Jump to content

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

how to impact turn K affs?


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 EatPrayJordan

EatPrayJordan

    Varsity

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 42 posts
-6
Slipping...
  • Name:Jordan
  • School:W

Posted 17 March 2017 - 04:39 PM

someone ran a natives queerness mexicana crip kuare poesis antiblakness intersection aff

 

anyways, how do i best go about imact turning this POO POO- I like po poo


  • -5

#2 AQuackDebater

AQuackDebater

    Kind of a fascist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 520 posts
244
Excellent
  • Name:Patrick Fox
  • School:Jack C. Hays High School

Posted 17 March 2017 - 05:19 PM

someone ran a natives queerness mexicana crip kuare poesis antiblakness intersection aff

 

anyways, how do i best go about imact turning this POO POO- I like po poo

*deleted yee*


Edited by AQuackDebater, 19 March 2017 - 10:27 AM.

  • -2
WHO ON HELL IS THIS FUCK BAUDRILLARD? BALSAS 06 [BALSAS is an interdisciplinary journal on media culture.  Interview with Art Group BBM, “on first cyborgs, aliens and other sides of new technologies,” translated from lithiuanian http://www.balsas.cc/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=151] JCH-PF

Valentinas: We all know that Jean Baudrillard did not believe that the Gulf War did take place, as it was over-mediated and over-simulated. In fact, the Gulf War II is still not over, and Iraq became much more than just a Frankenstein laboratory for the new media, technology and “democracy” games. What can we learn from wars that do not take place, even though they cannot be finished? Are they becoming a symptom of our times as a confrontation between multiple time-lines, ideologies and technologies in a single place? Lars: Actually, it has always been the same: new wars have been better test-beds for the state of art technologies and the latest computer-controlled firearms. The World War I already was a fully mechanized war where pre-robots were fighting each other and gassing the troops. And afterwards, the winners shape the new world order. Olaf: Who on hell is Baudrillard? The one who earns money by publishing his prognoses after the things happen? What a fuck, French philosophy deals too much with luxury problems and elegantly ignores the problem itself. It’s no wonder, this is the colonizer’s mentality, you can hear it roaring in their words: they use phrases made to camouflage genocide. I went to see that Virilio’s exhibition "Ce qui arrive" at Foundation Cartier in 2003. I was smashed by that banal presentation of the evil of all kinds: again, natural catastrophes and evil done by man were exposed on the same wall, glued together with a piece of "theory". There you find it all, filed up in one row: the pure luxury of the Cartier-funded Jean Nouvel building, an artwork without any blood in its veins, and that late Christian philosophy about the techno-cataclysm being the revenge of God. Pure shit, turned into gold in the holy cellars of the modern alchemists’ museums. The artist-made video "documents" of the Manhattan towers opposed to Iraqian war pictures: that’s not Armageddon, that’s man-invented war technology to be used to subdue others. And there is always somebody who pushes the buttons, even when the button is a computer mouse some ten thousand kilometers away from the place where people die, or even if it is a civil airplanes redirected by Islamists. Everybody knows that. War technology has always been made to make killing easier. And to produce martyrs as well. Janneke: Compare Baudrillard with Henry Dunant, the founder of the International Committee of the Red Cross. Dunant was no philosopher, he was just an intelligent rich man in the late 19th century. But his ideas went far more in the direction where you should hope to find philosophers as well. He experienced war as a "randonneur": he passed by, he saw the suffering and the inhumanity of war. And he felt obliged to act. Apart from the maybe 10 days he spent on the battlefield, on the beautiful meadows in the Europeans Alps, helping wounded people to survive, as a complete medical layman he decided to do something more sustainable against these odds. He knew that his efforts couldn’t prevent war in general, but he felt that he could alter the cruelty of reality. And he succeeded in doing it. No wonder that in our days we find the most engaged people to support the TROIA projects intention in Geneva, where they are still based. And they are not only doing their necessary surgeon’s work in the field: they are as well fighting with the same energy on the diplomatic battlefield.

 

Check out the small school starter pack! https://www.cross-x....l-starter-pack/


#3 jobas

jobas

    (-;

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts
452
Excellent
  • Name:jobas
  • School:the court

Posted 18 March 2017 - 03:29 PM

Read Bifo

Commit suicide

Delete your post. Saying stuff like this is extremely problematic. 


