Jump to content
PailAmbrose

Education vDebate – PailAmbrose [A] vs neeve [N]

Recommended Posts

Hey sorry Im late-

 

CX:

How does the 1AC solve private schools that practice segregation?

 

Does racism exist only on the level of policy? If not, what does the 1AC's policy measure do to stop social embedded racism?

 

What do you defend as integration? And why is it good?

 

The plan text says segregation is "unconstitutional"- what does that mean?
 

NeJaime indicates that plans create social movements- but when have those have ever been sufficient to solve racial prejudice? Like MLK led a movement but police shootings still happen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also sorry for being late

Hey sorry Im late-

 

CX:

How does the 1AC solve private schools that practice segregation?

 

I mean the federal government doesn't have much jurisdiction there, but we offer a couple solutions: 1. We allow future challenges to racially segregated private schools which would be rejected in the SQ because of Milliken 2. Desegregation boosts achievement for students of color, which helps reduce cycles of poverty that make them better able to access private schools 3. Even if we don't fix private schools at all, the aff is still better than the SQ. Like not every white family can afford private school

 

Does racism exist only on the level of policy? If not, what does the 1AC's policy measure do to stop social embedded racism?

 

No, racism is broader than just policy (although it's definitely embedded in policy). I think Hawley and NeJaime are pretty good on this question - Hawley says that school integration itself helps develop cross-racial tolerance, friendship, which naturally reduces racial prejudice, and NeJaime says that the Supreme Court spurs social activism, which means our plan would create and revitalize movements against racism. Plus, our entire 1AC is overall valuable to stop embedded racism. like we can expose the racist rhetoric and motives which fuel education policy, which is pedagogically valuable

 

What do you defend as integration? And why is it good?

 

Not sure how detailed of an answer you want here, but at its core integration entails increased diversity within schools. Again, not sure how specific you want me to be, but I can clarify. Also I think the whole advantage is why integration is good - segregation is rooted in white fears of people of color/desire to discriminate and reflects the government's preference for this white supremacy over the rights of students of color.

 

The plan text says segregation is "unconstitutional"- what does that mean?
 

It means both de jure and de facto segregation are illegal under the constitution. Like the last question, not sure how specific you want me to get

 

NeJaime indicates that plans create social movements- but when have those have ever been sufficient to solve racial prejudice? Like MLK led a movement but police shootings still happen?

 

First of all, we're not claiming we'll solve all racism. But the point is that we can make progress, and especially through school integration. Second, I think MLK kinda proves the point - the Civil Rights Movement did ultimately reduce racism and outright white supremacy, but a lack of attention to the cause of equal rights (as exemplified with Milliken v Bradley) has slowed and in some ways eroded that progress. We shouldn't give up, but recommit to social justice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah anyone can judge. And I thought it would be no CX, but I actually do need a question answered: Can you explain Weheliye to me? I'm really just not getting the impact here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we get a third person I'll judge, if both debaters are fine with it. PM for any questions on my paradigm.

Edited by TheTrashDebater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah anyone can judge. And I thought it would be no CX, but I actually do need a question answered: Can you explain Weheliye to me? I'm really just not getting the impact here

Our argument is that you only presume that one category of human exists when you argue that racism degrades what it means to be human- we think in the status quo black folk don't even have the ability to be dehumanized as Memmi puts it because they are rendered inhuman- thus the 1ac forsakes black flesh and gratuitous violence by assuming that everyone has equal access to ones humanity

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...