Jump to content

NickDB8

Member
  • Content Count

    808
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    43

Posts posted by NickDB8


  1. CX -

     

    Status of K and CP? Can you kick individual planks?

     

    Is there an ethical reason to reject the aff?

     

    What does the alt look like? Can the aff happen in the world of it? Do schools exist post alt?

     

    Have the 50 states ever acted uniformly on anything?

     

    In a world where your warming defense is true, why does federalism collapse matter?

     

    Why does education federalism spill over to things like environment and energy policy?


  2. What makes the plan a good idea?

    Our justification for the aff is outlined in the advantages

    So does the 1AC defend that the US has to be a leader in democracy, like what stops some other democratic nation from being able to take its place?

    The 1AC has two scenarios for democracy. First, is international democracy - That checks international conflict, and just needs a democratic leader, which doesn't necessarily have to be the US, but the second is domestic democracy - It's backsliding as per Kahlenberg and that's bad as per Kasparov


  3. Why is federal funding key?

    As per Avins, the NEA and NEH act as a "leveling force" ensuring equal access across the nation. Furthermore, Phenicie isolates that states can't pay for it on their own

     

    What standards does the aff create?

    Equal standards for access to high-quality A&H education

     

    How is the offense under democracy unique under trump?

    Trump provides UQ for the advantage - If anything, Trump proves the authoritarian leanings outlined in Kahlenberg

     

    Why vote aff?

    The plan is a good idea

     

    Why is US democracy good?

    It solves multiple scenarios for conflict, it's an impact filter, and, in context of the aff, reduces structural violence as per Eaude by combating things like stereotypes

     

    What benefit does state engagement give us?

    There's a couple -

    1) It gives us an understanding of how the legal system works - That allows us as individuals to be ready to be policymakers in the future

    2) Working within the state stops oppressive practices that happen within - The state isn't monolithic and always bad, there are things it can do that are good - Any kritik alt probably doesn't spill up into the USfg but the aff does which justifies a perm - That's Zanotti and Reitter

    3) Refusing the state cedes power to the right, which is especially dangerous in the era of Trump - That's Boggs

     

    edit: included the boggs stuff


  4. Not gonna lie, I think the fed key warrant in this is gonna relie on 1. Signaling and 2. Uniformity. I think that you should try and frame your fed key warrant is that the fed is key to a uniform approach, that ensures universal codes and design

    There's no reason why 50 state fiat doesn't solve 100% of this, though


  5. too lazy to make a new doc but here's a k2 demo card

     

     

     

    Debate is key to democracy – In an era of fake news and propaganda, effective truth testing is necessary and democracy needs a public that can make informed, logical policy decisions – Debate programs provide those necessary skills

    Calum Matheson 1-17 [1-17-2017, "We no longer know the difference between debating and arguing", PennLive, http://www.pennlive.com/opinion/2017/01/we_no_longer_know_the_differen.html, Calum Matheson is the director of the William Pitt Debating Union at the University of Pittsburgh and an assistant professor of public deliberation and civic life.]//NV

    Everyone in America should have instruction in the basic tenets of argument. This begins with recognizing the standards of strong factual evidence, prioritizing debate in our educational systems, and forming the tenets of good argument skills in everyday life. The United States is a divided country. As the recent election demonstrated, the traditional oppositions of "left" and "right," Democrat and Republican, conservative and progressive are breaking down. While the theatrical clash between Clinton and Trump most recently grabbed the headlines, the primaries exposed bitter divisions within the two major parties. These disagreements are worrisome because they are largely a matter not of different values, but different facts. The sheer volume of information today makes it hard to separate truth from fiction. Statistics have the ring of truth, but are easily manipulated to support shaky conclusions. We are bombarded with fake news and biased websites--what we used to call "propaganda." For democracy to prevail, we need to learn to learn the hard work of making good conclusions with good information. Instruction in the basics of argument can help us recognize such dangers and should be welcomed by anyone, regardless of their political beliefs. Debate is supposed to allow good arguments to triumph over bad ones; truth to persevere against falsehood. But rigorously filtering out deception and bias is difficult, time-consuming, and sometimes downright boring. Many of us tend to seek out information to confirm what we already believe rather than forming our opinions after balanced investigation. This is a breeding ground for sloppy thinking and outright manipulation. While we may never agree on "what the facts are," we need a basic agreement on what a fact is. Democracy requires an electorate capable of making informed, logical decisions over matters of local, state, and national policy, and that means knowing the difference between assertion and evidence, logic and fallacy. The marketplace of ideas only works when we use a common currency. Practical steps to support a culture of healthy argument include making argument classes options for general education requirements, as they already are at some fine institutions including the University of Pittsburgh. Defending our ideas forces us to recognize the shortcomings in our own beliefs. Encouraging students to play Devil's advocate develops empathy and might even lead them to reevaluate their own positions. Healthy competition can motivate students through active learning across the curriculum. Competitive debate teams provide the most challenging and rewarding intellectual opportunities available in high school and college and let students from different backgrounds and regions exchange ideas. Unfortunately, funding for debate programs has dwindled over the years. Reversing that trend would help strengthen academic achievement while bolstering the essential qualities necessary for good democratic policymaking. For a fraction of the money spent on other competitive activities, we can teach students how to succeed professionally and give them the skills necessary for good citizenship. Good argument skills make for better lives. Almost everything we do requires persuasion. When we write school essays, ask for raises, or fight a parking ticket, we are making arguments. Deliberation requires judgment, allowing us to make reasoned choices about everything from buying a home to picking a restaurant. The capacity to make and judge good argument is a basic currency of social interaction and clear thought. Quite simply, learning how to argue makes us smarter.

     

     

    • Upvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...