Jump to content
Jullianv1

Western Savior Complex K

Recommended Posts

Im sure this has been asked before- bur does anyone have anything on the western savior k? Like a structure or author?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the big thing that im trynig to figuire out is how itll work. If the plan says we need to aid china in their health problems or maybe something more radical like "build military presence to deter south china sea conflicts"- how do I argue a Kritik there? Does necropolitics work? I feel like there a big connection im missing- or an underlying premise. Why is helping China fight health problems "bad?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spanos might also be a good author. To (over)simplify his work, helping China with health problems is bad because it views the world as a series of problems in need of correction, justifying endless "humanitarian" intervention. All authors will obviously have their own perspectives, but most critiques of liberalism will end with "wars in the name of humanity"

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spanos might also be a good author. To (over)simplify his work, helping China with health problems is bad because it views the world as a series of problems in need of correction, justifying endless "humanitarian" intervention. All authors will obviously have their own perspectives, but most critiques of liberalism will end with "wars in the name of humanity"

That's not Spanos. He draws from Derrida, Heidegger, and Nietzsche crafting a rather totalizing and not very strategic critique of metaphysics based in the Pax Americana which claims that the "will to truth", i.e. the desire to make everything wholly transperant, the elimination of all enigma, etc. is what creates wars waged in the name of humanity. Spanos is an easier link to straight up policy affs instead of soft left affs for this reason. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spanos might also be a good author. To (over)simplify his work, helping China with health problems is bad because it views the world as a series of problems in need of correction, justifying endless "humanitarian" intervention. All authors will obviously have their own perspectives, but most critiques of liberalism will end with "wars in the name of humanity"

I cant seem to find anything by him? Are there any key articles I could search for? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im sure this has been asked before- bur does anyone have anything on the western savior k? Like a structure or author?

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think that you may be better off running a pure Orientalism K, with maybe a Western Savior tie in. Said has some pretty good stuff in the general vicinity, but I'm not sure it would check all of the boxes, so to speak. Good luck either way!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think that you may be better off running a pure Orientalism K, with maybe a Western Savior tie in. Said has some pretty good stuff in the general vicinity, but I'm not sure it would check all of the boxes, so to speak. Good luck either way!

 

You think so? What would that k look like? Would I argue the affs is perception is a skewed interpretation of the orient- or something along those lines

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  1. Hardt & Negri link the critiques like this into capitalism (this wouldn't really be my go to strategy)
  2. Critiques of culture bad.  (some anthropology theory stuff might talk about this)
  3. Post-colonialism bad
  4. Multiculturalism bad
  5. The west is the best.  Its like a ideology tradeoff DA.  (you can make a power vacuum argument, I'm almost sure.  For instance West leaves, some other nation like China or regional power fills the gap).
  6. US Internationalism good or US realism good (either one, but probably not both).  The later is probably the way to go I'm pretty sure.  This goes with the power vacuum argument. 
  7. The alternative is almost wholly unclear.  The idea that it could solve the aff is bunk.
  8. Does your aff use human rights?  Does it use western human rights?  Does it use them on people outside the west?
  9. In what ways might you liberate these movements instead of suppress them.
  10. Has US human rights promotion ever been effective in the past?  (probably with US AID or what is known as development assistance).  You might look at our democracy assistance in the past, because in terms of the K its functionally the same thing.
  11. What is the historical tradeoffs this K would cause.  What actions in the past are DAs to the K, it ideology or the alternative?  Are there any historical cases when the US being a savior to the world has been good and that people generally agree on or can you find evidence that this is the case.  (ie successful military interventions).  There are few of these, unfortunately.  There are some you would need to read a card for, but you're probably on the safe side to read a card. 
  12. I'm thinking in many cases the answer to Nayer (or Global/Local) should also answer this.  They are both forms of post-colonialism.  Note the securitization stuff probably won't, however.

You need to be able to answer the otherization, domination, and hippy dippy liberation claim of the alternative.

Edited by nathan_debate
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  1. Hardt & Negri link the critiques like this into capitalism (this wouldn't really be my go to strategy)
  2. Critiques of culture bad.  (some anthropology theory stuff might talk about this)
  3. Post-colonialism bad
  4. Multiculturalism bad
  5. The west is the best.  Its like a ideology tradeoff DA.  (you can make a power vacuum argument, I'm almost sure.  For instance West leaves, some other nation like China or regional power fills the gap).
  6. US Internationalism good or US realism good (either one, but probably not both).  The later is probably the way to go I'm pretty sure.  This goes with the power vacuum argument. 
  7. The alternative is almost wholly unclear.  The idea that it could solve the aff is bunk.
  8. Does your aff use human rights?  Does it use western human rights?  Does it use them on people outside the west?
  9. In what ways might you liberate these movements instead of suppress them.
  10. Has US human rights promotion ever been effective in the past?  (probably with US AID or what is known as development assistance).  You might look at our democracy assistance in the past, because in terms of the K its functionally the same thing.
  11. What is the historical tradeoffs this K would cause.  What actions in the past are DAs to the K, it ideology or the alternative?  Are there any historical cases when the US being a savior to the world has been good and that people generally agree on or can you find evidence that this is the case.  (ie successful military interventions).  There are few of these, unfortunately.  There are some you would need to read a card for, but you're probably on the safe side to read a card. 
  12. I'm thinking in many cases the answer to Nayer (or Global/Local) should also answer this.  They are both forms of post-colonialism.  Note the securitization stuff probably won't, however.