  • 1

#4 Chaos

Chaos

    Mare Incognitum

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,178 posts
2,493
Excellent

Posted 18 March 2017 - 04:40 PM

Delete your post. Saying stuff like this is extremely problematic. 


Get cancer before you post.


  • 0

There are no differences but differences of degree between different degrees of difference and no difference.


#5 Nonegfiat

Nonegfiat

    Agambabe

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 616 posts
423
Excellent

Posted 18 March 2017 - 04:53 PM

Delete your post. Saying stuff like this is extremely problematic.

I agree with the spirit of what you're saying but like... come on. There are better ways to engage people over issues like these. Ordering him to delete the post and calling it "extremely problematic" with no context or explanation isn't gonna help him understand why he shouldn't talk about suicide the way he did. It just comes off as arrogant and it's gonna make people defensive. Plus, for all we know, you could be talking about Bifo.

Edited by Nonegfiat, 18 March 2017 - 04:57 PM.

  • 3

DOUBLE BIND- Either the harms of the aff are true and they can't solve until they control the levers of power OR the harms are constructed and you reject them for alarmism


#6 jobas

jobas

    (-;

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts
452
Excellent
  • Name:jobas
  • School:the court

Posted 18 March 2017 - 05:06 PM

Get cancer before you post.

good one!!

I agree with the spirit of what you're saying but like... come on. There are better ways to engage people over issues like these. Ordering him to delete the post and calling it "extremely problematic" with no context or explanation isn't gonna help him understand why he shouldn't talk about suicide the way he did. It just comes off as arrogant and it's gonna make people defensive. Plus, for all we know, you could be talking about Bifo.

Context doesn't matter. Especially not the way his post was. Don't come at me with your pseudo-moralist defense of his rhetoric. If you can't see the problem with saying that, then you are the problem.
  • -1

#7 Nonegfiat

Nonegfiat

    Agambabe

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 616 posts
423
Excellent

Posted 18 March 2017 - 05:12 PM

Context doesn't matter. Especially not the way his post was. Don't come at me with your pseudo-moralist defense of his rhetoric. If you can't see the problem with saying that, then you are the problem.


So you're content to let people say offensive things because the fact that they don't realize that what they're saying is offensive means they're below a simple explanation?

That's sad. And it's symptomatic of the toxic political climate we live in.

You and I are on the same page on this issue. Trivializing suicide is really bad. But it won't stop if we don't actually engage people.
  • 5

DOUBLE BIND- Either the harms of the aff are true and they can't solve until they control the levers of power OR the harms are constructed and you reject them for alarmism


#8 NickDB8

NickDB8

    Exodus Files Forum Representative

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 618 posts
370
Excellent
  • Name:Nick
  • School:Emporia HS

Posted 18 March 2017 - 05:39 PM

don't cede the public


  • 6

Exodus Files - Updated 5/21! Grab our new STEM Affirmative for the upcoming education topic!

Research Tools


#9 jobas

jobas

    (-;

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts
452
Excellent
  • Name:jobas
  • School:the court

Posted 18 March 2017 - 08:16 PM

So you're content to let people say offensive things because the fact that they don't realize that what they're saying is offensive means they're below a simple explanation?
That's sad. And it's symptomatic of the toxic political climate we live in.
You and I are on the same page on this issue. Trivializing suicide is really bad. But it won't stop if we don't actually engage people.


That's literally not what I said. I think it goes without explanation that saying "commit suicide" is pretty messed up. Like I said, if you can't see it, you're the problem.
  • -1

#10 EatPrayJordan

EatPrayJordan

    Varsity

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 42 posts
-6
Slipping...
  • Name:Jordan
  • School:W

Posted 18 March 2017 - 09:44 PM

That's literally not what I said. I think it goes without explanation that saying "commit suicide" is pretty messed up. Like I said, if you can't see it, you're the problem.


I think suicide is badass-
Comments, concerns?
Hope this helped
  • 4

#11 jobas

jobas

    (-;

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts
452
Excellent
  • Name:jobas
  • School:the court

Posted 18 March 2017 - 09:49 PM

I'm glad the site has devolved into children who think they're funny despite the way rhetoric can carry severe emotional weight. Especially on this subject. I assumed that debaters, especially debaters who are on this site trying to learn, would be more cognizant of the things they say.

