debate flow: uoo dm vs washburn ad
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
1/26
LOC MGC MOC
Prior question on
procedural level, impact to
compettiive equitiy.
Use and abuse of fiat, no
access to critic. Impact
calculous proves abuse
story
2.Fiat means no access to K
or DA rounds, abuse in
debate round.
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
2/26
LOR PMR
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
3/26
LOC MGC MOC
A) specifiy judging voting
We meet, rulings normal
means
Specify which judges vote
for affirmative case, no
meet. Key to limits to
identifying ground. Cant
pic out of judges, specifity
is needed for this.
C) Ground: Ospec worse
1.Can pic out of judges
a. kill ground, prep time is
skewed advantages to judges
choosed. Crushes
predictability
A. Pic ground solves back,
important for the LOC.
LOC is most important
speech unique in this
situation
D) erre out of negative
strategy, LOC is only way to
grant strategies
not overspecification and
rooted in literature basis,
with the critic of decisions.
2. MG offense is bad
A2 predictability:
1.GROUnd checks this
back, even if you crush
predictability you would
get ground with new
counterplan. Cant get
ofense without it. Best
internal link to limite
debate.
3.Limits most is best
No limits, any nuimber of
combination of judges and
advantages
More limiting checks thisback and run politics link
to solve back for the
affirmative.
4. Aff gets to challenge
framework, and then
negative needs to win
Aff explosion of ground is
worse than negative
implosion of ground.
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
4/26
POIs always check
a.can choose to not
answer this question,
Voting issue for competing
interpretation
Reasonability, win clear in
round abuse
No standards for why this
is true, no compete with
competitng interpretationswhich forces you to look at
entire standards debate.
Ground is true, cant pic
out of anything under aff
interpretation and no
access to DA
Concede that you erre
negative on theory, LOC is
the most important speech.
MOC arguments are impact
turned by the PMR
No offense to limits
answered better.
Aff chooses the framwork,
and extrapolate use of fiat
to spike out of critic.
No counter interpretation
or we meet with normal
means
2.Outwigh on
interpretation, force you to
look at every specific
standards.
Fiat proves abuse:!
1.Reason why they dont
access to critic. Specify,
get pic ground and
uniqueness ground.
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
5/26
2.Guaruntees links to
advnatages and then
negative has to guess what
are the uniqueness and
links to DAs
Prior question to
affirmative
1.Sets framework and
thesis for the debate
round.
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
6/26
LOR PMR
Normal means is
predictable ground,
literature allows negative
to choose.
Infinite ground with
overspecifiying, negative
always loses.
Can choose with the aff
framework with the
infinite ground, aff would
choose their DA, CP andruling and then
affirmative would chose
the best one jacking them
from the best arguments
negative would walys
lose
1.Ground based, meaning
that this is the only
predictable ground.
Negative should be able
to choose which judges
do what with literature.
lITERATURE means that
negative gets access to
their arguments with this.
2. No limits, infinite
combination of judges.
Negative always gets
access to CP and DA
ground with this.
Explode limits with
affirmative specifiyin,g
infinite regression
offense with ground and
limits arguments
3. Negative gets fiat in
this interpretaion,
meaning negative interp
is stupid.
CP ground is still
eliminated when aff
chooses
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
7/26
Give specific in roundabuse, like voting on a
potential DA
Negative still gets fiat in
both interpretation. No
reason why this
argument matters.
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
8/26
PMC LOC MGC
Plan: US Supreme Court rule inf
avor of rodney gant in gant v
arizona
Ruling is normal means and
ruled on grounds of 4th
ammendment
Background:
1.Issue is of credible threat for
cops to search your cars,
privacy is not exiplicit meaning
that there is nothing preventing
searches
ADV:
A) 4th amendment is battled
now, right to privacy is always
battled
B) abandon rights of privacy is
a tipping point where it is
abandonedd
C) Ruling in favor of this means
that violent and credible threats
is eliminated
Racism exists because of
state, uniqueness cuts in
direction of the affirmative,
make state do less step in
right direction
D) Justifies racial profiling of
individuals which means that
this is only way that people can
do racial profililing and set legal
precident
E) Racism causes
dehumanizations, put someoneas the other. Excludes an entire
group based on how they are
born over race
2.Leads to property and
structural dehumanization, no
agency or society
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
9/26
F) creates a teleological
precedent where people cant be
arbitrarily killed, this is a
slippery slope to killing them
No uniquenss without a
pragmatic step
G) Privacy is the mandatory
starting point to tyranny anddictatership and normalizes
violence and no value to life
Solvency of the case, onlyway to solve racism without
state solvency and aciton.
