topics dont pertain to the USFG or Policy Making,

2)- Framework debates are different.  Its more Util vs. Deon or some sort of philosophy etc.  Ultimately, make sure you have a standpoint and stick with it.

3) - K AFFs are pretty chill if you have the right judge.  There are more topic specific links and research required.

4)- Topicality and other typical theory stuff can be "RVI"s or blatant abuses ie the NEG reading two Ts and theory.  

5)- You can read DAs and CPs, but finding ev that is good for either links or permuation answers is hella difficult.

6) - SPEAKING is more important.  There is a lesser quality of judging which means your not always going to get quality judges.  Work on presentation, cross x, and closing lines of 2NR and 2AR

Good luck - AS a former LDer to a newcomer - welcome to the less deadly, - more annoying beast of debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've done LD, switched to policy, and now I coach LD on the Texas circuit, which is one of the most progressive ones. The switch isn't that bad, but you've got to be really cognizant of the changes you'll have to make.

 

You should start reconsidering pretty much everything you think about debate theory in light of the statistics about aff/neg wins and losses and in light of the different times & speech orders. Like everyone else says: RVIs are legit, aff usually gets presumption, there's a lot of very fast theory that's substantiated heavily early on, etc. It's a lot different. Theory's ridiculously common, so that's a skill you should brush up on. And never don't disclose!

 

Invest your time this summer into learning analytic moral and social/political philosophy. For instance, you should start considering the debates between liberal theorists like Rawls and Nozick, how they disagree with one another, and how communitarians disagree with liberalism. You should look into metaethics and understand error theory and other kinds of moral anti-realism and start learning reasons for and against moral realism. You would do really well to get a hold of books and articles on Kantian ethics (Korsgaard's great), virtue ethics (Foot's great), Nietzschean ethics (Katsafanas), and various strains of consequentialism (check the HS LD wiki for various authors). Your K authors will be fine as well, but it's often strategic to diversify what NCs you can break against certain kinds of AC frameworks (and to make sure you have tricky ACs that can adapt to a multitude of NCs, CP/DA strategies, and Ks on different topics).

 

On that note, writing cases for LD is totally different than in policy. You should familiarize yourself with how some of the best LDers arrange not only their cases but also their aff/neg strategies; ACs are usually best off when they begin with framework, have contention-level offense that connects affirming the rez (or your plan or advocacy) with your framework, and then reserve time for an underview that includes theory spikes against probable neg strategies and that establish things like "only the aff gets RVIs" or "presumption flips aff" and the like. Because judging can be spotty, you should get used to having long (5 minute) NCs in those situations as well as strats that consist of a very short NC and a CP and DA or Ks, or be ready to just concede framework and read 7 minutes of turns in the NC (and then be prepared to answer frivolous-but-dangerous theory like "Neg must defend a competitive framework" or "Neg must defend the converse of the resolution"). 

 

UNT Mean Green Workshops are really good for LD, and UTNIF isn't bad either. VBI and NSD are LD-specific camps that are widely celebrated as well. The debaters I coached went to VBI last summer and gained a lot from it.

 

Your area has a lot of good schools - Walt Whitman and the like that were mentioned above. Hopefully the judging is good too, but I don't know too much about it; I'm really just familiar with Texan high school debate.

 

Oh and 1ARs are way harder and require very quick, high-stakes strategic decisions during rounds. But a good 1AR is awesome to see executed.

 

Good luck! LD's fun and has its own unique benefits. I probably enjoy it more than policy, honestly, but a lot of that is because I'm interested in moral philosophy. It's got some structural problems (hence the theory bonanza) but it's a really great activity.

 

Edit: Mad respect for the DC kid adopting "y'all" btw

Edited by dancon25
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello y'all!

 

There's a possibility that next year I may not have a partner, in which case I'll probably be doing LD debate. Thus, I just had some questions about LD debate in general/transitioning between the two. Here goes:

 

How difficult is it to transition between policy and LD-- I know that they both have spreading (in progressive circuits) and stuff, but I don't consider myself the best theory debater and I know LD has a lot of that?

 

How necessary is it to go to camp for competitive success/is it impossible to have competitive success as a first time LD'r if I've had success on the policy natcir?

 

Would I be able to get away with this whole LARPing thing/ and Ks and just apply backfiles and stuff that I already have?

 

Does anyone know how progressive the circuit is in maryland and/or VA?

 

Thanks!

I can sort of speak to the VA circuit. It's meh. Judging a semi's round, I voted on 'You need a plan' theory against someone who refused to answer it 'on principle,' so it's not up to what I've heard and seen of national circuit LD. 

 

The new trick for this area is to run Wilderson on the aff and neg because no one knows how to answer it so that's something to watch out for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I coach Peninsula so maybe my view isn't the most universally applicable to the area where you'll do LD, but at the top level it's very similar.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can sort of speak to the VA circuit. It's meh. Judging a semi's round, I voted on 'You need a plan' theory against someone who refused to answer it 'on principle,' so it's not up to what I've heard and seen of national circuit LD. 

 

The new trick for this area is to run Wilderson on the aff and neg because no one knows how to answer it so that's something to watch out for.

 

"Calling my aff racist is theoretically illegit and a voting issue... if they read an RVI against me you should vote them down just for reading an RVI cus those are shitty and if they try to spike a double-RVI in the AC that's a triple RVI for being little shits and trying to pre-empt stuff also presumption goes to the 3rd "neutral" position that the judge can vote on that's endorsed by the permutation texts of the aff and is the equivalent of giving a double win to both teams" 

 

 

This is what progressive LD sounds like to me. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Calling my aff racist is theoretically illegit and a voting issue... if they read an RVI against me you should vote them down just for reading an RVI cus those are shitty and if they try to spike a double-RVI in the AC that's a triple RVI for being little shits and trying to pre-empt stuff also presumption goes to the 3rd "neutral" position that the judge can vote on that's endorsed by the permutation texts of the aff and is the equivalent of giving a double win to both teams" 

 

 

This is what progressive LD sounds like to me. 

