Jump to content

AQuackDebater

Member
  • Content Count

    608
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    30

Everything posted by AQuackDebater

  1. yep yep yep. Msg me for stuff. I have like 5 affs and about 17 off for neg so far.
  2. Oooooooh yeah. As a Texas debater, I can attest to this happening even in the debate community. Once got voted down against a consult jesus cp because we ran FW against it and the judge was like "nah god solves all problems the CP works." And this was unironically mind you. So yeah in conclusion fuck UIL
  3. yo I'm down for that. sounds fun as hell, and it might make something of this event yet.
  4. Praise be unto WGLF, the almighty And praise be unto this beautiful bastard here for giving us their stuff. TimeCube is basically a K you run alongside CubeSpec, which is that the aff must spec which side of the timecube the plan is on.
  5. I have a bunch of RotB stuff, msg me for whatever
  6. Can confirm Benny went mav and did really well. He kicked me and AJs ass - great round Benny btw. As for being terrible in round, he actually was by far the most composed and professional opponent we had at UT.
  7. I'd suggest you look into the specific abortion laws in china (I believe it is called Yousheng?) that concern this policy, and incorporate that into the plan. It's better to have a more specific plan text so you don't get hit on that framework stuff from debaters like me. As for solvency, yeah I have to agree with NickDB8 that you really can't fiat away that much, and that discourse in and of itself is really easy to characterize as doing very little (eg: Discourse with my friends over healthy lifestyles probably isn't going to change the fact that I don't exercise and eat junk food 24/7). The way I'd personally take solvency is maybe through some sort of Heg argument (e.g: US economic and political hegemony over china causes them to comply for fear of backlash). I mean yeah you'd link into most Ks pretty hard because of using Heg but the Human Rights stuff already causes that so may as well. as for your a third adv, you could do some sort of Pan/ThreatCon thing talking about how opening up Sino-American political discourse helps with breaking down discursive constructs of china as a threat and all that. However if you run Heg as solvency it's kind of a performance contradiction.
  8. Don't forget Greenhill "You don't get a K aff only we get a K aff" -Every Greenhill kid
  9. I've found that traditional CX judges love Topicality, but they'll also hold you to a much higher standard on T, so really cheap/blippy T args won't fly. I would avoid T-QPQ unless you can reeeeaaaaaly sell it well, seeing as how it's just kind of become a meme on this topic. I personally am a big fan of T on the diff. types of engagement and diplomacy (ex: cultural engagement is not dip. engagement, science diplomacy is not real diplomacy), but the T debates on this topic have kind of been terrible overall, so I wouldn't go for it unless it links in beautifully. For the most part, I find that a good 1/2 DA + some On-Case combo, along with maybe a good CP and/or a T vio, is great for old school judges, as it strikes that really nice balance for giving you a lot of options to be going for while at the same time keeping it fairly straightforward for the judge. +1 for what CynicClinic said on the on-case stuff, it should be pretty easy to find some "China says no" evidence talking about how their mistrust of the US causes refusal. As for specific DAs, I'm a big fan of Appeasement, and if you want you can probably use appeasement links to make some sort of Heg DA, which traditional judges will love, as Heg is just one of those args that has been around forever and is a mainstay in trad. policy. You could also put together an organized crime DA, which I run whenever I do policy (hit me up if you wanna trade for any of this btw, or just need a hand - I gotchu) talking about the Triads and how the plan cots Xi PolCap, which he needs to continue aggressive policing strategies to take down the Triads. As for CPs, honestly the CP debate on the topic is kind of terrible, just because the topic is so huge, but I have had some success with the Isolationist CP (CP: US does the plan w/out china), but honestly other than that every CP I've run in CX this year just kind of died. and just a bit of general advice for traditional judges, they're most likely gonna focus on stock issues, so be sure to do better than your opponent with Impact Framing and Impact Calc for Harms, if you go for a Solvency takeout blow that shit up, and if you go for T then really go for it.
  10. Merry Christmas kiddies