H) Solvency: Guaruntee right to
privacy and mandates right of
privacy above all else before
someone's right to person.
Pragmatism is only way to
stolve
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
10/26
MOC LOR PMR
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
11/26
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
12/26
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
13/26
LOC MGC MOC
Fiat allows education,
understand how it acts.
B.better policy makers later
on C.better revolutionaries,
udnerstanding workings of
the state and see cracks and
fissuers.
Movement becomes
corrupted without state, no
knoweldge of action.
Fiat allows roleplaying,
representative democracy
Framework:
No eliminate rep systems, fiat
is best way to change.
1.Debate should be open to
a liberatory narratives
Cross apply, state is key in
squo, genocide is inevitable
without the state. Aff solves a
better scenario
1.Endorsement grants
legitimacy meaning that It is
a prior question
2.Bad method leads to bad
policy, Iraq proves
3.Symbolism frames
political violence, 9/11
proves
4.Ontology is a prior
question, cant seprate plan
from ontological
perspective
Links:
1.Aff imagines the existenceof the big other
Imagine state as a good
actor, utilization of fiat
meaning that we pretend to
be the supreme court
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
14/26
2.Supreme court is bad,
exclusive legalistic
language that excludes
people.
3.Imagine value to life onlyfrom the lens of the state
and supreme court
Without state, coercion is farworse. Biggest weapons
detirmines who does what
4. legal system is a facist
state power, invisible and
more exclusive key
manifistation of state power
and decides state norms
Only system with diplomacy,
stop war
5.Aff assumes that the state
is the only thing that can actto solve racism,
demobalizes people
because we assume that the
state has dealth with the
problem because the
supreme court has already
solved it
Fiat is good, debate is an
activity to discuss utility of
government to solve
movements. Ruling of
decision allows success point
allows new micrpolitics
No movement withoiut state
movement, no solvency
without the state of the
affirmativeImpacts:
1.Agency to paternal
figureheads which guts our
agency, we need to
recognize that we have
agency to frame external
philosophies. Triggers
passivity.
Fiat distance self from
argument, totalizing view of
the state
2.20th century atrocitiy
justified by biopolitical
imagination and iodea of an
unhuman iother to jsutify
violence and realism,
creation of an enemy that
we cant see but still
endlessly attack
State is inevtibale, only
prevent weapons is state.
State has launch codes only
learn how to stop state
without it
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
15/26
3. Justify and create real
violence, mobalize
populations for violence
and extirmination, 360
bombs dropped in bagdad
in an hour because we dontchallnege power.
4. neg frameowrk only for
value to life, do not privlage
ethical systems that divest
agency
State allows specalization,
people do different things
over hunter gathering. Allows
value to life.
5. Ecocide is inevitable,
pursuit of resources.
Supremem court regulates
resources, demobalizes us
from checking caopitalsim
Govenrment solve capitalism
stop ecodestruction and
technology
6. Biodiversity is necessary
for solving extinction
7. Demarcates the
bounderies of our
existnece, regulation of free
speech in zones.
Free speech zones is GOP
have militia outside doors
stop any speech
8. Big other preserves itself
through this, physicalrestraint on our agency
Alt:
Illegitimte ground, uniquness
for critical argument. Articifial
uniqueness and arbitary
inflation of impact arguments
Vote Negative to imagine
the big other does not exist
Solve:
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
16/26
1.Requires voting negative,
aff assumes supreme court
is a good actor. Severence,
moots 1nc the most
important speech.
2.Signifies a key political
stance and this privaleges
idea through the ballot.
3.Affirmation of critic itself,
metaforic condensation
rearangment, things we say
and way that we say them
have transformative value.
4.Demistify big other
because we imagine the big
other does not exist.
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
17/26
LOR PMR
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
18/26
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
19/26
LOC MGC MOC
State is inevitabel:
A. states break down and
reofrm
b. specalize create
governemnt systems
c.Survive, people rely on
government and others to
survive state for efficiency is
inevitable
Good:
A.keep captialism from killing
people through reuglationB. exploitation is inevitalbe
witohut state, makes
indentured servants are
illegal
C. strong destroy week in aff
framework, US military rolls
over world, no more state
Solve Eco:
1.Build tech to decrease C02,
only way to do it is state
power
Causes extinction, deserts
with temp rises
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
20/26
LOR PMR
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
21/26
LOC MGC MOC
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
22/26
LOR PMR
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
23/26
LOC MGC MOC
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
24/26
LOR PMR
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
25/26
1AC 1NC 2AC
i/l suck ass
impacts need terminalization
explain why drug plan bad
-
7/30/2019 Debate Flow: UoO DM vs Washburn AD
26/26
2NC