Jump to content
kissmyafff

ODT Round 1 vs NoNegFiat

Recommended Posts

Sweet, CX.

 

 

Can you give me an overview of the aff? Like can you outline the solvency, harms, inherency, and significance in like a bulleted list?

 

Did you write this aff or did this come from someone's wiki?

 

What is a structural adjustment program?

 

What is subprime lending?

 

Will you defend that subprime lending is the root cause of poverty?

 

How does the aff solve the permanent state of exception you talk about on the neo-col advantage?

 

Better yet, how does canceling debt stop cultural extinction?

 

On the econ advantage, why haven't we seen this economic stagnation, given that your inherency is almost 20 years old?

 

Are the US and China the only ones ruining third world countries with their loans?

 

Are the US and China demanding that their debt be repaid now? If not, then how are the loans causing structural problems for third world countries?

 

there will probably be follow ups

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweet, CX.

 

 

Can you give me an overview of the aff? Like can you outline the solvency, harms, inherency, and significance in like a bulleted list?

 

Did you write this aff or did this come from someone's wiki?

 

 

these 2 questions in an actual debate round would be h i l a r i o u s to hear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweet, CX.

 

 

Can you give me an overview of the aff? Like can you outline the solvency, harms, inherency, and significance in like a bulleted list?

 

• Inherency: Stuctural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) force governments to cut back on programs to help its citizens and force it to conform to western standards of economic prosperities- furthering poverty in indebted countries

• The first card highlights how governments put strict restrictions on debtor countries like Sub-Saharan Africa to get them to borrow more money or reschedule their debt. These restrictions are called SAPs because they’re supposedly designed to help governments figure out ways to repay their debts but in reality, it just leads to loaner countries forcing debtor countries to do things that are not economically advantageous to them for short term profits that hurt them in the long term, like focusing on cash crops while undercutting developing infrastructure to process those cash crops.

• This also means that debtor countries lose the ability to spend their money freely because they may not be for things that loaner countries recognize as important.

• This outside puppeteering is a new form of colonialism that should be rejected. Acemoglu and Robinson 10 does a good job of explaining how colonial control like SAPs make colonized governments insecure and the next card, Maldonado-Torres 8, says how under this state of exception, everyone experiences a constant state of warfare. That’s a harm

• The second harm is that it’s bad for the economy because you have all of these highly indebted low-income countries (HIPC) that can’t pay back their debt and debtor countries give them a lot of money which they don’t get back. This is similar to what happened in the 2008 depression. Our Eavis 16 card says that this is already affecting the Chinese economy because they have bad debt and this extends around the globe. That’s a harm.

• HIV/AIDS stuff is really expensive and HIPC can barely afford health care and they definitely can’t afford it when SAPs dictate that they’re only allowed to spend a certain amount of money on it. So people die of AIDS. That’s a harm.

• HIPC are also super impoverished which leads to a laundry list of harms as orated by Annan 00 in the econ contention. That’s a harm.

• Solvency: China says yes. The first Waters 8 card says that there’s been a record of success in eliminating poverty when debt cancellation is put in place. The second Waters 8 card says that private investment and sustainable development will improve in HIPC with debt cancellation. This is also beneficial for the economies of loaner countries because they don’t have to worry about all these loans that they’re giving out and not getting a return on. That’s a solvency.

 

Did you write this aff or did this come from someone's wiki?

 

Actually, my friend @elegantwaffle wrote this aff and literally ran it once this entire debate season.

 

What is a structural adjustment program?

 

Okay so when an HIPC can’t pay off its debt, it has to sign an agreement to reschedule the debt payment and allow the debtor country to impose a very strict economic plan on them, a STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT PLAN, which dictates how they’ll move forward and pay off their debt by the set date. This usually includes spending less on healthcare, education, social services, renewables, devaluing the national currency, and privatizing public industries. -Jubilee 98

 

What is subprime lending?

 

When a debtor country, like the US or China, loans money to an HIPC that has previously benefited from debt relief without having paid for their debt relief or that is facing the prospect of paying for future debt relief.