Is this where I make a smug comment about policy or nah?

 

On a serious note, it would be nice if people would at least borrow evidence/shorten blocks from their policy debaters for things like that instead of just...doing whatever else they're doing now.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit: Mad respect for the DC kid adopting "y'all" btw

Haha thanks! I've mainly adopted it from the debate community/it's the easiest non-gendered plural pronoun.

 

Where should I go to learn LD basics?-- a lot of what i've found have been geared towards lay circuits or just "debate basics"

 

Next year is my senior year-- how necessary is it for me to go to camp to have any sort of competitive success if I do a lot of work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I threw together this thing. Can anyone tell me why it's terrible? It's just an AC framework thing and theory spikes. I don't really know if I'm doing it right I'm just trying to pick up from what I've seen on the wiki.

ld thing.docx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not entirely sure where to get LD basics, besides from just doing it or talking to LDers and looking at wikis & rounds. If you have friends that have gone to camp you should ask for their notes! Like everyone's said though, you really can just tailor what you've learned in policy to fit the LD style and format (including a lot of thinking about theory) and you'll be almost totally fine. The best you can get from here is basically just more in-depth knowledge of different relevant philosophical literature. Camps can help with all of these concerns too.

 

The framework looks fine! You should have a few sentences between the value and standard; usually people justify morality by reading a definition of "ought" that either indicates normative desirability or moral obligation. (There's not much more to it than that, really; occasionally there are reasons to prefer but that's usually uncontroversial.) You repeat yourself in the Bostrom tagline (the stuff after the tag is what the tag itself says after the em-dash). The Sunstein ev makes a good "no act/omission distinction" argument, which you should preemptively levy against intent-based frameworks like Kantianism (changing the #1 after Sunstein to make a "that means consequences matter" argument would be a better use of the time than the imperfect knowledge argument in my opinion). This is just nitpicking.

 

I think your first spike is trying to say something like "CX Checks" and "Frivolous theory bad" at once, but not really substantiating either claim; you may do better to write out both of those. The second one does a similar thing by combining "Reject the argument," "Only aff RVIs," and "Frivolous theory bad." You may do better to prioritize "Only aff RVIs" (Time skew and win/loss difference are good reasons); "Always reject the argument" is fine too , especially since even in T debates, rejecting the argument entails voting neg, but I don't think you've given a good reason why theory debates should be avoided or why they invite abuse (or, pressingly, why AC underview spikes don't themselves invite abuse). Another good idea is to stick with one well-warranted impact for all of your theory spikes and give reasons why it outweighs (fairness > education is an easier and more applicable debate to win in my opinion); this has the benefit of doing impact calc for your 1ARs and the drawback of letting the neg cross-apply your AC underview argument for the benefit of their own theory argument. Choice is yours, really.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an example of a plan aff to give you an idea of what in ld it would look like:

 

India 1AC
Part One is the Framework

I affirm the resolution, [Just governments ought to require employers to pay a living wage.]

Affirm is defined as to assert as true or valid. (Merriam-Webster) Negate is defined as to cause ineffective (Merriam-Webster). Ought is defined as a moral obligation. (Merriam-Webster). This has two implications. First, this means that the value as per the definition of ought is morality. Second, an obligation doesn’t have to be enacted upon in order to exist in the first place. I.E. I may have an obligation to go to my little brother’s birthday party but if I get in a car accident and can’t make it, the obligation doesn’t disappear it means that I am not able to fulfill the obligation. Just is defined as agreeing with what is considered morally right or good. (Merriam-Webster) Thus the value of justice and morality are synonymous, so don’t prefer either value to the other. Living wage is defined as an amount of money you are paid for a job that is large enough to provide you with the basic things (such as food and shelter) needed to live an acceptable life. (Merriam-Webster) Because the living wage is subjective upon a number of factors it requires parametric in order to be implemented so the affirmative must defend a plan. Also presume affirmative if there is no offense in the round because 1. The affirmative enters the round blind so the negative has the advantage of adaptability. 2. The affirmative has the time disadvantage because I must extend twice while refuting my opponents arguments in a shorter speech time twice with the 7-4-6-3 times skew. 3. Advantage of off cases because the affirmative constructive can’t read an off case, the negative has the ability to open multiple layers in the debate by reading off. Furthermore, in order to fulfill the role of the ballot, if the affirmative has enough defense on the negative off case, this should be a reason to vote the affirmative up considering the time skew.

Part 1 is the Framework

A.     Governments must act utilitarian.  

Gooden

(Robert. Philosopher at the Research School of the Social Sciences. Utilitarianism as Public Philosophy. 1995. pp 62-63.)

Consider, first, the argument from necessity. Public officials are obliged to make their choices under uncertainty, and uncertainty of a very special sort at that. All choices—public and private alike—are madeunder some degree of uncertainty, of course. But in the nature of things, private individuals will usually have more complete information [about] on the peculiarities of their own circumstances and on the ramifications that alternative possible choices might have on them. Public officials, in contrast, are relatively poorly informed as to the effects that their choices will have on individuals, one by one. What they typically do know are generalities: averages and aggregates. They know what will happen most often to most people as a result of their various possible choices. But that is all. That is enough to allow public policy-makers to use the utilitarian calculus—if they want to use it at all—to choose general rules of conduct. Knowing aggregates and averages, they can proceed to calculate the utility payoffs from adopting each alternative possible general rules.

 

B.   The moral equity of all person’s demands the state is ends based in its decision-making as a Meta constraint on all state action

Rakowski “Taking and Saving Lives” Columbia Law Review, Vol. 93, No. 5, (Jun., 1993), pp. 1063-1156 Published by: Columbia Law Review Association, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1122960

On one side, it presses toward the consequentialist view that individuals' status as moral equals requires that the number of people kept alive be maximized. Only in this way, the thought runs, can we give due weight to the fundamental equality of persons; to allow more deaths when we can ensure fewer is to treat some people as less valuable than others. Further, killing some to save others, or letting some die for that purpose, does not entail that those who are killed or left to their fate are being used merely as means to the well-being of others, as would be true if they were slain or left to drown merely to please people who would live anyway. They do, of course, in some cases serve as means. But they do not act merely as means. Those who die are no less ends than those who live. It is because they are also no more ends than others whose lives are in the balance that an impartial decision-maker must choose to save the more numerous group, even if she must kill to do so.

