Jump to content

adampah

Member
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Okay

About adampah

  • Rank
    Junior-Varsity

Profile Information

  • Name
    Adam Pahlavan
  • School
    Agape Leaders
  1. Hey, I realllly want to go to camp, but unfortunately I won't be able to attend anything from the start of summer until July 25th..Are there still any good camps open that I should consider, or did I miss the boat? Thanks
  2. One time in semis, I had a panel of 3 lay judges who won't flow spread, T, or theory. They also disliked counterplans... Debate is about persuasion, and not substance...We weren't allowed to talk to or hand work to our partner during their speech, cross-x was closed, no disclosure, and no RFD..... I forgot - no Kritiks either
  3. Simply put, Zizek says that in order to sustain themselves, dominant ideologies present benign images to the public that conceal their damaging nature. For example, capitalism is presented as ‘the American Dream’, a system that allows any individual to advance, despite the fact that it leaves many excluded from formal systems of power. Likewise, real fascists do not behave like fascists. Repressive governments paint themselves as open and tolerant in order to keep public support and to create the mass-illusion that their politics serves the people. Overidentification is a method of pushing the system to its extremes in order to expose the concealed undersides of power. Here, Zizek cites the Slovenian punk band “Laibachâ€. At face value, Laibach appears fascist. Its lead singer frequently poses as Mussolini, the band dresses in military uniforms and read from their ‘manifesto’. Thus, they identify with fascism to an extreme degree – what Zizek calls “over-identificationâ€. Laibach appears so extreme that their elicit a repulsed reaction from the public – people are ‘put back’ by how repressive they appear to be. As such, Laibach exposes the hidden flip-side of fascism, its true nature. They show the force in its most visible, brutal, and apparent, enabling it to be resisted. In debates, many Affirmative teams will claim that their plan is part of a strategy of over-identification, snapping the public out of the belief that the system is benign. Some negatives similarly advocate over-identification as their critique alternative. <http://sdiencyclopedia.wikispaces.com/Overidentification> However, the cards get pretty confusing with terms such as cynicism and irony - can someone explain how that ties into the argument.
  4. Hi, does anyone have any over-identification cards that say how this is a better methodology to destroy "the system" or whatever is the subject of criticism??
  5. I know it doesn't work with macs Is there another application that is analogous for macs??
  6. And it also helps to know that I have beaten the judge on multiple occasions at local tournaments
  7. Judge's RFD: "I voted Affirmative because I hate kritiks - especially the one you beat me with" Me: ummm... we went for the counterplan Judge: But I still hate kritiks He then proceeded to get up and leave without saying a word -
  8. Novice year - the opposing team ran 4 Affirmative Plan Texts - not knowing what to do, I answered each individual Affirmative plan with different off-case and analytics -
  9. adampah

    Trading

    Does anyone have a Federalism, Spending, Downgrade, or anything that is a NB to devolution states CP - I am willing to trade - pm me
  10. Oh...ok. I understand now. One more question - would a states CP that devolves authority and terminates federal gas taxes in favor of state gas taxes solve the link.... I think so because the Unique Link card I have talks about fiscal irresponsibility triggering the link, not termination of taxes. Here is the card The plan will trigger Moody’s will trigger downgrading of US credit rating Gongloff 11 Mark Gongloff, Wall Street Journal, 08/2/’11, [Moody’s Affirms US AAA Rating,http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2011/08/02/moodys-affirms-us-aaa-rating/] VN Moody’s just came out and said, great job, USA, you get to keep your AAA rating. For now. This follows Fitch, which earlier said more or less that they were still reviewing the US rating, a process that could take through August. They didn’t promise they’d keep a AAA rating at the end of the process, but called the debt deal “a step in the right direction.†Now the big shoe dangling is S&P, which is really on the hook, having sounded the loudest warning about a downgrade. The size of the debt deal doesn’t seem to hit the $4 trillion mark S&P has said would be necessary to keep a AAA rating. My prediction? They’ll issue a similar placeholder statement soonish. Meanwhile, let’s hear what Moody’s has to say: Moody’s Investors Service has confirmed the Aaa government bond rating of the United States following the raising of the statutory debt limit on August 2. The rating outlook is now negative. Moody’s placed the rating on review for possible downgrade on July 13 due to the small but rising probability of a default on the government’s debt obligations because of a failure to increase the debt limit. The initial increase of the debt limit by $900 billion and the commitment to raise it by a further $1.2-1.5 trillion by yearend have virtually eliminated the risk of such a default, prompting the confirmation of the rating at Aaa. In confirming the Aaa rating, Moody’s also recognized that today’s agreement is a first step toward achieving the long-term fiscal consolidation needed to maintain the US government debt metrics within Aaa parameters over the long run. The legislation calls for $917 billion in specific spending cuts over the next decade and established a congressional committee charged with making recommendations for achieving a further $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction over the same time period. In the absence of the committee reaching an agreement, automatic spending cuts of $1.2 trillion would become effective. In assigning a negative outlook to the rating, Moody’s indicated, however, that there would be a risk of downgrade if (1) there is a weakening in fiscal discipline in the coming year; (2) further fiscal consolidation measures are not adopted in 2013; (3) the economic outlook deteriorates significantly; or (4) there is an appreciable rise in the US government’s funding costs over and above what is currently expected. Thanks-
  11. I hit this Disadvantage a lot, and unfortunately, I am not very familiar with economic theory.... Can someone explain the thesis of the argument? Thanks
  12. Does anyone have a cool DA they would like to trade....i have some cool crowd out DA's with climate adaptation modules, and Investor Confidence DA's. Inbox me
×
×
  • Create New...