Jump to content
CondoK

DnG

Recommended Posts

I attempted to run DnG for the first time while only being half way into cap and schiz. I plan on reading a lot more lit and working on the story of the K more but aside from thas Does anyone have any tips on running this K or any tricks that could be specifc to this K? And with that are there any args that are common against DnG and what would be the best way to answer them? I've only hit generic K args at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I attempted to run DnG for the first time while only being half way into cap and schiz. I plan on reading a lot more lit and working on the story of the K more but aside from thas Does anyone have any tips on running this K or any tricks that could be specifc to this K? And with that are there any args that are common against DnG and what would be the best way to answer them? I've only hit generic K args at this point.

First and foremost, running DnG in debate is not strategic

A. Construction of a value system is necessary for judging a round which Deleuze indicts, and it double turns the criticism

B. The argument that some limits can be good is very compelling, and thus drawing the line the way you have to for most link stories is very easy to beat

C. Microfascism bad is definitely a totalizing argument

 

Anyway, despite my inclinations to tell you to find a different author (Baudrillard/Lacan/Marx), the arguments I would prep are as follows: the stupid fight club turn about DnG, args about fluid identity bad for black and native bodies, co-option arguments, state good, limits inevitable, limits good, microfascism good, all of the things I said above, that one card about the Israeli military using Deleuze, and that card about Deleuze and Pol Pot. Other than that, its your generic K answers

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First and foremost, running DnG in debate is not strategic

A. Construction of a value system is necessary for judging a round which Deleuze indicts, and it double turns the criticism

B. The argument that some limits can be good is very compelling, and thus drawing the line the way you have to for most link stories is very easy to beat

C. Microfascism bad is definitely a totalizing argument

 

Anyway, despite my inclinations to tell you to find a different author (Baudrillard/Lacan/Marx), the arguments I would prep are as follows: the stupid fight club turn about DnG, args about fluid identity bad for black and native bodies, co-option arguments, state good, limits inevitable, limits good, microfascism good, all of the things I said above, that one card about the Israeli military using Deleuze, and that card about Deleuze and Pol Pot. Other than that, its your generic K answers

This is controversial - it has been argued that the Capitalism and Schizophrenia series had some form of normative value inscribed onto them 

Microfascism, I believe, was not something formally introduced until A Thousand Plateaus? There are other things you could discuss as being "impacts" from Anti-Oedipus; what I would recommend is to read the original work and look into secondary literature that actually attaches normative value onto their theories as well as provides an explicit "impact" to their works. For instance, Hardt and Negri, Franco "Bifo" Berardi, Brian Massumi, Puar, Moten (to an extent), etc. 

 

Reading DnG in debate is not strategic, I believe, because it requires too much explanation in order for them to make sense; with the time constraints inherent in debate, you're left with a very butchered form of their philosophy, which isn't really something I'd go for (or vote on if I were judging) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah fam running DnG is good if you have a judge that understands DnG

to respond to those three things

a.) saying deleuze criticizes value systems is a very shallow reading of deleuze. I'd say he doesn't provide an actual ethic, but rather seeks to describe the world. He criticizes certain value systems but not the idea of them as a whole

b.) Deleuze isn't only about limits

c.) A good deleuze debater won't rely on microfascism bad.

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...