 

C.) Policies must maximize expected well-being Woller[1] ’97

Moreover, virtually all public policies entail some redistribution of economic or political resources, such that one group's gains must come at another group's ex- pense. Consequently, public policies in a democracy must be justified to the public, and especially to those who pay the costs of those policies. Such [but] justification cannot simply be assumed a priori by invoking some higher-order moral principle. Appeals to a priori moral principles, such as environmental preservation, also often fail to acknowledge that public policies inevitably entail trade-offs among competing values. Thus since policymakers cannot justify inherent value conflicts to the public in any philosophical sense, and since public policies inherently imply winners and losers, the policymakers' duty [is] to the public interest requires themto demonstrate thatthe redistributive effects and value trade-offs implied by their polices are somehow to the overall advantage of society. At the same time, deontologically based ethical systems have severe practical limitations as a basis for public policy. At best, [Also,] a priori moral principles provide only general guidance to ethical dilemmas in public affairs and do not themselves suggest appropriate public policies, and at worst, they create a regimen of regulatory unreasonableness while failing to adequately address the problem or actually making it worse.                                                                       

 

The standard is maximizing well-being.

Part Two is the Plan PLAN TEXT: India ought to require employers to pay a living wage. I reserve the right to clarify in CX. Varkkey and Mehta are the advocates:

Varkkey, Biju, and Khushi Mehta. "Minimum Wages in India: Issues and Concerns." Minimum Wages in India: Issues and Concerns. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Dec. 2014.

The Constitution of India envisages a just and humane society and accordingly gives place to the concept of living wage in the chapter on Directive Principles of State Policy. The Minimum Wages Act, 1948 is based on Article 43 of the Constitution of India which states that, "The State shall endeavour to secure by suitable legislation or economic organisation or in any other way to all workers, agricultural, industrial or otherwise, work, a living wage (emphasis added) conditions of work ensuring a decent standard of life and full enjoyment of leisure and social and cultural opportunities".

Part Three is the Advantages Advantage One: Small Businesses A.    India’s economy is controlled by small businesses.

Bernard, Christophe. "Family-owned Businesses – the Backbone of India's Economy." KPMG Family Business. KPMG International Cooperative, 25 Oct. 2013. Web. 29 Dec. 2014.

Speaking at the inauguration of this year’s Kerala Family Business Conclave in August 2013, Chairman and Managing Director of Kurlon Ltd, Kurlon Sudhakar Pai said that family-owned businesses form the backbone of the Indian economy. Explaining that these business account for almost two-thirds of India’s GDP, he noted that many of the companies in the country are run by families and that these organisations employ approximately half of the country’s work force, making them key players in the country’s economic growth. Organised by the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), the Kerala Business Conclave has been established as a platform to discuss the challenges and prospects of family-run businesses. With the Kerala Government aiming to provide impetus to home-grown industry and promote sustained entrepreneurial growth in the region, family business has gained an increased focus and importance. The role of family business in the economy There is also a need for young leaders to understand the role of their businesses in the Indian and global economies, and forums like the Conclave can help to facilitate this understanding. According to the CII’s Family Business Network (India chapter), the gross output of these family-run businesses [and] accounts for 90% of India’s industrial output, 79% of organised private sector employment, and 27% of overall employment, superseded only by the government and Public Sector Undertakings, companies in which the government own the majority of the equity.

This means that small businesses are key to the economy due to the amount they control.

B.     Employee turnover is detrimental to small businesses.

Hamel, Gregory. "The Effects of High Turnover in Companies." Small Business. Hearst Newspapers, n.d. Web. 29 Dec. 2014.

Productivity High rates of employee turnover can lead to lower worker productivity. Workers who have more experience at a certain company will be more aware of the company's policies, goals and how to fulfill their roles in the company. [First]New workers often require time to learn how to fulfill their roles; since companies with high turnover will tend to have [leading to] more inexperienced workers, they may also [and]  suffer from lower worker productivity. Small companies with few total employees may find it especially difficult to replace workers, as workers may fill a variety of different specialized roles. Customer Service [second] High turnover can harm a business's ability to retain customers and provide high-quality customer service. Customers may feel more comfortable talking to the same employees and customer service representatives over time. Personal relationships and familiarity can build customer loyalty. Small businesses are better positioned than large competitors to take advantage of this, but if workers are constantly leaving and being replaced by new ones, it may limit the ability of the business to form a strong rapport with customers. A 2008 study carried out by Zeynep Ton and Robert S. Huckman of the Harvard Business School on a major chain of retail bookstores found that higher employee turnover was associated with lower-quality customer service. Turnover Costs [Third] High rates of turnover lead to higher costs related to recruiting and training new employees. It costs businesses money to hire human resource workers to interview and hire candidates and training new workers can be a costly process that diverts skilled workers from revenue-generating activities. Experienced workers who have to frequently train new hires are less able to concentrate on their normal job duties. In a small business, the owner himself might have to train new employees. Profit The combined effect of the negatives that can result from high turnover may cause a firm to generate less profit. Anything that tends to increase costs or reduce productivity or revenue will tend to reduce profit. The Harvard Business School study by Zeynep Ton and Robert S. Huckman found that when stores experienced [with] higher turnover, they tended to have lower profit margins. A new business often takes months or years to achieve profitability and unexpected costs like high turnover can increase the time it takes a new venture to make a profit.

