Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'critique'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Debate
    • Help Me...
    • Novice Center
    • Culture
    • Other Forms of Debate
    • Virtual Debates and Online Videos
    • Workshops, Institutes, and Camps
  • Specific Arguments
    • Immigration
    • Disadvantages and Counterplans
    • Critiques
    • Theory and Framework
  • Evidence
    • Evazon
    • Evidence Trading
  • Community
    • Current Events
    • Thoughts and Ideas
    • Non-Debate Debates
    • World Culture
  • Regional
    • National Circuit
    • Pacific
    • Mountain
    • Southwest
    • Great Plains
    • Great Lakes
    • Northeast
    • Mid Atlantic
    • South
    • Kansas
    • Missouri
    • Texas
  • Respecting the Elders
    • College
    • Judging
    • Coaching
  • The Site
    • Feedback
    • Discuss the Articles
    • Main Page Polls
  • Archive
    • Topic Archive

Categories

  • Thursday Files
  • Affirmatives
  • Case Negatives
  • Counterplans
  • Critiques
  • Disadvantages
  • Impacts
  • Theory
  • Topicality
  • LD and Public Forum

Calendars

  • Tournament of Champions

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Product Groups

There are no results to display.

Categories

  • Debate Resources
  • Coach Resources
  • Blogs
  • Videos
  • Tournaments & Results
  • Administrative Organizations

Categories

  • Announcements

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Skype


Google Chat/Jabber


AIM


MSN


ICQ


Yahoo


Name


School


Biography


Location


Interests


Occupation

Found 28 results

  1. QuigleyD

    Cap Turns and General Nuances

    Hey everyone, I would greatly appreciate if everyone could give me an explanation of how to answer Capitalism Good Turns. For example, Cap Solves War, Inequality, Poverty, Space, Racism, Warming. all with cards as to why citing aggregate data or whatever else. They also say that the examples of capitalism our cards mention are all pure capitalism, but the US has nuances and regulations of capitalism. How do you defend against those cap turns and other cap arguments? I feel like when I run cap, its a lost cause. Any tech arguments? Sincerely appreciate anything anyone can offer.
  2. As some are running arguments from Jeremy Fernando's The Suicide Bomber, and Her Gift of Death, I wanted to share Jeremy's perspective on the debate community and its engagement of his work. As a European Graduate School colleague of Jeremy's, we were looking at utilizing his arguments and also understood others had as well. If you have read the work, you should understand that there are substantial onto-epistemological and ethical problems with 1) attempting to use the material in a utilitarian construct (e.g. to win a debate round, or to firm up/make a "Resolved" argument), and 2) seeking to attain a certainty of a position, given his explicatoin of the Suicide Bomber is one of unknowability. I wrote to Jeremy about these questions and he provided the following reply on Friday January 17, 2014: "hey Jamie, It's always really good to hear from you my friend, and i do hope that your trip to Oklahoma will be a smooth, safe, one. mmm perhaps you might just let them know -- or, as i tend to put it, whisper echoes of -- the notion of responding, as thinking as the attempt to respond to and with, people, thoughts, and a text. After all, the reminder of the suicide bomber -- even as much as it is a difficult, extremely violent, terroristic, one -- is that of the unknown, the unknowable that haunts what we do, what we say. It is one thing to have humour, jokes, the witz to open new registers, to shake the foundations, the illegitimate abgrund, of authority; it is a completely different thing to attempt to pull the wool over to assert one's power over another. A disingenuous 'use' -- and perhaps one can stress using, utilising, reading as utility -- is the very gesture of terror (the effacing of another, the other), that the text itself is attempting to work against, to avoid. Thank you for the opportunity to respond dear Jamie: it is very much appreciated. Sending you and yours my warmest thoughts, jeremy"
  3. RyeZOAM

    "Victim" PIK

    Didn't see a post generated for my latest file. check it out and feel free to ask me any questions about it! http://www.cross-x.com/files/file/11157-victim-pik/
  4. permthedisad

    Silence debate?

