Scripps Ranch Sridharan Aff
| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 - NBA | Finals | Cavaliers LJ | Adam Silver |
|
|
| |
| 1 - Loyola Invitational | Doubles | Immaculate Heart JL | Panel |
|
|
| |
| 1 - Loyola Invitational | 1 | Vestavia Hills DS | Kurian, Michael |
|
|
| |
| 1 - Loyola Invitational | 3 | Peninsula BD | Das, Sreyaash |
|
|
| |
| 1 - Loyola Invitational | 6 | San Mateo YR | Hatfield, Wyatt |
|
|
| |
| 1 - Loyola Invitational | Triples | Lynbrook SM | Panel |
|
|
| |
| 2 - Duke Invitational | 2 | Myers Park BJ | Thomas-McGinnis, Conal |
|
|
| |
| 2 - Duke Invitational | Finals | Edgemont Junior-Senior AA | Panel |
|
|
| |
| 2 - Duke Invitational | 4 | Byram Hills EW | Survance, Anthony |
|
|
| |
| 2 - Duke Invitational | Octas | Lake Highland Prep SV | Panel |
|
|
| |
| 2 - Duke Invitational | Semis | Salado HF | Panel |
|
|
| |
| 2 - Duke Invitational | 5 | Ridge LA | Chung, Carol |
|
|
| |
| 3 - Yale University Invitational | 1 | Strake Jesuit DA | Chang, Curtis |
|
|
| |
| 3 - Yale University Invitational | Doubles | Lexington VM | Panel |
|
|
| |
| 3 - Yale University Invitational | 4 | McDowell JJ | Scopa, Stephen |
|
|
| |
| 3 - Yale University Invitational | 5 | Milton AT | Aldridge, Allison |
|
|
| |
| 4 - New York City Invitational Debate and Speech Tournament | 2 | Northview MS | Bathily, Silma |
|
|
| |
| 4 - New York City Invitational Debate and Speech Tournament | 3 | Hunter AH | Lee, Andrew |
|
|
| |
| 4 - New York City Invitational Debate and Speech Tournament | 6 | Academy Of Classical Christian Studies JM | Ciocca, Amanda |
|
|
| |
| 4 - New York City Invitational Debate and Speech Tournament | Doubles | Strake Jesuit EP | Panel |
|
|
| |
| 4 - New York City Invitational Debate and Speech Tournament | Octas | BASIS Peoria PY | Panel |
|
|
| |
| 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | 1 | Riverwood LF | Wu, Jalyn |
|
|
| |
| 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | 5 | Memorial DX | McGinnis, David |
|
|
| |
| 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | Doubles | Peninsula RM | Panel |
|
|
| |
| 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | 4 | Immaculate Heart BC | Misra, Parth |
|
|
| |
| 6 - Harvard National Forensics Tournament | 2 | Bronx Science IP | Anderson, Sam |
|
|
| |
| 6 - Harvard National Forensics Tournament | 4 | Strake Jesuit ZD | Eberhart, Henry |
|
|
| |
| 6 - Harvard National Forensics Tournament | 6 | King CP | Kopf, Kyle |
|
|
| |
| 6 - Harvard National Forensics Tournament | Triples | Park City NL | Panel |
|
|
| |
| 6 - Harvard National Forensics Tournament | Doubles | Memorial DX | Panel |
|
|
| |
| 7 - Tournament of Champions | 2 | Harrison AC | Chen, Victor |
|
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| 0 - NBA | Finals | Opponent: Cavaliers LJ | Judge: Adam Silver 1AC - Stock |
| 1 - Loyola Invitational | Doubles | Opponent: Immaculate Heart JL | Judge: Panel 1AC - Be Prepared De-leuze v4 |
| 1 - Loyola Invitational | 1 | Opponent: Vestavia Hills DS | Judge: Kurian, Michael 1AC - AFC - Must Have Contact Info - You're Going De-Leuze Kurian votes for Scripps Ranch AS (W) |
| 1 - Loyola Invitational | 3 | Opponent: Peninsula BD | Judge: Das, Sreyaash 1AC - You're Going De-leuze - AFC |
| 1 - Loyola Invitational | 6 | Opponent: San Mateo YR | Judge: Hatfield, Wyatt 1AC - Be Prepared De-leuze v3 |
| 1 - Loyola Invitational | Triples | Opponent: Lynbrook SM | Judge: Panel 1AC - Be Prepared De-leuze v4 Hilligoss votes for Scripps Ranch AS (W) |
| 2 - Duke Invitational | 2 | Opponent: Myers Park BJ | Judge: Thomas-McGinnis, Conal 1AC - You're Going De-leuze v5 |
| 2 - Duke Invitational | Finals | Opponent: Edgemont Junior-Senior AA | Judge: Panel 1AC - The Lorax v1 - AFC |
| 2 - Duke Invitational | 4 | Opponent: Byram Hills EW | Judge: Survance, Anthony 1AC - Be Like Mike v1 |
| 2 - Duke Invitational | Octas | Opponent: Lake Highland Prep SV | Judge: Panel 1AC - Be Like Mike v2 |
| 2 - Duke Invitational | Semis | Opponent: Salado HF | Judge: Panel 1AC - Be Prepared De-leuze v7 - Must Contact Other Debater |
| 2 - Duke Invitational | 5 | Opponent: Ridge LA | Judge: Chung, Carol 1AC - Lay |
| 3 - Yale University Invitational | 1 | Opponent: Strake Jesuit DA | Judge: Chang, Curtis 1AC - The Lorax v1 - AFC |
| 3 - Yale University Invitational | Doubles | Opponent: Lexington VM | Judge: Panel 1AC - The Lorax v2 |
| 3 - Yale University Invitational | 4 | Opponent: McDowell JJ | Judge: Scopa, Stephen 1AC - You're Going De-Leuze v5 |
| 3 - Yale University Invitational | 5 | Opponent: Milton AT | Judge: Aldridge, Allison 1AC - You're Going De-Leuze v6 - Round Reports - AFC Aldridge votes for Scripps Ranch AS (W) |
| 4 - New York City Invitational Debate and Speech Tournament | 2 | Opponent: Northview MS | Judge: Bathily, Silma 1AC - You're Going De-leuze v8 - Must Contact Other Debater |
| 4 - New York City Invitational Debate and Speech Tournament | 3 | Opponent: Hunter AH | Judge: Lee, Andrew 1AC - The Lorax v3 |
| 4 - New York City Invitational Debate and Speech Tournament | 6 | Opponent: Academy Of Classical Christian Studies JM | Judge: Ciocca, Amanda 1AC - Be Prepared De-leuze v8 - AFC |
| 4 - New York City Invitational Debate and Speech Tournament | Doubles | Opponent: Strake Jesuit EP | Judge: Panel 1AC - The Lorax v3 |
| 4 - New York City Invitational Debate and Speech Tournament | Octas | Opponent: BASIS Peoria PY | Judge: Panel 1AC - The Lorax v4 |
| 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | 1 | Opponent: Riverwood LF | Judge: Wu, Jalyn 1AC - Lackan |
| 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | 5 | Opponent: Memorial DX | Judge: McGinnis, David 1AC - Lackan v2 |
| 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | Doubles | Opponent: Peninsula RM | Judge: Panel 1AC - Lackan v3 |
| 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | 4 | Opponent: Immaculate Heart BC | Judge: Misra, Parth 1AC - Mollow |
| 6 - Harvard National Forensics Tournament | 2 | Opponent: Bronx Science IP | Judge: Anderson, Sam 1AC - Lackan v2 - Disclose Correct Tourney Name |
| 6 - Harvard National Forensics Tournament | 4 | Opponent: Strake Jesuit ZD | Judge: Eberhart, Henry 1AC - Mollow |
| 6 - Harvard National Forensics Tournament | 6 | Opponent: King CP | Judge: Kopf, Kyle 1AC - Lightning McQueen |
| 6 - Harvard National Forensics Tournament | Triples | Opponent: Park City NL | Judge: Panel 1AC - Mollow |
| 6 - Harvard National Forensics Tournament | Doubles | Opponent: Memorial DX | Judge: Panel 1AC - Lightning McQueen |
| 7 - Tournament of Champions | 2 | Opponent: Harrison AC | Judge: Chen, Victor 1AC - Lackan v3 |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
1 -- ContactTournament: 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | Round: 4 | Opponent: Immaculate Heart BC | Judge: Misra, Parth FramingHey, I'm Agastya - the sovereign of Scripps Ranch High School LD Debate team and the world writ large. There are two implications:~1~ You must concede to me because of my status as the absolute authority.~2~ Any attempts to contact my being will be rejected because I have ascended above moral authority as the ideal robot-human – my subjectivity transcends comprehension. Kantian frameworks source ends off of extrinsically moral factors - but that collapses because I am the source of goodness.Contention 1My Royal Assistant's Email: agastyasridharan@gmail.com. EDIT: FB me instead (Agastya Sridharan) - my email's glitching.Contention 21: InformationSO: September/OctoberND: November/DecemberJF: January/FebruaryContention 3Note: Cites for r2 of Duke and r2 of Bronx aren't working. Ask me for cites if you'd like and I'll gladly send them to you. UPDATE: Cites aren't working from Bronx r2 onwards - I'll try to get the problem fixed. | 4/18/22 |
1 -- Possible InterpsTournament: 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | Round: 4 | Opponent: Immaculate Heart BC | Judge: Misra, Parth DisclosureInterpretation: Debaters must disclose all constructive positions on open source in an accessible format on the 2021-2022 NDCA LD wiki after the round in which they read them in conjunction with a highlighted version. Interpretation: Debaters must disclose all constructive positions on open source with highlighting on the 2021-22 NDCA LD wiki after the round in which they read them. Interpretation: For each position on their corresponding 2021-22 NDCA LD Interpretation: If debaters disclose full text, they must not post the full text of the cards in the cite box, but must upload an open source document with the full text of their cards. To clarify, you don’t have to disclose highlighting or underlining, you just need an open source document with minimally the full, un-underlined text of cards. Interpretation: Debaters must disclose round reports on the 2021-22 NDCA LD wiki for every round they have debated this season. Round reports disclose which positions (AC, NC, K, T, Theory, etc.) were read/gone for in every speech. Paragraph TheoryConditionality is a voting issue. PICs are a voting issue. Condo PICS are a voting issue. Floating PIKs are a voting issue. Dispo is a voting issue. Alt actor fiat is a voting issue. Multiple shells with DTD implications are a voting issue. Multiple NIBs is a voting issue. Consult CPs are a voting issue. Counterplans competing only through net benefits are a voting issue. Delay CPs are a voting issue. TJFs are a voting issue. Agent CPs are a voting issue. Not speccing status is a voting issue. Spec shells are a voting issue. Vague alts are a voting issue. MiscInterpretation: The negative must concede to the affirmative’s framework. Interpretation: Debaters may not read epistemic modesty. Interpretation: Debaters may not read epistemic modesty and extinction outweighs. Interpretation: Debaters may not read extinction first under any framework. Interpretation: The neg may not derive a route to the ballot premised on the flaws of the aff framework. To clarify, framework Ks are bad. Interpretation: Debaters must ask everyone in the room if they are okay with spreading before their first speech. Interpretation: Counterplans must not be conditional. Interpretation: All theory paradigms in the 1NC must be phrased as proactively bidirectional. Interpretation: Debaters may not defend at more than one conditional advocacy. Interpretation: If the negative proscribes a proactive change to the status quo, they must defend a governmental action. Interpretation: Negative debaters may only defend the status quo as an advocacy if the aff is whole res. Interpretation: All negative advocacies must be unconditional. Interpretation: If the negative reads a dispositional counterplan, they must defend that they go for it if I straight turn it. Interpretation: Negative debaters must not read an advocacy that defends the affirmative’s advocacy absent a particular part or parts. To clarify PICs bad. Interpretation: Negative counterplans must be functionally and textually competitive. Interpretation: If the affirmative defends a consequentialist framework, they must explicitly delineate which theory of the good they defend in the form of a text in the 1AC. Interpretation: Negative debaters must defend an advocacy that does not do part of the affirmative advocacy if the affirmative defends the entirety of the resolution. Interpretation: The negative may not advocate the entirety of the affirmative with the exception of one word. Interpretation: Negative debaters must defend an advocacy that does not do all of the aff advocacy except for a word or phrase unconditionally. Interpretation: The negative must not read an advocacy that can result in the world of the affirmative. To clarify, floating PIKs bad. Interpretation: Negative debaters must not read a counterplan that only competes through net benefits. To clarify, advantage counterplans are bad. Interpretation: If the negative debater reads a counterplan, the agent of the counterplan must be the same agent as the AC. Interpretation: If the negative reads a CP then they must have a carded solvency advocate, defined as an author with a scholarly degree in a relevant field to the topic that advocates for the CP. Interpretation: If the negative reads a plan inclusive counterplan, then the neg must have a solvency advocate, defined as an author with a scholarly degree in a relevant field to the topic that advocates for the explicit counterplan text. Interpretation: If the negative justifies competing interpretations, they must specify whether it operates under a norms-creation or an in-round abuse model. Default to norms-creation since the violation proves that your practice is bad in the context of a norm. Interpretation: Debaters may not spread without receiving explicit verbal consent from their opponent. To clarify, debaters must ask for permission before spreading. Interpretation: All neg counterplans need to be a) disclosed if they have been read before and b) need to be currently implemented somewhere in the status quo. Interpretation: The negative must disclose text of PICs 30 minutes prior to the round on their own NSDA LD Wiki if the affirmative is whole res and disclosed. Interpretation: The negative must defend a unique ethical framework from the aff. To clarify you cannot straight ref. Interpretation: The negative debater must either only contest the aff framework or the aff offense functioning under their framework. Interpretation: the negative must have a counter-advocacy text in the NC. Interpretation: The negative debater must defend the converse of the resolution. Interpretation: The negative may not defend a counterplan that fiats an alternative actor that is distinct from the aff. Interpretation: Debaters must not read an alternative that only specifies that we must reject the aff in favor of a critical shift. Interpretation: Kritik alternatives must only be specific, solvent policy actions implemented by a single actor. The alt must have a solvency advocate that explains the implementation of the policy, and cannot fiat a rejection or mindset shift. Interpretation: The neg must only have topical K links. Interpretation: Debaters may not defend implementation of the resolution through state or location action. They must defend either federal legislation, an executive order, or a reversal of current decisions through the Supreme Court. Interpretation: The negative debater may not read more than one theory shell in the 1NC. Interpretation: If the negative reads a “pre-fiat kritik”, then the link cannot be derive from something in the resolution. Interp solves any abuse: They can still read their criticism but they have to impact it back to a substantive framework. That could be minimizing oppression, but it can’t have pre fiat implications. Interpretation: The negative may only link offense to the post-fiat advocacy of the aff. To clarify, no Reps K’s. Interpretation: The neg must gain offense only from at most one unconditional route to the ballot. To clarify, a route to the ballot is one independent layer of the debate that functions as a voting issue. Interpretation: The negative must defend a counter-advocacy with a solvency advocate from the topic literature and a text written down in the 1NC. Interpretation: Kritiks must have an alternative. Interpretation: All kritik alternatives must have an explicitly delineated text in the 1NC. Interpretation: If the negative reads both theory and a kritik, they must explicitly say which layer outweighs in an explicit text in the 1NC. Interpretation: If the negative debater reads a K, they must not read multiple links into the K. Interpretation: The negative may only read theory shells that indict the aff for an advocacy shift after the shift has occurred. To clarify you may not read a shell indicting a potential advocacy shift. Interpretation: If debaters read theory and a K and don’t explicitly weigh between them in the speech they were read or in CX, they must grant me an RVI. Interpretation: Debaters may not read multiple theory and/or T shells with an implication of drop the debater and no RVI’s. Interpretation: Debaters may not read affirming/negating is harder arguments. Interpretation: If the negative reads a negating is harder arguments, they must specify the implication they have in a delineated text of the speech they read them. Interpretation: If the negative reads negating is harder arguments, they may not specify more than one implication. Interpretation: Debaters cannot impose identity specific burdens. To clarify, they can’t set certain conditions that are contingent based on the identity of the debater. Interpretation: The neg must specify the status of all advocacies in the form of a delineated text in 1NC during the 1NC immediately after reading the advocacy text. To clarify, you must say if advocacies are condo, uncondo, or dispo in the 1NC. Interpretation: Debaters must defend the resolution as a general principle. Interpretation: Debaters must read a value. Interpretation: All debaters theory shells must operate through the norms-creation model, otherwise known as NCM. Interpretation: All theoretical paradigm issues must be contextual to their corresponding interpretation. Note: I reserve the right to read shells contextual to the round in order to check for abuse if I feel as though the violation is particularly egregious. | 4/18/22 |
