Jump to content
SagarB123

What is "Unflinching Paradigmatic Analysis" and why is it a good alt for the AntiBlackness K?

Recommended Posts

Basically it means exposing the operation of anti-blackness. Unflinching basically means you don't get a perm (allowing any instance to continue would be a 'flinch' in debate terms, that's not what it really means I guess).

 

It's strategic in a debate sense because it reframes the debate to a UQ question: is the world anti black? If you win that blackness is ontological, then the aff was always already implicated in anti-blackness and their impacts don't matter, etc. This is strategic because people are really bad at the 'blackness is ontological' debate.

 

 

Now, that being said, the reason this K can be strategic is why it's scholarship is attacked by a lot of people in the academy , because the world rarely operates in such grand sweeping claims.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what does the Alt actually entail? Questioning the ethicacy of the State and Civil Society? If I ran the K, haven't I already come to the conclusion that the State and Civil Society?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what does the Alt actually entail? Questioning the ethicacy of the State and Civil Society? If I ran the K, haven't I already come to the conclusion that the State and Civil Society?

It's role to the ballot (absent arbitrary ROB nonsense debaters try to impose) is similar to Marx and historical materialism, ie if you win your history, it A) implicates the aff, B) is the ethical viewpoint that should be endorsed. It doesn't fit in well with the policy maker framework of judging (and is bolstered by the 'well obviously fiat isn't real so let's focus on epistemology first' line of argumentation common among K debates now).

Part of Wilderson's claim is that if the world is anti-black, the *only* ethical stance is through the 'grammar of anti-blackness' (another reason why it's not as widely cited as, say, Hartman or other more nuanced authors who aren't as sweeping) since it obviously (and perhaps intentionally) doesn't fit well within standard philosophic tradition.

Edited by SnarkosaurusRex
  • Upvote 2

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...