  11. actually since someone brought up college LD, if you guys wouldn't mind I'd like to jump in here and ask some questions on that? thanks, -what circuts/associations does college LD compete on? (ndt, ceda, etc?) -is it comparable to tech high school LD? -where can I find info about it like online or such? I've looked a bunch but can't find it anywhere -what schools even do college LD?
  12. DO NOHT BE OFFHENDED BY MEEH BE OFFHENDED *SCHNIFF* BY ZSCHEE DIRTY BALL DUSCHTING REFORMERS and since we're making Zizek jokes
  13. bump for free por favor? or like $2.50
  14. Just msgd you with a request, hit me up when you can amigo
  15. *correction* HE'SH NOHT REALLY A SCHECURITY *SNIFF* K AUTHOR IN ZSCHEE FIRSCHT PLASCHE All joking aside, he write's a little about Sec in terms of like the big other and stuff but yeah Zizek is more of a cap author, but he has some good stuff on psychoanalysis too. I run this Zizek "Shock treatment" k which is basically cap with psychoanalysis and Giroux critical thought alts, but I also use that classic Zizek and Daly 04 evidence we all know. It's a great K, especially for a My-First-K kind of deal, just because he has written so much and it's a pretty simple concept to get, but can be competitive nonetheless. The main downside to zizek though is that everyone knows him and has a2s out the wazoo, and it fundamentally is still cap, which is kind of a generic K. if you want a good "starter K" of sorts, for this topic I'd recommend Pan and Settler Colonialism or maybe Imperialism, I find that there's a wealth of lit on this topic for both and they're both competitive and straightforward.
  16. getting back to the OP, it's basically like truth testing debate. It's more or less a (much) more broad-topic version of LD (my main event kiddos). But yeah no this is all sketchy as hell. The topics are all totally neg biased in record, almost certainly due to the more progressive/liberal slant of the aff positions. Not that liberalism/progressivism has no faults mind you (after all I am a Foucault and Nietzsche debater), but the hugely conservative leanings of the "debate" format itself is both intrinsic and intentional. Sickens me.
  17. Yo benny knows what up, +1 to all the stuff he said. And BIT affs are great, LASA here in Austin runs a really good one on green tech, but you can run them for stuff like space, infrastructure, and the like. hell I have one thats a BIT for OTEC plants, just so I can recycle the 1AC I ran novice year with it's five advantages (Sea Col, Energy, Aquacultures, Warming, and I run a Pan adv) . I'm a really big fan of Tech coop offs (i.e: nanotech, green tech). And medical coop over traditional chinese medicine is what my school runs and it's worked really well. If you wanna do a human rights aff there's a Tibetan Monks case floating around out there that's distinct enough from the Uyghur case that most people have very little stuff on it. Msg me if you want anything, I'll trade if you have stuff, give it for free if you don't.
  18. I think constitutionalism is a bit hyper specific. If you zoom out a bit, so to speak, you can do Social Contract deontology stuff, get into Locke and whatnot. I have some stuff that says the SocCon is a prereq to any form of morality within a society, msg me if you want it. And sorry for the deadposting.
  19. has this topic become too big it hasn't "become" too big per se, it was just way to big from the start I think. why arent people winning topicality (no qpq/qpq, diplomatic engagement interps, etc.) because the topic's huge. there are just very few affs that can't be framed as topical in some way or another. favorite aff i hit a eugenics k aff at UT a while back, wilcox and ableism/securitization of the body in IR. talked about the yousheng forced abortion laws in china, advocated a self examination of how we securitize bodies and erase them as sites of politics and resistance. fun stuff. (I will admit I shamelessly stole a lot of the evidence for my Ableism aff on the LD Cop topic for NovDec) *EDIT* I actually realized the guy running that aff is on this thread yo Benny what it do most abusive/worst aff youve debated or heard of there's this necropolitics k aff floating around that I also hit at UT, talks about self-immolation and tibetan suicide. kind of terrible, the link chain to the topic is really bad. And there are some really weak attempts at foucault affs on this topic that make me wanna die. and there's a "Military tech coop" aff that tries to frame itself as science dip as opposed to military engagement which is terrible. favorite neg position Nietzsche K, BioPol/Foucault K. Straight up Heg DAs, DeDev. And of course Pan K with that spicy derrida decon alt. worst/most abusive neg position youve debated or heard of "T: Substantial means you must name a % increase." and of course language Ks are always trash. what good da's are left other than relations type ones I like appeasement, I also think there's some really good purely Heg DA's out there on this topic, both Heg good and heg bad. and I've run some sort of org crime DA on every topic, LD and CX, going back to oceans and handguns, respectively. rn I'm running triads and it's pretty fun. is politics viable (outside of rider da's) lol nope
×
×
  • Create New...