1 -- Theory InterpretationsTournament: 0 - NBA | Round: Finals | Opponent: Cavaliers LJ | Judge: Adam Silver Loyola Doubles: Yale r1: Yale r4: New York City Doubles: Barkley Forum r1: | 1/29/22 |
2 -- AC -- MollowTournament: 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | Round: 4 | Opponent: Immaculate Heart BC | Judge: Misra, Parth | 4/18/22 |
JANFEB -- AC -- Lackan v1Tournament: 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | Round: 1 | Opponent: Riverwood LF | Judge: Wu, Jalyn 1ACLackanThe drive to appropriate the cosmos is founded upon fantasy – private entities cast conflicts within the psyche towards outer space which fail and cement serial policy failure.Ormrod 9 – James S. Ormrod — School of Applied Science @ University of Birmingham UK, "Phantasy and Social Movements: An Ontology of Pro-Space Activism", http://cyber.sci-hub.tw/MTAuMTA4MC8xNDc0MjgzMDkwMjc3MDI3NA==/10.10804014742830902770274.pdf, April 2009, Agastya AND narcissistic responses to a culture of narcissism, rather than a reaction against postmodernity Space appropriation furthers fantasies of human omnipotence but fails to satisfy repetitive cravings for whole subjectivity – this expands militarism and commodification.Dickens 9 – Peter Dickens 9, Senior Research Fellow, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, University of Cambridge, Fellow and Director of Studies in Social and Political Sciences at Fitzwilliam College, James Ormrod, Principal Lecturer in Sociology at the University of Brighton, Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Essex, 8/20/09, Cosmic Society: Towards a Sociology of the Universe, p. 106-107, Agastya AND forms of subjectivity. Here, too, lie real and actual instabilities. Thus, appropriation is mediated by a structural relationship to the lack. The subject emerges through loss, unable to express its desires through language. This traps the subject in the symbolic, creating a constant desire towards the lost object.McGowan 13 – Todd; Associate Professor of Film Studies at the UVermont; "Enjoying What We Don't Have: The Political Project of Psychoanalysis," Pg. 26-29; 2013; University of Nebraska Press/Lincoln and London, Agastya AND ). However, this inexhaustibility may be attributed to all seven affective instincts. The impact is escalating cycles of violence premised on the repetition of drives that proliferates a never-ending war against life and culminates in extinction.Themi 8 – Tim, Prof @ Deakin U, "How Lacan’s Ethics Might Improve Our Understanding of Nietzsche’s Critique of Platonism: The Neurosis and Nihilism of a ‘Life’ Against Life," Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy, 2008, Agastya AND own volition until it accidentally finishes us!s Ethics, May 1960. No neg turns – theories cannot rely on an external linguistic framework for validation.Joyce 1 – Joyce, R. (2001). The Myth of Morality (Cambridge Studies in Philosophy). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511487101 AND count as evidence that would sway the debate one way or the other. Vote affirmative to recognize the appropriation of outer space by private entities is unjust as a method of traversing the fantasy.Rejecting appropriation orients desire towards the inevitability of lack – this allows for the possibility of true enjoyment in the face of incomplete identity.Hickman 16 – Steven Craig Hickman — Resistance Blogger and Philosopher, Social Ecologies, "The New Fantastic: The Carnival of the World", https://socialecologies.wordpress.com/2016/07/30/the-new-fantastic-the-wound-in-the-real/, 30 July 2016, Agastya AND realm, as well as redefine and shape our lives toward other goals. Embracing our constitutive lack severs proximate affective investments that breed passivity – our orientation is necessary to bridge the gap between discursive regimes and the material world.Berlant 11 – Lauren, George M. Pullman Professor, Department of English, University of Chicago, Cruel Optimism, Routledge: Duke University Press, 2011, p. 33-6, Agastya AND worn out by the promises that they have attached to in this world. The role of the judge is to expose the fantasy:1 – Pedagogy – Our method breaks free from educational projects that create psychic numbness and smooth governmentality.Taubman 17 – Peter Taubman (Department of Secondary Education @ Brooklyn College, CUNY), 2017, "DEATH BY NUMBERS: A RESPONSE TO BACKER, SARIGIANIDES, AND STILLWAGGON," Educational Theory, 67(1), 97–106, doi:10.1111/edth.12230, Agastya AND , thinking hardens. The rigor demanded by education reformers becomes rigor mortis. 2 – Performativity – Debate is a libidinal activity that asks us to evaluate possible worlds and advocacies through language which cannot encompass the Real – means every argument concedes to the authority of the lack.3 – Circularity – Answers to the standard concede to the lack since we recognize achieving an absolute correct interpretation is impossible – the aff is a never-ending project.4 – Serial Policy Failure – status-quo reforms fail absent intervention at the level of fantasy – otherwise policies are coopted towards counter-productive ends.Fotaki – Fotaki, Marianna. Organization Studies Group @ Manchester Business School). "Why do public policies fail so often? Exploring health policy-making as an imaginary and symbolic construction." June 15, 2010. Sage, 713-716, Agastya AND of new ways of desiring, engaging and being in organizations and society. 5 – Indeterminacy – there is nothing inherent in a rule that mandates following a specific interpretation. They are always subject to interpretation by the observer, which means an absolute moral rule would get interpreted differently by different agents. The AC solves – we recognize that signified rules cannot encompass their true essence because of the gap between the Symbolic and the Real.6 – Every reason is equally violent in creation.Derrida – Jacques Derrida, "Force of Law: The Mystical Foundation of Authority" Massa AND precipitation, acting in the night of non-knowledge and non-rule UV – Standard1 – Yes 1AR theory – anything else means infinite abuse – drop the debater, competing interps – the 1AR is too short to make up for the time trade-off – no RVIs or 2NR paradigm issues – 6 min 2NR means they can brute force me every time.2 – Permissibility affirms on this topic: (A) The aff is the status quo since existing I-Law treaties and the OST all ban private space appropriation. That affirms since negating requires a coherent obligation to take action – absent one you default to an action being unjust. Probability flips aff – there are infinite ways an action could be unjust, and only one way for the action to be just.Add-On – AFCInterpretation – The negative must concede the affirmative framework if the role of the judge is to expose the fantasy and the aff framework is disclosed.1 – Time skew – Winning the negative framework moots 6 minutes of 1AC offense and forces a 1AR restart against a 7 min 1NC – outweighs on quantifiability and reversibility – I can’t get back time lost and it’s the only way to measure abuse.2 – Topic Ed – Every debate would just be a framework debate which crowds out our ability to have core debates about the topic – that outweighs – we only have 2 months to debate the topic.3 – Prep skew – We can’t predict every single negative framework before round but they know the aff coming into round which makes pre-tournament prep impossible – outweighs on scope since there are millions of K’s and NC’s that could negate.4 – Empirics prove structural skews – that justifies AFC.Shah 21 – Sachin Shah Jan 2021, "A Statistical Analysis of the Impact of the Transition to Online Tournaments in Lincoln-Douglas Debate", http://nsdupdate.com/2021/a-statistical-analysis-of-the-impact-of-the-transition-to-online-tournaments-in-lincoln-douglas-debate-by-sachin-shah/ AND form chosen should be tested to ensure the skew is not unintentionally flipped. Drop the negative on 1AC theory – skews put me at an unrecoverable disadvantage from the outset. Use competing interps on 1AC theory – the negative has 7 minutes to answer the shell, and you can’t reasonably concede my framework. No RVIs – you’d read a counter-interp for 7 minutes of the NC and the debate would end right there.AdvantagePrivatization of space is unsustainable and increases debris – triggers the Kessler Syndrome.Thompson 21 – Clive, 11/17/21, Clive Thompson is a contributing writer for the New York Times Magazine, a columnist for Wired and Smithsonian magazines, and a regular contributor to Mother Jones. He’s the author of Coders: The Making of a New Tribe and the Remaking of the World, and Smarter Than You Think: How Technology is Changing our Minds for the Better. He’s @pomeranian99 on Twitter and Instagram, "Get Ready for the "Kessler Syndrome" to Wreck Outer Space," OneZero, https://onezero.medium.com/get-ready-for-the-kessler-syndrome-to-wreck-outer-space-7f29cfe62c3e, Justin AND orbit but unintentional ones — bits of rocket parts and detritus from launches. Debris causes nuclear war – Noko, Iran, and China – extinction.Beauchamp 14 – Zack, 4/21/14, Zack Beauchamp is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he covers global politics and ideology, and a host of Worldly, Vox's podcast on foreign policy and international relations. His work focuses on the rise of the populist right across the West, the role of identity in American politics, and how fringe ideologies shape the mainstream. Before coming to Vox, he edited TP Ideas, a section of Think Progress devoted to the ideas shaping our political world. He has an MSc from the London School of Economics in International Relations and grew up in Washington, DC, where he currently lives with his wife, daughter, and two (rescue) dogs ~"How space trash could start a nuclear war," Vox, https://www.vox.com/2014/4/21/5625246/space-war-china-north-korea-iran~~, Justin AND from South Korea and the West; it could extend that behavior to space | 1/28/22 |
JANFEB -- AC -- Lackan v2Tournament: 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | Round: 5 | Opponent: Memorial DX | Judge: McGinnis, David | 2/13/22 |
JANFEB -- AC -- Lackan v3Tournament: 5 - Barkley Forum for High Schools | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Peninsula RM | Judge: Panel | 2/13/22 |
JANFEB -- AC -- Lightning McQueen v1Tournament: 6 - Harvard National Forensics Tournament | Round: 6 | Opponent: King CP | Judge: Kopf, Kyle 1ACLightning McQueenJanuary 28th, 1986. 11:38 AM.T minus 3 … 2 … 1 … We have liftoff!Challenger is a go.Howell, E. (2019, May 1) | Challenger: The shuttle disaster that changed NASA. Space.com. | https://www.space.com/18084-space-shuttle-challenger.html, Agastya 11:39 AM – a booster engine tears apart and Challenger explodes mid-air. Welcome to the original accident.Featherstone 1 – Speed and violence: Sacrifice in virilio, Derrida, and Girard - Anthropoetics VI, no. 2 fall 2000/ Winter 2001. Anthropoetics. (2018, September 17). Retrieved December 1, 2021, from http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap0602/virilio, Agastya AND accident as the disordered chaos that provoked the invention of the ordered machine? 33 years later – SpaceX plans a static test for its Super Draco Engine. However, a leaky propellant valve causes the capsule to burst into flames – two decades of technological investment erased.Futurism. (2020, January 21) | Watch a spacex rocket explode in mid-flight. Futurism. | https://futurism.com/the-byte/spacex-rocket-explode-mid-flight, Agastya Modernity is marked by the politics of speed – founded by the accelerationist drive towards techno-rationalism. Speed shapes subjectivity – deliberative schemas and cultural vivacity are rendered obsolete through the striation of time.Ebert 13 – John David Ebert, 2013, "Dromology" in "The Virilio Dictionary" edited by John Armitage, pg 69-71 AND , and written media, correspondingly, suffer a diminishment of information content. With technological accumulation comes the accident – inevitable failure fueled by imperatives of progress.Crogan 99 – Patrick Crogan. "The Tendency, the Accident, and the Untimely: Paul Virilio’s Engagement with the Future," Paul Virilio: From Modernism to Hypermodernism and Beyond, ed. John Armitage. Article from Theory, Culture and Society, 1999. Google Books, pp. 171-173, Agastya AND enigmatic accidents that Virilio says ‘every technology produces, provokes, programs’. Private appropriation is driven by the lust for technological expansion – conquering space turns it into yet another battleground to flaunt progress.Kroker 4 – Arthur, 2004. "The Will to Technology and the Culture of Nihilism: Heidegger, Nietzsche, and Marx.", pat recut Agastya AND Artificial war, then, as a prolegomenon to the codes of technology. The drive to conquer the cosmos is antagonistic with the disabled subject – it necessitates our eradication.Boucher 18 – Martin ~PhD Candidate in Human Studies at Laurentian University. His work is primarily situated in disability studies and posthumanism, but he maintains an interest in the philosophy of social science and the history of ideas.~ "Prostheticity, Disability, and Spaceflight", Jwala AND re-evaluation of how we interpret those technologies and relationships mentioned above. Reject counter-accounts – theories cannot rely on an external linguistic framework for validation.Joyce 1 – Joyce, R. (2001). The Myth of Morality (Cambridge Studies in Philosophy). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511487101 AND count as evidence that would sway the debate one way or the other. Incessant development within the technological apparatus further a state of permanent conflict – culminating in serial policy failure, arms racing, and extinction.Virilio 9 – Paul Virilio, philosopher, urbanist, and cultural theorist, 2009 "The State of Emergency," The Virilio Reader, p 48-57, Agastya AND by any other kind of conflict, rapidity delivers us from this world. Vote affirmative to reject the appropriation of outer space by private entities as a method of dwelling within slow time.Appeals towards status-quo political reforms further a cyclical model of governmentality that revolves between speed, war, and totalitarianism.Glezos 9 – Simon Glezos, Ph.D. in political theory and international relations from Johns Hopkins University, now works in the department of political science at University of Regina, " The politics of speed: Capitalism, the state and war in an accelerating world" ~dissertation~ pg. 93-94, Agastya AND cycle of reinforcement between speed, war and the (Globalitarian) state. Our method breaks free from categorical rejection of technology in favor of a re-orientation that challenges the perfect portrait of progress.Adams 3 – Jason Adams (B.A., Evergreen State College). "Popular Defense in the Empire of Speed: Paul Virilio and the Phenomenology of the Political Body." Thesis submitted for a Masters in Political Science, Simon Fraser University. 2003. Absent technological intervention, reasons are infinitely violent from creation.Derrida – Jacques Derrida, "Force of Law: The Mystical Foundation of Authority" The role of the judge is to expose the accident. The University of Disaster emerges as a bulwark of cynical critique that comes complicit within accelerationism – voting affirmative injects a dose of negativity within academia.Ebert 13 – John David Ebert, 2013, "Dromology" in "The Virilio Dictionary" edited by John Armitage, pp. 202-203, MNGB recut Agastya UV – Standard1 – Yes 1AR theory – anything else means infinite abuse – drop the debater, competing interps, no 2N paradigm issues – the 1AR is too short to make up for the time trade-off – no RVIs – 6 min 2NR means they can brute force me every time.2 – Presumption affirms on this topic: (A) The aff is the status quo since existing I-Law treaties and the OST all ban private space appropriation. That affirms since negating requires a coherent obligation to take action – absent one you default to an action being unjust (B) Unjust is defined as not based on or behaving according to what is morally right and fair.1 If there isn’t a proactive obligation, everything doesn’t behave according to what is morally right.ShellInterpretation: Debaters must disclose all constructive positions on open source with highlighting on the 2021-22 NDCA LD wiki after the round in which they read them.Violation – they don’t.
