Jump to content
TheSnowball

Counterplan Alternative

Recommended Posts

Hey all,

Can you run a counterplan as the alternative to your Kritik?

Thanks,

Rniv

Just curious, why? Like, in what situation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just curious, why? Like, in what situation?

 

Just a critical CP I guess. Really this is likely not functionally different from an alt except that it might do something more "policy-like". I could read a cap accelerationism K (pls don't do this) against a dam removal aff and have the CP just build like 100 more dams or something and that might work. 

 

 

EDIT: WHAT THE FUCK? 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerationism

 

"Contemporary accelerationist philosophy takes as its starting point the Deleuzo-Guattarian theory of deterritorialisation, aiming to identify, deepen, and radicalise the forces of deterritorialisation with a view to overcoming the countervailing tendencies that suppress the possibility of far-reaching social transformation." 

 

Are you shitting me? Can a DnG hack tell me if this is true, page numbers, citations, additional reading, etc? 

Edited by RainSilves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a critical CP I guess. Really this is likely not functionally different from an alt except that it might do something more "policy-like". I could read a cap accelerationism K (pls don't do this) against a dam removal aff and have the CP just build like 100 more dams or something and that might work. 

 

 

EDIT: WHAT THE FUCK? 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerationism

 

"Contemporary accelerationist philosophy takes as its starting point the Deleuzo-Guattarian theory of deterritorialisation, aiming to identify, deepen, and radicalise the forces of deterritorialisation with a view to overcoming the countervailing tendencies that suppress the possibility of far-reaching social transformation." 

 

Are you shitting me? Can a DnG hack tell me if this is true, page numbers, citations, additional reading, etc? 

 

Yeah, lots of accelerationists are Deleuzians. Here's a blog post on drugs, production, Deleuze, and accelerationism; here's a post on Deleuze, Nietzsche, and left accelerationism; here's an article on accelerationism that draws a bit on Anti-Oedipus and What is Philosophy?; the Wikipedia article cites p. 260 of Anti-Oedipus and also Robin Mckay's article "So, Accelerationism, What's All That About?"; Nick Land is something of a Deleuzian, insfoar as he's something of an anything at all. Really I just googled "Deleuze and Accelerationism" to find these though.

Edited by dancon25
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just curious, why? Like, in what situation?

It would be for a counterplan. Basically, Aff says "If we don't do something, we're gonna become a surveillance state" and I run biopower or whatever K that says "If we curtail surveillance we become a surveillance state" and concede their impacts. Then run a CP saying "The only other thing we could do that we're not gonna get screwed by is keeping surveillance the way it is now" then anything else I run as a Negative to decreasing surveillance is easy NB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be for a counterplan. Basically, Aff says "If we don't do something, we're gonna become a surveillance state" and I run biopower or whatever K that says "If we curtail surveillance we become a surveillance state" and concede their impacts. Then run a CP saying "The only other thing we could do that we're not gonna get screwed by is keeping surveillance the way it is now" then anything else I run as a Negative to decreasing surveillance is easy NB.

A couple things sound wrong with this, I'll reread this later

 

EDIT -- okay, so

 

1) The CP is just "keep surveillance the way it is now"  or simply "do nothing". This means you are defending the status quo. You don't need to (and shouldn't) call this a CP. The Neg always has the status quo as an option -- eg when you go for a DA, if you win the DA, it means that in the end the judge votes that the plan is a bad idea and nothing is done -- thus, the status quo.

 

2) A kritik is three parts -- Link, Impact, Alt (you know this already). I'm kind of wondering (since you seem new at debate, no offense) if you've heard the phrase "even if they win the alt, kick the alt and weigh it as a case turn". This means that the link/impact scenario is a turns case arg, but most of the time is a little dumb, so basically:

 

3) You want to rephrase your "K" as being a "case turn". To get the whole argument you wanted to get in (instead of reading 'we become a surveillance state, we'll concede your impacts as an impact to the K, and the alternative is a counterplan which is to keep the status quo'), you can go to Case and read "curtailling surveillance makes us become a surveillance state -- turns case" and then read your card, and that's it. Much more efficient and clean for both you and the judge.

 

I'm assuming you know what turns are -- in a sense, causing the aff's impacts to happen -- through link turns (they cause their impacts / their link chain is wrong), impact turns (their impact / closest internal link is actually good), and you'll also commonly hear DAs "turn the case" (doing the plan would cause the same impacts they are trying to prevent). Thus, a case turn is something you read on-case that's literally just like "doing the plan causes more of the harms" -- now that I re-read it it's kind of a link turn to case, but whatever you want to think of it as, read it on-case as a case turn.