I'm glad you get your upvotes for being "funny" for saying things like the person above, but you're also disgusting.

Edited by jobas, 18 March 2017 - 09:54 PM.

  • 1

#12 EatPrayJordan

EatPrayJordan

    Varsity

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 42 posts
-6
Slipping...
  • Name:Jordan
  • School:W

Posted 18 March 2017 - 11:02 PM

I'm glad the site has devolved into children who think they're funny despite the way rhetoric can carry severe emotional weight. Especially on this subject. I assumed that debaters, especially debaters who are on this site trying to learn, would be more cognizant of the things they say.
I'm glad you get your upvotes for being "funny" for saying things like the person above, but you're also disgusting.


Fuck you, bitch
  • 4

#13 Nonegfiat

Nonegfiat

    Agambabe

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 616 posts
423
Excellent

Posted 19 March 2017 - 04:24 AM

That's literally not what I said. I think it goes without explanation that saying "commit suicide" is pretty messed up. Like I said, if you can't see it, you're the problem.


Look friend, I see that what he said was bad. So stop saying that I'm the problem; that makes no sense. I think you're wrong to assume that it's obvious to everyone why joking about suicide is bad, and in the case where it's not obvious to someone, why wouldn't you just give them a simple explanation so that they can understand it? You're assuming they understand the full weight of what they're saying but they just don't care because they're evil or something. That's not gonna get you anywhere.

Speaking of not getting anywhere, I shouldn't have started this argument. It's not accomplishing anything.
  • 4

DOUBLE BIND- Either the harms of the aff are true and they can't solve until they control the levers of power OR the harms are constructed and you reject them for alarmism


#14 iheartzizek

iheartzizek

    Varsity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 32 posts
2
Okay
  • Name:Kyle

Posted 19 March 2017 - 05:08 AM

Allow me to decode everything you just said:

Delete your post. Saying stuff like this is extremely problematic. 

"I am the language police. Delete your post now because I say so."

 

Context doesn't matter. Especially not the way his post was. Don't come at me with your pseudo-moralist defense of his rhetoric. If you can't see the problem with saying that, then you are the problem.

"Anyone who disagrees with me in any fashion must be doing it as a veiled defense of suicide jokes. And if it isn't instantly obvious to someone how right I am, then they are ****THE PROBLEM**** (Another term that sounds heavy but doesn't actually mean anything)"

 

That's literally not what I said. I think it goes without explanation that saying "commit suicide" is pretty messed up. Like I said, if you can't see it, you're the problem.

"I don't know how to use the word literally, plus I'm too immature to have an actual disagreement with anyone. If they disagree with me then they're what's wrong with the world. I have a monopoly on understanding 'basic' issues like these"

 

I'm glad the site has devolved into children who think they're funny despite the way rhetoric can carry severe emotional weight. Especially on this subject. I assumed that debaters, especially debaters who are on this site trying to learn, would be more cognizant of the things they say.

I'm glad you get your upvotes for being "funny" for saying things like the person above, but you're also disgusting.

"I'm don't like what EatPrayJordan is saying so I'm gonna call the whole site children and indict their credentials as debaters despite the fact that basically everyone here dislikes EatPrayJordan and downvotes him to hell. I'm also so above everyone that I'm 'glad' they're wallowing in their own idiocy.  Now let me end it with an insult just like my last two posts because I'm the smartest and most ethical person here so I get to hurl insults."

 

 

Seriously, you're acting like a child. As someone who has attempted suicide and has had friends commit suicide, I cringed a bit at what the quack debater said. But you need to realize a couple things:

1) The issue of what is okay and not okay to joke about is not black and white. And even if you choose to see it that way, at least understand that other people don't. This "muh if you don't see why it's bad you're the problem" is complete BS. The world is more complicated than that. 

 

2) Get off your fucking high horse and stop assuming people's motivations. You don't know who you're talking to, especially over the internet. You don't know the experience that people are coming at a given issue with.

 

3) For gods sake, the way you talk to people matters. The type of rhetoric you're using is why we have anti-PC reactionary dumbasses like Manhood Academy running around saying the horrible shit they do. Obviously you're not responsible for the way they act, but you sure do galvanize them. And if your goal is to improve the overall quality of discourse you should care about that. Nonegfiat covered this sorta well, but the goal should always be to change people's minds, not just yell at them for being less "woke" than you.