1~ Debate resource inequities—you’ll say people will steal cards, but that’s good—it’s the only way to truly level the playing field for students such as novices in under-privileged programs who can’t bypass paywalled articles.2~ Evidence ethics – open source is the only way to verify pre-round that cards aren’t miscut or highlighted or bracketed unethically. That’s a voter – maintaining ethical ev practices is key to being good academics and we should be able to verify you didn’t cheatEvidence ethics is an independent voter and a reason to drop them absent DTD – 1~ it’s key to assessing the honesty of your form of argumentation which means if you’re lying about an argument then we don’t know if it’s correctly implicated 2~ turns their ROB – if the judge is an educator they should enforce norms that won’t get you kicked out of college in the future 3~ prevents neg solvency – movements and thought experiments are cool but it doesn’t matter if you’re getting sued to space and back cuz it prevents your ability to theorize and create a movement given that you’ll either be bankrupt with no credibility or too caught up in legal forms to plan 4~ you have a constitutive role to vote these practices down absent the flow – even if we lose the tech of this argument, you know they intuitively did something that violates a D-Rule.Competing interps because they can’t reasonably plagiarize. | 3/1/22 |
JANFEB -- AC -- Lightning McQueen v2Tournament: 6 - Harvard National Forensics Tournament | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Memorial DX | Judge: Panel | 3/1/22 |
JANFEB -- AC -- MollowTournament: 6 - Harvard National Forensics Tournament | Round: 4 | Opponent: Strake Jesuit ZD | Judge: Eberhart, Henry | 2/19/22 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- Be Like Mike v1Tournament: 2 - Duke Invitational | Round: 4 | Opponent: Byram Hills EW | Judge: Survance, Anthony 1AC1AC – Be Like MikeIP-based data exclusivity standards in Jordan devastate healthcare accessibility and the economy.Barqawi 19 – "The access to medicine puzzle: scaling back the negative effects of the Jordan–US Free Trade Agreement" Laila Barqawi ~Lecturer of University of Central Lancashire, Preston (UCLAN)~. Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, Volume 14, Issue 9, September 2019, Pages 678–686, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpz080 SM Data exclusivity in Jordan blocks generic competition, economic growth, and affordable healthcare – the only major case study decisively affirms.Malpani 9 – "All costs, no benefits: How the US – Jordan free trade agreement affects access to medicines" Rohit Malpani ~a senior campaigns advisor at Oxfam America. He currently manages Oxfam International's access-to-medicines campaign~. 2009 Palgrave Macmillan 1741-1343 Journal of Generic Medicines Vol. 6, 3, 206–217 https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.851.5138andrep=rep1andtype=pdf SM Data exclusivity stymies the generic market which is key to the Jordanian pharmaceutical industry. That spills over to neighboring countries and the Jordanian economy writ large.Armouti and Nsour 16 – "Data Exclusivity for Pharmaceuticals: Was It the Best Choice for Jordan Under the U.S.- Jordan Free Trade Agreement?" WAEL ARMOUTI ~LL.M in intellectual property law, Faculty of Law, the University of Jordan (Amman, Jordan), Legal Affairs Director at Jordan Food and Drug Administration (JFDA).~ AND MOHAMMAD F.A. NSOUR ~Lawyer and associate law professor at the University of Jordan.~ OREGON REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL LAW ~Vol. 17, 259 2016~ https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1794/20019/Nsour.pdf?sequence=1andisAllowed=y SM Jordan's generic pharmaceutical industry is key to economic growth and Middle East healthcare.Salih 19 – "Now More Competitive, Jordan's Pharmaceuticals See Healthy Jump in Exports" Mar 14, 2019, Razan Salih, Samer Badawi, and Luma Batarseh https://dai-global-developments.com/articles/now-more-competitive-jordans-pharmaceuticals-see-healthy-jump-in-exports SM Economic stagnation structurally locks in instability in Jordan.Wolf 4/14 – "A Hashemite Family Reunion Can't Hide Jordan's Woes" Albert B. Wolf, an associate research fellow at Johns Hopkins SAIS and an assistant professor of political science at the American University of Central Asia. April 14, 2021 https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/04/14/jordan-abdullah-hamzah-hashemite-family-reunion-cant-hide-economic-woes/ SM Economic dependency on the US is a ticking time bomb – it makes instability structurally inevitable absent a domestic economic boost.Younes 18 – "Jordan's economic crisis threatens political stability" Ali Younes, 14 Feb 2018 https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2018/2/14/jordans-economic-crisis-threatens-political-stability SM Jordan's instability due to economic failure spills over regionally – independently ruins Israel-Jordan peace treaty.Al-Shami 4/13 – "Jordan's Thorny Spring Spells Trouble for the Middle East" Farah Al-Shami, Research Fellow, Arab Reform Initiative (ARI), Tuqa Nusairat, Deputy Director, Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East - Atlantic Council, Paolo Maggiolini, Associate Researcher, Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI) and Lecturer in History of Islamic Asia, Catholic University of Milan, Bruce Riedel, Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy, Center for Middle East Policy, Center for Security, Strategy, and Technology, Director - The Intelligence Project, Brookings, April 13, 2021 https://www.ispionline.it/en/pubblicazione/jordans-thorny-spring-spells-trouble-middle-east-30024 SM Instability spills over to Israeli security crises specifically.Solomon 4/6 – "Instability in neighboring Jordan is 'bad news' for Israel" Ariel Ben Solomon ~Middle East Correspondent for the Jerusalem Post~, Apr 6, 2021 https://www.jns.org/instability-in-neighboring-jordan-is-bad-news-for-israel/ SM Collapse of Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty causes Middle East war.Lazaroff 20 – "Will annexation destroy Israeli-Jordanian peace, set kingdom aflame?" Tovah Lazaroff is the Deputy Managing Editor of The Jerusalem Post May 1, 2020 https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/will-annexation-destroy-israeli-jordanian-peace-set-kingdom-aflame-626104 SM Middle East turmoil goes nuclear.Silverstein 4/23 – "Iran-Israel tensions: The threat of nuclear disaster looms large," Richard Silverstein ~writes the Tikun Olam blog, devoted to exposing the excesses of the Israeli national security state~, 23 April 2021 https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/iran-israel-tensions-threat-nuclear-war-looms-large SM Regional war escalates quickly and draws in Russia and the US.Hour 18 – Maj. Nadav Ben Hour, a visiting military fellow with The Washington Institute, "The Great Middle Eastern War of 2019," 8/20, https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/the-great-middle-eastern-war-of-2019 Nuke war causes extinction – Ice Age, famines, and war won't stay limited.Edwards 17 – Paul N. Edwards, CISAC's William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at Stanford's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. Being interviewed by EarthSky. How nuclear war would affect Earth's climate. September 8, 2017. earthsky.org/human-world/how-nuclear-war-would-affect-earths-climate 1AC – PlanPlan – The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ought to reduce data exclusivity for medicines.Barqawi 19 – "The access to medicine puzzle: scaling back the negative effects of the Jordan–US Free Trade Agreement" Laila Barqawi ~Lecturer of University of Central Lancashire, Preston (UCLAN)~. Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, Volume 14, Issue 9, September 2019, Pages 678–686, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpz080 SM
Reducing data exclusivity revives the generic market which boosts accessible healthcare and the economy.Alawi and Alabbadi 15 – Investigating the Effect of Data Exclusivity on the Pharmaceutical Sector in Jordan Rand Alawi ~Pharmacist, MBA, Faculty of Business, The University of Jordan~ and Ibrahim Alabbadi ~ Associate Professor, MBA, PhD, Biopharmaceutics and Clinical Pharmacy Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, The University of Jordan Jordan Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Volume 8, No. 2, 2015 https://journals.ju.edu.jo/JJPS/article/view/9377/4480 SM 1AC – Framing v1The standard is maximizing expected well-being – to clarify, saving lives.1 – Death outweighs – A~ Agents can't act if they fear for their bodily security – my framework constrains every NC and K and B~ It's the worst form of evil:Paterson 3 – Department of Philosophy, Providence College, Rhode Island (Craig, "A Life Not Worth Living?", Studies in Christian Ethics. 2~ Actor spec – governments must use Util because they don't have intentions and are constantly dealing with tradeoffs—outweighs since different agents have different obligations – takes out calc indicts since they are empirically denied. | 11/20/21 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- Be Like Mike v2Tournament: 2 - Duke Invitational | Round: Octas | Opponent: Lake Highland Prep SV | Judge: Panel AC – Policy1AC1AC – Framing v1My value is morality – since 'ought' implies a moral obligation.The criterion is saving the most amount of lives.Preventing death is the highest moral consideration, since people can't act if they fear for their bodily security, and it's the worst form of evil:Paterson 3 – Department of Philosophy, Providence College, Rhode Island (Craig, "A Life Not Worth Living?", Studies in Christian Ethics. 1AC – AdvantageIP-based data exclusivity standards in Jordan devastate healthcare accessibility and the economy.Barqawi 19 – "The access to medicine puzzle: scaling back the negative effects of the Jordan–US Free Trade Agreement" Laila Barqawi ~Lecturer of University of Central Lancashire, Preston (UCLAN)~. Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, Volume 14, Issue 9, September 2019, Pages 678–686, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpz080 SM Data exclusivity in Jordan blocks generic competition, economic growth, and affordable healthcare – the only major case study decisively affirms.Malpani 9 – "All costs, no benefits: How the US – Jordan free trade agreement affects access to medicines" Rohit Malpani ~a senior campaigns advisor at Oxfam America. He currently manages Oxfam International's access-to-medicines campaign~. 2009 Palgrave Macmillan 1741-1343 Journal of Generic Medicines Vol. 6, 3, 206–217 https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.851.5138andrep=rep1andtype=pdf SM Data exclusivity stymies the generic market which is key to the Jordanian pharmaceutical industry. That spills over to neighboring countries and the Jordanian economy writ large.Armouti and Nsour 16 – "Data Exclusivity for Pharmaceuticals: Was It the Best Choice for Jordan Under the U.S.- Jordan Free Trade Agreement?" WAEL ARMOUTI ~LL.M in intellectual property law, Faculty of Law, the University of Jordan (Amman, Jordan), Legal Affairs Director at Jordan Food and Drug Administration (JFDA).~ AND MOHAMMAD F.A. NSOUR ~Lawyer and associate law professor at the University of Jordan.~ OREGON REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL LAW ~Vol. 17, 259 2016~ https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1794/20019/Nsour.pdf?sequence=1andisAllowed=y SM Jordan's generic pharmaceutical industry is key to economic growth and Middle East healthcare.Salih 19 – "Now More Competitive, Jordan's Pharmaceuticals See Healthy Jump in Exports" Mar 14, 2019, Razan Salih, Samer Badawi, and Luma Batarseh https://dai-global-developments.com/articles/now-more-competitive-jordans-pharmaceuticals-see-healthy-jump-in-exports SM Economic stagnation structurally locks in instability in Jordan.Wolf 4/14 – "A Hashemite Family Reunion Can't Hide Jordan's Woes" Albert B. Wolf, an associate research fellow at Johns Hopkins SAIS and an assistant professor of political science at the American University of Central Asia. April 14, 2021 https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/04/14/jordan-abdullah-hamzah-hashemite-family-reunion-cant-hide-economic-woes/ SM Economic dependency on the US is a ticking time bomb – it makes instability structurally inevitable absent a domestic economic boost.Younes 18 – "Jordan's economic crisis threatens political stability" Ali Younes, 14 Feb 2018 https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2018/2/14/jordans-economic-crisis-threatens-political-stability SM Jordan's instability due to economic failure spills over regionally – independently ruins Israel-Jordan peace treaty.Al-Shami 4/13 – "Jordan's Thorny Spring Spells Trouble for the Middle East" Farah Al-Shami, Research Fellow, Arab Reform Initiative (ARI), Tuqa Nusairat, Deputy Director, Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East - Atlantic Council, Paolo Maggiolini, Associate Researcher, Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI) and Lecturer in History of Islamic Asia, Catholic University of Milan, Bruce Riedel, Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy, Center for Middle East Policy, Center for Security, Strategy, and Technology, Director - The Intelligence Project, Brookings, April 13, 2021 https://www.ispionline.it/en/pubblicazione/jordans-thorny-spring-spells-trouble-middle-east-30024 SM Instability spills over to Israeli security crises specifically.Solomon 4/6 – "Instability in neighboring Jordan is 'bad news' for Israel" Ariel Ben Solomon ~Middle East Correspondent for the Jerusalem Post~, Apr 6, 2021 https://www.jns.org/instability-in-neighboring-jordan-is-bad-news-for-israel/ SM Collapse of Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty causes Middle East war.Lazaroff 20 – "Will annexation destroy Israeli-Jordanian peace, set kingdom aflame?" Tovah Lazaroff is the Deputy Managing Editor of The Jerusalem Post May 1, 2020 https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/will-annexation-destroy-israeli-jordanian-peace-set-kingdom-aflame-626104 SM Middle East turmoil goes nuclear.Silverstein 4/23 – "Iran-Israel tensions: The threat of nuclear disaster looms large," Richard Silverstein ~writes the Tikun Olam blog, devoted to exposing the excesses of the Israeli national security state~, 23 April 2021 https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/iran-israel-tensions-threat-nuclear-war-looms-large SM Regional war escalates quickly and draws in Russia and the US.Hour 18 – Maj. Nadav Ben Hour, a visiting military fellow with The Washington Institute, "The Great Middle Eastern War of 2019," 8/20, https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/the-great-middle-eastern-war-of-2019 Nuke war causes extinction – Ice Age, famines, and war won't stay limited.Edwards 17 – Paul N. Edwards, CISAC's William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at Stanford's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. Being interviewed by EarthSky. How nuclear war would affect Earth's climate. September 8, 2017. earthsky.org/human-world/how-nuclear-war-would-affect-earths-climate 1AC – PlanPlan – The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ought to reduce data exclusivity for medicines.Barqawi 19 – "The access to medicine puzzle: scaling back the negative effects of the Jordan–US Free Trade Agreement" Laila Barqawi ~Lecturer of University of Central Lancashire, Preston (UCLAN)~. Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, Volume 14, Issue 9, September 2019, Pages 678–686, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpz080 SM