You need to be able to answer the otherization, domination, and hippy dippy liberation claim of the alternative.

 

There is a lot of good information in this, but I'm kinda confused on what the list means/what its in response to. I dont know which angle to approach it at- also can you clarify 6,7, and 12. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said US realism and US internationalism, but the theories without the US is sufficient.

Realism is power politics. 

Internationalism is being engaged and active internationally, generally through institutions. (for instance UN & treaties)

 

Most all alternatives are vague about the empowerment they provide and how they "solve" the case.  This one you kind of have to figure out yourself.

Also, the K has none of the mechanisms of the aff to solve the case--if movements, say non-western human rights movements could solve the case they would be solving it now.  The alternative would sever what makes solvency possible in the first place.

Also rejecting and re-thinking doesn't solve the case & the specific problems you outline.

Also, I would use specific arguments like "hege good" as a DA to their alternative.

 

Nayer or Nayar (also called Global/Local) is an argument about hegemonic countries hurting culture.  The overlap in the argument is rather significant in terms of how the arguments think about the US and the developing world (the developing world being what you typically call "the third world.")

 

If you go to any generic answers to K's file, it should have realism good in it.

 

Any other questions????

 

BTW, what is your aff?????

Edited by nathan_debate
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said US realism and US internationalism, but the theories without the US is sufficient.

Realism is power politics. 

Internationalism is being engaged and active internationally, generally through institutions. (for instance UN & treaties)

 

Most all alternatives are vague about the empowerment they provide and how they "solve" the case.  This one you kind of have to figure out yourself.

Also, the K has none of the mechanisms of the aff to solve the case--if movements, say non-western human rights movements could solve the case they would be solving it now.  The alternative would sever what makes solvency possible in the first place.

Also rejecting and re-thinking doesn't solve the case & the specific problems you outline.

Also, I would use specific arguments like "hege good" as a DA to their alternative.

 

Nayer or Nayar (also called Global/Local) is an argument about hegemonic countries hurting culture.  The overlap in the argument is rather significant in terms of how the arguments think about the US and the developing world (the developing world being what you typically call "the third world.")

 

If you go to any generic answers to K's file, it should have realism good in it.

 

Any other questions????

 

BTW, what is your aff?????

This was very helpful, but my post was FOR the kritik- not against it. However, everything you listed are important things to note when i write it/face it. Right now im working with freiren (kinda i think)- and I'm scartching my head for legitmate impacts. Ive been told "imperalism/colonaliams"- but that seems kinda counterintuitive. How would, for example, the U.S working with china to deal with STD problem or social issues actually link? I mean ig it could depend on their language

 

My AFF rn is reovlving around helping the jewish population in china. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was very helpful, but my post was FOR the kritik- not against it. However, everything you listed are important things to note when i write it/face it. Right now im working with freiren (kinda i think)- and I'm scartching my head for legitmate impacts. Ive been told "imperalism/colonaliams"- but that seems kinda counterintuitive. How would, for example, the U.S working with china to deal with STD problem or social issues actually link? I mean ig it could depend on their language

 

My AFF rn is reovlving around helping the jewish population in china. 

The thing with the type of critiques that you seem interested in (e.g. "Western Savior"-esque K's) is that they are not very generic in the sense that you cannot read them in every single instance, but only in particular instances in which the link is very blatant and does not require a lot of internal links, so to speak, in order to make sense. If you're not finding a connection between Freire and, to use your example, the U.S. working with China to deal with STD problems - then that probably means one of two things: Either you're not thinking hard enough/haven't researched enough or there simply isn't a link which means you should look into alternative strategies. 

 

Don't try to make a K "work" against a plan by reading links that are on a very slippery slope - forcing a link will require a lot of bullshitting and generalizations in part by you that'll inevitably result in a loss for you if the other team understands how weak the link is...

 

I'd recommend you look into Poor Eliza by Lauren Berlant once again - you appear to have some confusion on what she's saying based on your previous comment, I don't want to spoon feed you an explanation as that won't help you in the long-run so instead I'll recommend you skip the first few paragraphs where she discusses The King and I, about a page or so, and start reading from there. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be ready to answer realism: 

Jim George is good for that.

Threat Construction, which is out of a book called On Security, (although I don't think he uses the word realism all that much).  Its a critique of national security and security language.

 

Its just under $13 for a used copy plus $3.99 shipping.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Security-Ronnie-D-Lipschutz/dp/0231102712/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1469147828&sr=8-1&keywords=on+security

 

Reading that Nayar article might be helpful, although its much more complex I think than the Mutua one.  I'm sorry I don't have the title.  (if you have a decent backfile, this should be easy to find.  Although i would re-read the article to get the insight and to see the argument develop)

 

Finding some Bleiker evidence in the backfiles would be smart.  I think thats how you spell it (its the framework evidence).

 

Here is the Jim George book for $2.64 (if you have prime).  Shipping and handling is more if you don't.  But $8 for that book is pretty solid.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Discourses-Global-Politics-Reintroduction-International/dp/1555874460

 

So for about $20 you can get both books.  Both are incredibly applicable to debate.

 

I can't believe there isn't a more recent version.

Edited by nathan_debate
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×