Jump to content

Recommended Posts

To sum up my case really quick, It's a softer version of a K aff (to work better in traditional states/schools/ lay judges) revolving around repealing the one child policy. The plan text is literally just asking China to abolish the policy. Again, it's like half and half on traditional case and K Aff. The impacts and advantages are more K like. All I need to seal my last argument is that worldwide discourse (or just discourse itself) solves for all problems (or just that it solves generally). I've been digging through all the files my team has and I can't find anything that says it like that. I thought that maybe someone from a more progressive district could have more K type cards like that. Any help is appreciated :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't that already happen?

They've made it a two-child policy now. You can have a second child as long as one of the parents is an only child. Previously you could have a second child if the first one was a female or disabled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've made it a two-child policy now. You can have a second child as long as one of the parents is an only child. Previously you could have a second child if the first one was a female or disabled.

Ah, I see. Then, if I understand you correctly, your case is attempting to get China to abolish child quantity regulation entirely?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, I see. Then, if I understand you correctly, your case is attempting to get China to abolish child quantity regulation entirely?

Yes. The specific plan text is- "Thus we present the plan: Resolved: The United States Federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with the People’s Republic of China by asking China to completely abolish their two-child policy.

 

We claim the right to fiat and clarification"

 

I'm literally asking china to and through the endless powers of fiat, they will. (Besides, circumvention arguments are tedious)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't fiat China - Make sure the "China says yes" ev is good, or you claim advantages from simply asking, which is a sketchy idea in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. The specific plan text is- "Thus we present the plan: Resolved: The United States Federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with the People’s Republic of China by asking China to completely abolish their two-child policy.

 

We claim the right to fiat and clarification"

 

I'm literally asking china to and through the endless powers of fiat, they will. (Besides, circumvention arguments are tedious)

You've prepped out extensive responses to China Says No and International Fiat Bad, yes? You're essentially fiating away a big part of your solvency (namely, anything that isn't solved merely by the act of asking the question), and most people aren't going to buy that by default.

 

Anyway, what exactly are your harms? Your original post says, "all problems," but that's a bit vague - can you be more specific? I'll happily do a bit of digging to help you out.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've prepped out extensive responses to China Says No and International Fiat Bad, yes? You're essentially fiating away a big part of your solvency (namely, anything that isn't solved merely by the act of asking the question), and most people aren't going to buy that by default.

 

Anyway, what exactly are your harms? Your original post says, "all problems," but that's a bit vague - can you be more specific? I'll happily do a bit of digging to help you out.

As for discourse in general its more about opening discourse within sino-american relations and the world. At that point when everyone knows more about the issue and the underlying effects, it either A) pressures china into repealing it and/or B) ( if the neg rejects the claim to fiat) makes more countries aware of the problem cause more "peer pressure" to abolish it.

 

My first advantage (harm, whatever you want to call it) is violence against women ( forced sterilization, forced late term abortions, female infanticide, abandonment). The second I have planned is an elderly/job advantage. China doesn't have enough people to take care of its elderly population or fill the jobs that they are retiring from. I was thinking about another advantage, but haven't had any earthshattering idead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't fiat China - Make sure the "China says yes" ev is good, or you claim advantages from simply asking, which is a sketchy idea in my opinion.

I kind of putting them in a double bind. I'm claiming advantages that are benefitted from the two child policy being repealed and also claiming discourse as a type of quasi-advantage. This is all if they accept my fiat and assume the plan passes. If they want to deny fiat and argue that China won't simply repeal the two child policy, Then I pull the idea that if we are actually roleplaying as policymakers (as we should), we have now opened up discourse within sino-american politics and now put international pressure on China to repeal it anyway. But this is only possible in the aff world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of putting them in a double bind. I'm claiming advantages that are benefitted from the two child policy being repealed and also claiming discourse as a type of quasi-advantage. This is all if they accept my fiat and assume the plan passes. If they want to deny fiat and argue that China won't simply repeal the two child policy, Then I pull the idea that if we are actually roleplaying as policymakers (as we should), we have now opened up discourse within sino-american politics and now put international pressure on China to repeal it anyway. But this is only possible in the aff world.

You're working with some pretty complex theoretical concepts here. If you don't mind, could you post the 1AC and relevant 2AC extensions to this thread - or, failing that, move this conversation to a private message for the same purpose? I don't feel comfortable giving you any more specific advice without seeing exactly how your arguments interact with each other.

Edited by CynicClinic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google "feminist rhetoric and importance of language."  Or something very similar.

 

You aren't going to get one child, but presumably you're speaking of something with respect to either Feminism or Foucault.  Use whichever framework you are claiming your impact in.

 

You might look at the ways in which language or policy language includes/excludes (because its a T and framework argument).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd suggest you look into the specific abortion laws in china (I believe it is called Yousheng?) that concern this policy, and incorporate that into the plan. It's better to have a more specific plan text so you don't get hit on that framework stuff from debaters like me. As for solvency, yeah I have to agree with NickDB8 that you really can't fiat away that much, and that discourse in and of itself is really easy to characterize as doing very little (eg: Discourse with my friends over healthy lifestyles probably isn't going to change the fact that I don't exercise and eat junk food 24/7). The way I'd personally take solvency is maybe through some sort of Heg argument (e.g: US economic and political hegemony over china causes them to comply for fear of backlash). I mean yeah you'd link into most Ks pretty hard because of using Heg but the Human Rights stuff already causes that so may as well.

 

as for your a third adv, you could do some sort of Pan/ThreatCon thing talking about how opening up Sino-American political discourse helps with breaking down discursive constructs of china as a threat and all that. However if you run Heg as solvency it's kind of a performance contradiction.

Edited by pdfox0513
  • Upvote 1

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...