Jump to content
TheSnowball

ODT Round 2 -- TheSnowball [A] v. SpookBuster [N]

Recommended Posts

I'm happy to get round 2 started. Good luck.

 

Cross:

Plan

1. Does your plan defend conditioning (is it qpq)?

 

Adv. 1

1. Has the 19th party congress happened? If so, why is Xi still in a vulnerable political position?

 

2. Do you have any examples of any of the three warfares happening recently?

 

2. Why hasn't war happened yet? What's the tipping point?

 

Adv. 2

1. How does coop happen (like post-plan on other issues)?

 

2. Why is Taiwan the most important issue?

 

Solvency

1. Do you have any specific evidence that China says yes?

 

2. Why does China say yes?

 

That's all off the top of my head. There will definitely be follow-ups. Is it ok if they are out of the 12 hour limit? I'll get my 1nc in on time but my follow-ups for cross-x might be late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm on my phone so I can't bold text, sorry.

I'm happy to get round 2 started. Good luck.

 

Cross:

Plan

1. Does your plan defend conditioning (is it qpq)?

 

Yes.

 

Adv. 1

1. Has the 19th party congress happened? If so, why is Xi still in a vulnerable political position?

 

Not yet. Late 2017.

 

2. Do you have any examples of any of the three warfares happening recently?

 

Xi has been progressively closing in on Taiwan and getting in fights over fishing territory and political communication especially after Trump's phonecall with Tsai.

 

2. Why hasn't war happened yet? What's the tipping point?

 

I think a reasonable tipping point is immediately before or after the Party Congress because it synthesizes U.S.-China tensions, the growing North Korea issue, SCS/ECS disputes, and the Taiwan issue into a single challenge for Xi to consolidate power. Resolving Taiwan and the SCS issue would "cut the red wire" on the bomb.

 

Adv. 2

1. How does coop happen (like post-plan on other issues)?

 

It's not different in content, but in strength. Signaling cooperation on Taiwan allows strategy to match rhetoric on issues mentioned in the laundry list impact evidence.

 

2. Why is Taiwan the most important issue?

 

It's been at the heart of U.S. tensions ever since their civil war which formed the ROC and the PRC. China thinks Taiwan is China. Taiwan thinks Taiwan is Taiwan. China wants the U.S. to agree Taiwan is China.

 

Solvency

1. Do you have any specific evidence that China says yes?

 

Any card from Glaser.

 

2. Why does China say yes?

 

The fact that each side both makes and recieves a concession means Trump and Xi can de-escalate without embarassing themselves.

 

That's all off the top of my head. There will definitely be follow-ups. Is it ok if they are out of the 12 hour limit? I'll get my 1nc in on time but my follow-ups for cross-x might be late.

 

Honestly I don't care at all about time limits unless we're the last debate to end, but if it gets rediculous I'll let you know.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

snapback.png

Adv. 1
1. Has the 19th party congress happened? If so, why is Xi still in a vulnerable political position?
Not yet. Late 2017.

Cool. I guess I still don't know why he's politically vulnerable. Why is he politically vulnerable?

 

Adv. 2
1. How does coop happen (like post-plan on other issues)?
It's not different in content, but in strength. Signaling cooperation on Taiwan allows strategy to match rhetoric on issues mentioned in the laundry list impact evidence.
So it's status quo coop just more intense/meaningful?

 

 Solvency
1. Do you have any specific evidence that China says yes?
Any card from Glaser.
Can you point me to a specific card? I honestly just can't find it. 

 

Honestly I don't care at all about time limits unless we're the last debate to end, but if it gets rediculous I'll let you know.

Thanks for being understanding. I'll get my speeches in on time but I was out this morning so couldn't keep within the required cross-x time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Cool. I guess I still don't know why he's politically vulnerable. Why is he politically vulnerable?"

Yeah, no problem. The Party Congress is a huge leadership transition and it determines whether the "populist coalition" or the "elitist coalition" (Xi and company) will have the power in China.

 

"Can you point me to a specific card? I honestly just can't find it."

No worries - there's just lots of embedded reasons - here's some quotes.

2nd to last card in 1AC: When an adversary has limited territorial goals, granting them can lead...to satisfaction with the new status quo and a reduction of tension

 

2nd card in relations: a posture change...will...strengthen Sino-American cooperation by winning the hearts and minds of 1.3 billion Chinese people

 

3rd card in nuke war: Appearing soft toward Taiwan could create a vulnerability for...opponents to exploit at a sensitive time

Edited by TheSnowball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the 1NC. CX.

 

1. Status of the CP and K?

 

2. What constitutes unprovoked aggression?

 

3. How and why is containment successful in deterring Chinese aggression?

 

4. Chang says "Adhering to the One China principle is the political bedrock for the development of U.S.-China relations." The One China principle is that Taiwan belongs to China. Why isn't acknowledging the One China principle per the Affirmative good for relations?

 

5. Is the world of the Affirmative one of Chinese global hegemony?

 

6. Does the alternative defend every country globally withdrawing faith in capitalism?

 

7. Post-alternative, would there be global socialism?

Edited by TheSnowball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the 1NC. CX.

 

1. Status of the CP and K?

Condo

2. What constitutes unprovoked aggression?

Aggression in response to no aggression from Taiwan. An example would be attacking Taiwan for existing or for a fabricated dispute. What really matters is the U.S. clarifying that unless Taiwan actively causes a conflict the U.S. will defend them.