Reducing data exclusivity revives the generic market which boosts accessible healthcare and the economy.Alawi and Alabbadi 15 – Investigating the Effect of Data Exclusivity on the Pharmaceutical Sector in Jordan Rand Alawi ~Pharmacist, MBA, Faculty of Business, The University of Jordan~ and Ibrahim Alabbadi ~ Associate Professor, MBA, PhD, Biopharmaceutics and Clinical Pharmacy Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, The University of Jordan Jordan Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Volume 8, No. 2, 2015 https://journals.ju.edu.jo/JJPS/article/view/9377/4480 SM 1AC – ShellInterpretation: All debaters must have a wiki with a delineated citation for contact information on the HSLD 2021 page.Violation: They don't – screenshots below:Theirs: The standard is safety – contact info's the only way to check trigger warnings before the round for what debaters are comfortable reading, anything else creates a hostile environment – for example, checking about scenes of violence authors may mention. Safety is a voting issue – we can't debate unless we feel safe to do so. Also controls the I/L to disclosure – contact info is necessary to contact the other debater before the round.Drop them on 1AC theory – skews put me at an unrecoverable disadvantage from the outset. Use competing interps on 1AC theory – the negative has 7 minutes to answer the shell, and you can't reasonably withhold contact info. No RVIs on 1AC theory – you'd read a counter-interp for 7 minutes of the NC and the debate would end right there.1AC – Underview1 – Yes 1AR theory – anything else means infinite abuse – drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer – 1AR are too short to make up for the time trade-off – no RVIs – 6 min 2NR means they can brute force me every time.2 – RVIs on T and neg theory – A~ Time-skew – 6 Minute 2NR with collapse to whatever I undercover means that you can win theory and substance, but I need to go for both in half the time and split it between the 2 layers. B~ Reciprocity – you get T and theory so I should get theory and an RVI to make the burden reciprocal.3 – Reasonability on neg theory with a bright-line of link/impact turn ground towards the 1AC – prevents frivolous T debates and recenters our arguments towards the topic. | 11/20/21 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- Be Prepared De-Leuze v1Tournament: 0 - NBA | Round: Finals | Opponent: Cavaliers LJ | Judge: Adam Silver SO21 Deleuze AC1ACShellInterpretation: All debaters must have contact info on the NSDA 21-22 wiki.Violation: You don't even have a wiki – screenshots below:Drop them on 1AC theory – skews put me at an unrecoverable disadvantage from the outset. Use competing interps on 1AC theory – the negative has 7 minutes to answer the shell. No RVIs – you'd read a counter-interp for 7 minutes of the NC and the debate would end right there.AC – You're Going De-LeuzeWe are dynamic – overtime, affective encounters with our surroundings through time shape subjectivity, yet representational thought ascribes to them a limited essence – our model resists the imposition of sameness onto a chaotic world.Deleuze – Deleuze, Gilles. Difference and Repitition. Translated by Paul Patton. 1968 Our instability necessitates power structures of rhizomatic becoming that embrace difference. Dominant economic models repress creative desires and over-code social life – fields that are not intelligible within straited space are excluded as deviant.Rowe 13 – Rowe, J. E. (2013). Understanding economic development as a Deleuzian "plateau." Local Economy, 28(1), 99–113. doi:10.1177/0269094212465580, Agastya Thus, the roll of the ballot is to embrace economic creative difference. Our orientation is key to pedagogy – we need to tip the scales towards a minoritarian repositioning to mobilize moments of relationality and challenge dominant epistemologies.Carlin and Wallin – Carlin, Matthew. Wallin, Jason. "Deleuze and Guattari, Politics and Education." Bloomsbury. 2014. Pg. 119-121 The politics of stable subjectivity coopts all attempts at resistance – it stabilizes complex features into unchanging models which dooms all radical praxis to failure.Rolli – Rolli, Marc. "Immanence and Transcendence" Bulletin de la Sociite Amincaine de Philosophie de Langue Franfais Volume 14, Number 2, Fall 2004 Now affirm – The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to eliminate intellectual property protections for medicines. I'll clarify specification in CX to avoid frivolous debates.Medical intellectual property protections proliferate the Empire's parasitic control of subjects by restricting affective communication, making revolution impossible.Lemmens – Lemmens, P. (n.d.). The conditions of the Common. A Stieglerian critique ON Hardt AND Negri's thesis on Cognitive capitalism as a prefiguration of communism. The_Conditions_of_the_Common_A_Stieglerian_Critique_on_Hardt_and_Negri_s_Thesis_on_Cognitive_Capitalism_as_a_Prefiguration_of_Communism Restrictions of fluidity idealize life to warrant a cleansing of difference which is the root cause of material violence and collapses to fascism.Evans 10 – Brad Evans, Lecturer in the School of Politics and International Studies at the University of Leeds and Programme Director for International Relations, "Foucault's Legacy: Security, War, and Violence in the 21st Century," Security Dialogue vol.41, no. 4, August 2010, pg. 422-424 Reject focus on utility and death – it creates a survival-at-all-costs mindset in the form of racism, xenophobia, and sexism that makes debate unsafe.Winnubst – Shannon Winnubst, professor of Women's and gender studies at Ohio State University, Queering Freedom, pg. 183 Utilitarianism fails – multiple warrants.Cleveland ~Cleveland, Paul A. "The Failure of Utilitarian Ethics in Political Economy." Independent Institute. https://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=1602. Published 1 September 2002~ AFCInterpretation: The negative must concede the affirmative framework if the standard is promoting economic creative difference.Prefer – 1~ Time skew – Winning the negative framework moots 6 minutes of 1AC offense and forces a 1AR restart against a 7 min 1NC – outweighs on quantifiability and reversibility – I can't get back time lost and it's the only way to measure abuse. 2~ Topic Ed – Every debate would just be a framework debate which crowds out our ability to have core debates about the topic – that outweighs – we only have 2 months to debate the topic 3~ Prep skew – We can't predict every single negative framework before round but they know the aff coming into round which makes pre-tournament prep impossible. Especially true since there are millions of K's and NC's that could negate – that outweighs – A~ Sequencing – It's a perquisite engaging in-round since you need prep to debate B~ Engagement – It ruins the quality and depth of discussions that make debate rounds educational.1AC – Paradigm1~ Yes 1AR theory – anything else means infinite abuse – drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer – the 1AR is too short to make up for the time trade-off – no RVIs – 6 min 2NR means they can brute force me every time. | 1/29/22 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- Be Prepared De-Leuze v2Tournament: 1 - Loyola Invitational | Round: 3 | Opponent: Peninsula BD | Judge: Das, Sreyaash SO21 Deleuze ACSPIKES ON THE BOTTOMAC – You're Going De-LeuzeWe are dynamic – overtime, affective encounters with our surroundings through time shape subjectivity, yet representational thought ascribes to them a limited essence – our model resists the imposition of sameness onto a chaotic world.Deleuze – Deleuze, Gilles. Difference and Repitition. Translated by Paul Patton. 1968 Impacts: A~ Stable subjectivity makes critique impossible since it takes empirical features and treats it as a model, which provides no place for contestation and B~ Every negation is just a reconfiguration of a set of relationships of differences. It doesn't in truth deny those relations, it just affirms them in a different way. There is a multiplicity of "yes's" from which we shape a no, which means even if there is no logical conclusion from this, then only affirmation is true.Our instability necessitates power structures of rhizomatic becoming that embrace difference. Dominant economic models repress creative desires and over-code social life – fields that are not intelligible within straited space are excluded as deviant.Rowe 13 – Rowe, J. E. (2013). Understanding economic development as a Deleuzian "plateau." Local Economy, 28(1), 99–113. doi:10.1177/0269094212465580, Agastya And, it is imperative to preserve affective truth – theories cannot rely on an external framework of power structures for validation – other ethics are referential.Joyce 1 – Joyce, R. (2001). The Myth of Morality (Cambridge Studies in Philosophy). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511487101 Thus, the roll of the ballot is to embrace economic creative difference. Our orientation is key to pedagogy – we need to tip the scales towards a minoritarian repositioning to mobilize moments of relationality and challenge dominant epistemologies.Carlin and Wallin – Carlin, Matthew. Wallin, Jason. "Deleuze and Guattari, Politics and Education." Bloomsbury. 2014. Pg. 119-121 The politics of stable subjectivity coopts all attempts at resistance – it stabilizes complex features into unchanging models which dooms all radical praxis to failure.Rolli – Rolli, Marc. "Immanence and Transcendence" Bulletin de la Sociite Amincaine de Philosophie de Langue Franfais Volume 14, Number 2, Fall 2004 There are infinite affective states – the aff is moral in one which is sufficient.Vaidman 2 ~Vaidman, Lev, 3-24-2002, "Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)," No Publication, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-manyworlds/~~ Only affect can bridge the gap between discursive regimes and the material world – it's cruelly optimistic to force chaotic identity into stable structures.Schafer 13 – Schaefer '13. Schaefer, D. "The Promise of Affect: The Politics of the Event in Ahmed's The Promise of Happiness and Berlant's Cruel Optimism." Theory and Event 16.2 2013. Project MUSE Outweighs – A~ Even you win your framework, this outweighs because we can't cohere to that norm and B~ The statement of affirmation is sufficient to affirm. The nature of affect is such that any singularity of expression must be taken as an individual's truth, thus my stance is sufficient to affirm.Now affirm – The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to eliminate intellectual property protections for medicines. I'll clarify specification in CX to avoid frivolous debates.Medical intellectual property protections proliferate the Empire's parasitic control of subjects by restricting affective communication, making revolution impossible.Lemmens – Lemmens, P. (n.d.). The conditions of the Common. A Stieglerian critique ON Hardt AND Negri's thesis on Cognitive capitalism as a prefiguration of communism. The_Conditions_of_the_Common_A_Stieglerian_Critique_on_Hardt_and_Negri_s_Thesis_on_Cognitive_Capitalism_as_a_Prefiguration_of_Communism Intellectual property regimes biologically regulate affective expression and force the subject into binary, mechanical, categories which staticize creative desires.Lefebvre – Lefebvre, A. (2009). In The image of law: Deleuze, BERGSON, SPINOZA. essay, Stanford University Press. Body extension and the law: Medical devices, intellectual property, prosthetics and marginalisation (again) TRIPS standards fail to protect indigenous knowledge – current patent system is built on Eurocentric values .Garcia 4 – Javier Garcia. "Fighting Biopiracy: The Legislative Protection of Traditional Knowledge". 2004 Restrictions of fluidity idealize life to warrant a cleansing of difference which is the root cause of material violence and collapses to fascism.Evans 10 – Brad Evans, Lecturer in the School of Politics and International Studies at the University of Leeds and Programme Director for International Relations, "Foucault's Legacy: Security, War, and Violence in the 21st Century," Security Dialogue vol.41, no. 4, August 2010, pg. 422-424 Reject focus on utility and death – it creates a survival-at-all-costs mindset in the form of racism, xenophobia, and sexism that makes debate unsafe.Winnubst – Shannon Winnubst, professor of Women's and gender studies at Ohio State University, Queering Freedom, pg. 183 Utilitarianism fails – multiple warrants.Cleveland ~Cleveland, Paul A. "The Failure of Utilitarian Ethics in Political Economy." Independent Institute. https://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=1602. Published 1 September 2002~ AFCInterpretation: The negative must concede the affirmative framework.Prefer – 1~ Time skew – Winning the negative framework moots 6 minutes of 1AC offense and forces a 1AR restart against a 7 min 1NC – outweighs on quantifiability and reversibility – I can't get back time lost and it's the only way to measure abuse. 