Jump to content
ClownFiestaInTheDebateRoom

A policy CP that claims to solve for some part of racism or something

Recommended Posts

i'd search for topical version of the aff blocks in a framework backfile.  tvas are a similar idea to what you're talking about––they could have been topical and not violated our perfectly reasonable framework without loosing any ground, that proves the thesis of the fw and takes out reasonability, so long as you win the voters.  you could even think of fairness/education as the net benefits to your fw and tva.

 

otherwise just find a solvency advocate for some sweeping anti-racism bill and go hard on state action k2 solve racism etc.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not necessarily, but that would be useful too. 

 

Honestly, against most race K affs, the thing the k as a whole is the state/civil society. i.e: Anti-Blackness is a K of the state, so using the state to fix Black ontological death doesn't really work and they'll turn the fuck outta you. That'll go for most race K affs on this topic. Maybe try PIKs? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, against most race K affs, the thing the k as a whole is the state/civil society. i.e: Anti-Blackness is a K of the state, so using the state to fix Black ontological death doesn't really work and they'll turn the fuck outta you. That'll go for most race K affs on this topic. Maybe try PIKs?

 

So whats the best way to answer anti blackness affs? SSD? But even then, if they win their claims about the state (which in this case means winning the thesis of the k), how can you argue they should defend a plan during aff rounds?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So whats the best way to answer anti blackness affs? SSD? But even then, if they win their claims about the state (which in this case means winning the thesis of the k), how can you argue they should defend a plan during aff rounds?

 

Win framework. Honestly though against most K teams you'd be better off reading a counter-k and turns on the K than just going all in on the FW debate. So like if it's an afropess aff, read Hudson for oncase, then like maybe Cap with a link for the middle passage being motivated by capitalist greed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Win framework. Honestly though against most K teams you'd be better off reading a counter-k and turns on the K than just going all in on the FW debate. So like if it's an afropess aff, read Hudson for oncase, then like maybe Cap with a link for the middle passage being motivated by capitalist greed

i guess what i meant to ask was how do you win framework when it seems like they can turn it so easily?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i guess what i meant to ask was how do you win framework when it seems like they can turn it so easily?

Honestly, most K teams are gonna be prepped to hell and back on FW, I sure as hell am. So unless you're a FW god, I wouldn't suggest putting all your eggs in that basket. But if you really wanna go all in on that route, just know that most all K teams are gonna run the same K-precludes-FW-and-FW-is-a-new-link args. Like pretty much every Anti-Blackness debater is gonna run the same args of "FW is a construct of whiteness" and every cap debater is gonna say "Cap has corrupted our education so their framework is rooted in Cap." It's basically always gonna be something along the lines of "Their FW is an extension of what we K." You feel me?

 

So, the good thing about that is 9 times out of 10, they're going to do very little actual LBL analysis on the FW debate. Which means that aside from the K comes first arg, they literally cold dropped the FW debate. So basically all you have to win is that one K comes first arg. How do you do that? Easy. Debate is a forum, the success of their critique is reliant on the pedagogical value of that forum. So, if they harm the pedagogical value of debate in any way, you win. And lucky for you, they just dropped a whole FW shell on why they harm the pedagogical value of debate.

 

Of course this entails you having extensions out the wazoo on the FW debate,  which you should have anyways, as I believe a good thorough FW/T file is something every debater needs.

Edited by AQuackDebater
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, most K teams are gonna be prepped to hell and back on FW, I sure as hell am. So unless you're a FW god, I wouldn't suggest putting all your eggs in that basket. But if you really wanna go all in on that route, just know that most all K teams are gonna run the same K-precludes-FW-and-FW-is-a-new-link args. Like pretty much every Anti-Blackness debater is gonna run the same args of "FW is a construct of whiteness" and every cap debater is gonna say "Cap has corrupted our education so their framework is rooted in Cap." It's basically always gonna be something along the lines of "Their FW is an extension of what we K." You feel me?

 

So, the good thing about that is 9 times out of 10, they're going to do very little actual LBL analysis on the FW debate. Which means that aside from the K comes first arg, they literally cold dropped the FW debate. So basically all you have to win is that one K comes first arg. How do you do that? Easy. Debate is a forum, the success of their critique is reliant on the pedagogical value of that forum. So, if they harm the pedagogical value of debate in any way, you win. And lucky for you, they just dropped a whole FW shell on why they harm the pedagogical value of debate.

 

Of course this entails you having extensions out the wazoo on the FW debate,  which you should have anyways, as I believe a good thorough FW/T file is something every debater needs.

 

thanks a lot. that's super helpful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks a lot. that's super helpful

 

Of course! When i did policy I was huge on the FW/T debate, so I have files for all this stuff too, PM me if you wanna trade. Glad to be of service!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i guess what i meant to ask was how do you win framework when it seems like they can turn it so easily?

 

destroy them by saying that they don't get to read turns since they argued a k aff

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 4

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...