Jump to content
Ausar

Need help for my Econ security k

Recommended Posts

So I have my link and impact made for next years topic, but I cannot think a good alternative advocacy to solve. I might need a few ideas to research. Thx!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I have my link and impact made for next years topic, but I cannot think a good alternative advocacy to solve. I might need a few ideas to research. Thx!

Can you explain what your argument is a little bit?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I talk about how any implementation of the China resolution is basically an example of economic securitization and I have a specific impact which talks about how Econ securitization is exclusively bad (something around reordering the world).

 

 

@flyingjakob thx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I talk about how any implementation of the China resolution is basically an example of economic securitization and I have a specific impact which talks about how Econ securitization is exclusively bad (something around reordering the world).

 

 

@flyingjakob thx

Isn't this a link of omission? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I talk about how any implementation of the China resolution is basically an example of economic securitization and I have a specific impact which talks about how Econ securitization is exclusively bad (something around reordering the world).

@flyingjakob thx

Maybe read that in a template 1NC version of the Kritik, but I would have some more specific things to read in the block like "The Affirmative constructs the threat of economic decline in terms of war and chaos" or "The Affirmative's economic positivism seeks to tame and control something that is dependent on too many factors" or "The Affirmative's over-regulation comes at the cost of any economic potential, crushing individual and business capacity, making the impact inevitable" or "The Affirmative's construction of China as a rising economic power is a guise for the spread of Western capitalism and the suppression of Chinese ideology." Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. Can I extend with normal "threat construction" bad scenarios, or will I be forced to stay within the economy?

 

Isn't this a link of omission? 

I don't think so, as the aff in this case tries to securitize the economy of the US, which actually triggers the link. I have seen a lot of K's this year that link not only by omission, but by not doing enough (e.g. you don't solve for all surveillance so u justify it and that's how we link) and I fail to see how that logic works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. Can I extend with normal "threat construction" bad scenarios, or will I be forced to stay within the economy?

 

I don't think so, as the aff in this case tries to securitize the economy of the US, which actually triggers the link. I have seen a lot of K's this year that link not only by omission, but by not doing enough (e.g. you don't solve for all surveillance so u justify it and that's how we link) and I fail to see how that logic works.

 

Both omission and 'not doing enough' are bs links, and that anyone ever votes on them makes me sad.  There's a reason my current paradigm effectively says you must prove your argument for me to even vote on it.  I don't consider either of those proving a link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both omission and 'not doing enough' are bs links, and that anyone ever votes on them makes me sad.  There's a reason my current paradigm effectively says you must prove your argument for me to even vote on it.  I don't consider either of those proving a link.

Amend that I think that (and I think Squirreloid would agree) that they are not bogus links if you present a legitimate CP or alternative that solves. I would happily vote on a link of omission to "you don't solve for all surveillance" if the Neg defends anarchy as a CP or alt. But links of omission without a real competitive alt that does solve for the stated problem aren't very persuasive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amend that I think that (and I think Squirreloid would agree) that they are not bogus links if you present a legitimate CP or alternative that solves. I would happily vote on a link of omission to "you don't solve for all surveillance" if the Neg defends anarchy as a CP or alt. But links of omission without a real competitive alt that does solve for the stated problem aren't very persuasive.

It's still not competitive. Ending part of the surveillance state is not exclusive with dismantling all of it - the AFF is net better than the squo for the alternative. You need an offensive reason why reforming part of the state makes the rest of it harder to subvert. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's still not competitive. Ending part of the surveillance state is not exclusive with dismantling all of it - the AFF is net better than the squo for the alternative. You need an offensive reason why reforming part of the state makes the rest of it harder to subvert.

 

Correct. But most policy Affs have something to point to there that they use for impact defense. For example, if Aff only stops warrantless drone surveillance but allows warranted drone surveillance to avoid Terror DAs, you have something to stop the perm and show competitiveness. Or if Aff has any cards emphasizing a balance between security and civil rights, you have a solid answer to the perm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct. But most policy Affs have something to point to there that they use for impact defense. For example, if Aff only stops warrantless drone surveillance but allows warranted drone surveillance to avoid Terror DAs, you have something to stop the perm and show competitiveness. Or if Aff has any cards emphasizing a balance between security and civil rights, you have a solid answer to the perm.

How exactly is the drones scenario above a link of omission, as the Aff willingly maintains the warranted types of securitization (in this case drone surveillance) in practice which could be spun into a potential link.

 

 

Also, I must mention that most of the K alts that I went against only maintained competition by saying "reject the aff" which I blasted with theory.

Edited by Raj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I must mention that most of the K alts that I went against only maintained competition by saying "reject the aff" which I blasted with theory.

 

Well, most Ks are argued poorly.  I hate 'reject' alts with a passion 99.9% of the time, because they refuse to make the commitment their other evidence would seem to demand.  You need to do more than just reject the aff, you need to actually do something in some world (policy, real, whatever) which solves for the actual problems your K identifies.

 

Only a K with uniqueness can get away with a reject alt (or, for that matter, without an alt at all, because it's effectively a disad with non-utilitarian impacts).

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, most Ks are argued poorly.  I hate 'reject' alts with a passion 99.9% of the time, because they refuse to make the commitment their other evidence would seem to demand.  You need to do more than just reject the aff, you need to actually do something in some world (policy, real, whatever) which solves for the actual problems your K identifies.

 

Only a K with uniqueness can get away with a reject alt (or, for that matter, without an alt at all, because it's effectively a disad with non-utilitarian impacts).

that moment in the 2nr where the reject alt becomes the "u dropped the floating pic lololololol"

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...