Jump to content
ronniesportman

ODT RD 3 jhrish vs Ronniesportman//Misrap354

Recommended Posts

Co

After paradigm is posted Ill put up cross x because start depends on it

cool, I reserve the right to edit the aff based on that paradigm though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OH shit sorry my dudes i was soing the sat and stuff im prettty much tab if  u read high theory don't expect me to understand it right away i need u to explain it also T-FW IMO is probably bad for debate thats all

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool. I’ll pm you if I have questions if that’s alright?

 

Raunak I’m ready for cross when you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool. I’ll pm you if I have questions if that’s alright?

 

Raunak I’m ready for cross when you are.

 

Sure, Sorry about the delay, I am in India on a different time zone, but here's CX

 

1. Why Vote aff/ Why is the plan a good idea/How do you generate Solvency in this debate space

2. What's is the barrier to the plans implementation 

3. Will you defend the entirity of the 1AC throughout this debate?

4. Your jabreen evidence says you prevent desegregation in all areas? Why is that good?

5. Why do you want better overall educational quality?

6. Why is closing the opportunity gap good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1. Why Vote aff/ Why is the plan a good idea/How do you generate Solvency in this debate space

Vote aff for a couple key reasons, status quo policies create an opportunity gap that perpetuates systems of structural violence. In addition, Orfield is pretty clear that Milliken is unjustifiable, so on face voting aff to overturn that doctrine solves. Idk what you mean with “inside the debate space,” if you could rephrase?

 

2. What's is the barrier to the plans implementation 

There are a couple things. First, the Milliken doctrine prevents adequate solutions to de facto segregation. The court is unwilling to abandon the intent doctrine (EPPS) so Milliken won’t be overturned any time soon. Second, equity litigation and desegregation haven’t fought together to close the opportunity gap (Liu)

 

3. Will you defend the entirity of the 1AC throughout this debate?

I mean if you misconstrue the 1AC, or any of our evidence, i reserve the right to clarify, and I reserve the right to create a perm with part of plan, but for the most part yeah

 

4. Your jabreen evidence says you prevent desegregation in all areas? Why is that good?

Lol Jabareen isn’t a solvency card, it’s a harms card, we’re saying that the intent doctrine spills over to prevent desegregation in all areas, our argument is that the intent doctrine is bad.

 

5. Why do you want better overall educational quality?

Because educational opportunity is the best predictor of success and opportunity outside of school, a ton of other warrants too

 

6. Why is closing the opportunity gap good?

Because it decreases structural violence and eliminates structures of racism and poverty, plus c/a answer from q5

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note to both debaters -- pls make LBL clear itll make everyones lives easier

Okey doke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

1. Why Vote aff/ Why is the plan a good idea/How do you generate Solvency in this debate space

Vote aff for a couple key reasons, status quo policies create an opportunity gap that perpetuates systems of structural violence. In addition, Orfield is pretty clear that Milliken is unjustifiable, so on face voting aff to overturn that doctrine solves. Idk what you mean with “inside the debate space,” if you could rephrase?

 

2. What's is the barrier to the plans implementation 

There are a couple things. First, the Milliken doctrine prevents adequate solutions to de facto segregation. The court is unwilling to abandon the intent doctrine (EPPS) so Milliken won’t be overturned any time soon. Second, equity litigation and desegregation haven’t fought together to close the opportunity gap (Liu)

 

3. Will you defend the entirity of the 1AC throughout this debate?

I mean if you misconstrue the 1AC, or any of our evidence, i reserve the right to clarify, and I reserve the right to create a perm with part of plan, but for the most part yeah

 

4. Your jabreen evidence says you prevent desegregation in all areas? Why is that good?

Lol Jabareen isn’t a solvency card, it’s a harms card, we’re saying that the intent doctrine spills over to prevent desegregation in all areas, our argument is that the intent doctrine is bad.

 

5. Why do you want better overall educational quality?

Because educational opportunity is the best predictor of success and opportunity outside of school, a ton of other warrants too

 

6. Why is closing the opportunity gap good?

Because it decreases structural violence and eliminates structures of racism and poverty, plus c/a answer from q5

 

 

 

Q1. How does your performance of the 1AC generate solvency? And how does the plan pass

Q2. Why is the court unwilling to abandon the intent doctrine

Q3. Cool, so aff won't be conditional?

Q4. Ahh, thx. 

Q5. What is success and opportunity and why is that good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Q1. How does your performance of the 1AC generate solvency? And how does the plan pass

The aff is Policy, not a performance. We aren’t performing. Solvency is generated off of the plans passage. The plan text outlines this pretty well, the Supreme Court accepts and then rules in favor of a test case to overturn Milliken v. Bradley and its precedent. Then Congress mandates that states more equitably distribute educational funding in order to follow the new precedent. The plan is enforced by Congress, the DoJ, and the courts

 

Q2. Why is the court unwilling to abandon the intent doctrine

Because it relies waaaay too heavily on precedent. “the reason so many elite lawyers and judges underestimated the changeability and surprise of constitutional law is that they took court precedents and standard legal reasoning too seriously” (Purdy). The Milliken Court was racist and protected white privilege, and the court through inaction continues to do so

 

Q3. Cool, so aff won't be conditional?