    how would a debate play out if the 1ac stands up and says nothing? this happened last year during semis at a tournament in Chicago; the aff said nothing for their 1ac, the neg replied by saying nothing in their 1nc, the aff then read cards in their 2ac saying "silence good," and neg still stayed silent; the 1ar read more silence good cards and the rest of the speeches were silent. the neg won because they were more silent. in the situation above, would the best method of action for the aff be to turn their case and say silence bad? is that even possible? how would you be able to win aff on this strategy? my partner and i are considering this at a scrimmage, but we don't know how we would possibly win with this strategy or what to do if the same situation played out. if we stay silent for the entire debate the judge would vote neg on presumption, right? are there any cards/case files somebody could link me to? we are very interested in this. thanks!
  5. Lazzarone

    From Marx to Baudrillard

    If you'd like to better understand the transition from Marx's critique of capitalism to Baudrillard's, watch these two comedy sketches respectively: Mr. Show's "The Fairsley Difference" (https://youtu.be/tP4yX2rkpBc) and Tim & Eric Awesome Show's "Prices" (https://youtu.be/hJ9yBgTp9UQ). Mr. Show relies on classically anti-capitalist themes: monopoly, false advertising, how small firms are driven out-of-business by corporate chain-stores; prices are still based here on real production and real competition. (There's even a Foucauldian angle to the adoption of surveillance security.) In Tim & Eric's postmodern capitalism, however, prices become pure simulacra entirely disconnected from the real economy. (There's even a Nietzschean angle to accelerating the system to its own destruction.)
  6. Debating4Christ

    Critique My 1AC

    hey if anyone is available to look over this 1AC and give me any thoughts that would be great.
  7. JWang

    Wilderson

    can someone please explain wilderson to me? i'm kind of new to this, and i want some kind of idea what his basics args are before i dive into the lit. thx
  8. jstonemorales

    Explanation of Fems

    Can someone explain all the different types of fem Ks? Like fem ir, ecofem, etc.
  9. DiscJam

    Aryan Brotherhood K

    I recently heard about the Aryan (Arian?) brotherhood k. I was wondering how you can run it and if i could have some cards on it .
  10. raincan

    Code-switching

    I've been hearing things through the grapevine about a code-switching critique. From what I can understand, it's using a combination of black vernacular and standard English to make the activity more appealing to minorities. Can anyone explain it a bit more or find a file on it?
  11. cccolette

    Running kritiks in PF?

    I've been looking a lot into kritiks and was curious how they would do in PF. I know for sure that I want to run a Patriarch or Fem IR K and Freire one on a different case. I've already found previously made Ks for each one, but I'm not exactly sure to cut them and make them effective for PF.
  12. Does anyone know what arguments to make/how to explain them? Thanks!
  13. Lordofthefli3s

    help on the K!

    hello experienced K debaters, I live in a very traditional-policy-orientated area, where most coaches will give you a look if you even have remote interest in a K thats not neolib or security. so I can't really get good help. I'm getting into this nuclear fetish K currently and the alt sucks so bad. it says to imagine the real by truly excepting the monstrosity of nuclear weapons. this is really easily subject to being perm-ed and just weak in general. I talked to a KU debate friend of mine and they told me to look at virilio/reza for some ideas but I still can't find an appropriate alt. I was originally thinking to use that thing from baudrillard where it says to reject all extinction level impacts bc controlling death -> zombification of life but idk if thats appropriate. someone please help!!!
  14. r1t1k

    Intro to Foucault

    Hi all, I wanted to read a bit on foucault and biopower before the new topic. Does anybody know of a book/paper that describes foucault and biopolitics/biopower in a nutshell?
  15. kylerbuckner

    Trade

    Im looking to trade some files I have for some k's, preferably nothing from openev, anything from ecofem to schopenhauer Im open to it, just trying to trade broaden the backfiles..
  16. r1t1k

    Kritikal Aff

    Hi everyone. I was wondering if anyone had some tips on how to answer to theory by the negative when reading a kritikal aff. The only thing I can really think of is fairness, regarding the ability of the aff to access the kritik. Any ideas help!
  17. Smarf

