Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'kritik'.
Found 211 results
-
So in one of my coaches files he shared with me, there's a very interesting kritik that is meant to be read against affs of personal experience. There is no alternative for it, but it's meant to be read as a case turn. I read it on case against an aff of legalizing undocumented migrants that talked about forced harm and internalized racism. There's only two cards, but in cross-ex, I stumbled a little bit because I didn't quite understand it well enough. My understanding was that the 1AC was simply a forced confession of a story in exchange for the ballot which ultimately trivialized the violence they truly faced. Their answers were that we don't give a sh** about your guilt. The judges said that their answers were good and that we shouldn't be reading those authors if we didn't understand them, but we won on a procedural so it didn't end up mattering. Can someone help explain the argument made by Foucault and Zizek in these cards? I don't want to put the whole thing in the event that someone takes our evidence and I am blamed, but I'll put some excerpts and if anyone could help me understand them, I would greatly appreciate it. First card- Aff is a process of confessional-their demand is an exchange of truth of experience as the price of redemption. Foucault Excerpt 1: The mad would be cured if one managed to show them that their delirium is without any relation to reality. Excerpt 2: Leuret wishes to obtain a precise act the explicit affirmation, “I am mad.” Excerpt 3: To declare aloud and intelligible the truth about oneself – I mean, to confess-has been considered for be a long time in the western world either a condition for redemption for one sins or a essential item in the condemnation of the guilty. Second Card- Their confessional is tantamount to a Stalinist show-trial that locks us all into an unproductive forced choice – their criticism deploys guilt as a means of avoiding a full questioning of privilege. Their argument enforces a kind of metaguilt, implicated by individuals who participate in their own oppression-their project doesn’t allow for the possibility of escape, meaning there is no alternative Zizek Excerpt 1: the subject experiences guilt before the big Other, while anxiety is a sign that the Other itself is lacking, impotent – in short, guilt masks anxiety. Excerpt 2: The more they proclaim their innocence, the more guilty they are!’) therefore contains a grain of truth; the ex-Party cadres wrongfully condemned as ‘traitors’ were guilty in a way, although not, of course, of the crimes of which they were explicitly accused – their true guilt was a kind of metaguilt: that is, it lay in the way they themselves participated in the creation of the system which rejected them Excerpt 3: their condemnation meant that they got from the system their own message in its inverted-true form. Can someone help me understand these cards better? I would really appreciate it, because I think the literature is very interesting but I only understand a small fraction of it. Some key things I don't understand include-"a essential item in the condemnation of the guilty" "Stalinist show-trial" "metaguilt" "their own message in its inverted-true form". Thanks!
-
Hi! I've recently finished putting the rough finishes on what I'm calling the "Swearing Kritik". It's partially inspired from @macmc201 and @U_spread_I_extend from this thread: So I wanted to test it out. I called an old buddy of mine and he agreed to have a practice debate with me. Since I haven't been actively debating at public tournaments recently, we've decided to make it a throwback debate. We'll act as if it's May 2017 again. The resolution will be the China topic (a personal favorite of mine) and we'll use evidence that is only from or before May 2017. My friend will be aff, and he'll likely run the Space aff. I'll be neg and run the Swearing K among other things. We'll need several judges for our debate. The debate will start sometime in late February since early February is a busy time for me. It would also be good if you were somewhat familiar with the China topic. -
Hey everyone, I was wondering if someone could give me a pretty thorough explanation of nietzsche diceroll? I am a little confused by the idea of how a diceroll solves with the whole affirmation of chance, what ressentiment really is, will to power and truth, and also any tips that you have. Are there any tips or important things to know when running nietzsche? I sincerely appreciate any help.
-
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.
-
So I run neg against a local team and they always run the perm - methodological pluralism. The specific tag is "Perm – methodological pluralism combines multiple schools of thought to reclaim IR as emancipatory praxis and avoid endless political violence." How do you answer this? Can you say they sever out of advocating for their own plan text? I specifically ran cap and security k against this team, both times losing on this perm. Anything will help!!