 

That specific argument you mentioned on this topic sounds a bit like a circumvention argument (eg if you stop x surveillance the NSA will find loopholes and become stronger as a whole meaning the aff fails) -- I think I'm about to start a discussion thread on here about that arg.

Edited by deb8lover
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple things sound wrong with this, I'll reread this later

 

EDIT -- okay, so

 

1) The CP is just "keep surveillance the way it is now" or simply "do nothing". This means you are defending the status quo. You don't need to (and shouldn't) call this a CP. The Neg always has the status quo as an option -- eg when you go for a DA, if you win the DA, it means that in the end the judge votes that the plan is a bad idea and nothing is done -- thus, the status quo.

 

2) A kritik is three parts -- Link, Impact, Alt (you know this already). I'm kind of wondering (since you seem new at debate, no offense) if you've heard the phrase "even if they win the alt, kick the alt and weigh it as a case turn". This means that the link/impact scenario is a turns case arg, but most of the time is a little dumb, so basically:

 

3) You want to rephrase your "K" as being a "case turn". To get the whole argument you wanted to get in (instead of reading 'we become a surveillance state, we'll concede your impacts as an impact to the K, and the alternative is a counterplan which is to keep the status quo'), you can go to Case and read "curtailling surveillance makes us become a surveillance state -- turns case" and then read your card, and that's it. Much more efficient and clean for both you and the judge.

 

I'm assuming you know what turns are -- in a sense, causing the aff's impacts to happen -- through link turns (they cause their impacts / their link chain is wrong), impact turns (their impact / closest internal link is actually good), and you'll also commonly hear DAs "turn the case" (doing the plan would cause the same impacts they are trying to prevent). Thus, a case turn is something you read on-case that's literally just like "doing the plan causes more of the harms" -- now that I re-read it it's kind of a link turn to case, but whatever you want to think of it as, read it on-case as a case turn.

 

That specific argument you mentioned on this topic sounds a bit like a circumvention argument (eg if you stop x surveillance the NSA will find loopholes and become stronger as a whole meaning the aff fails) -- I think I'm about to start a discussion thread on here about that arg.

I agree with most of this, but I'm going to add a couple things (these might have been above, but I just skimmed):

1) I don't see how endorsing the SQ is either an alternative or a counterplan. Also, you will lose every single round on case is a DA to the "alt/cp". The alternative is the MOST important part of a K for me personally, but it is one of the most underutilized parts of criticisms.

 

2) you want the alt to be something that can access the 1AC but can't be accessed by the 1AC. This means a couple things: A.) you can get more specific offense to affs, B.) you have the ability to solve the aff, C.) you can get out of generic offense.

 

3) I really don't understand the example you provided earlier. Even if somehow decreasing surveillance led to bioptx, I think an alt of allowing surveillance is actually garbage and links harder to the K than the aff. At least the aff would be winning negative state action.

Edited by aram
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nick Land is something of a Deleuzian, insfoar as he's something of an anything at all.

how about a nazi

 

 

grey face no space

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how about a nazi

 

 

grey face no space

should I post my nick land is a nazi DA (yes it even has UQ) again? I read it once and didn't go for it but probably should've (we still won on T Oceans).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

should I post my nick land is a nazi DA (yes it even has UQ) again? I read it once and didn't go for it but probably should've (we still won on T Oceans).

A2: Land = Nazi

no

Land '12 Nick, former Lecturer in Continental Philosophy at Warwick University, Fanged Noumena ed. Ray Brassier and Robin Mackay "Making it with Death" Journal for the British Society for Phenomenology, 1993

 

Death is to0 simple, too fluid, too disdainful of races and fatherlands to have anything much to do with Nazis. Ressentiment was something they knew about, as was the aspiration to a mythic sacrifice, a Gotterdammerung that would inscribe them in the history books, but these things never stretch to dissolution desire. After all, lose control and you might end up fucking with a Jew, becoming effeminate, or creating something degenerate like a work of art. Does anyone really think that Nazism is like letting go? Thewileit's studies of Nazi body posture should be sufficient to disabuse one of such an absurdity. Nazism can turn you into a stiff before the messy passage into death.

making this argument means they link to it and we don't -- they can lose the debate on this card by itself... don't vote for anyone trying not to be a Nazi too hard...

