Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by seanarchy

  1. Look at the neg file vs Pittsburgh BF at CEDA here. https://opencaselist16.paperlessdebate.com/Wake+Forest/Cronin-Reddy+Neg
  2. Cal Berkeley GJ's neg file vs Indiana DM includes a couple cards that are responsive to charity cannibalism under case in the 2nc. It's open sourced on their wiki.
  3. In a short time span, err to what you know. Also, there's nothing particularly more or less "winning"about K or policy: it's just a different style. It depends on your deployment of the given argument.
  4. Optional but yeah you can do it that way. Did you learn how to cite at GDI? You really don't need to say the credentials - just put it after first name. That's the way I've seen it done almost everywhere except GDI.
  5. It's like he's on the right track, but going in the exact wrong direction.
  6. Here's a response article that outlines the issues with West's piece: https://www.theroot.com/from-an-ex-neo-liberal-why-ta-nehisi-coates-keeps-talk-1821429336 Granted, it gets a little wacky towards the end with its understanding of what neoliberalism is, but I figured I should post it here.
  7. For reference: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/17/ta-nehisi-coates-neoliberal-black-struggle-cornel-west The top half of the article seems promising, if not particularly unique - the mode of defiance Coates and other similar intellectuals employ is apathetic to class and empire, and ignores hierarchies internal to black movements. The second half is quite clearly not an answer to Wilderson or other afro-pessimists. It's about Coates' explicit endorsement of Obama and of the the creation of a new black punditry. Those are things Wilderson and others criticize as being false markers of progress and are definitely a part of civil society.
  8. seanarchy

    States cp

    Competition comes from net benefits (i.e. the DA) not mutual exclusively. That said, you can still make arguments that regulating something twice makes the whole thing worse. Stuff like state and federal level bureaucrats tripping over each other, wasted funding, etc.
  9. This all sounds like things that you want to say, but it's nothing that fiat couldn't solve. What you'll really be doing is reading inherency for the States CP - the states haven't done it yet and won't anytime soon. The same can also be said about the federal government, except that it's probably even less likely to pass the plan than individual states, since the Republicans (who are in control) hate public education and federal interventionism. DeVos has a hardline deregulatory agenda and would almost certainly never implement the plan. The federal government can maybe set minimums for education policy, but the states are definitely capable of exceeding whatever those minimums are.
  10. If I had to guess why it's not being run, probably because it could be done by the states pretty easily. Any risk of a disadvantage is a reason to vote neg.
  11. Just tested it and you're right, there's some problem with the files. I got some XML stuff I don't understand.
  12. If you mean "can I read a new advantage in the 1ar," then no. If you mean "can I read impact turns on their new federalism scenario or new cards on solvency," then yes.
  13. On a slightly more serious note, sacrificing the aff obviously does nothing. Bataille says ritual expenditure is good because it wastes energy. The 1ac has already been read, and the ballot is inevitable. Giving it to the neg doesn't waste anything.
  14. Say that if the judge buys the K, they should vote aff to vote neg for no reason. Bataille would love the sacrifice.
  15. Disclaimer: I know next to nothing about HSS. Om the other hand, I can highly recommend CNDI. Obviously the staff may vary but there are some constants like Russell and Jonah. Whatever you want to do, they can definitely make you better at it. PM me any questions.
  16. I think I may have seen a performance like this before. We're they saying the same words/did they have a reason for why they did whatever it is that they did?
  17. seanarchy


    The aff just gets fiat. You don't need to say anything, you just get it. Unless the other team kritiks fiat or reads a trade-off DA, it's fine. Fiat literally means "let it be." That means don't really question if it gets funded, it's just assumed money is allocated to allow the plan.
  18. seanarchy


    Are you asking if the aff can fiat a mechanism of revenue generation for the plan? Like "the money for the competitive grants will come from a new income tax on the top 5%"?
  19. I think this is a bit of a misconception. Wipeout is not a K, it's a rather specific and also rather dumb impact turn. I think Patrick covered the most intuitive answers. I'll also point out, having read the evidence, that it says nowhere that aliens actually exist, just that some guy thought we were gonna find microbes 3 years ago. There's obviously going to be a link if the plan prevents extinction, and the reason to prefer is the impact. You've literally said the plan would be actively preventing this great thing, which is human extinction. There's no need to have an alt, because the status quo will solve by killing us all. This more like a disadvantage that links to the impact than it is a K. The answers to Wipeout are really just that the premises it takes are dumb, not that the plan doesn't link.
  20. The point Foucault makes is not that we should adopt pessimism as a strategy like Wilderson does, but that if power is everywhere, we always have something to do. Basically we should constantly be resisting unilateral power relations, but that we should expect to fall short. If you're defending pessimism as a method, I'm pretty sure that's not Foucault. For him it's just an outlook. Lastly, Foucault’s entire corpus is sort of a perm, so I'm not sure he's the most strategic on the neg. Unless it's the biopower stuff in which case you're probably better off looking at Agamben and his work on study for a topic specific alt. There's an article you may want to look at called The Potentiality of Study by Tyson Lewis that outlines how students are reduced to bare life and how study (in an open-ended, self-justifying sense) is a way that we can resist that process. Edit: I just realized I wasn't sure if you were writing aff blocks to a Foucault K or neg blocks to aff answers. That said, Foucault might say that pessimism is a totalizing strategy PROVIDED you're defending something like afro-pess. You should ideally want to perm the K, which would definitely solve the link, although it might mess up your method. Basically it would be easier to answer the question if you tell what the aff is you're answering it with.
  • Create New...