 

Will you defend that subprime lending is the root cause of poverty?

 

I would say that colonialism is the root cause of poverty in HIPC and that subprime lending is a very thicc branch on the tree of neo-colonialism.

 

How does the aff solve the permanent state of exception you talk about on the neo-col advantage?

 

We eliminate the neo-colonial tool, SAPs, and institute policies to prevent neo-colonial policies from ever happening again by imposing regulations for responsible lending.

 

Better yet, how does canceling debt stop cultural extinction?

 

Basically there's less direct imperialism which means there's less cultural imperialism meaning cultures don't adopt colonial standards into their culture and now there's cultural diversity which is good

 

On the econ advantage, why haven't we seen this economic stagnation, given that your inherency is almost 20 years old?

 

Actually, Eavis 16 is only one year old and it says that we have been experiencing this economic stagnation. Last year, China suffered $6.6 trillion in losses because of their bad lending practices! That’s a harm.

 

Are the US and China the only ones ruining third world countries with their loans?

 

Not necessarily but they’re the biggest and have the most effect.

 

Are the US and China demanding that their debt be repaid now? If not, then how are the loans causing structural problems for third world countries?

 

The whole point of SAPs is that that they’re not. SAPs are causing the structural problems because they regulate the governments of HIPC in a mostly negative way.

 

there will probably be follow ups

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, no follow ups. I have until 9:58 my time to upload the 1NC. I have a lot of school work tonight, so this could end up being a forfeit because, like, priorities, but i'll try my best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

okay, now i've got everything sorted out. Just in time. I would have to forfeit in 7 minutes! This 1nc is a bit of a mess but it will have to do

 

4 off, neocolonialism, econ, solvency, 2747 words

 

1nc vs kissmyafff.docx

 

Open for cross!

 

btw, I didnt mean to be dickish by asking if you got this aff from the wiki. I honestly asked that so that if it was on the wiki, i could look up to see what's been read against it LOL (i did not have this aff prepped out. this was actually the first time i had even heard about it)

Edited by Nonegfiat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cx!

 

T

 

How exactly do I violate your interpretation?

 

You mention your interpretation "requires US China relations to remain the focal point of the debate", are you saying any aff without a relations advantage isn't topical?

 

How exactly is the aff obscure? and how do we not allow in depth discussion specifically to this aff?

 

What exactly is my engagement if not your interpretation?

 

DA

 

The first card in solvency in the 1ac shows China has provided debt relief before. Why is the plan unique;y triggering the DA?

 

CP

 

Where in the evidence you used does it say international works better than bilateral? 

 

Post Col

 

On your complexity argument, why is this a reason to not put in the plan and maintain the status quo of the harms?

 

Econ

 

Where did we say we increase China's growth? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cx!

 

T

 

How exactly do I violate your interpretation?

 

Resnick names about 5 specific characteristics of engagement, none of which describe your aff.

 

You mention your interpretation "requires US China relations to remain the focal point of the debate", are you saying any aff without a relations advantage isn't topical?

 

Nope. But we are saying that the resolution should be limited to plans and issues that directly implicate US-China relations.

 

How exactly is the aff obscure?

 

I've been debating and researching this topic since June of last year and I'd never heard of a HIPC or a SAP until I read your 1AC. Your aff is centered around something that has absolutely nothing to do with core topic controversies. That's how it's obscure.

 

and how do we not allow in depth discussion specifically to this aff?

 

It neither meets the textual burden of the resolution nor addresses core topic controversies, so it's not predictable for neg teams, thus we can't be prepared to refute it.

 

What exactly is my engagement if not your interpretation?

 

Your aff is not engagement.

 

DA

 

The first card in solvency in the 1ac shows China has provided debt relief before. Why is the plan unique;y triggering the DA?