C.    Living wages leads to lower turnover rates for small businesses.

David Fairris et al 05 [Department of Economics, UC Riverside] and David Runsten [North American Integration and Development Center, UCLA] Carolina Briones and [Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy] and Jessica Goodheart [Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy], “Examining The Evidence The Impact of the Los Angeles Living Wage Ordinance on Workers and Businesses”, UCLA, 2005, AC

Methodology: Sample Size of 82 firms. The analysis comparing changes in turnover for living wage and non-living wage firms may be conducted in a control group setting with establishment controls for a variety of other factors that also affect turnover, such as union status and size. This control group analysis also shows that turnover decreased among living wage firms relative to nonliving wage firms. In order to conduct a multiple regression analysis, the change in turnover variable was converted to a numeric scale ranging from zero to two, with zero representing a decrease in turnover, one no change, and two an increase. The results of this analysis show that the mean turnover change score for living wage firms is lower than that of non-living wage firms, as shown in row one of Table 7-9.146

A wage increase may lead to a decrease in employee turnover for two different reasons. First, workers may value the job more at a higher wage level, and [makes workers] be less likely to leave voluntarily for a better-paying job. Also, a higher wage level may [and] attract more desirable employees into the hiring pool and enable firms to be more selective in their hiring. Hiring better qualified employees [which] may reduce the rate at which firms discharge employees for poor performance. The control group analysis measured changes in turnover for living wage and non-living wage firms by asking whether turnover increased, decreased or stayed the same. As shown in Table 7-8, although the majority of living wage affected firms experienced no changes in turnover, [Empirically] one-third [of living wage firms] did see a decrease in turnover, more than double the percentage for non-living wage firms. For the purposes of this study, turnover refers to the percentage of employees that quit or were fired on an annual basis.144 Living wage affected firms were asked specifically about changes in turnover for workers whose wages were increased due to the living wage.145

Advantage two: Caste system discrimination A.    The caste system’s discrimination can’t be openly addressed.

"With Reservations." The Economist. The Economist Newspaper, 06 Oct. 2007. Web. 30 Dec. 2014.

And despair he may. Practically no politician dares speak out against this caste-based racket for fear of being labelled an apologist for the caste system. Rather like guests at the Hotel California, those that join the list never leave—even one or two castes that were allegedly included by mistake. The surpassing example is Tamil Nadu, which reserves a total of 69% of government jobs: 1% for tribal people, 18% for dalits, 30% for the OBCs and 20% for a subset of them—members of castes once categorised by British colonisers as “criminal tribes” and now known more delicately as “denotified communities”. There is little opposition to this policy in Tamil Nadu, for two reasons. It is one of India's more literate and prosperous states. And low-caste Hindus are unusually prominent in Tamil Nadu, which suggests to reservationists that the policy is working well. Textiles companies in Tirupur, a T-shirt hub, for example, are mostly owned by gounders, members of a peasant caste that is officially listed as an OBC.

B.     The effects of the Caste-System

Rao, Jasmine. "The Caste System: Effects on Poverty in India, Nepal and Sri Lanka." The Caste System: Effects on Poverty in India, Nepal and Sri Lanka 1.2 (2010): 97-106. He Caste System: Effects on Poverty in India, Nepal and Sri Lanka. Global Majority E-Journal. Web. 30 Dec. 2014.

The caste system that was established in India forced many people who belong to the lower castes into poverty. There are approximately 180 million to 220 million people who are considered to be in the lowest caste in India (Ninian, 2008). These lower castes or ―Dalits [into poverty] (broken people) are essentially shunned from society (Thekaekara, 2005). It is not that they have earned such isolation, they ―experience absolute exclusion from the cradle to the grave‖ (Thekaekara, 2005). Many [Dalitas] are forbidden to hold jobs because their caste may be one of an untouchable, or a person with basically no rights. Out of the 180-220 million Dalits, 40 million are essentially doing slave labor because they must work off the debts of their ancestors (Ninian, 2008). These people are taught to expect nothing in life but to work all day in the sun and hope that someone will buy their labor or produce, which is in fact uncommon because those of higher castes often refuse to touch anything an untouchable has touched. This practice is due to the reasoning that people feared that even a simple glance at an untouchable could pollute your standing in a higher caste position and aid in the eventual downgrade of caste in the next life (Standing, 2007). Because of this discrimination and work bondage, it is [makes it]difficult for many people of a lower caste to have a steady income, therefore keeping them in extreme poverty.

C.      Dehumanization destroys the value to life and outweighs all impacts

David Berube, 1997 Professor of Communication Studies and Associate Director of NanoScience and Technology Studies at University of South Carolina

"NANOTECHNOLOGICAL PROLONGEVITY: The Down Side,"

This means-ends dispute is at the core of Montagu and Matson's treatise on the dehumanization [‘s] of humanity. They warn: "its destructive toll is already greater than that of any war, plague, famine, or natural calamity on record -- and its potential danger to the quality of life and the fabric of civilized society is beyond calculation. For that reason this sickness of the soul might well be called the Fifth Horseman of the Apocalypse.... Behind the genocide of the holocaust lay a dehumanized thought; beneath the menticide of deviants and dissidents... in the cuckoo's next of America, lies a dehumanized image of man... (Montagu & Matson, 1983, p. xi-xii). While it may never be possible to quantify the impact dehumanizing ethics may have had on humanity, it is safe to conclude the foundations of humanness offer great opportunities which would be foregone. When we calculate the actual losses and the virtual benefits, we approach a nearly inestimable value greater than any tools which we can currently use to measure it. Dehumanization is nuclear war, environmental apocalypse, and international genocide. When people become things, they become dispensable. When people are dispensable, any and every atrocity can be justified. Once justified, they seem to be inevitable for every epoch has evil and dehumanization is evil's most powerful weapon

Advantage Three: Poverty A.     India’s workers are impoverished.

Bhowmick, Nilanjana. "India Is Home to More Poor People Than Anywhere Else on Earth." Time. Time, 17 July 2014. Web. 29 Dec. 2014.

One third of the world’s 1.2 billion poorest people live in India, according to the latest Millennium Development Goals report by the U.N. India only managed to reduce its poverty rate (the ratio of the number of people who fall below the poverty line and a country’s total population) from 49.4% in 1994 to 42% in 2005 and 32.7% in 2010. By contrast, regional rival China brought it down from 60% in 1990 to an impressive 16% in 2005 and just 12% in 2010. India also accounted for the highest number of under-five deaths in the world in 2012, with 1.4 million children not reaching their fifth birthday.