    Strange Ecology K

    So, as I wait for my Evazon access to begin, I wanted to announce a K I'm selling. If there's interest I'll finish writing the blocks this weekend and let it go for $10. (Or a trade in Magic the gathering cards is definitely possible.) Basically it's a Guattari (not DnG) K that criticizes the attempt to control the oceans (or nature writ large.) It's really, REALLY good against any aff with an evironment advantage. It takes a large portion from Guattari's Three Ecologies which basically argues that the world is divided into: a. environmental ecologies (how we relate to the world/enviro.) b. social ecology (social science, etc.) and c. mental ecology (the psyche yo.) Now this makes sense because an ecology is simply systems in which the elements of the system relate to each other and how they relate to each other. Socially we have an ecology, environmentally we have an ecology, and mentally we relate to the world and affect it. He argues that things will go down because all ecologies are interrelated. The social is impacted by mental and environ. and vise versa, etc. etc. It requires you to contextualize the K to make it make the most sense in terms of the aff, but the basic argument is this: 1. Links: i. Original Argument: The aff attempts to control/striate/stabilize the ocean (nature, ecology, etc.) which divorces us from the flux of nature and creates a human/nature divide. Each link is a little different but basically there are two main arguments: a. The fact the aff is acting ONTO the ocean or saving it or securing something puts them in a position above and removed from nature itself. This distinction makes that divide. It is also the reason that the three ecologies now can't be fixed together. b. On that note, the three ecologies are now not able to be dealt with together because we're using a. the state, b. large scale movements, c. we're distinct from nature. This is also why no perms work. ii. Now most of the link pieces of evidence also have links to capitalism and the use of the state, which offer interesting scenarios that's can be isolated throughout the debate. These elements also allow for great block responses to common add arguments. 2. Impacts: i. Extinction - The only way that major violence and oppresion, war, etc. happens is if all ecologies are dealt with together. Otherwise violence in one will spill over. These warrants are incredible in the evidence. ii. No Impact to Death - The control and security/stability of the aff forces us to follow that value system to its extreme - To stop that which creates flux and instability (the true nature of everything.) This leads towards a suicidal tendancy towards control and stopping the human element. Think the Voluntary Extinction Society (for environmental stability) or wars we fight in names of security leading to nukes. Security leads to destroying that which is insecure, and eventually ourselves. When we want death then the impacts of the aff are irrelevant. iii. Macropolitics Bad - This is where the state stuff comes in. EVEN if they prove they solve their aff, their lack of fixing all three ecologies together inevitably leads back to their impacts. In fact, state action often messes up and complicates problems because it isn't adaptive enough to solve over the large earth. Basically try or die for the K. iv. Capitalism DA - this follows DnGs basic arguments about capitalism, but integrates them in relation to the Three Ecologies and the aff. v. Expenditure DA - Only understanding and embracing the sheer flux and instability and release/expenditure of nature stops it from building up and exploding. Energy is meant to be spent, not accumulated. This relates intimately with the cap. args of Bataille and DnG... to be frank, this scenario is only okay, but it's an element that'll win the debate if dropped. Above all the evidence on this question is just great. It is literally one of the best pieces of evidence that articulates this argument. However, this is no where close to the crux of the argument, so it is not developed heavily in this k. f. Try or Die for the alt - The world is completely going to collapse RIGHT NOW - The aff can't solve every scenario that can happen tomorrow - The