2~ Topic Ed – Every debate would just be a framework debate which crowds out our ability to have core debates about the topic – that outweighs – we only have 2 months to debate the topic 3~ Prep skew – We can't predict every single negative framework before round but they know the aff coming into round which makes pre-tournament prep impossible. Especially true since there are millions of K's and NC's that could negate – that outweighs – A~ Sequencing – It's a perquisite engaging in-round since you need prep to debate B~ Engagement – It ruins the quality and depth of discussions that make debate rounds educational.Drop them on 1AC theory – skews put me at an unrecoverable disadvantage from the outset. Use competing interps on 1AC theory – the negative has 7 minutes to answer the shell, and you can't reasonably concede my framework. No RVIs – you'd read a counter-interp for 7 minutes of the NC and the debate would end right there.1AC – Paradigm1~ Yes 1AR theory2~ Presumption and Permissibility Affirm – | 1/13/22 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- Be Prepared De-Leuze v3Tournament: 1 - Loyola Invitational | Round: 6 | Opponent: San Mateo YR | Judge: Hatfield, Wyatt SO21 Deleuze ACSPIKES ON THE BOTTOMACWe are dynamic – overtime, affective encounters with our surroundings through time shape subjectivity, yet representational thought ascribes to them a limited essence – our model resists the imposition of sameness onto a chaotic world. Every negation is just a reconfiguration of a set of relationships of differences. It doesn't in truth deny those relations, it just affirms them in a different way.Deleuze – Deleuze, Gilles. Difference and Repitition. Translated by Paul Patton. 1968 Our instability necessitates power structures of rhizomatic becoming that embrace difference. Dominant economic models repress creative desires and over-code social life – fields that are not intelligible within straited space are excluded as deviant.Rowe 13 – Rowe, J. E. (2013). Understanding economic development as a Deleuzian "plateau." Local Economy, 28(1), 99–113. doi:10.1177/0269094212465580, Agastya And, it is imperative to preserve affective truth – theories cannot rely on an external framework of power structures for validation – other ethics are referential.Joyce 1 – Joyce, R. (2001). The Myth of Morality (Cambridge Studies in Philosophy). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511487101 Thus, the standard is to embrace economic creative difference.There are infinite affective states – the aff is moral in one which is sufficient.Vaidman 2 ~Vaidman, Lev, 3-24-2002, "Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)," No Publication, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-manyworlds/~~ Static rules fail since each agent formulates their own interpretation in moments of crisis – we must orient agency towards chaos to break free from indeterminate principles.Smith – Nathan Jun and Daniel W. Smith. "Deleuze and Ethics." Prefer obligatorily – ought entails that obligations are understood through the frame of affective relations.Cappelle – "Should vs Ought to" 2010 Bert Cappelle is a lecturer of English linguistics at the University of Lille https://www.academia.edu/1433058/Should_vs_ought_to Now affirm – The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to eliminate intellectual property protections for medicines. Resolved is defined as firm in purpose or intent; determined and I'm determined. Affirm means to express agreement and you already know I do. I'll clarify specification in CX to avoid frivolous debates.Medical intellectual property protections proliferate the Empire's parasitic control of subjects by restricting affective communication, making revolution impossible.Lemmens – Lemmens, P. (n.d.). The conditions of the Common. A Stieglerian critique ON Hardt AND Negri's thesis on Cognitive capitalism as a prefiguration of communism. The_Conditions_of_the_Common_A_Stieglerian_Critique_on_Hardt_and_Negri_s_Thesis_on_Cognitive_Capitalism_as_a_Prefiguration_of_Communism 1AC – Paradigm1~ Yes 1AR theory – anything else means infinite abuse – drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer – the 1AR is too short to make up for the time trade-off – no RVIs – 6 min 2NR means they can brute force me every time – eval after the 1AR – only way to check back for 7 minute NC dump. No new 2NR weighing or theory – they can up-layer the short 3 minute 2AR with infinite no-risk paradigm issues for 6 minutes.2~ Presumption and Permissibility Affirm – ~A~ We assume statements true until proven false. You'd believe me if I told you that my name was Agastya unless you already had a reason to believe otherwise. The neg may not read meta-theory – I only have time to check abuse 1 time but you can do it in the NC and 2N, up-layering my attempt means we never get to the best norm. This means reject any reason why an aff spike is bad since they claim aff theory is unfair. And, drop them for contesting spikes – skews 1ar time allocation cause I invested time in reading them. ~B~ Affirming is harder – the short 1AR is always at a disadvantage to the 7 minute NC dump – means that if the round's equal I did the better debating.3~ No 2NR "I meet" arguments – A~ Skews theory ground because they're each a NIB for me to winning theory which kills my ability to check abuse. B~ Skews time, they can make three minutes of blippy I meets that I can't cover because the 2AR is too short. No neg arguments – skews me to answer those. Answering this triggers a contradiction since it relies on an analytic argument and those affirm since I spoke first and they were your fault for creating. Also no new 2n arguments, weighing, and paradigm issues. a) overloads the 2AR with a massive clarification burden b) it becomes impossible to check NC abuse if you can dump on reasons the shell doesn't matter in the 2NR – c) neg has access to bidirectional shells which makes neg shells impossible to meet and impact turns your reading of the shells since I'll always lose on an interpretation.4~ The neg may not read nibs or OCIs a) you can up-layer for 7 minutes that I have to answer before I even have access to offense b) inf neg abuse since you would just read 7 mins of auto-negate arguments c) The neg may not read overview answers to aff arguments – they can up-layer all aff arguments for 7 minutes and the 1ar has to shift through it all. I have a computer virus that prevents changing font size and everything's in an overview. d) OCIs are just shorter theory args they can blow up. No neg analytics - I don't have time to cover 100 blippy arguments in the NC since you can read 7 min of analytics and extend any of them to win. No Ks on spikes – moot all the time I spent reading it. This means they must only line by line aff arguments, since otherwise they function as nibs before I access warrants.5~ Can't contest both the fwk and ROB a) forces me to win my fwk is relevant, then win the fwk, then win offense which is a 3-1 skew b) All neg interps are counter interps since the aff takes an implicit stance on every issue which means you need an RVI to become offensive. C) You should accept all aff interps and assume I meet neg theory since the aff speaks in the dark and I have to take a stance on something, you can at least react and adapt.reject all answers to this theory argument – you solve all objections by picking a specific ROB and being the only one that links offense.6~ Reject neg fairness concerns since a) 13-7 time skew and 6-minute collapse gives the negative the strategic advantage and means the AFF must split 1AR time. b) The NC has the ability to uplayer and restart the round and have time to generate offense that matters. c) The AFF will defend NEG preferences on specificity insofar as it doesn't require me to abandon my maxim. Subsequently, you must propose all interps about my advocacy to guarantee better substantive debates. This also means that you should reevaluate the AC under the interpretation. If there is a problem with the paradigmatic issues set, it would justify dropping them rather than the AFF in its entirety since they are logically a prerequisite to the round. d) You have access to more positions due to generic backfiles and bidirectional shells which means neg theory is impossible to avoid. Also, fairness definitionally questions ability to engage in same practice, any abuse is solved for when you affirm next round which is terminal defense to neg shells – only affirming solves because you can construct the aff the way you like while neg is always reactive which means you can't do anything every round d) neg reactivity means you can just perfectly react to any of my advantages and then generate offense – if anything it'll be for 3 mins max which evens out the 1ar and 2n and and no neg analytics. | 1/13/22 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- Be Prepared De-Leuze v4Tournament: 1 - Loyola Invitational | Round: Triples | Opponent: Lynbrook SM | Judge: Panel SO21 Deleuze AC1ACSPIKES ON THE BOTTOMAC – You're Going De-LeuzeWe are dynamic – overtime, affective encounters with our surroundings through time shape subjectivity, yet representational thought ascribes to them a limited essence – our model resists the imposition of sameness onto a chaotic world.Deleuze – Deleuze, Gilles. Difference and Repitition. Translated by Paul Patton. 1968 Our instability necessitates power structures of rhizomatic becoming that embrace difference. Dominant economic models repress creative desires and over-code social life – fields that are not intelligible within straited space are excluded as deviant.Rowe 13 – Rowe, J. E. (2013). Understanding economic development as a Deleuzian "plateau." Local Economy, 28(1), 99–113. doi:10.1177/0269094212465580, Agastya Thus, the roll of the ballot is to embrace economic creative difference. Our orientation is key to pedagogy – we need to tip the scales towards a minoritarian repositioning to mobilize moments of relationality and challenge dominant epistemologies.Carlin and Wallin – Carlin, Matthew. Wallin, Jason. "Deleuze and Guattari, Politics and Education." Bloomsbury. 2014. Pg. 119-121 The politics of stable subjectivity coopts all attempts at resistance – it stabilizes complex features into unchanging models which dooms all radical praxis to failure.Rolli – Rolli, Marc. "Immanence and Transcendence" Bulletin de la Sociite Amincaine de Philosophie de Langue Franfais Volume 14, Number 2, Fall 2004 Static rules fail since each agent formulates their own interpretation in moments of crisis – we must orient agency towards chaos to break free from indeterminate principles.Smith – Nathan Jun and Daniel W. Smith. "Deleuze and Ethics." Now affirm – The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines. CPs and PICs don't negate – they don't disprove the thesis of the AFF which destroys affective revolution. I'll clarify specification in CX to avoid frivolous debates.Medical intellectual property protections proliferate the Empire's parasitic control of subjects by restricting affective communication, making revolution impossible.Lemmens – Lemmens, P. (n.d.). The conditions of the Common. A Stieglerian critique ON Hardt AND Negri's thesis on Cognitive capitalism as a prefiguration of communism. The_Conditions_of_the_Common_A_Stieglerian_Critique_on_Hardt_and_Negri_s_Thesis_on_Cognitive_Capitalism_as_a_Prefiguration_of_Communism Restrictions of fluidity idealize life to warrant a cleansing of difference which is the root cause of material violence and collapses to fascism.Evans 10 – Brad Evans, Lecturer in the School of Politics and International Studies at the University of Leeds and Programme Director for International Relations, "Foucault's Legacy: Security, War, and Violence in the 21st Century," Security Dialogue vol.41, no. 4, August 2010, pg. 422-424 Utilitarianism fails – multiple warrants.Cleveland ~Cleveland, Paul A. "The Failure of Utilitarian Ethics in Political Economy." Independent Institute. https://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=1602. Published 1 September 2002~ AdvantageOnly the plan can solve covid access – inequalities heighten the risk of mutations and uneven development – neg objections miss the boat.Kumar 21 ~Rajeesh; Associate Fellow at the Institute, currently working on a project titled "Emerging Powers and the Future of Global Governance: India and International Institutions." He has PhD in International Organization from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior to joining MP-IDSA in 2016, he taught at JamiaMilliaIslamia, New Delhi (2010-11and 2015-16) and University of Calicut, Kerala (2007-08). His areas of research interest are International Organizations, India and Multilateralism, Global Governance, and International Humanitarian Law. He is the co-editor of two books;Eurozone Crisis and the Future of Europe: Political Economy of Further Integration and Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); and Islam, Islamist Movements and Democracy in the Middle East: Challenges, Opportunities and Responses (Delhi: Global Vision Publishing, 2013); "WTO TRIPS Waiver and COVID-19 Vaccine Equity," IDSA Issue Briefs; https://idsa.in/issuebrief/wto-trips-waiver-covid-vaccine-rkumar-120721~~ Justin Yes scale-up for covid.Erfani et al 21 ~Parsa; Lawrence Gostin; Vanessa Kerry; Parsa Erfani is a Fogarty Global Health Scholar at Harvard Medical School and the University of Global Health Equity. Lawrence Gostin is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, director of the school's O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, and director of the World Health Organization Center on National and Global Health Law. Vanessa Kerry is a critical care physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, director of the Program for Global Public Policy at Harvard Medical School, and CEO of Seed Global Health, a nonprofit that trains health workers in countries with critical shortages; "Beyond a symbolic gesture: What's needed to turn the IP waiver into Covid-19 vaccines," STAT; 5/19/21; https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/19/beyond-a-symbolic-gesture-whats-needed-to-turn-the-ip-waiver-into-covid-19-vaccines/~~ Justin Corona escalates security threats that cause extinction – cooperation thesis is wrong.Recna 21 ~Research Center for Nuclear Weapon Abolition; Nagasaki, Japan; "Pandemic Futures and Nuclear Weapon Risks: The Nagasaki 75th Anniversary pandemic-nuclear nexus scenarios final report," Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament; 5/28/21; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2021.1890867~~ Justin 1AC – Paradigm1 – Yes 1AR theory – anything else means infinite abuse – drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer – the 1AR is too short to make up for the time trade-off – no RVIs – 6 min 2NR means they can brute force me every time. | 1/13/22 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- Be Prepared De-Leuze v5Tournament: 3 - Yale University Invitational | Round: 4 | Opponent: McDowell JJ | Judge: Scopa, Stephen 1AC – LayAC – You're Going De-LeuzeWe are dynamic – overtime, affective encounters with our surroundings through time shape subjectivity, yet representational thought ascribes to them a limited essence – our model resists the imposition of sameness onto a chaotic world. Every negation is a reconfiguration of a set of relationships of differences. It doesn't in truth deny those relations, it just affirms them in a different way.Deleuze – Deleuze, Gilles. Difference and Repitition. Translated by Paul Patton. 