 

I apologize to everyone on this site that seems to dislike the way I "unload" on people, but I'm gonna speak my mind on this issue. I'm tired of seeing people like jobas running around making a mockery of discourse issues.


  • 0

#15 jobas

jobas

    (-;

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts
452
Excellent
  • Name:jobas
  • School:the court

Posted 19 March 2017 - 06:17 AM

Yup, I'm the worst. I have no idea what I'm talking about.

 

I don't get why you're trying to call me out while a person literally said "commit suicide." I just disagree that I should have to enlighten someone on why that's wrong. If it's that big of a deal, I don't get why the people who disagree with the way I went about the situation couldn't just be like, "While I disagree with how this was originally handled, he's right that your rhetoric carries emotional/psychological weight." 

 

You've criticized me for being on a moral high horse while adopting that very same moral high horse to deconstruct what I've said.


  • 0

#16 iheartzizek

iheartzizek

    Varsity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 32 posts
2
Okay
  • Name:Kyle

Posted 19 March 2017 - 07:10 AM

I don't get why the people who disagree with the way I went about the situation couldn't just be like, "While I disagree with how this was originally handled, he's right that your rhetoric carries emotional/psychological weight." 

 

Let's see how that worked out.

 

Person who disagrees with the way you went about the situation: 

 

I agree with the spirit of what you're saying but like... come on. There are better ways to engage people over issues like these. 

 

You:

 

Don't come at me with your pseudo-moralist defense of his rhetoric. If you can't see the problem with saying that, then you are the problem.

 

Hence my issue. You called them pseudo-moralist, you accused them of defending the rhetoric, and you topped it all off my saying they're the problem. L.


  • 0

#17 Nonegfiat

Nonegfiat

    Agambabe

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 616 posts
423
Excellent

Posted 19 March 2017 - 07:14 AM

Let's see how that worked out.

 

Person who disagrees with the way you went about the situation: 

 

 

You:

 

 

Hence my issue. You called them pseudo-moralist, you accused them of defending the rhetoric, and you topped it all off my saying they're the problem. L.

 

Calm down already. I was wrong to start this. It's just becoming a cesspool of anger. Let's just all agree it's important not to joke about serious stuff like suicide and leave it at that.


  • 0

DOUBLE BIND- Either the harms of the aff are true and they can't solve until they control the levers of power OR the harms are constructed and you reject them for alarmism


#18 TheSnowball

TheSnowball

    Hall of Fame

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,559 posts
971
Excellent
  • Name:Ryan

Posted 19 March 2017 - 08:11 AM

Calm down already. I was wrong to start this. It's just becoming a cesspool of anger. Let's just all agree it's important not to joke about serious stuff like suicide and leave it at that.

Yeah, this sounds good. If anyone is wondering, suicide is bad because life is good.* That's all.

*except for the 8 minutes in which one may be referring to Baudrillard or Schopenhauer or poorly-understood-Nietzsche or some other weird stuff.
  • 1

Daily Evidence Card!
Exodus Files!

This cross-ex is taking too long.

Kafka 25 (Franz, Novelist, Translated by David Wyllie, "The Trial", 1925) //Snowball

K. was informed by telephone that there would be a small hearing concerning his case the following Sunday. He was made aware that these cross examinations would follow one another regularly, perhaps not every week but quite frequently. On the one hand it was in everyone’s interest to bring proceedings quickly to their conclusion, but on the other hand every aspect of the examinations had to be carried out thoroughly without lasting too long because of the associated stress. For these reasons, it had been decided to hold a series of brief examinations following on one after another. Sunday had been chosen as the day for the hearings so that K. would not be disturbed in his professional work. It was assumed that he would be in agreement with this, but if he wished for another date then, as far as possible, he would be accommodated. Cross-examinations could even be held in the night, for instance, but K. would probably not be fresh enough at that time. Anyway, as long as K. made no objection, the hearing would be left on Sundays. It was a matter of course that he would have to appear without fail, there was probably no need to point this out to him. He would be given the number of the building where he was to present himself, which was in a street in a suburb well away from the city centre which K. had never been to before.


