Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I am a novice debater and I just finished my first year of debate. Me and my partner both agreed since I am the 2A I will write our aff, and since my partner is the 2N, he will write most of our neg arguments. We are both going to Michigan (although I have not been accepted yet) him 5 week and me 7 week. My team is a primarily K team, however, reading a hard right aff thoroughly convinced me it links to everything. What are some pros and cons of reading a soft left aff with framing and taking the util debate every time vs reading a K aff and taking the framework debate every time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For soft left, it depends on what you’re reading on framing. But I think the judge community consensus is that the average framing contention is silly. This includes cards with tags like “reject big impacts” and “prefer probability— multiple internal links bad” etc. Also, I’ve never ever seen a good debate where the judge didn’t use utilitarianism to make a decision.

I think the best way to run a soft left aff is to leverage your central reps/ideas and use them to critique DAs. For example MBA BHs bioparanoia aff (check wiki, TOC), or a desecuritization aff to critique a China DA, or a islamophobia aff to critique a terror DA etc. This type of affirmative is the best of all kinds imo because not only can you better answer the DA, but also you can use these ideas to make your aff unique and generarte solvency deficits, or even DAs versus Counterplans, and obviously you’ll be able to cream bad K teams with the whole “the aff does something good, it’s a good idea, link turn” type rebuttal. Hopefully the Aff is topical though.

 

For K affs, I think you need to be counter defining words of the resolution in the 2AC and really just win a high level of defense: Let them read their DAs, CPs whatever too. I don’t think there’s much of a difference between the good kind of soft left aff and this kind of K aff, except obviously topicality. So really unless you care about the K and genuinely want it to be the point of discussion then read it, but otherwise if you just want to win, then I’m not sure that’s the best reason to read a K aff because at that point you’re just avoiding clash on purpose and that’ll never help you get better. You said you were a novice but won’t run a hard right aff because it links to everything. That’s a bad reason to not run it because you’re only gonna be in your second year of debate so having debates with tons of clash can only help you become better, which in turn will lead to more wins. I will say though, I am from a primarily policy school so maybe im biased. Anyway, hope this helps, and I’ll see you at Michigan this summer :) 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I forgot to turn notifications on for this, so I'm seeing this after a good while, but thanks for the advice. I guess bias does differ according to each judge, but I have to say that I wouldn't necessarily want to run one aff the whole year, so I guess it's a possibility. 

On 5/16/2019 at 12:47 AM, icwDS said:

 For K affs, I think you need to be counter defining words of the resolution in the 2AC and really just win a high level of defense: Let them read their DAs, CPs whatever too. I don’t think there’s much of a difference between the good kind of soft left aff and this kind of K aff, except obviously topicality. So really unless you care about the K and genuinely want it to be the point of discussion then read it, but otherwise if you just want to win, then I’m not sure that’s the best reason to read a K aff because at that point you’re just avoiding clash on purpose and that’ll never help you get better. You said you were a novice but won’t run a hard right aff because it links to everything. That’s a bad reason to not run it because you’re only gonna be in your second year of debate so having debates with tons of clash can only help you become better, which in turn will lead to more wins. I will say though, I am from a primarily policy school so maybe im biased. Anyway, hope this helps, and I’ll see you at Michigan this summer :) 

I think the idea of letting them read DAs and CPs on a K aff is an interesting take, I did think about that but I'm not 100% exactly what that looks like absent "We the People" We Meet arguments. I guess I'm just kind of afraid I'll be roasted by my coaches for reading a hard right aff because I kinda like policy more than Ks but it's really hard to win heg good when all your opponents run is Ks lol. Anyways, thanks again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as prep -- with Ks, you'll have the same debate a lot, which means that prepping is easier because you won't have to update generic DA uniqueness every week (depending on the aff, I suppose). However, it does mean that schools will have you VERY well prepped out and can potentially spring new arguments on you when you least expect it.

In addition, find an aff that you like and understand! If you're really into the K aff, you're more likely to fully understand the arguments and beat teams who are less familiar with it. But if you have a hard time understanding deep K lit, a soft left aff might be the way to go.

Hope this helps! Happy debating :)

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...