1968 Thus, the standard is to embrace creative difference. Prefer additionally:1 – Rule-following fails – maxims are arbitrary since each agent formulates their own interpretation – it is impossible to enforce violations since an agent can always perceive their actions as a non-violation.2 – Collapses – theories cannot rely on an external affective framework for validation.Joyce 1 – Joyce, R. (2001). The Myth of Morality (Cambridge Studies in Philosophy). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511487101 3 – Cruel optimism – Only affect can bridge the gap between abstract linguistic regimes and the material world – it's cruelly optimistic to force chaotic identity into stable structures. Any singularity of expression must be taken as an individual's truth – my stance is sufficient to affirm.Schafer 13 – Schaefer '13. Schaefer, D. "The Promise of Affect: The Politics of the Event in Ahmed's The Promise of Happiness and Berlant's Cruel Optimism." Theory and Event 16.2 2013. Project MUSE 4 – Referential – negating assumes the AFF is valid of contestation which concedes the validity of our affective investment.5 – Pedagogy – we need to tip the scales towards a minoritarian repositioning.Carlin and Wallin – Carlin, Matthew. Wallin, Jason. "Deleuze and Guattari, Politics and Education." Bloomsbury. 2014. Pg. 119-121 6 – Negative arguments begin with a descriptive premise about our affective investment – however, if the aff does not have truth value, their counter-premise would not have truth value.7 – Arguments against our AC are inherently dogmatic and collapse.Sorensen – Sorensen, Roy, Professor of Philosophy at Washington University in St. Louis. "Epistemic Paradoxes." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 21 June 2006. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemic-paradoxes/ 8 – Decision making – judging requires a decision-making procedure to determine its validity, which requires another decision to determine the accurate procedure, etc. which devolves – instead, affirm our affective orientation. Use truth testing – anything else moots 6 minutes of the AC and exacerbates the fact that they get a reactivity advantage since I should be able to compensate by choosing – their framing collapses since you must say it is true that a world is better than another before you adopt it. Most inclusive because other ROBs open the door for personal lives of debaters to factor into decisions and compare who is more oppressed which causes violence in a space where some people go to escape.9 – All negative positions are contradictory with our personal affective conditions.Camus – Albert Camus (existentialist). "The Myth of Sisyphus." Penguin Books. 1975(originally published 1942). Accessed 12/11/19. Pg 22 10 – There are infinite affective states – the aff is moral in one which is sufficient.Vaidman 2 – Vaidman, Lev, 3-24-2002, "Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)," No Publication, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-manyworlds/ 11 – Obligations – ought entails obligations are understood through the frame of affective relations.Cappelle – "Should vs Ought to" 2010 Bert Cappelle is a lecturer of English linguistics at the University of Lille https://www.academia.edu/1433058/Should_vs_ought_to Now affirm – The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines – Resolved is defined as firm in purpose or intent; determined and I'm determined. Affirm means to express agreement and you already know I do. Medical IP protections erase affective creativity.Lemmens – Lemmens, P. (n.d.). The conditions of the Common. A Stieglerian critique ON Hardt AND Negri's thesis on Cognitive capitalism as a prefiguration of communism. The_Conditions_of_the_Common_A_Stieglerian_Critique_on_Hardt_and_Negri_s_Thesis_on_Cognitive_Capitalism_as_a_Prefiguration_of_Communism UV1~ Yes 1AR theory – anything else means infinite abuse – drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer – the 1AR is too short to make up for the time trade-off – no RVIs – 6 min 2NR means they can brute force me every time – eval after the 1AR – only way to check back for 7 minute NC dump. No new 2NR weighing or theory – they can up-layer the short 3 minute 2AR with infinite no-risk paradigm issues for 6 minutes.2~ Presumption and Permissibility Affirm – ~A~ We assume statements true until proven false. You'd believe me if I told you that my name was Agastya unless you already had a reason to believe otherwise. The neg may not read meta-theory – I only have time to check abuse 1 time but you can do it in the NC and 2N, up-layering my attempt means we never get to the best norm. This means reject any reason why an aff spike is bad since they claim aff theory is unfair. And, drop them for contesting spikes – skews 1ar time allocation cause I invested time in reading them. ~B~ Affirming is harder – the short 1AR is always at a disadvantage to the 7 minute NC dump – means that if the round's equal I did the better debating.3~ No 2NR "I meet" arguments – A~ Skews theory ground because they're each a NIB for me to winning theory which kills my ability to check abuse. B~ Skews time, they can make three minutes of blippy I meets that I can't cover because the 2AR is too short. No neg arguments – skews me to answer those. Answering this triggers a contradiction since it relies on an analytic argument and those affirm since I spoke first and they were your fault for creating. Also, no new 2n arguments, weighing, and paradigm issues. a) overloads the 2AR with a massive clarification burden b) it becomes impossible to check NC abuse if you can dump on reasons the shell doesn't matter in the 2NR – c) neg has access to bidirectional shells which makes neg shells impossible to meet and impact turns your reading of the shells since I'll always lose on an interpretation.4~ The neg may not read nibs or OCIs a) you can up-layer for 7 minutes that I have to answer before I even have access to offense b) inf neg abuse since you would just read 7 mins of auto-negate arguments c) The neg may not read overview answers to aff arguments – they can up-layer all aff arguments for 7 minutes and the 1ar has to shift through it all. I have a computer virus that prevents changing font size and everything's in an overview. Also, no Ks on spikes because they moot all the time, I spent reading them. d) OCIs are just shorter theory args they can blow up. No neg analytics - I don't have time to cover 100 blippy arguments in the NC since you can read 7 min of analytics and extend any of them to win. This means they must only line by line aff arguments, since otherwise they function as nibs before I access warrants.5~ Can't contest both the fwk and ROB a) forces me to win my fwk is relevant, then win the fwk, then win offense which is a 3-1 skew b) All neg interps are counter interps since the aff takes an implicit stance on every issue which means you need an RVI to become offensive. C) You should accept all aff interps and assume I meet neg theory since the aff speaks in the dark and I have to take a stance on something, you can at least react and adapt.reject all answers to this theory argument – you solve all objections by picking a specific ROB and being the only one that links offense.6~ Reject neg fairness concerns since a) 13-7 time skew and 6-minute collapse gives the negative the strategic advantage and means the AFF must split 1AR time. b) The NC has the ability to uplayer and restart the round and have time to generate offense that matters. c) The AFF will defend NEG preferences on specificity insofar as it doesn't require me to abandon my maxim. Subsequently, you must propose all interps about my advocacy to guarantee better substantive debates. This also means that you should reevaluate the AC under the interpretation. If there is a problem with the paradigmatic issues set, it would justify dropping them rather than the AFF in its entirety since they are logically a prerequisite to the round. d) You have access to more positions due to generic backfiles and bidirectional shells which means neg theory is impossible to avoid. Also, fairness definitionally questions ability to engage in same practice, any abuse is solved for when you affirm next round which is terminal defense to neg shells – only affirming solves because you can construct the aff the way you like while neg is always reactive which means you can't do anything every round d) neg reactivity means you can just perfectly react to any of my advantages and then generate offense – if anything it'll be for 3 mins max which evens out the 1ar and 2n and no neg analytics. Vote for me because my name is Agastya – key to promote education about not well known names in debate and different cultures. | 1/13/22 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- Be Prepared De-Leuze v6Tournament: 3 - Yale University Invitational | Round: 5 | Opponent: Milton AT | Judge: Aldridge, Allison 1ACAC – You're Going De-LeuzeWe are dynamic – overtime, affective encounters with our surroundings through time shape subjectivity, yet representational thought ascribes to them a limited essence – our model resists the imposition of sameness onto a chaotic world.Deleuze – Deleuze, Gilles. Difference and Repitition. Translated by Paul Patton. 1968 The goal of ethics should not be to follow supposedly 'objective' moral laws, but instead to creatively push the boundaries that diffuse radical praxis – philosophy should not seek to represent the subject but criticize its imposition.Spangenberg – Yolanda Spangenberg (Department of Philosophy, University of Pretoria). "'Thought without an Image': Deleuzian philosophy as an ethics of the event." Phronimon 10:1, 2009 Thus, the standard is to embrace creative difference. Prefer additionally:1 – Pedagogy – we need to tip the scales towards a minoritarian repositioning to mobilize moments of relationality and challenge dominant epistemologies.Carlin and Wallin – Carlin, Matthew. Wallin, Jason. "Deleuze and Guattari, Politics and Education." Bloomsbury. 2014. Pg. 119-121 2 – Rule-Following fails – there is nothing inherent in a rule that mandates following a specific interpretation. They are always subject to interpretation by the observer, which means an objective moral rule would get interpreted differently by different agents.3 – History proves – no moral or epistemological theory has received a majority support among philosophers, despite thousands of years of debate – means that even if there is an objective moral principle – it's not binding as proven by ever past act of immorality.4 – Cruel optimism – Only affect can bridge the gap between discursive regimes and the material world – it's cruelly optimistic to force chaotic identity into stable structures.Schafer 13 – Schaefer '13. Schaefer, D. "The Promise of Affect: The Politics of the Event in Ahmed's The Promise of Happiness and Berlant's Cruel Optimism." Theory and Event 16.2 2013. Project MUSE 5 – Serial policy failure – The politics of stable subjectivity stabilizes complex features into unchanging models which dooms all radical praxis to failure.Rolli – Rolli, Marc. "Immanence and Transcendence" Bulletin de la Sociite Amincaine de Philosophie de Langue Franfais Volume 14, Number 2, Fall 2004 6 – Root Cause – Restrictions of creative difference are the root cause of material violence and collapse to fascism.Evans 10 – Brad Evans, Lecturer in the School of Politics and International Studies at the University of Leeds and Programme Director for International Relations, "Foucault's Legacy: Security, War, and Violence in the 21st Century," Security Dialogue vol.41, no. 4, August 2010, pg. 422-424 Now affirm – The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines. Resolved is defined as firm in purpose or intent; determined and I'm determined. Affirm means to express agreement and you already know I do. I'll clarify specification in CX to avoid frivolous debates.Intellectual property regimes biologically regulate affective expression and force the subject into binary, mechanical, categories.Wolodzko 18 – Agnieszka Anna, Bodies within affect. : on practicing contaminating matters through bioart, 2018, https://scholarlypublications.universiteitleiden.nl/handle/1887/66889, recut from a fellow Deleuzian – SHS KS Medical intellectual property protections proliferate the Empire's parasitic control of subjects by restricting affective communication, eliminating creative potentialities.Lemmens – Lemmens, P. (n.d.). The conditions of the Common. A Stieglerian critique ON Hardt AND Negri's thesis on Cognitive capitalism as a prefiguration of communism. The_Conditions_of_the_Common_A_Stieglerian_Critique_on_Hardt_and_Negri_s_Thesis_on_Cognitive_Capitalism_as_a_Prefiguration_of_Communism AdvantageIP regimes push biodiversity loss over the brink.Pamun 14 – "PAMUN Xviii Research Report— Question Of Intellectual Property And Biodiversity" ~http://asp-edu.net/pamun/pamun2013/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/OK_EDITED_-UNCTAD-biodiversity-and-IP-1.pdf Extinction.Schelske 20 – Why managing biodiversity risk is critical for the global economy By Oliver Schelske, Natural Assets and ESG Research Lead, Swiss Re Institute and Bernd Wilke, Senior Risk Manager, Group Risk Management Published on:23 Sep 2020 https://www.swissre.com/risk-knowledge/mitigating-climate-risk/managing-biodiversity-risk-is-critical-for-global-economy.html ShellInterp: Debaters must disclose round reports on the 2021-2022 NDCA LD wiki for every round they have debated this season. Round reports disclose which positions (AC, NC, K, T, Theory, etc.) were read/gone for in every speech.Violation: screenshot in the doc – they only have for their 2NRs and 2ARs.