only chance to even solve the aff is the alt. 3. Alternative: While I have provided several alternates which can correlate with different affs, I'd say generally go with the micropolitical ecology one. It's awesome. Basically, it's what Guattari calls for in Three Ecologies. We need to recognize all three ecologies and work at all of them as they interconnect all at the same time in micropolitical, local stuggles. The comparative evidence for micro/local politics vs. macro sovereign state politics in terms of the three ecologies is REALLY hot. It contextualizes the criticism's alternative in relation to specific macro policies and warrants out, line by line, why the alternative is better and solves the aff. That being said, it is definitely a floating PIK. You can definitely solve the aff, solve back the bad parts of capitalism, solve back oceans etc. The only question is sequencing. They say state. We say micropolitical action - Solves the mental, the social, and the environmental ecologies. This leads to BETTER state action, because it started at the right level with the right things in focus (the three ecologies.) Also a reason the K is super strategic, it just becomes a sequencing argument that they can't perm without severing and a lot of try or dies. TOC Topshelf Read First Strategy Dictionary Environmental Policy 1NC 2NC Impacts Strange Ecology 1NC Eco-Capitalism 1NC Environmentalism à Capitalism 2NC Solvency Links Animal Metaphors Animal Rights Avoiding the Human Biodiversity Bookchin Borders Conservation Movements Cruise Ships Deep Ecology Discourse Ecological Goals Ethics Exploration LOST Mapping Oceanic Control Oceanic Development Oceans Generic Parks/ Reserves Returns to Nature Sedative Discourse Singular Goals Statistics Subjectivity Trade Impacts Annihilation Eco-Fascism Everything Rascism Turns Case Capitalism Impacts Environmental Destruction/ Nationalism No Value Oppression Commodification Hierarchy/ debt Control/ biopower War Machine Replication No value to life Death Desiring death Did it all/ AT impact turns Alternative Micropolitical Ecology AT// Aff Solves Specific Problem AT// Not Instantaneous AT// Pragmatism AT// Utopian Spillover Solves Capitalism Solves Desire Solves State State à Extinction State Guts Solvency Turns Kritikal Cases Key to Politics Macropolitics < Micropolitics Becoming-Animal Solves Best Geophilosophy Violently Deterritorialize Solves Heidegger Solves State 2NR Tricks 2NR Desire Framing 2NR No Impact to Death Framework AT// Roleplaying AT// Utopian Desire First Solvency Deficit – Desire Solvency Deficit – Sequencing Micropolitics à Better Education AT// Cede the Political AT// VtL Stuff AT// Threats Real AT// Democracy Checks AT// Extinction First AT// Cap good AT// Consequentialism Answers AT// Darwin AT// Death Drive AT// Infinite Regression AT// Perm – Both AT// Rhizomatics of Domination AT// No Specific Solvency AT// Environmentalism Bad AT// Modern Eco/Science AT// “No Specific Scenarios” AT// Technology Good AT// Vitalism Bad AT// Human/Nature Divide Good AT// Environment Doesn’t Matter AT// Alternative Ends in Genocide etc. AT// DnG = Madness AT// Scientists Prove Deleuze Wrong (Ev Indict) AT// DnG Coopted by Cap AT// Chaos Turns AT// Pol Pot AT// Fight Club Turn AT// DnG Use Binaries AT// IDF AT// Post-Modernism Bad for Indigenous Peoples AT// “Schizophrenics are suffering” AT// Schizo = Totalitarianism AT// Structuralism AT// Subjectivity Bad/Become the Object AT// Masochism AT// Barbrook AT// Psychoanalysis AT// Jameson AT// Cohen AT// Connolly AT// Conway AT// Fasching AT// Heidegger AT// Kettles AT// Kurasawa AT// Levinas AT// May AT// Schell AT// Spivak Affirmative Answers Turns Becoming-Animal Bad Eco-Equality Bad Rhizomes Bad Vitalism Bad Permutation Perm – Do Both Yall can comment or PM me. I was going to use this to coach a team, but UChicago involves too much work for double majors. If yall don't have $10 or magic cards, just PM me. I love helping smaller programs and would be happy to learn your story and help you out for free. I also have several resources to help you learn the argument, as well as several other backfiles, Ks, and books to help with you critical education. 0 QuoteMultiQuote EditReport
  18. Kojin24