3. How and why is containment successful in deterring Chinese aggression?

The second half of Chang is really good on this. China perceives the U.S. as being able to take them if the U.S. wanted to. However, specifically conceding on Taiwan, emboldens the Chinese government and proves that they can get what they want just by being belligerent.

4. Chang says "Adhering to the One China principle is the political bedrock for the development of U.S.-China relations." The One China principle is that Taiwan belongs to China. Why isn't acknowledging the One China principle per the Affirmative good for relations?

That's what a Chinese spokesperson has stated in order to get Trump to back down. The card directly refutes this and proves the opposite, that letting China have Taiwan is bad for relations. Also, forcing China to concede in the SCS and ECS probably hurts the One China Principle just as much.

5. Is the world of the Affirmative one of Chinese global hegemony?

Not necessarily. It's one where the U.S. has lost its hegemony due to China's assertiveness. 

6. Does the alternative defend every country globally withdrawing faith in capitalism?

Nope.

7. Post-alternative, would there be global socialism?

Probably most communities would be socialistic.

 

 

By the way I'm flowing the case turn on solvency, is that okay?

Sounds good. That's where I'll address it from now on since that's a logical place to put it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To follow up 5, who runs the world post-Aff?

I don't think the 1nc necessarily takes a stance on that. The point is the U.S. can no longer sustain its hegemony due to an adventurous, aggressive China.

To follow up 6, who does the alt?

The judge/us, in  the sense that rather than lend legitimacy to capitalism we refuse the action of the 1ac and refuse to believe in capitalism, and whoever does the plan, in the sense that they don't do the plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The judge/us, in  the sense that rather than lend legitimacy to capitalism we refuse the action of the 1ac and refuse to believe in capitalism, and whoever does the plan, in the sense that they don't do the plan.

 

I'm a little confused on how your alternative interacts with your link and impact. What does Chaos, yourself, and I refusing to have faith in capitalism do to resolve the Taiwan problem and other instances of capitalism? And what if I don't want to refuse capitalism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a little confused on how your alternative interacts with your link and impact. What does Chaos, yourself, and I refusing to have faith in capitalism do to resolve the Taiwan problem and other instances of capitalism?

Sorry for the confusion. So our argument on the alternative is two-fold: first, capitalism is collapsing now, and second, belief in the system is key to sustaining it (and in a similar vein critique/divesting belief is good and k2 solvency). By refusing to pour faith in the system through the redeeming action of the aff (see link debate) and by choosing to critique it instead, we allow cap to collapse.

 

And what if I don't want to refuse capitalism?

You don't have to. By "us" i meant "within the round". I know that doesn't necessarily make sense but I would like to clarify that the judge is the one who is choosing whether or not to invest faith in capitalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Case

1. Why would the sides agree to a piece treaty (Goldstein from "AT: War Turn")

 

Cap K

1. Framework - this may be a silly question, but when should the judge vote neg?

 

2. Kritik Thesis - are humans solely governed by "human nature"? Why are humans inherently greedy?

 

3 Alt - on your last Zizek card, how am I an academic who has tenure rather than change as an ultimate goal?

 

Appeasement

1. What is defensive realism?

 

Strategic Clarity Cp

1. What does the perm do both look like?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Case

1. Why would the sides agree to a piece treaty (Goldstein from "AT: War Turn")

For China, it's sufficient to fulfill "One China." For Taiwan, it's better than fighting China and dying.

Cap K

1. Framework - this may be a silly question, but when should the judge vote neg?

If the Kritik impacts outweigh the Affirmative impacts (when links and solvency etc. are accounted for).

2. Kritik Thesis - are humans solely governed by "human nature"? Why are humans inherently greedy?

We are always governed by our nature and our biology. We're greedy because Darwin's theory of natural selection means creatures who don't act in self-interest or self-defense die and the ones that do live.

3 Alt - on your last Zizek card, how am I an academic who has tenure rather than change as an ultimate goal?

That's probably the least relevant line of the card, but the debate equivalent would be critiquing capitalism to achieve competitive success. The last line perfectly describes your alternative when it says "Leftists who adopt an attitude of utter disdain towards the Third Way, while their own radicalism ultimately amounts to an empty gesture which obliges no one to do anything definite"

Appeasement

1. What is defensive realism?

Offensive realism is "let's achieve hegemony by stealing it from everyone else" and defensive realism is "let's achieve hegemony by protecting our core interests and defending our security."

Strategic Clarity Cp

1. What does the perm do both look like?

It's pretty much the Affirmative, but instead of ending the commitment to Taiwan we clarify our position on Taiwan.

 

Also, any theoretical reasons to reject the team?

Fortunately for you, I had to take out "conditionality bad" to meet the word limit. So no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. What does the perm do both look like?


It's pretty much the Affirmative, but instead of ending the commitment to Taiwan we clarify our position on Taiwan.


 


So rather than ending our commitment we clarify that we have no commitment?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. What does the perm do both look like?

It's pretty much the Affirmative, but instead of ending the commitment to Taiwan we clarify our position on Taiwan.

 

So rather than ending our commitment we clarify that we have no commitment?

Honestly, just scratch that perm. It makes no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CX:

1. In what ways can the U.S. extend deterrence over Taiwan?

 

2. How does the counterplan solve U.S.-China relations?

 

3. How does a company turn a war into a profit-making opportunity?

 

4. What do we rely on besides human nature?

 

5. What does the alternative do differently than the status quo?

 

6. Explain the Jevons Paradox.

 

7. You say capitalism as a structure is collapsing now. Why does viewing something through a capitalist lens keep socio-economic systems from shifting away from profit-making?

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...