 

There are two specific reasons why that's different. 1) Our campbell evidence indicates that now is a delicate period in CCP politics because of the upcoming party congress and 2) our deng evidence indicates that what matters is whether the plan gets interpreted as Xi succumbing to a foreign agenda, which the plan does because the US is directing China to forgive its debt as opposed to China doing it on their own. So it's an issue of both timeframe and process. Just because China has decided to relieve debt once in the past doesn't mean there won't be political backlash for the plan

 

CP

 

Where in the evidence you used does it say international works better than bilateral? 

 

Debt relief is expensive. The evidence indicates that forgiving the debt of all those countries required a team effort. Also like on a common sense level, projects like these work better with more coordination and more resources. Also, the evidence is really good in general for solvency-- all the times in history where people have successfully done your aff, ie relieving the debt of HIPCs and improving conditions in those countries, it was done multilaterally. So the evidence indicates our method is more real-world and has a proven track record.

 

Post Col

 

On your complexity argument, why is this a reason to not put in the plan and maintain the status quo of the harms?

 

That question assumes you solve your harms-- complexity says you don't solve them, and that reliance on your linear model of planning leads to more failures in the future.

 

Econ

 

Where did we say we increase China's growth? 

 

You say China's economic stagnation is bad and caused by irresponsible loaning and will lead to some kind of bubble burst that will hurt impoverished countries. I'm assuming you claim to solve for that, which would mean stopping stagnation and thus creating growth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool, speech will probably be up hopefully by tomorrow after noon, if not it will probably be barely the 24 hour point

Sweet! I look forward to it! Hope it goes smoother for you than it did for me today!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

alright sweet, cx

 

T

 

What is membership in an international institution?

 

What is a trade agreement?

 

How do we determine which interp better accesses "precision"?

 

What does it mean for the core of the topic to be whatever the most precise definition outlines?

 

CP

 

Your walters evidence talks about a failure of multilateralism. My question is: What failure, how, and when?

 

You read a shit ton of cards saying IMF fails. Can you connect the dots for me on how that means the counterplan is a bad idea? Is it because it involves the IMF?

 

 

K

 

Your Monahan evidence says that eliminating spaces for debate advances the neoliberal agenda. How to we eliminate spaces for debate?

 

How do we "fail to account for issues of power or domination", as Monahan suggests?

 

What's unpredictable about a suffering reps K? If I were running your aff, that would be high on my list of things to block out.

 

How do you access the alt via your "perm do the aff" argument?

 

Neocol

 

You said that abandoning the west/nonwest binaries is the only way to solve. Can I get a better warrant for how you do that than "we look beyond current debt policies"?

 

How do you solve the Harvey evidence?

 

Econ

 

Who poses a bigger threat to the environment, HIPCs or big lender countries like China?

 

Can you please explain the brink for your this burst you keep talking about? Sure, stability now doesn't guarantee permanent stability (we'd be stupid to say otherwise), but where does the aff establish an immediate threat of losing said stability? Because the original 1AC tag suggested that it was happening in the squo, so I'm really confused.

 

Solvency

 

Mbele wrote 2 years ago that signs of slowdown in China has led to fear of a global recession. Why is that still a concern in 2017?

 

What are the Wortham and Lazzarato cards doing on this flow? They seem like impact extensions/magnifiers. How do they relate to solvency?

 

On Lazzarato, why did you highlight the line "no financial regulation is possible" to read "financial regulation is possible"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey btw I'm sorry if these answers are kinda low quality, I would normally type out paragraphs but its 11 pm on wednesday. Sorry!

 

T

 

What is membership in an international institution?

 

I would define international institution as a structure set into place but international cooperation, so the US and China working together to establish regulations and ensure plans for the future (aka the plan)

 

What is a trade agreement?

 

A negotiation based on imposing regulations in the context of the economy.

 

How do we determine which interp better accesses "precision"?

 

Whichever is most accurate to the context of the resolution.

 

What does it mean for the core of the topic to be whatever the most precise definition outlines?