B.      Poverty is the worst form of violence.

Abu-Jamal, prominent social activist and author, ‘98 [A Quiet and Deadly Violence, Sept 19, http://www.flashpoints.net/mQuietDeadlyViolence.html]
The deadliest form of violence is poverty. --Ghandi It has often been observed that America is a truly violent nation, as shown by the thousands of cases of social and communal violence that occurs daily in the nation. Every year, some 20,000 people are killed by others, and additional 20,000 folks kill themselves. Add to this the nonlethal violence that Americans daily inflict on each other, and we begin to see the tracings of a nation immersed in a fever of violence. But, as remarkable, and harrowing as this level and degree of violence is, it is, by far, not the most violent features of living in the midst of the American empireWe live, equally immersed, and to a deeper degree, in a nation that condones and ignores wide-ranging "structural' violence, of a kind that destroys human life with a breathtaking ruthlessness. Former Massachusetts prison official and writer, Dr. James Gilligan observes; By "structural violence" I mean the increased rates of death and disability suffered by those who occupy the bottom rungs of society, as contrasted by those who are above them. Those excess deaths (or at least a demonstrably large proportion of them) are a function of the class structure; and that structure is itself a product of society's collective human choices, concerning how to distribute the collective wealth of the society. These are not acts of God. I am contrasting "structural" with "behavioral violence" by which I mean the non-natural deaths and injuries that are caused by specific behavioral actions of individuals against individualssuch as the deaths we attribute to homicide, suicide, soldiers in warfare, capital punishment, and so on. --(Gilligan, J., MD, Violence: Reflections On a National Epidemic (New York: Vintage, 1996), 192.) This form of violence, not covered by any of the majoritarian, corporate, ruling-class protected media, is invisible to us and because of its invisibility, all the more insidious. How dangerous is it--really? Gilligan notes: [E]very fifteen years, on the average, as many people die because of relative poverty as would be killed in a nuclear war that caused 232 million deaths; and every single year, two to three times as many people die from poverty throughout the world as were killed by the Nazi genocide of the Jews over a six-year period. This is, in effect, the equivalent of an ongoing, unending, in fact accelerating, thermonuclear war, or genocide on the weak and poor every year of every decade, throughout the world.[Gilligan, p. 196] Worse still, in a thoroughly capitalist society, much of that violence became internalized, turned back on the Self, because, in a society based on the priority of wealth, those who own nothing are taught to loathe themselves, as if something is inherently wrong with themselves, instead of the social order that promotes this self-loathing. This intense self-hatred was often manifested in familial violence as when the husband beats the wife, the wife smacks the son, and the kids fight each other.

 

C.      Living wages solve for poverty.

Neumark and Adams 03

David, prof of econ @ UCI, edits several journals, started several institutes. Scott, director of grad studies @ Wisconsin-Milwaukee, co-editor of Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. “Do Living Wage Ordinances Reduce Urban Poverty?” The Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 38, No. 3 (Summer, 2003), pp. 490-521. [PDI]

It is worth considering whether the estimated effects on poverty are plausible, given the magnitudes of the wage effects noted earlier indicating that a similar 10 percent increase in the living wage boosts average wages of low-wage workers by only 0.7 percentage point. Of course no one is claiming that living wages lift a family from well below the poverty line to well above it. But living wages may help nudge some families over the poverty line, especially when we recognize that this estimated wage impact is an average effect, whereas the more likely scenario  Neumark and Adams, p. 25 is larger gains concentrated on fewer workers and families. For exampleif the 0.7 percentage  point average wage increase is concentrated on 10 percent of low-wage workers (1 percent of workers overall)then the implied wage increase for them is 7 percent. If we consider a worker earning the federal minimum, this translates into an earnings increase of $720 over the course of the year for a full-time worker; for a higher-wage worker the annual earnings increase would of course be larger. If the families of one-third of the affected workers (0.33 percent of all familiesare initially poor and are lifted above poverty, then the reduction of poverty would approximately equal the magnitudes implied by the poverty estimates noted in the previous paragraph; while one third may seem high, earnings gains of $800 or $900 or more are not out of the question. Thus, even coupled with some employment reductions, if a fair amount of the gains from living wages go to low-income families (and even more so if the losses fall more heavily on other families), it is possible that living wages on net lift a detectable number of families above the poverty line. 

Advantage 4: Disease A.) Poverty and disease have a relationship.

Rees, Anna. "Diseases and the Links to Poverty." RESET.to. RESET, Feb. 2013. Web. 30 Dec. 2014.