    K aff help

    What is the best way to structure a K aff? I've seen many, but I'm not sure how to fully create one from scratch for myself. I'm unsure of what ideology/philosophy to use, or even how to pick what to use. Any help in how to make one would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance. I've ran Ks before, so I'm familiar with how the idea of a K works.
  19. Last weekend I went to my 2nd tournament. (First novice tournament, I went to my first tournament open). My partner and I got 3rd place. We won our first four rounds easily, but the 5th round was a little more difficult. To add on to our arguments, I decided to run a conditional counterplan. I explained to the judge and opposing team how a counterplan worked as did my partner at the beginning of every one of our speeches. (Long explanation first speech, couple sentences every speech after). I thought we had it in the bag. Then I shook the affirmative team's hand and went to go shake the hand of the judge. He said to me "This was my first time judging and I really didn't know what was going on." At that point my heart sank. We ended up losing the round. He put two reason on the ballot. a) Because in their last rebuttal, the aff team said that our counterplan wasn't a legitimate counterplan because it was nontopical and because of an argument about China (which was a new argument that they brought up in their last rebuttal). I really enjoy kritiks and counterplans. I have been told numerous times by my debate coach to never run a kritik in a novice tournament. She also told me if I ran a counterplan I would have to explain it in a way that would make sense to the judge. Basically, my question is this: Is there anyway I can run a kritik or counterplan at a novice tournament that would make sense to a lay judge? (College judges are a little different). Also, would a judge find it offensive if I asked them their paradigm or if they liked kritiks/counterplans? I ask this question because one of our teams at that tournament because a judge felt insulted by them.
  20. Hello! I'd like an explanation of these two concepts and how they relate to Heidegger's concept of dasein, please. I'm reading him rn, and it is a really difficult concept for me to grasp, seeing as for some reason, whenever I look up "temporality vs temporality", literally no website offers a good, concise, definition. (I'm looking for a paraphrase, too. Please don't just respond with Heidegger's definiton of both). Thanks. Edited for language.
  21. Smarf