#19 Johnathan

Johnathan

    Champion

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 181 posts
99
Excellent

Posted 19 March 2017 - 08:16 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

also humor is a coping mechanism for dark subjects


  • 0

A more sinister example is a "renew the Holocaust" counterplan


#20 AQuackDebater

AQuackDebater

    Kind of a fascist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 520 posts
244
Excellent
  • Name:Patrick Fox
  • School:Jack C. Hays High School

Posted 19 March 2017 - 10:26 AM

Yeah that was in poor taste of me, I should have explained further, I was making a Bifo joke, he mentioned in a lecture once about how suicide is just an extreme form of escape from cognitive capitalism. Bifo impact turns everything.

 

I wasn't trying to trivialize the matter, I was really tired when I wrote that and didn't realize not everyone has read Bifo, that was my bad. Believe me, as the son of a psychiatrist and as someone who's nearly been institutionalized before, I know how serious the matter is. My apologies to anyone I offended, i meant no harm.

 

Delete your post. Saying stuff like this is extremely problematic. 

Also congrats on second at state Jonas!

 

 

edit - then again discourse doesn't solve so like this whole convo was pointless


Edited by AQuackDebater, 19 March 2017 - 10:31 AM.

  • 1
WHO ON HELL IS THIS FUCK BAUDRILLARD? BALSAS 06 [BALSAS is an interdisciplinary journal on media culture.  Interview with Art Group BBM, “on first cyborgs, aliens and other sides of new technologies,” translated from lithiuanian http://www.balsas.cc/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=151] JCH-PF

Valentinas: We all know that Jean Baudrillard did not believe that the Gulf War did take place, as it was over-mediated and over-simulated. In fact, the Gulf War II is still not over, and Iraq became much more than just a Frankenstein laboratory for the new media, technology and “democracy” games. What can we learn from wars that do not take place, even though they cannot be finished? Are they becoming a symptom of our times as a confrontation between multiple time-lines, ideologies and technologies in a single place? Lars: Actually, it has always been the same: new wars have been better test-beds for the state of art technologies and the latest computer-controlled firearms. The World War I already was a fully mechanized war where pre-robots were fighting each other and gassing the troops. And afterwards, the winners shape the new world order. Olaf: Who on hell is Baudrillard? The one who earns money by publishing his prognoses after the things happen? What a fuck, French philosophy deals too much with luxury problems and elegantly ignores the problem itself. It’s no wonder, this is the colonizer’s mentality, you can hear it roaring in their words: they use phrases made to camouflage genocide. I went to see that Virilio’s exhibition "Ce qui arrive" at Foundation Cartier in 2003. I was smashed by that banal presentation of the evil of all kinds: again, natural catastrophes and evil done by man were exposed on the same wall, glued together with a piece of "theory". There you find it all, filed up in one row: the pure luxury of the Cartier-funded Jean Nouvel building, an artwork without any blood in its veins, and that late Christian philosophy about the techno-cataclysm being the revenge of God. Pure shit, turned into gold in the holy cellars of the modern alchemists’ museums. The artist-made video "documents" of the Manhattan towers opposed to Iraqian war pictures: that’s not Armageddon, that’s man-invented war technology to be used to subdue others. And there is always somebody who pushes the buttons, even when the button is a computer mouse some ten thousand kilometers away from the place where people die, or even if it is a civil airplanes redirected by Islamists. Everybody knows that. War technology has always been made to make killing easier. And to produce martyrs as well. Janneke: Compare Baudrillard with Henry Dunant, the founder of the International Committee of the Red Cross. Dunant was no philosopher, he was just an intelligent rich man in the late 19th century. But his ideas went far more in the direction where you should hope to find philosophers as well. He experienced war as a "randonneur": he passed by, he saw the suffering and the inhumanity of war. And he felt obliged to act. Apart from the maybe 10 days he spent on the battlefield, on the beautiful meadows in the Europeans Alps, helping wounded people to survive, as a complete medical layman he decided to do something more sustainable against these odds. He knew that his efforts couldn’t prevent war in general, but he felt that he could alter the cruelty of reality. And he succeeded in doing it. No wonder that in our days we find the most engaged people to support the TROIA projects intention in Geneva, where they are still based. And they are not only doing their necessary surgeon’s work in the field: they are as well fighting with the same energy on the diplomatic battlefield.

 

Check out the small school starter pack! https://www.cross-x....l-starter-pack/






Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users