According to the World Bank, an estimated 1.2 billion live in extreme poverty (defined as those who live on less than 1,25 USD per day) worldwide. Running parallel to statistics about global poverty are statistics about infectious diseases. Terms such as “neglected tropical diseases” and “infectious diseases of poverty” are employed to define a number of infectious diseases more commonly found in areas where poverty is high. This list includes widely recognised diseases such as HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis as well as lesser-known ailments such as dengue, chagas disease and foodborne trematode infections. The relationship between poverty and diseases is emphatically intertwined however we paint with too broad a brush when we generalise that infection rates go down as poverty declines. This trend is not a given and spikes in infection rates do occur when disastrous events take place such as natural disasters or the outbreak of conflict. The chicken and the egg A common train of thought is that poverty is a driving force behind poor health and disease. While certainly not disputable, that fact reflects only one side of the argument and does not take into account the nuanced links between poverty and health. The fact of the matter is that the relationship between poverty and health is inextricably linked, presenting a chicken-an-egg situation where one seemingly exists, in part, because of the other. The Global Report for Research on Infectious Diseases of Poverty (put together by the European Commission, the World Health Organization and TDR) offers a clear rationale of this relationship “Poverty creates conditions that favour the spread of infectious diseases and prevents affected populations from obtaining adequate access to prevention and care. Ultimately, these diseases...disproportionately affect people living in poor or marginalized communities. Social, economic and biological factors interact to drive a vicious cycle of poverty and disease from which, for many people, there is no [can’t] escape.“ In short, poverty is instrumental in cultivating conditions that allow disease to spread. In turn, infectious diseases exacerbate certain factors that contribute to poverty. In many parts of the world, healthcare is not free nor is it cheap, placing huge financial stress on families who may already live under the poverty line. Potential job losses and/or time off work add to monetary burdens and have an adverse affect on economic development while children who lose their parents to infectious diseases face an increased risk of being exploited. One study released in late 2012 highlights the interdependent nature of poverty and disease, analysing the negative impact of infectious and parasitic diseases on economic development. The study also adds a third factor into this argument, taking into account the role that biodiversity plays in this area by noting that a lack of proper maintenance of natural flora and fauna led to an increase in cases of infectious diseases. Writing in the Public Library of Science Biology, the study’s authors state “Our model indicates that vector-borne and parasitic diseases (VBPDs) have systematically affected economic development. Importantly, we show that the burden of VBPDs is, in turn, determined by underlying ecological conditions. In particular, the model predicts that the burden of disease will rise as biodiversity falls.” Furthermore, the study outlined that maintaining healthy biodiversity and thriving natural environment could help reduce the impact of parasitic and infectious diseases. The big three: HIV/AIDS, Malaria and Tuberculosis The three [two] diseases mostly commonly linked to poverty—HIV/AIDS, Malaria and Tuberculosis—are the cause of six million deaths globally per year. HIV/AIDS More than 40 million people across the globe are infected with HIV/AIDS. Over 90 percent of people living with HIV/AIDS are located in developing countries. The Indian government estimates that approximately 2.4 million people are living with HIV/AIDS in the country, the majority of them aged between 15 and 49 years old. The World Bank notes that the occurrence of HIV/AIDS in states that are commonly listed as having high prevalence of the disease (such as Tamil Nadu) have been on a steady decline since 2007 while the reverse is happening in states that have commonly been marked as having a low prevalence of the disease (such as Chandigarh, Orissa and Kerala). See the World Bank's website for a detailed breakdown of HIV/AIDS in India. For a thorough anaylsis of HIV/AIDS throughout the world, head to the World Health Organization’s dedicated website. Malaria Malaria is attributable to one million deaths globally per year. Estimating the exact number of malaria cases in India has proven difficult. In late 2012, reports came out that projected India would experience a 50-75 percent drop in cases over the coming years while in early 2013, it was reported that estimates on the number of malaria-related deaths in India had been largely underestimated and were being recalculated (figures were not available at the time of writing). It is generally noted that India, Nigeria and Congo account for 40 percent of the world’s malaria cases. Tuberculosis Tuberculosis results in around two million deaths per year, 98 percent of which occur in developing countries. People infected with HIV are incredibly susceptible to contracting tuberculosis (which is an airborne disease) due the weakening of the immune system through the virus. Tuberculosis (TB) is one of the leading causes of death among HIV infected people in the developing world, accounting for about 13 percent of HIV-related deaths. (Not necessary but highly recommended) There are cures available though recently there has been an increase in the number of people contracting drug-resistant forms of TB. According to WHO, India accounts for one fifth of the world’s TB cases with around 2.3 million people being infected with the disease each year. An article in the Wall Street Journal published in 2012 outlined how one strain of drug-resistant TB had entered India, despite the country’s sophisticated approach to tackling the disease.

B.) Disease has capacity for extinction.

MacPhee RDE, Greenwood1  AD. Infectious Disease, Endangerment, and Extinction. International Journal of Evolutionary Biology 2013;2013:571939. doi:10.1155/2013/571939.

Infectious disease, especially virulent infectious disease, is commonly regarded as a cause of fluctuation or decline in biological populations. However, it is not generally considered as a primary factor in causing the actual endangerment or extinction of species. We review here the known historical examples in which disease has, or has been assumed to have had, a major deleterious impact on animal species, including extinction, and highlight some recent cases in which disease is the chief suspect in causing the outright endangerment of particular species. We conclude that the role of disease in historical extinctions at the population or species level may have been underestimated. Recent methodological breakthroughs may lead to a better understanding of the past and present roles of infectious disease in influencing population fitness and other parameters.

MacPhee RDE, Greenwood2  AD. Infectious Disease, Endangerment, and Extinction. International Journal of Evolutionary Biology 2013;2013:571939. doi:10.1155/2013/571939.

 

Although the fossil record clearly establishes that the fate of all species is to eventually die out, it is obvious from the same record that the rate of disappearance of individual species varies significantly [22]. As already noted, inferences about how (as opposed to when) an individual species disappeared must be developed inductively and retrospectively. An important guideline is that apparent causes of extinction that are diachronic (repeatedly affect species across time) are inherently more plausible than ones that are claimed to have occurred only once, or apply to only one taxon. Although this means that explanations about individual extinctions are not strictly testable, they can nevertheless be evaluated in terms of likelihood, which is the approach currently taken by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and several other conservation organizations interested in compiling extinction statistics [23, 24]. It is an accepted tenet in conservation biology that any severe, continuing threat to a species might eventually contribute to its extinction [25]. From this perspective, it is also accepted that diseases presenting with very high levels of mortality—as in the case of a highly transmissible infection that is newly emergent in a population—can cause outright endangerment. But are there conditions under which a disease, probably in combination with other threats, might so imperil a species to cause its complete disappearance? MacPhee and Marx [19] considered this issue from the standpoint of model pathogenic features that a disease-provoking organism might exhibit in forcing the extinction of a given species. These features include:

1.  a reservoir species presenting a stable carrier state for the pathogen,

2.  a high potential for causing infections in susceptible species, affecting critical age groups,

3.  a capacity for hyperlethality, defined here as mortality rates in the range of 50–75%.