Land '12 Nick, former Lecturer in Continental Philosophy at Warwick University, Fanged Noumena ed. Ray Brassier and Robin Mackay "Making it with Death" Journal for the British Society for Phenomenology, 1993

 

Trying not to be a Nazi approximates one to Nazism far more radically than any irresponsible impatience in destratification. Nazism might even be characterized as the pure politics of effort; the absolute dominion of the collective super-ego in annihilating rigor. Nothing could be more politically disastrous than the launching of a moral case against Nazism: Nazism is morality itself, heir to Europe's respectable history: that of witch-burnings, inquisitions and pogroms. To want to be in the right is the common substratum of morality and genocidal reaction; the same desire for repression - organized in terms of the disapproving gaze of the father - that Anti-Oedipus analyzes with such power. Who could imagine Nazism without daddy? And who could imagine daddy being pre-figured in the energetic unconscious?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

should I post my nick land is a nazi DA (yes it even has UQ) again? I read it once and didn't go for it but probably should've (we still won on T Oceans).

If you search the topics here, the whole 'he's a Nazi" thing is pretty clearly a blatant misinterpretation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you search the topics here, the whole 'he's a Nazi" thing is pretty clearly a blatant misinterpretation.

No he isn't literally a Nazi but calling him one is catchy. He is a neo-reactionary and his "Dark Enlightenment" is pretty fucked up. 

 

Bartlett 14 Jamie Bartlett Director of the Centre for the Analysis of Social Media at Demos, Specialises in online culture and the dark net. “Meet The Dark Enlightenment: sophisticated neo-fascism that's spreading fast on the net” The Telegraph January 20th 2014 http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/technology/jamiebartlett/100012093/meet-the-dark-enlightenment-sophisticated-neo-fascism-thats-spreading-fast-on-the-net/

"The neo-fascist bit lies in the view that races aren’t equal (they obsess over IQ testing and pseudoscience that they claim proves racial differences, like the Ku Klux Klan) and that women are primarily suited for domestic servitude. They call this "Human biodiversity" – a neat little euphemism. This links directly to their desire to be rid of democracy: because if people aren’t equal, why live in a society in which everyone is treated equally? "[that's not the whole card just part of it]

 

Also there's a lot of obscurantism which occurs when debating teams that read Land. This card is pretty good on how his vagueness can lead to either misinterpretation or seduction of individuals into racist philosophies (whether you call them Neo-Reactionary, neo-Nazi or neo-fascist)

Stanley 14 Tim Stanley, MA, Mphil, PhD in Modern History, “The 'neo-fascist' Dark Enlightenment is more sad than scary” The Telegraph Jan 22nd 2014 http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100255944/the-dark-enlightenment-is-more-sad-than-neo-fascist-scary/ PBM SME

This paragraph is actually contained within a vaguely negative critique of white nationalism, but it's hard to tell it's intention because a) Land can't write and B) he appears to have a lot of sympathy for the discourse of "whites as victims". Land probably thinks that he walks a semantic line between reason and racism. But even just trying to do that is an indication of myopia and an invitation for Nazis to endorse him. There is no line to be walked between reason and racism. Racism and biological determinism are unscientific and immoral, and they have no place in a sane philosophy. Jamie interprets the rise of the Dark Enlightenment in terms of a resurgence of historical fascism. He maybe right. But I also think it's an insight into how desperate elements of the Right have become. They believe they've lost the battle for control of the West and would now like to withdraw from democracy altogether. Some are driven into the arms of Putin, some into the Far, Far Right and some up trees with guns. As such, the Dark Enlightenment is probably more tragic than it is scary. Or, at least, let's hope it stays that way.

 

So yes, he's not a "Nazi" in the strict sense, and it is  misleading to call him one, however, his Dark Enlightenment is still racist/sexist/generally screwed up.

 

Also back in 93 he wrote for a site called Nazbol.net (standing for National Bolshevism) which may not be Nazist but is essentially the left wing version of Nazism (it came from the political philosophies of Ernst Junger, a member of the Nazi party).

 

And finally, even if he isn't a Nazi himself, he is certainly radically right wing, and displays racist tendencies. The authors I've read on this question tend to conclude that even if he is not a Nazi himself, his politics and his readings can lead to extreme right wing/nationalist ideologies. 

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...