 

For each team, they should pick a specific interpretation to defend for every word in the resolution. That interpretation decides what ground they have on the neg, and what their affirmative is allowed to do. If it is broken, it becomes T battle. We picked this interpretation as our definition for economic engagement, because it is in the context of IR and from the literal state department. Precision is simply the argument of what is closest to the resolution specific to policymaking

 

CP

 

Your walters evidence talks about a failure of multilateralism. My question is: What failure, how, and when?

 

The imf basically like emphasized too much on economy compared to social issues like health, and here's some other quotes from cards i read

"the IMF’s mismanagement of the Asian Financial Crisis" "resulted in an increased concentration of wealth, the privatization of public infrastructure, and the impoverishment and disenfranchisement of ever larger numbers of citizens" 

 

You read a shit ton of cards saying IMF fails. Can you connect the dots for me on how that means the counterplan is a bad idea? Is it because it involves the IMF?

 

problem with the imf is the structure in place that has a bad history that is outlined in some of the cards and above, the counterplan is worse than the aff because it engages with this colonial structure rather than away from it

 

K

 

Your Monahan evidence says that eliminating spaces for debate advances the neoliberal agenda. How to we eliminate spaces for debate?

 

its not the entire 1nc as a whole, but the fact you offered a non policy option for the judge to vote continues the system your K critiques

 

How do we "fail to account for issues of power or domination", as Monahan suggests?

 

Because you do not provide a policy alternative. its super easy to criticize everything, shouldn't be a reason to reject me with no other specific way to solve your impacts.

 

What's unpredictable about a suffering reps K? If I were running your aff, that would be high on my list of things to block out.

 

it's about your vision of debate compared to mine, not as simple as one specific kritik, your interp allows every possible critical idea to be discussed, which makes our research burden infinite.

 

How do you access the alt via your "perm do the aff" argument?

 

because this isn't a k aff, we provide a policy way to begin ending the suffering represented. the aff is fighting against the very structures your alt critiques.

 

Neocol

 

You said that abandoning the west/nonwest binaries is the only way to solve. Can I get a better warrant for how you do that than "we look beyond current debt policies"?

 

we look beyond simply looking at the economic implications of debt (like the imf) , we account social issues like HIV and AIDS and cultural imperialism into our decision for action. looking at it through a "pragmatic" lens reifies the west/nonwest binaries because as outlined in the extinction doesn't outweigh card, utilitarian ways of looking at it is bad, and that plays into the west/nonwest binary.

 

How do you solve the Harvey evidence?

 

since we provide a starting point for de imperialization, the judge should consider the impacts imperialism has, in extinction and morality. We don't solve for it as in the minute the policy is put in imperialism is gone, but it is a huge starting point, as outlined in Lumina 11.

 

Econ

 

Who poses a bigger threat to the environment, HIPCs or big lender countries like China?

 

SAPs do, the colonization represents where entire countries become mere resources to be consumed by  big lender countries, and this will lead to environmental collapse because it feeds into the very growth that causes your impact, and permanently damages and institutes poisonous structures into the environmental policies of HIPCs, meaning my probability is higher because it is happening and is in place right now like global warming (100%). 

 

Can you please explain the brink for your this burst you keep talking about? Sure, stability now doesn't guarantee permanent stability (we'd be stupid (ableist) to say otherwise), but where does the aff establish an immediate threat of losing said stability? Because the original 1AC tag suggested that it was happening in the squo, so I'm really confused.

 

the subprime lending china is doing in the squo is what will cause this, it's economy can stabilize for other reasons, but China relys on this lending, hurting their own economy and hurting the HIPC economy and then the global economy basically

 

Solvency

 

Mbele wrote 2 years ago that signs of slowdown in China has led to fear of a global recession. Why is that still a concern in 2017?

 

this card outlines specifically why China can have a quick and drastic effect on HIPC's economy, and this tension continues today.

 

What are the Wortham and Lazzarato cards doing on this flow? They seem like impact extensions/magnifiers. How do they relate to solvency?

 

oh im sorry, i must have misplaced them! they were supposed to be on the post col flow.