Only under the most extreme conditions is it conceivable that a species would suffer extinction in a single epizootic event. Much more likely would be repeated outbreaks over a period of years gradually reducing the fitness level of the species, with final disappearance potentially caused by stochastic events (such as causally unassociated climate change). One way in which this condition might be achieved would be through a stable carrier (i.e., a species other than the target, living in similar circumstances in the same environment, and in which the infection is inapparent or at least sublethal). A well-studied example is the transfer of simian acquired immunodeficiency virus from one species of macaque to another [26]. Although this instance occurred under captive conditions, repeated outbreaks of distemper in lions and African wild dogs have long been thought to be due to transfer from domestic dogs (although the mechanism is debated; see [27]). Obviously, for a disease to have a very severe impact, it would be necessary for the pathogen to occur in highly lethal, aggressive strains that strongly impact the target species before attenuated strains arise and become common. High potential for causing infections in a susceptible species is usually associated with the ability to successfully enter the organism through a major portal, such as the respiratory tract, where it can be lodged and transmitted easily (e.g., via aerosol). To achieve hyperlethality and produce serious mortality, all age groups within a species would probably have to be susceptible, not just the very young or very old (or the immunocompromised), with death the usual outcome. In large-bodied mammals, a fundamental consideration is that any process that deleteriously affects young individuals will have a pronounced effect on survivorship because of the lengthy intervals in birth spacing [19]. Lethality in the range of 50–75% is obviously extremely high and thus extremely unusual, although historically seen in Ebola infections in humans and in experimental transmission studies from pigs to macaques [28]. High percentages may have also been achieved in rinderpest outbreaks among East African bovids in the early 20th century [29], although quantitative data on this are largely lacking. An important issue here, however, is whether pathogens causing this level of lethality could maintain themselves in nature long enough to seriously imperil a species. Speculatively, a possible outcome with hyperlethal infections producing a rapid, fatal outcome is that affected populations would be reduced to small numbers of widely dispersed and/or relatively or completely immune individuals. Under these circumstances, the epizootic would necessarily abate as it ran out of new hosts, leading to the conclusion that exceptionally lethal diseases cannot be indefinitely maintained in a population or species under normal circumstances. However, if reservoirs exist from which the pathogen could repeatedly emerge, in principle epizootics might resurge year after year until population sizes were reduced below viable levels (~50–500 individuals). At this point stochastic effects might intervene and lead to complete loss of the species. Among possible examples of this “perfect storm” of circumstances and consequences is the loss of Christmas Island rats, detailed elsewhere in this paper. Among birds, the severe impact of avian malaria on Hawaiian honeycreepers is also pertinent and discussed later in this paper. Although a number of honeycreeper species survive at high elevations, above the limit at which introduced Culex mosquitos can survive, there are multiple adventitious threats, such as deforestation and competition from invasive species, which add to their endangerment picture [30].

C.) Multi-resistant strains happens in developing countries.

Planta, Margaret B. "The Role of Poverty in Antimicrobial Resistance." JABFM. American Board of Family Medicine, n.d. Web. 30 Dec. 2014.

In developing countries with high mortality, infectious diseases remain the main cause of death.4 In 1990, an estimated 78% of the world's population lived in developing countries. In those countries, 23% of deaths were attributable to infectious and parasitic disease.5 Resistant bacteria have emerged in these developing countries. In 1996, in Bangladesh, over 95% of Shigella dysenteriae isolates were resistant to ampicillin, co-trimoxazole, and nalidixic acid, and up to 40% were resistant to mecillinam. 6 In Quetta, Pakistan, 69% of Salmonella typhi isolated from blood were multidrug resistant.7 In tropical countries, there has been an emergence of Streptococcus pneumoniae that is resistant to penicillin, cefotaxime, and chloramphenicol.8 Neisseria gonorrhoeae has developed strains resistant to penicillin, sulfonamides, tetracyclines, and fluoroquinolones.9 This problem of multidrug-resistant organisms in developing countries can also directly affect and threaten more developed countries (such as the United States) because international travel, driven by globalized trade, allows for easier dissemination of these strains. For example, penicillin-resistant and multidrug-resistant pneumococci, like the serotype 23F clone, have been found not only in Mexico, South Africa, South Korea, and Croatia, but also in Portugal, France, and the United States.10 Reasons for multidrug-resistant organisms in developing countries are numerous, but [include] the inadequate access to effective drugs, the unregulated manufacture and dispensation of antimicrobials, and the lack of money available to pay for appropriate, high-quality medications are some of the major poverty-driven factors contributing to antimicrobial resistance.1–3 In some developing countries, regulation of the manufacture of antibiotics may not exist to any extent that would assure the quality and potency of the medications. A 500-mg capsule of ciprofloxacin that was acquired locally in Vietnam was analyzed and found to contain the equivalent of only 20 mg of ciprofloxacin.2 Studies conducted in several other developing countries have also demonstrated counterfeit drugs with few or no active ingredients.3

Advantage 5:Terrorism

A.     Terrorism is caused by structural conditions created by social class divisions.

"Terrorism: Cause, Effects and the Search for Solutions Religious & Economic Conflict." Terrorism: Cause, Effects and the Search for Solutions Religious & Economic Conflict. Global Focus, n.d. Web. 29 Dec. 2014.

Violent political conflict can be categorized in terms of the motivation and aspirations of the combatants. 1. Political – In some cases the dissidents have what may best described as political motivations. It’s said that war is diplomacy by other means; violent political conflict could be described as politics by other means. The motivation may be to affect a political reform, or overthrow a regime perceived as illegitimate or lacking public trust and support. Terrorism may be used as to demonstrate the weakness and vulnerability of the regime, to reveal its inability to provide security, to provoke government repression to help recruit followers, and ultimately to force leaders from power. This motivation has been most common in Latin America, and would be typical where there is an oppressed majority population that is denied political influence. 2. CulturalThis motivation is most common in situations where an ethnic or religious group fears extermination, or loss of their common identity, language or culture. It may also be combined with political motives, where the rulers discriminate against the ethnic group in terms of jobs, economic opportunity or access to the political process. In the case of oppressed minorities, opposed by a strong, entrenched regime, terrorism may be seen as the only available option. This is especially true where demands for political reform are ignored, where there are few, if any, external allies, and where the regime resorts to collective punishment for what are seen as reasonable and justified demands. 3. Psychological – A surprising number of pro-government analysts favor this explanation, which asserts that some terrorists are unbalanced, violent individuals suffering some form of psychosis. Others may be egomaniacs driven to achieve recognition through violence, and who attract a following of other dysfunctional individuals. This characterization may be accurate in cases where terrorist appear to have no logical goal, or motivation, or a purpose that makes little sense to normal people. This can include cases where the goal is the psychological benefit achieved by vengeance (Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombing). Psychologically motivated terrorism is simply a criminal act, like serial killing, and doesn’t qualify for analysis as political violence.