Prefer – A~ Level Playing Field – big schools can go around and scout and collect flows but independents are left in the dark so round reports are key for them to prep – they give you an idea of overall what layers debaters like going for so you can best prepare your strategy when you hit them. Accessibility first and independent voter – it's an impact multiplier. B~ Strategy Education – round reports help novices understand the context in which positions are read by good debaters and help with brainstorming potential 1NCs vs affs – helps compensate for kids who can't afford coaches to prep out affs. C~ Pre-round prep –1ARs gives especially give an idea of what type of debater someone is – they could go for 1AR theory every round– otherwise I enter every round unknowing whereas you have an idea of what you want to go for from the start.Drop them on 1AC theory – skews put me at an unrecoverable disadvantage from the outset. Use competing interps on 1AC theory – the negative has 7 minutes to answer the shell, and you can't reasonably not have round reports. No RVIs – you'd read a counter-interp for 7 minutes of the NC and the debate would end right there.ShellInterpretation: The negative must concede the affirmative framework if the standard is to embrace creative difference.Prefer – A~ Time skew – Winning the negative framework moots 6 minutes of 1AC offense and forces a 1AR restart against a 7 min 1NC – outweighs on quantifiability and reversibility – I can't get back time lost and it's the only way to measure abuse. B~ Topic Ed – Every debate would just be a framework debate which crowds out our ability to have core debates about the topic – that outweighs – we only have 2 months to debate the topic C~ Prep skew – We can't predict every single negative framework before round but they know the aff coming into round which makes pre-tournament prep impossible – especially true since there are millions of K's and NC's that could negate.Underview1 – Yes 1AR theory – anything else means infinite abuse – drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer – the 1AR is too short to make up for the time trade-off – no RVIs – 6 min 2NR means they can brute force me every time.2 – Utilitarianism fails – multiple warrants.Cleveland ~Cleveland, Paul A. "The Failure of Utilitarian Ethics in Political Economy." Independent Institute. https://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=1602. Published 1 September 2002~ | 1/13/22 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- Be Prepared De-Leuze v7Tournament: 2 - Duke Invitational | Round: Semis | Opponent: Salado HF | Judge: Panel 1ACACWe are dynamic – overtime, affective encounters with our- surroundings through time shape subjectivity, yet representational thought ascribes to them a limited essence – our model resists the imposition of sameness onto a chaotic world.Spangenberg 9 – Yolanda Spangenberg (Department of Philosophy, University of Pretoria). "'Thought without an Image': Deleuzian philosophy as an ethics of the event." Phronimon 10:1, 2009 Our goal should not be to follow supposedly 'objective' moral laws, but instead to creatively push the boundaries that diffuse radical praxis – we do not seek to represent the subject but criticize its imposition.Spangenberg – Yolanda Spangenberg (Department of Philosophy, University of Pretoria). "'Thought without an Image': Deleuzian philosophy as an ethics of the event." Phronimon 10:1, 2009 Thus, the roll of the ballot is to embrace creative difference. Our orientation is key to pedagogy – we need to tip the scales towards a minoritarian repositioning to mobilize moments of relationality and challenge dominant epistemologies.Carlin and Wallin – Carlin, Matthew. Wallin, Jason. "Deleuze and Guattari, Politics and Education." Bloomsbury. 2014. Pg. 119-121 Only affect can bridge the gap between discursive regimes and the material world – it's cruelly optimistic to force chaotic identity into stable structures.Schafer 13 – Schaefer '13. Schaefer, D. "The Promise of Affect: The Politics of the Event in Ahmed's The Promise of Happiness and Berlant's Cruel Optimism." Theory and Event 16.2 2013. Project MUSE The politics of stable subjectivity stabilizes complex features into unchanging models which dooms all radical praxis to failure.Rolli – Rolli, Marc. "Immanence and Transcendence" Bulletin de la Sociite Amincaine de Philosophie de Langue Franfais Volume 14, Number 2, Fall 2004 Restrictions of creative difference are the root cause of material violence and collapse to fascism.Evans 10 – Brad Evans, Lecturer in the School of Politics and International Studies at the University of Leeds and Programme Director for International Relations, "Foucault's Legacy: Security, War, and Violence in the 21st Century," Security Dialogue vol.41, no. 4, August 2010, pg. 422-424 Intellectual property regimes biologically regulate affective expression and force the subject into binary, mechanical, categories.Wolodzko 18 – Agnieszka Anna, Bodies within affect. : on practicing contaminating matters through bioart, 2018, https://scholarlypublications.universiteitleiden.nl/handle/1887/66889 Medical intellectual property protections proliferate the Empire's parasitic control of subjects by restricting affective communication, eliminating creative potentialities.Lemmens – Lemmens, P. (n.d.). The conditions of the Common. A Stieglerian critique ON Hardt AND Negri's thesis on Cognitive capitalism as a prefiguration of communism. The_Conditions_of_the_Common_A_Stieglerian_Critique_on_Hardt_and_Negri_s_Thesis_on_Cognitive_Capitalism_as_a_Prefiguration_of_Communism Relegation of identity to a static, fixed, and historicized object makes their politics recalcitrant and reactive. Focus on historical retrieval and mourning makes it impossible to affirm identity beyond whiteness as the prime mover, entrenches ressentiment and destroys the possibility for articulating other valuesWright 15 – Michelle Wright, professor of African American studies at Northwestern University, The Physics of Blackness, University of Minnesota Press, 2015, pg. 116 Ontological understandings of identity and being lock in politics rather than opening up the possibility of a pragmatics of becoming acting directly upon the contingencies of power relations that make up the illusory status quo. Ontology is not pre-political – it is only a freeze frame of a particular moment of stasis.Buck-Morss 13. Susan Buck-Morss, Distinguished Professor of Political Science at the CUNY Graduate Center, NYC, "A Commonist Ethics, " in The Idea of Communism, 2013, http://susanbuckmorss.info/text/commonist-ethics/ ShellInterpretation: All debaters must provide some method of contacting them before the round or contact the other debater before the round – this could include messaging me on Facebook, or the LD Wiki.Violation: They don't – screenshots below:
Standards:1~ Safety – contact info's the only way to check trigger warnings before the round for what debaters are comfortable reading, anything else creates a hostile environment – for example, checking about scenes of violence authors may mention. Safety is a voting issue – we can't debate unless we feel safe to do so.2~ Small schools – schools like Scripps Ranch need to be able to contact debaters to reach out in the community especially given its elitist nature – the interp evens the playing field by allowing debaters to check each other's arguments.Drop the debater to deter future abuse. Use competing interps on 1AC theory – the negative has 7 minutes to answer the shell, and you can't reasonably not contact someone. No RVIs – you'd read a counter-interp for 7 minutes of the NC and the debate would end right there.Underview1 – Yes 1AR theory – anything else means infinite abuse – drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer – the 1AR is too short to make up for the time trade-off – no RVIs – 6 min 2NR means they can brute force me every time.2 – Utilitarianism fails – multiple warrants.Cleveland ~Cleveland, Paul A. "The Failure of Utilitarian Ethics in Political Economy." Independent Institute. https://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=1602. Published 1 September 2002~ | 1/13/22 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- Be Prepared De-Leuze v8Tournament: 4 - New York City Invitational Debate and Speech Tournament | Round: 6 | Opponent: Academy Of Classical Christian Studies JM | Judge: Ciocca, Amanda | 2/13/22 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- LaysTournament: 2 - Duke Invitational | Round: 5 | Opponent: Ridge LA | Judge: Chung, Carol 1ACFrameworkI affirm the resolution – Resolved: The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines.The value for today's debate is morality, since 'ought' implies a moral obligation.The value criterion is minimizing oppression, defined as promoting the material conditions necessary for inclusion.Mitigating oppression is necessary to prevent flawed moral exclusion.Opotow 11 – Susan Opotow is a social psychologist and justice researcher at the City University of New York. Her research examines the scope of justice over time, as well as exclusionary and inclusionary change in a range of contexts that include: environmental degradation, societal changes after the USA Civil War and World War II, and museums that represent past injustice. She was Editor of Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology) "Social Injustice," Peace, Conflict, and Violence: Peace Psychology for the 21st century, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 2001 Debaters shouldn't have to prove oppression is bad.Alston and Timmons 14, Jonathan Alston and Aaron Timmons, 4-28-2014, "Nobody Knows the Trouble I See" (And In National Circuit Lincoln-Douglas Debate, Does Anyone Really Care?), https://www.vbriefly.com/2014/04/28/20144nobody-knows-the-trouble-i-see-and-in-national-circuit-lincoln-douglas-debate-does-anyone-really-care/, 8-10-2021 This means you should vote affirmative in this debate if I prove that reducing intellectual property minimizes oppression.Contention 1 – Vaccine ImperialismCurrent intellectual property law exacerbates inequalities between countries in the Global North and South. This has empirically resulted in disparate life outcomes.Vanni 21 – Dr. Amaka Vanni is Lecturer in Law at the University of Leeds. ("On Intellectual Property Rights, Access to Medicines and Vaccine Imperialism," 3-23-2021, https://twailr.com/on-intellectual-property-rights-access-to-medicines-and-vaccine-imperialism/ The current intellectual property regime is at the heart of that imbalance. Property standards allocate wealth towards the privileged class who have access to medicine, and systematically exclude developing countries. Furthermore, intellectual property inflates the price of live-saving medicines which are critical to mitigate the effects of public health emergencies like COVID.Vanni 21 – Dr. Amaka Vanni is Lecturer in Law at the University of Leeds. ("On Intellectual Property Rights, Access to Medicines and Vaccine Imperialism," 3-23-2021, https://twailr.com/on-intellectual-property-rights-access-to-medicines-and-vaccine-imperialism/ The affirmative is critical to combat vaccine imperialism – an IP reduction for medicines puts vaccines in the hands of the people who need it.Vanni 21 – Dr. Amaka Vanni is Lecturer in Law at the University of Leeds. ("On Intellectual Property Rights, Access to Medicines and Vaccine Imperialism," 3-23-2021, https://twailr.com/on-intellectual-property-rights-access-to-medicines-and-vaccine-imperialism/) Contention 2 – COVID in IndiaToday, India is in crisis – their infrastructure cannot solve for COVID without increased vaccination rates. Modi's regime has been ineffective, reducing credibility and increasing case numbers.New York Times 9/17 – What to Know About India's Coronavirus Crisis, https://www.nytimes.com/article/india-coronavirus-cases-deaths.html, Reducing IP rules is necessary to increase vaccine production – the affirmative increases timely access to vaccines.Pandey 21 – (Ashutosh Pandey) "Rich countries block India, South Africa's bid to ban COVID vaccine patents," DW, April 2, 2021. https://www.dw.com/en/rich-countries-block-india-south-africas-bid-to-ban-covid-vaccine-patents/a-56460175 Only a definitive reduction in IP rights can increase covid access – inequalities heighten the risk of mutations and uneven development.Kumar 21 – Rajeesh; Associate Fellow at the Institute, currently working on a project titled "Emerging Powers and the Future of Global Governance: India and International Institutions." He has PhD in International Organization from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior to joining MP-IDSA in 2016, he taught at JamiaMilliaIslamia, New Delhi (2010-11and 2015-16) and University of Calicut, Kerala (2007-08). His areas of research interest are International Organizations, India and Multilateralism, Global Governance, and International Humanitarian Law. He is the co-editor of two books;Eurozone Crisis and the Future of Europe: Political Economy of Further Integration and Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); and Islam, Islamist Movements and Democracy in the Middle East: Challenges, Opportunities and Responses (Delhi: Global Vision Publishing, 2013); "WTO TRIPS Waiver and COVID-19 Vaccine Equity," IDSA Issue Briefs; https://idsa.in/issuebrief/wto-trips-waiver-covid-vaccine-rkumar-120721 | 2/13/22 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- The Lorax v1Tournament: 3 - Yale University Invitational | Round: 1 | Opponent: Strake Jesuit DA | Judge: Chang, Curtis SO21 Sharp AC1ACSPIKES ON THE BOTTOMACI value morality – since ought is defined as "used to express obligation".(https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ought) There is no transcendental force behind being – humans, animals, rocks are forms of matter which exist as modes of a larger essence that is nature – the vessel of cause and effect.Hanson 12 – Daniel Hansson "Unpacking Spinoza: Sustainability Education Outside the Cartesian Box" March 2012 chrome-extension://cbnaodkpfinfiipjblikofhlhlcickei/src/pdfviewer/web/viewer.html?file=http://www.jsedimensions.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Hansson2012Updated.pdf An assemblage can engage in the world only with the features it possesses, characterized by conatus – an inherent drive towards self-preservation. Identity emerges as a site of experimentation – difference becomes the grounds for our shared singularity. Negation is a reconfiguration of affective relations that doesn't deny those relations, but rather affirms them in a different way.Sharp 11 – Hasana Sharp, (2011) Assistant professor of philosophy at McGill University. "Spinoza and the Politics of Renaturalization," The University of Chicago Press, pp. 132-139 Conflicting affective drives within conatus cause a chaotic state of nature that produces endless egoist violence. We must re-naturalize agency as a site of constant experimentation – a unique but miniscule part of nature.Sharp 3 – Hasana Sharp, (2011) Sharp is an assistant professor of philosophy at McGill University. "Spinoza and the Politics of Renaturalization," The University of Chicago Press, pp. 7-15 Thus, the standard is to promote a politics of renaturalization. Prefer additionally:1 – Pedagogy – status-quo academia imposes a fragmented Cartesian model of analysis which demands difference as currency and coopts political praxis – renaturalization is necessary to affirm difference.Hansson 2 – "Unpacking Spinoza: Sustainability Education Outside the Cartesian Box" March 2012 chrome-extension://cbnaodkpfinfiipjblikofhlhlcickei/src/pdfviewer/web/viewer.html?file=http://www.jsedimensions.