There are VERY extreme circumstances under which I will kick case and go for other offense, but I genuinely believe the plan is a good idea, so yeah, as long as you don’t do something bigoted or anything way off the deep end

 

Q5. What is success and opportunity and why is that good?

I won’t defend that success is necessarily good, but opportunity is the ability of individuals to achieve the level of success they wish to. That we will defend is good, because that ability is key to a ton of other rights.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Q1. How does your performance of the 1AC generate solvency? And how does the plan pass

The aff is Policy, not a performance. We aren’t performing. Solvency is generated off of the plans passage. The plan text outlines this pretty well, the Supreme Court accepts and then rules in favor of a test case to overturn Milliken v. Bradley and its precedent. Then Congress mandates that states more equitably distribute educational funding in order to follow the new precedent. The plan is enforced by Congress, the DoJ, and the courts

 

Q2. Why is the court unwilling to abandon the intent doctrine

Because it relies waaaay too heavily on precedent. “the reason so many elite lawyers and judges underestimated the changeability and surprise of constitutional law is that they took court precedents and standard legal reasoning too seriously” (Purdy). The Milliken Court was racist and protected white privilege, and the court through inaction continues to do so

 

Q3. Cool, so aff won't be conditional?

There are VERY extreme circumstances under which I will kick case and go for other offense, but I genuinely believe the plan is a good idea, so yeah, as long as you don’t do something bigoted or anything way off the deep end

 

Q5. What is success and opportunity and why is that good?

I won’t defend that success is necessarily good, but opportunity is the ability of individuals to achieve the level of success they wish to. That we will defend is good, because that ability is key to a ton of other rights.

 

 

 

So how does your reading of the Plan generate affirmative solvency?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how does your reading of the Plan generate affirmative solvency?

I am still super confused as to what you mean by this. The plan text generates solvency, we present the policy, if the judge believes it creates a net better world then they vote aff. An aff ballot means that post-fiat the plan goes into place, which generates solvency. Still don’t see the point of this

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okey doke

one last thing, if u want me to look at specifc ev compile a doc aftr the 2ar of the ev that both of u want me to look at so its easier yk

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3

 

 

So how does your reading of the Plan generate affirmative solvency?
I am still super confused as to what you mean by this. The plan text generates solvency, we present the policy, if the judge believes it creates a net better world then they vote aff. An aff ballot means that post-fiat the plan goes into place, which generates solvency. Still don’t see the point of this
 

 

3 post limit reached so 1NC should be up soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cross of the 1NC:

 

1. To clarify, it's T/FW, this weird fiat thing, whiteness turn, and frame subtraction?

 

2. Is your argument really that since we don't physically regulate or fund education in the round that the judge should vote neg on presumption??

 

3. How are the first and second off functionally different?

 

4. You do realize that the Pitcher card is talking about British media productions, not the legitimacy of fiat right?

 

5. What is 'frame subtraction'?

 

6. Is this a PIK?

 

7. What is the alt?

 

8. Is the alt conditional?

 

9. Are you African American?

 

10. You make this argument about how you shouldn't have to negate all of case (like having to argue inequality and segregation are good) but then you do the same thing in your case arguments. Doesn't that make your case offense and the off mutually exclusive?

 

11. Is the Sexton and Barber card an alt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cross of the 1NC:

 

1. To clarify, it's T/FW, this weird fiat thing, whiteness turn, and frame subtraction?

Yah, 

 

2. Is your argument really that since we don't physically regulate or fund education in the round that the judge should vote neg on presumption??

Our argument is that u fail to change anything, so vote neg on presumption

 

3. How are the first and second off functionally different?

The best way to explain it would be as the first off is a fW of what debate should be and the second off can be considered as a Disad to using Fiat,

 

4. You do realize that the Pitcher card is talking about British media productions, not the legitimacy of fiat right?

The Pitcher card is not talking about fiat, this is a different thing altogether, it views explains how the performance of attempting to solve or substantially solve racism gives the viewer e.g.. the judge a feeling that if I  show that I agree with you e.g.. Giving the ballot, it causes the viewer to feel that they have done their job and that they don't need to do anything more causing passivity on this subject. 

 

5. What is 'frame subtraction'?

I guess you can consider it as a case turn based on your conceptualization of oppressors and oppressed groups.

 

6. Is this a PIK?

I guess so, its better described as a case turn b/c of your conceptualizations of oppressors and oppressed groups, but would not preclude the aff from happening in real life. 

 

7. What is the alt?

Refer to Q6 and I guess its vote neg. 

 

8. Is the alt conditional?

Voting neg is not conditional, you probably should :P, but frame subtraction itself is conditional

 

9. Are you African American?

 

Define African American, I have a mix of Indian and African heritage.

 

10. You make this argument about how you shouldn't have to negate all of case (like having to argue inequality and segregation are good) but then you do the same thing in your case arguments. Doesn't that make your case offense and the off mutually exclusive?

Wait, we never argue that inequality and segregation are good, we argue that ur framing of these things as well as your plan text are not the best way to to do this....

11. Is the Sexton and Barber card an alt?

We would say its more of a link, as the conceptualization of doing an affirmative act probably recreates anti-black discrimination

Edited by ronniesportman

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...