B.     Terrorism is prominent in India.

Raghuraman, Shankar. "India Loses Maximum Lives to Terror except Iraq - The Times of India." The Times of India. Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd., 27 Aug. 2007. Web. 29 Dec. 2014.

In fact, India has since 2004 lost more lives to terrorist incidents than all of North America, South America, Central America, Europe and Eurasia put together. All of these vast swathes of the globe[. Every country but India has] lost a total of 3,280 lives in terrorist incidents between January 2004 and March this year. India alone lost 3,674 lives over the same period of three years and three months.

C.     Terrorism leads to nuclear disaster.

Brill, Kenneth C., and Kenneth N. Luongo. "Nuclear Terrorism: A Clear Danger." The New York Times. The New York Times, 15 Mar. 2012. Web. 29 Dec. 2014.

At least four terrorist groups, including Al Qaeda, have demonstrated interest in using a nuclear device. These groups operate in or near states with histories of questionable nuclear security practices. Terrorists do not need to steal a nuclear weapon. It is quite possible to [can] make an improvised nuclear device from highly enriched uranium or plutonium being used for civilian purposes. And there is a [or the] black market in such material. There have been 18 confirmed thefts or loss of weapons-usable nuclear material. In 2011, the Moldovan police broke up part of a smuggling ring attempting to sell highly enriched uranium; one member is thought to remain at large with a kilogram of this material. A terrorist nuclear explosion could kill hundreds of thousands, create billions of dollars in damages and undermine the global economy. Former Secretary General Kofi Annan of the United Nations said that an act of nuclear terrorism “would thrust tens of millions of people into dire poverty” and create “a second death toll throughout the developing world.”

 


[1] Gary Woller [bYU Prof., “An Overview by Gary Woller”, A Forum on the Role of Environmental Ethics, June 1997, pg. 10]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How difficult is it to transition between policy and LD-- I know that they both have spreading (in progressive circuits) and stuff, but I don't consider myself the best theory debater and I know LD has a lot of that?


 


The Transition is actually quite easy, but it does depend upon your circuit and style. You have to be able to adapt to different judges and debating styles, but this gets easier after a lot of practice. Theory is not quite as big as some people may want you to think it is. The thing about the nat circuit is that it's all ball game there, so LD gets a rep of theory every round. In my circuit of KS, it's very traditional and running a theory type arg here wouldn't get you very far. Also, the basics of policy are even more basic in LD.


 


How necessary is it to go to camp for competitive success/is it impossible to have competitive success as a first time LD'r if I've had success on the policy natcir?


 


Not necessary, unless you seriously want to win nationals. I've debated against and gone toe to toe with TOC qualifiers and quarterfinalists at nationals, and really it all comes down to how you adapt and how you react to the topic. You can't be one dimensional, but that's a whole other topic. I've gone to a short camp for LD and it was a little better than useless for what I plan to do in LD.


 


Would I be able to get away with this whole LARPing thing/ and Ks and just apply backfiles and stuff that I already have?


 


Again, depends on circuit for the K stuff. Lay, it's pushing it. You need to have good explanation. For example, I ran a neolib neg and even ran anti blackness once on aff - doesn't matter if you are good at tech or not in these lay rounds because it comes down to how you can explain your argument and what effect it has in the round. Nat'circuit, go nuts. Backfiles are OK, but you should do original research and make an aff and a neg case with evidence purely cut by you first before you head into something else.


 


Does anyone know how progressive the circuit is in maryland and/or VA?


No clue :(


 


If you have other questions, feel free to ask. This is going to be my last year of LD so I don't mind reminiscing.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does "triggering" and "linking into [a framework]" mean? Is there any equivalent forum like cross-x.com for LD?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does "triggering" and "linking into [a framework]" mean? Is there any equivalent forum like cross-x.com for LD?

Triggering can mean different things. If this is for theory or t, its just triggering the violation. For fw, this could mean either you cause some philosophical impact or this could mean that something you did in your last speech triggers reading an entirely new framework for your opponent(this is not very common). For a da or a cp this just means you cause the impact. for a k, this could mean that since you link, you trigger impacts of the k.

 

linking into a framework also has dual meanings as well-> on one hand this could mean the equivalent of conceding framework. For example, the 1nc could concede to the 1ac framework and just read offense that links into the 1ac framework/operates under the 1ac framework. the other scenario for linking into the framework is virtually the same as triggering for framework, you have caused some philosophical impact stemming from your opponent's framework.

 

finally, there is no equivalent cross-x for ld. honestly, cross-x can answer all of your questions. there are lders on this forum and the cxers can answer your questions just as well or well enough to serve your needs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh yeah i forgot-> triggering for theory spikes means that the 1nc has done something that violates one of the 1ac's theory spikes, thus triggering a full theory shell to be read in the 1ar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it abusive to read a plan and then justify the plan under a framework other than Util?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it abusive to read a plan and then justify the plan under a framework other than Util?

no.  I would imagine that must use util for plans t will not be read, thats just dumb. The plan will just function under a non-util calculus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey all! I made a preliminary trutil AC for the sept-oct topic and I was wondering if anybody not debating in my circuit would be willing to take a look at it and critique it.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i just wanted to say that all of the above advice was super helpful, particular dancons, and it is absolutely possible to switch from policy to circuit LD relatively seamlessly. I did it without a coach, having never gone to LD camp, and managed to qualify to the TOC and make it to late outrounds of large tournaments. there are not as many resources out there as policy, but circuitdebater is super helpful and people in the community are always willing to help you out. 

Edited by Miro
  • Upvote 3

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...