 

On Lazzarato, why did you highlight the line "no financial regulation is possible" to read "financial regulation is possible"?

 

oh im sorry (pt 2), that was not supposed to be like that. sorry if this caused you any trouble. it should be no financial regulation is possible.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a few follow ups:

 

So you move beyond the west/nonwest binary by abandoning pragmatism? Is that your argument?

 

 

What's ableist about the word "stupid"? And is it ableist for you to describe "looking" beyond the west/nonwest binary as the only way to solve case, implying that blind folks are trapped in a colonial mindset because they can't look?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a few follow ups:

 

So you move beyond the west/nonwest binary by abandoning pragmatism? Is that your argument?

 

Also like the plan engages with China (non west) while before it was just the imf (which is international but it's definitely the west), and yes also we include morality as an argument.

 

 

What's ableist about the word "stupid"? And is it ableist for you to describe "looking" beyond the west/nonwest binary as the only way to solve case, implying that blind folks are trapped in a colonial mindset because they can't look?

Sorry, that comment was meant to be outside the debate, and I would say the difference between the two is for such a word as "looking" there's no other way to say the same thing without going back to the problems of the original. However, "stupid" is just derogatory and unnecessary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, that comment was meant to be outside the debate, and I would say the difference between the two is for such a word as "looking" there's no other way to say the same thing without going back to the problems of the original. However, "stupid" is just derogatory and unnecessary

Can you explain this to me? I understand why "retard" would be ablest because it was originally used to describe the mentally impaired. But to my understanding, "stupid" is used to insult basically everyone and has no specific history relating to the disabled. Why is "asinine" used as a PC synonym to "stupid" when its definition is literally "extremely stupid or foolish"?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, that comment was meant to be outside the debate, and I would say the difference between the two is for such a word as "looking" there's no other way to say the same thing without going back to the problems of the original. However, "stupid" is just derogatory and unnecessary

alright well if it's not going to become an issue in the debate, i apologize for using derogatory language. I was ready to go to war over this because i hate language k's, especially since i had originally written "crazy" but changed it to"stupid" because I thought that was less ableist. But seeing as your comment was a good-faith effort to inform me of problematic language, rather than a setup to a 1ar cheap shot, i'll accept the criticism and apologize. 

 

anyway that's it for cross. 2nc will be up by tonight

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

alright well if it's not going to become an issue in the debate, i apologize for using derogatory language. I was ready to go to war over this because i hate language k's, especially since i had originally written "crazy" but changed it to"stupid" because I thought that was less ableist. But seeing as your comment was a good-faith effort to inform me of problematic language, rather than a setup to a 1ar cheap shot, i'll accept the criticism and apologize. 

 

anyway that's it for cross. 2nc will be up by tonight

yeah i'm sorry if it came off like that (also it was bolded so I understand that), I respect language K's but not in a commodifying way so yeah I wouldn't do that

 

Good luck on the block!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you explain this to me? I understand why "retard" would be ablest because it was originally used to describe the mentally impaired. But to my understanding, "stupid" is used to insult basically everyone and has no specific history relating to the disabled. Why is "asinine" used as a PC synonym to "stupid" when its definition is literally "extremely stupid or foolish"?[/size]

 

I believe it is because of the connotation with stupid, like you're directly insulting someone and their mental intelligence, and that's not okay cause some people actually don't have it as easy as able minded people. I didn't know about asinine though, maybe it's because it isn't used in a social context? (like that word is used more for essays and stuff rather than going up to someone and calling them asinine)

 

(I don't know if I described any of that in a problematic way. Anyone please tell me if it was!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sidenote: I believe you have until 3:30 (in my timeline, pacific) to post the 2nc?

yep. that's 6:30 my time. I have 4 and a half hours. I get off of work in like 2 hours, so should have enough time this afternoon to make it happen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep. that's 6:30 my time. I have 4 and a half hours. I get off of work in like 2 hours, so should have enough time this afternoon to make it happen

Okay! sorry just checking

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...