    Strange Ecology K

    So, as I wait for my Evazon access to begin, I wanted to announce a K I'm selling. If there's interest I'll finish writing the blocks this weekend and let it go for $10. (Or a trade in Magic the gathering cards is definitely possible.) Basically it's a Guattari (not DnG) K that criticizes the attempt to control the oceans (or nature writ large.) It's really, REALLY good against any aff with an evironment advantage. It takes a large portion from Guattari's Three Ecologies which basically argues that the world is divided into: a. environmental ecologies (how we relate to the world/enviro.) b. social ecology (social science, etc.) and c. mental ecology (the psyche yo.) Now this makes sense because an ecology is simply systems in which the elements of the system relate to each other and how they relate to each other. Socially we have an ecology, environmentally we have an ecology, and mentally we relate to the world and affect it. He argues that things will go down because all ecologies are interrelated. The social is impacted by mental and environ. and vise versa, etc. etc. It requires you to contextualize the K to make it make the most sense in terms of the aff, but the basic argument is this: 1. Links: i. Original Argument: The aff attempts to control/striate/stabilize the ocean (nature, ecology, etc.) which divorces us from the flux of nature and creates a human/nature divide. Each link is a little different but basically there are two main arguments: a. The fact the aff is acting ONTO the ocean or saving it or securing something puts them in a position above and removed from nature itself. This distinction makes that divide. It is also the reason that the three ecologies now can't be fixed together. b. On that note, the three ecologies are now not able to be dealt with together because we're using a. the state, b. large scale movements, c. we're distinct from nature. This is also why no perms work. ii. Now most of the link pieces of evidence also have links to capitalism and the use of the state, which offer interesting scenarios that's can be isolated throughout the debate. These elements also allow for great block responses to common add arguments. 2. Impacts: i. Extinction - The only way that major violence and oppresion, war, etc. happens is if all ecologies are dealt with together. Otherwise violence in one will spill over. These warrants are incredible in the evidence. ii. No Impact to Death - The control and security/stability of the aff forces us to follow that value system to its extreme - To stop that which creates flux and instability (the true nature of everything.) This leads towards a suicidal tendancy towards control and stopping the human element. Think the Voluntary Extinction Society (for environmental stability) or wars we fight in names of security leading to nukes. Security leads to destroying that which is insecure, and eventually ourselves. When we want death then the impacts of the aff are irrelevant. iii. Macropolitics Bad - This is where the state stuff comes in. EVEN if they prove they solve their aff, their lack of fixing all three ecologies together inevitably leads back to their impacts. In fact, state action often messes up and complicates problems because it isn't adaptive enough to solve over the large earth. Basically try or die for the K. iv. Capitalism DA - this follows DnGs basic arguments about capitalism, but integrates them in relation to the Three Ecologies and the aff. v. Expenditure DA - Only understanding and embracing the sheer flux and instability and release/expenditure of nature stops it from building up and exploding. Energy is meant to be spent, not accumulated. This relates intimately with the cap. args of Bataille and DnG... to be frank, this scenario is only okay, but it's an element that'll win the debate if dropped. Above all the evidence on this question is just great. It is literally one of the best pieces of evidence that articulates this argument. However, this is no where close to the crux of the argument, so it is not developed heavily in this k. f. Try or Die for the alt - The world is completely going to collapse RIGHT NOW - The aff can't solve every scenario that can happen tomorrow - The only chance to even solve the aff is the alt. 3. Alternative: While I have provided several alternates which can correlate with different affs, I'd say generally go with the micropolitical ecology one. It's awesome. Basically, it's what Guattari calls for in Three Ecologies. We need to recognize all three ecologies and work at all of them as they interconnect all at the same time in micropolitical, local stuggles. The comparative evidence for micro/local politics vs. macro sovereign state politics in terms of the three ecologies is REALLY hot. It contextualizes the criticism's alternative in relation to specific macro policies and warrants out, line by line, why the alternative is better and solves the aff. That being said, it is definitely a floating PIK. You can definitely solve the aff, solve back the bad parts of capitalism, solve back oceans etc. The only question is sequencing. They say state. We say micropolitical action - Solves the mental, the social, and the environmental ecologies. This leads to BETTER state action, because it started at the right level with the right things in focus (the three ecologies.) Also a reason the K is super strategic, it just becomes a sequencing argument that they can't perm without severing and a lot of try or dies. TOC Topshelf Read First Strategy Dictionary Environmental Policy 1NC 2NC Impacts Strange Ecology 1NC Eco-Capitalism 1NC Environmentalism à Capitalism 2NC Solvency Links Animal Metaphors Animal Rights Avoiding the Human Biodiversity Bookchin Borders Conservation Movements Cruise Ships Deep Ecology Discourse Ecological Goals Ethics Exploration LOST Mapping Oceanic Control Oceanic Development Oceans Generic Parks/ Reserves Returns to Nature Sedative Discourse Singular Goals Statistics Subjectivity Trade Impacts Annihilation Eco-Fascism Everything Rascism Turns Case Capitalism Impacts Environmental Destruction/ Nationalism No Value Oppression Commodification Hierarchy/ debt Control/ biopower War Machine Replication No value to life Death Desiring death Did it all/ AT impact turns Alternative Micropolitical Ecology AT// Aff Solves Specific Problem AT// Not Instantaneous AT// Pragmatism AT// Utopian Spillover Solves Capitalism Solves Desire Solves State State à Extinction State Guts Solvency Turns Kritikal Cases Key to Politics Macropolitics < Micropolitics Becoming-Animal Solves Best Geophilosophy Violently Deterritorialize Solves Heidegger Solves State 2NR Tricks 2NR Desire Framing 2NR No Impact to Death Framework AT// Roleplaying AT// Utopian Desire First Solvency Deficit – Desire Solvency Deficit – Sequencing Micropolitics à Better Education AT// Cede the Political AT// VtL Stuff AT// Threats Real AT// Democracy Checks AT// Extinction First AT// Cap good AT// Consequentialism Answers AT// Darwin AT// Death Drive AT// Infinite Regression AT// Perm – Both AT// Rhizomatics of Domination AT// No Specific Solvency AT// Environmentalism Bad AT// Modern Eco/Science AT// “No Specific Scenarios” AT// Technology Good AT// Vitalism Bad AT// Human/Nature Divide Good AT// Environment Doesn’t Matter AT// Alternative Ends in Genocide etc. AT// DnG = Madness AT// Scientists Prove Deleuze Wrong (Ev Indict) AT// DnG Coopted by Cap AT// Chaos Turns AT// Pol Pot AT// Fight Club Turn AT// DnG Use Binaries AT// IDF AT// Post-Modernism Bad for Indigenous Peoples AT// “Schizophrenics are suffering” AT// Schizo = Totalitarianism AT// Structuralism AT// Subjectivity Bad/Become the Object AT// Masochism AT// Barbrook AT// Psychoanalysis AT// Jameson AT// Cohen AT// Connolly AT// Conway AT// Fasching AT// Heidegger AT// Kettles AT// Kurasawa AT// Levinas AT// May AT// Schell AT// Spivak Affirmative Answers Turns Becoming-Animal Bad Eco-Equality Bad Rhizomes Bad Vitalism Bad Permutation Perm – Do Both
  22. CXthulhu