-
I'll trade HEAVILY - I has Black Fem K, Fem Intersectionality K, Taoism K, DnG Ks, Death Cult K, OOO K, Queer Privacy K, Speed K, and a few others.
-
Okay, so one of our teams got hit with this K off the book Shortest Shadow about suffering and it's word for word the Rowland Hall Shortest Shadow/God is Dead Kritik. It links directly to ontology so it renders ontology framework useless, how does one answer this? Cites/Cards would be helpful, if not then just an analytical explanation would be great.
-
I've been trying to find a way to argue against teams running identity politics. My old coach told me about a new article that's on fire and DESTROYS identity politics in debate. It's brand new evidence from Ritter 2016, he kritiks identity politics under competition rules and gives five detailed reasons why teams engaging in identity politics for the ballot are actually disempowering minority and disenfranchised communities. The article is available at: http://theforensicsfiles.com/national-journal-of-speech-amp-debate.html
- 1 reply
-
- 1
-
-
- identity politics
- kritik
- (and 1 more)
-
Does anyone have a fully blocked out Race/Wilderson K? Willing to trade heavily, PM me for a trade.
-
just looking to trade files, if its useful ill take it! lots to trade for..
-
Does anyone have any cards or know where to find cards that "prove" that the psyche exists, or that the concept of the psyche isn't bullcrap? Thanks.
-
How is imperialism this year? Its an arg I've always wanted to run and go for, but I've never actually prepped it. I saw on open ev that frontier k is pretty much imperialism for oceans. The only thing I'm concerned about are links and relevant impacts to the aff, as the oceans seems pretty different for the lit since it usually occurred on land.
-
I don't need pages and pages of explanation, just a brief one will do. If y'all could also explain what to say against it, that be really helpful.
-
Neoliberalism K specific to Identity Politics
MichaelCeraKnockOff posted a topic in Evidence Trading
Does anyone have a neoliberalism k specific to identity politics? Willing to trade pretty heavily. PM me for details -
Please attach the best possible card for a terminal impact of anthro. It would be greatly appreciated.
-
Can anybody point me in the right direction or share with me some good oppression link cards? preferably to 2015-2016 topic but generic government action will work also
-
Does anyone know any good camps focused on kritiks? Lower price ranges would be preferred. Thanks.
-
EDIT: someone sent me a file, thx anyway
-
So, I've been working on writing a K for a couple months now for next year. I already have the basic stuff that makes it a runnable K, a good 1NC Shell, basic AT and AT Perms, a handy-dandy framework, and block extensions. This is good, but what can I do to make it great?
-
Any one have a full necropolitics file? willing to trade a bunch of other kritiks
-
Hey, I'm new to varsity, and I would appreciate any suggestions for neg strats against the following affs: - Biopower - Anti-blackness/ Black Insurgency - Racial Profiling Thank you!!
-
Looking for the following kritiks/evidence: DnG K Legalism K Queer Theory K Islamaphobia K or K Aff Will trade heavy, pm me.
-
So I've been thinking of a kritik that was similar to what weber used in 2008. i wanted it to follow the lines of something similar to... Link (People perceive the market to be an omnipotent being/savior). Impact (This zombifies people into blindly accepting whatever the market values at the time) Alt Generic reject the market to begin becoming independent from the market as a different person/idea from what the market holds. Does anyone have any ideas to some cards that would make sense or other things I could do to run something like this? Thanks
-
I'm running a cap K, and I have some cards that say that the left uses dialogue as a way to prop up the upper class hegemony. I also have a CX Check and an "RVI good." I know these are spikes, but where do I put them? Are they underviews, or should I have them randomly at the bottom of the case? EDIT: I'm in LD EDIT2: K aff. Whoops
-
I know what a juxtaposition perm is. I know how to run it, but does anyone have answers against it? If so, what's the logic behind the answers?
