Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by DML

  1. that awkward moment when SETI got passed speaking from a purely personal bias I think satellite hardening is strategic - it's easy to win a no link/link turn for weaponization, and the aff lit is very good.
  2. DSCOVR isn't gonna get re-funded no matter what and the JWST was already funded. #awks But earth monitoring is legit - Michigan put out a file for it
  3. Aren't these Evazon files? Buy them, don't trade for them. That's cheating the authors out of money that they deserve.
  4. This. Like, obviously you're not standing up and making a bunch of Holocaust jokes or woman jokes, but it's a question of the subconscious implications - "If the perpetrators of the Holocaust were really no worse than American guards at Guantanamo, then, as is the case at Guantanamo where not one death has been reported, did no one really perish at Belsen or Treblinka, either?"* Subconsciously, by saying things like a "manned mission", you imply that mankind must be going to space, man must conquer the moon, man must expand - is it really that hard to just strike through the word or gender correct it? "We need to recognize that making women linguistically a subset of man/men through terms like "mankind" and "guys" also makes women into objects. If we, as women, aren't worthy of such true generics as "first-year," "chair" or "you all," then how can we expect to... ...be respected as people rather than objects (sexual or otherwise) on the job and at home, be treated as equals rather than servers or caretakers of others... ...define who and what we want as sexual beings?"** *Davis Hanson 5 Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution (Victor, 6/28/05, “Hitler, Hitler, Everywhereâ€, http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson062805.html) MH **Kleinman 2007 - teaches in the Department of Sociology at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (March 12, Sherryl, “ Why Sexist Language Matters †http://www.alternet.org/story/48856/?page=entire)
  5. neither Holocaust trivialization nor critiques of gendered language are stupid in any sense - comparing things to the Holocaust probably does diminish its uniqueness and importance in cultural memory, and saying "gendered language isn't a problem" is part of the problem - male-based generics in debate do help to reinforce patriarchal dominance in an activity which already is not very inclusive towards women - making men the standard allows for people to call aggressive female debaters "bitchy" and is pretty screwed up. That being said, I'm of the opinion that an apology is a sufficient answer - something along the lines of "look, we messed up, we don't endorse oppression, we're sorry about what we said, we agree that there are some parts of debate that are exclusive and we agree that they should be reformed, but our commitment to the project and an apology should be enough." And here's an answer to Holo-triv: don't trivialize the Holocaust.
  6. roleplaying as the USFG posits us as the US strategists - the justifications we use for policy are what shape them into being
  7. *staffed also, OP probably means red spread regarding Russian relations impact turns rather than a topic-specific disad
  8. bids went to GBS HJ, Rosemount BS, Blake MM, and Edina MS Sems: Edina MS d. GBS HJ 2-1 (Hirn, Short, *McCarty) Blake MM d. Rosemount BS 2-1 (*Ehrlich, Kennedy, Stone) Finals will be held at the Blake tournament
  9. I guess the first question is "what is a gish gallop" Also, why is this in the novice center?
  10. DML


    Moral relativism good/bad?
  11. structural factors check 10 T violations - there are only so many pertinent words in the resolution that the aff doesn't meet - there's like 12 words/phrases in the resolution and 4 of them are "Resolved", "The USFG", "should", and "and/or" which you're not gonna hear a T violation on if you're reading an aff you can say condo bad with. Multiple T violations don't cause nearly the same strat skew because people won't define "development" two different ways or whatever because of potential cross-applications and we meet arguments. The same doesn't hold true for conditionality - the counterplans/Ks operate in different worlds and offense really can't be cross-applied from one flow to another.
  12. DML


    any preliminary estimates on who's going aside from St George's? (<3 you ajay)
  13. dualistic thought is inevitable - it's a question of how we use them
  14. lololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololol parts of this are relatively solid advice (minus the parts that are just like "impact turn the alt derp", or the part where he misunderstands the entirety of the knowability/unknowability argument, eg, the last 4-ish points) but this quote is really what the K is saying - everything is an unknowable blank slate and we shouldn't try to map it out. also, This is definitively a neg card and a very good card - we are a rejection of the binary logic of the known/unknown which tries to eliminate the second. The card isn't saying that all binary struggles should be rejected, it's saying that we shouldn't base political strategies off of them. The alternative is a celebration of alterity which is inherently a rejection of binaries. It's an answer to framework because they attempt to lock language and debate into specific binary modes which should be rejected. If someone has specific questions about the argument I'm happy to answer them - shoot me a PM/email
  15. "plan flaw: there isn't one"
  16. Why cut cards when you can just keep saying death good? But actually those new Lanza cards are siiiiiiick
  17. lolololololololololololololol
  18. either the counterplan gives energy exclusively for helping the energy-oppressed poor, in which case there's no net benefit and either the perm solves or you vote aff on presumption, or the counterplan gives energy for the purposes of a net benefit, in which case it is a subjugation of the question of ethics, which probably makes tyranny and stuff possible. <3s you, Cole Johnson Jensen.
  19. lol it's the Santos card/a neolib aff, extinction=inevitable bruh And that Dalai Lama card is so sick
  20. y u no solve demand, silly
  21. lol Depending on the round/judge sometimes we defend fiat, sometimes we don't - however, the demand is there for the purposes of accessing the obligation to the Other, yeah
  • Create New...