    Ks with a vote aft/neg to reject

    I am trying to figure out if people win with an alternative along the lines of "Vote affirmative to show you support the K, therefore solving it in the real world." If you've won with a K with a similar alternative, please tell me what K it was and what the alternative text stated.
  23. FlashMaster

    Virilio K

    Version 1

    Very strategic and simple kritik. It links to almost any aff and has good turns case arguments. Contains block overviews and answers to the generic answers most people will make. This is a good file to have in your back pocket. You can catch people off-guard or use it as a generic critique when you have nothing else to say. Table of Contents Virilio K.. 1 1NC Shell [1/2] 2 1NC Shell [2/2] 3 ****LINKS****. 4 Link: Extinction. 5 Link: Disaster Representations. 6 Link: Communications. 7 Link: Communications. 8 Link: Deterrence. 9 Link: Military Technology. 10 Link: Military Technology. 11 Link: Hegemony. 12 Link: Hegemony. 13 Link: Economics. 14 Link: Ecology. 15 Link – Terrorism... 16 *****Impacts*****. 17 Impact – Extinction. 18 Impact – Nuclear War 20 Impact – Totalitarianism... 21 Impact – Ethics. 22 Impact – Value to Life. 23 *****Alternative*****. 24 Alt Solvency – Eschatology. 25 Alt Solvency – Ethics. 26 Alt Solvency – Resistance. 27 2NC/1NR Overview.. 28 *****Other Business*****. 29 AT: Perm... 30 AT: Perm...31 AT: Perm... 32 AT: Realism... 33 AT: Cede the Political 34 AT: Nuke War Outweighs. 35 AT: We Solve War 36

    5.00 USD

  24. FlashMaster

    Virilio K

    File Name: Virilio K File Submitter: FlashMaster File Submitted: 25 Feb 2014 File Category: Critiques Resolution: Oceans Very strategic and simple kritik. It links to almost any aff and has good turns case arguments. Contains block overviews and answers to the generic answers most people will make. This is a good file to have in your back pocket. You can catch people off-guard or use it as a generic critique when you have nothing else to say. Table of Contents Virilio K.. 1 1NC Shell [1/2] 2 1NC Shell [2/2] 3 ****LINKS****. 4 Link: Extinction. 5 Link: Disaster Representations. 6 Link: Communications. 7 Link: Communications. 8 Link: Deterrence. 9 Link: Military Technology. 10 Link: Military Technology. 11 Link: Hegemony. 12 Link: Hegemony. 13 Link: Economics. 14 Link: Ecology. 15 Link – Terrorism... 16 *****Impacts*****. 17 Impact – Extinction. 18 Impact – Nuclear War 20 Impact – Totalitarianism... 21 Impact – Ethics. 22 Impact – Value to Life. 23 *****Alternative*****. 24 Alt Solvency – Eschatology. 25 Alt Solvency – Ethics. 26 Alt Solvency – Resistance. 27 2NC/1NR Overview.. 28 *****Other Business*****. 29 AT: Perm... 30 AT: Perm...31 AT: Perm... 32 AT: Realism... 33 AT: Cede the Political 34 AT: Nuke War Outweighs. 35 AT: We Solve War 36 Click here to download this file
  25. Debater89012347089

    Critique my Aff

    With districts coming up I wish to call on the community for help. I would like to know what you would run against it, how I could better it, or anything else you believe would be helpful. Any help would be appreciated! Thanks Fukushima Case Updated.docx
×