Jump to content
SapphoWilson

Is "Perm do the Alt then the Plan" or vice versa severance?

Recommended Posts

One of my debater buds told me it was severing out of the timeframe because they don't pass at the same time and also made the Alt and plan noncompetitive, but I wouldn't qualify him as a reliable source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So "perm- do the alternative then the Affirmative" is severance. There's an assumption made that the plan will happen in a guaranteed and immediate fashion due to the nature of fiat. The Negative could argue that this is not necessarily true in order to try to justify the permutation.

 

I think it's unfair to do that because the Affirmative can always just say "embrace their ideology, but then vote Aff" as a way to get around criticism.

 

The "vis versa" would be "perm - do the Affirmative then the alternative" - this isn't severance, but it is intrinsic. By separating the two, the Affirmative adds an element of delay which didn't exist before, which is unfair because it always pushes off criticism to the future and isn't as predictable.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just my opinion, but if the affirmative said that perm against me in a round, I would use it as a concession of the Alt solves the affirmative, because voting Negative would still mean you would solve the entirety of the affirmative. Then if you win the Link Debate, then they would be fucked because the negative has access over the affirmative and the just the affirmative alone would trigger the K Impact. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

voting Negative would still mean you would solve the entirety of the affirmative.

 

I might be wrong but

1. Voting neg doesn't do the aff

2. Perm is a test of competition

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be wrong but

1. Voting neg doesn't do the aff

2. Perm is a test of competition

 

I mean in the 2NC you could use this as offense to say that the ALT can solve the affirmative, since the affirmative would of argued pass the Alt first then the AFF, which kinds of concedes this to the negative. It wouldn't be testing competition because your saying do the K first then the AFF, which in my opinion gives a lot of lee way for the negative to make the argument that the K would be able to solve the AFF

  • 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

×