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Hansson2012Updated.pdf 2 – Infinite Regress – a non-natural ethic contains an infinitude of parts, each of which is infinitely reducible and have individually relevant characteristics. That constantly begs the question of what truly grounds the world and makes facts-of-the-matter impossible – only our framework can resolve this by relying on a fundamental and irreducible substance.3 – Serial policy failure – only the politics of renaturalization can reject the liberalist demand for a conforming subject in favor of a radical body politic, unified by a shared feeling of the political.Sharp 4 – Hasana Sharp, (2011) Sharp is an assistant professor of philosophy at McGill University. "Spinoza and the Politics of Renaturalization," The University of Chicago Press, Pp 181-183. 4 – Cruel optimism – perseverance creates a gap between discursive regimes and actuality which create spaces of domination – proving an obligation can affirm because we have subjective affective preferences which requires larger structures to compare – only structures of affect escape our cruelly optimistic relation to stable structures.Schafer 13 – Schaefer '13. Schaefer, D. "The Promise of Affect: The Politics of the Event in Ahmed's The Promise of Happiness and Berlant's Cruel Optimism." Theory and Event 16.2 2013. Project MUSE 5 – Our framework is not consequentialist but relational – the basis for ethics are the fluid relations that manifest in singular essence.Sharp 2 – Hasana Sharp, 2011 Sharp is an assistant professor of philosophy at McGill University. "Spinoza and the Politics of Renaturalization," The University of Chicago Press, pp. 100-102 Now affirm – The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines. I'll clarify specification in CX to avoid frivolous debates.Intellectual property regimes biologically regulate affective relationalities and force the subject into binary, mechanical, categories.Wolodzko 18 – Agnieszka Anna, Bodies within affect. : on practicing contaminating matters through bioart, 2018, https://scholarlypublications.universiteitleiden.nl/handle/1887/66889 IP laws prioritize uniformity and predictability as a method of homogenizing knowledge and refusing experimentation – that refuses the connections that are vital to a politics of renaturalization.Wu 14 – Tim Wu (Julius Silver Professor of Law, Science and Technology at Columbia University). "Intellectual Property Experimentalism By Way of Competition Law". Columbia Law School. 2014. Accessed 8/16/21. https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2843andcontext=faculty_scholarship Our demand for affective revolution is an investigation into networks of domination – placing being over nature is the root cause of material violence and culminates in fascism.Evans 10 – Brad Evans, Lecturer in the School of Politics and International Studies at the University of Leeds and Programme Director for International Relations, "Foucault's Legacy: Security, War, and Violence in the 21st Century," Security Dialogue vol.41, no. 4, August 2010, pg. 422-424 AFCInterpretation: The negative must concede the affirmative framework if the standard is promoting economic creative difference.Prefer – 1~ Time skew – Winning the negative framework moots 6 minutes of 1AC offense and forces a 1AR restart against a 7 min 1NC – outweighs on quantifiability and reversibility – I can't get back time lost and it's the only way to measure abuse. 2~ Topic Ed – Every debate would just be a framework debate which crowds out our ability to have core debates about the topic – that outweighs – we only have 2 months to debate the topic 3~ Prep skew – We can't predict every single negative framework before round but they know the aff coming into round which makes pre-tournament prep impossible. Especially true since there are millions of K's and NC's that could negate – that outweighs – A~ Sequencing – It's a perquisite engaging in-round since you need prep to debate B~ Engagement – It ruins the quality and depth of discussions that make debate rounds educational.AdvantageOnly the plan can solve covid access – inequalities heighten the risk of mutations and uneven development – neg objections miss the boat.Kumar 21 ~Rajeesh; Associate Fellow at the Institute, currently working on a project titled "Emerging Powers and the Future of Global Governance: India and International Institutions." He has PhD in International Organization from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Prior to joining MP-IDSA in 2016, he taught at JamiaMilliaIslamia, New Delhi (2010-11and 2015-16) and University of Calicut, Kerala (2007-08). His areas of research interest are International Organizations, India and Multilateralism, Global Governance, and International Humanitarian Law. He is the co-editor of two books;Eurozone Crisis and the Future of Europe: Political Economy of Further Integration and Governance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); and Islam, Islamist Movements and Democracy in the Middle East: Challenges, Opportunities and Responses (Delhi: Global Vision Publishing, 2013); "WTO TRIPS Waiver and COVID-19 Vaccine Equity," IDSA Issue Briefs; https://idsa.in/issuebrief/wto-trips-waiver-covid-vaccine-rkumar-120721~~ Justin Corona escalates security threats that cause extinction – cooperation thesis is wrong.Recna 21 ~Research Center for Nuclear Weapon Abolition; Nagasaki, Japan; "Pandemic Futures and Nuclear Weapon Risks: The Nagasaki 75th Anniversary pandemic-nuclear nexus scenarios final report," Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament; 5/28/21; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2021.1890867~~ Justin Underview1~ Yes 1AR theory – anything else means infinite abuse – drop the debater, competing interps, and the highest layer – the 1AR is too short to make up for the time trade-off – no RVIs – 6 min 2NR means they can brute force me every time. | 11/20/21 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- The Lorax v2Tournament: 3 - Yale University Invitational | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Lexington VM | Judge: Panel 1ACSPIKES ON THE BOTTOMAC – The LoraxThere is no transcendental force behind being – humans, animals, rocks are forms of matter which exist as modes of a larger essence that is nature – the vessel of cause and effect.Hanson 12 – Daniel Hansson "Unpacking Spinoza: Sustainability Education Outside the Cartesian Box" March 2012 chrome-extension://cbnaodkpfinfiipjblikofhlhlcickei/src/pdfviewer/web/viewer.html?file=http://www.jsedimensions.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Hansson2012Updated.pdf An assemblage can engage in the world only with the features it possesses, characterized by conatus – an inherent drive towards self-preservation. Identity emerges as a site of experimentation – difference becomes the grounds for our shared singularity.Sharp 11 – Hasana Sharp, (2011) Assistant professor of philosophy at McGill University. "Spinoza and the Politics of Renaturalization," The University of Chicago Press, pp. 132-139 Conflicting affective drives within conatus cause a chaotic state of nature that produces endless egoist violence. We must re-naturalize agency as a site of constant experimentation – a unique but miniscule part of nature.Sharp 3 – Hasana Sharp, (2011) Sharp is an assistant professor of philosophy at McGill University. "Spinoza and the Politics of Renaturalization," The University of Chicago Press, pp. 7-15 Thus, the standard is to promote a politics of renaturalization. Prefer additionally:1 – Pedagogy – status-quo academia imposes a fragmented Cartesian model of analysis which demands difference as currency and coopts political praxis – renaturalization is necessary to affirm difference.Hansson 2 – "Unpacking Spinoza: Sustainability Education Outside the Cartesian Box" March 2012 chrome-extension://cbnaodkpfinfiipjblikofhlhlcickei/src/pdfviewer/web/viewer.html?file=http://www.jsedimensions.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Hansson2012Updated.pdf 2 – Infinite Regress – a non-natural ethic contains an infinitude of parts, each of which is infinitely reducible and have individually relevant characteristics. That constantly begs the question of what truly grounds the world and makes facts-of-the-matter impossible – only our framework can resolve this by relying on a fundamental and irreducible substance.3 – Serial policy failure – only the politics of renaturalization can reject the liberalist demand for a conforming subject in favor of a radical body politic, unified by a shared feeling of the political.Sharp 4 – Hasana Sharp, (2011) Sharp is an assistant professor of philosophy at McGill University. "Spinoza and the Politics of Renaturalization," The University of Chicago Press, Pp 181-183. 4 – Cruel optimism – perseverance creates a gap between discursive regimes and actuality which create spaces of domination – only structures of affect escape our cruelly optimistic relation to stable structures.Schafer 13 – Schaefer '13. Schaefer, D. "The Promise of Affect: The Politics of the Event in Ahmed's The Promise of Happiness and Berlant's Cruel Optimism." Theory and Event 16.2 2013. Project MUSE 5 – Rule-Following fails – there is nothing inherent in a rule that mandates following a specific interpretation. They are always subject to interpretation by the observer, which means an objective moral rule would get interpreted differently by different agents. The only solution is to embrace the chaos of nature – our shared relationality creates mutual agreement on rules since every sensation is constituted by the same substance.6 – Our framework is not consequentialist but relational – the basis for ethics are the fluid relations that manifest in singular essence.Sharp 2 – Hasana Sharp, 2011 Sharp is an assistant professor of philosophy at McGill University. "Spinoza and the Politics of Renaturalization," The University of Chicago Press, pp. 100-102 Now affirm – The member nations of the World Trade Organization ought to reduce intellectual property protections for medicines. I'll clarify specification in CX to avoid frivolous debates.Oxford defines:Member as "a person, country, or organization that has joined a group, society, or team."Nation as "a large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory."Reduce as "make smaller or less in amount, degree, or size."Medicine as "a compound or preparation used for the treatment or prevention of disease"Intellectual Property Protection is defined as "protection for inventions, literary and artistic works, symbols, names, and images created by the mind."World trade organization is "an intergovernmental organization that regulates and facilitates international trade between nations."Intellectual property regimes biologically regulate affective relationalities and force the subject into binary, mechanical, categories.Wolodzko 18 – Agnieszka Anna, Bodies within affect. : on practicing contaminating matters through bioart, 2018, https://scholarlypublications.universiteitleiden.nl/handle/1887/66889, recut from a fellow Spinozan – SHS KS IP laws prioritize uniformity and predictability as a method of homogenizing knowledge – that refuses the connections that are vital to a politics of renaturalization.Wu 14 – Tim Wu (Julius Silver Professor of Law, Science and Technology at Columbia University). "Intellectual Property Experimentalism By Way of Competition Law". Columbia Law School. 2014. Accessed 8/16/21. https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2843andcontext=faculty_scholarship AdvantageIP regimes push biodiversity loss over the brink.Pamun 14 – "PAMUN Xviii Research Report— Question Of Intellectual Property And Biodiversity" ~http://asp-edu.net/pamun/pamun2013/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/OK_EDITED_-UNCTAD-biodiversity-and-IP-1.pdf Extinction.Schelske 20 – Why managing biodiversity risk is critical for the global economy By Oliver Schelske, Natural Assets and ESG Research Lead, Swiss Re Institute and Bernd Wilke, Senior Risk Manager, Group Risk Management Published on:23 Sep 2020 https://www.swissre.com/risk-knowledge/mitigating-climate-risk/managing-biodiversity-risk-is-critical-for-global-economy.html AFCInterpretation: The negative must concede the affirmative framework if the standard is to embrace creative difference.Prefer – A~ Time skew – Winning the negative framework moots 6 minutes of 1AC offense and forces a 1AR restart against a 7 min 1NC – outweighs on quantifiability and reversibility – I can't get back time lost and it's the only way to measure abuse. B~ Topic Ed – Every debate would just be a framework debate which crowds out our ability to have core debates about the topic – that outweighs – we only have 2 months to debate the topic C~ Prep skew – We can't predict every single negative framework before round but they know the aff coming into round which makes pre-tournament prep impossible – especially true since there are millions of K's and NC's that could negate.Drop them on 1AC theory – skews put me at an unrecoverable disadvantage from the outset. Use competing interps on 1AC theory – the negative has 7 minutes to answer the shell, and you can't reasonably concede my framework. No RVIs – you'd read a counter-interp for 7 minutes of the NC and the debate would end right there.Underview1 – Yes 1AR theory – anything else means infinite abuse – drop the debater, competing interps – the 1AR is too short to make up for the time trade-off – no RVIs – 6 min 2NR means they can brute force me every time.2 – IPP unjustifiably restricts agents from setting and pursuing ends in healthcare because patents prevent people from taking part in scientific advancements in medicine – that violates freedom in multiple waysHale 18 – Zachary Hale, 4-4-2018, accessed on 8-22-2021, The Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service, "Patently Unfair: The Tensions Between Human Rights and Intellectual Property Protection - The Arkansas Journal of Social Change and Public Service", https://ualr.edu/socialchange/2018/04/04/patently-unfair/ 3 – IPP is inconsistent with free market principlesKinsella 11 – Stephan Kinsella, 5-25-2011, accessed on 8-23-2021, Foundation for Economic Education, "How Intellectual Property Hampers the Free Market | N. Stephan Kinsella", https://fee.org/articles/how-intellectual-property-hampers-the-free-market/ 4 – Presumption and permissibility affirm –A~ Statements are true before false since if I told you my name, you'd believe me.B~ Epistemics – we wouldn't be able to start a strand of reasoning since we'd have to question that reason.C~ Illogical – presuming statements false is illogical since you can't say things like P and ~P are both wrong.D~ Presuming obligations is logically safer since it's better to be supererogatory than fail to meet an obligation.E~ Affirming is harder because u can up-layer for 7 mins in the NC.F~ Presuming statements false is impossible since we can't operate in a world where we don't trust anything.G~ To negate means to deny the truth of, which means if there isn't offense to deny the truth of you should affirm.F~ Otherwise we'd have to have a proactive justification to do things like drink water.H~ If anything is permissible, then definitionally so is the aff since there is nothing that prevents us from doing it.5 – Ought is defined as "used to express obligation". | 11/20/21 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- The Lorax v3Tournament: 4 - New York City Invitational Debate and Speech Tournament | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Strake Jesuit EP | Judge: Panel | 2/13/22 |
SEPTOCT -- AC -- The Lorax v4Tournament: 4 - New York City Invitational Debate and Speech Tournament | Round: Octas | Opponent: BASIS Peoria PY | Judge: Panel | 2/13/22 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|---|---|---|
1/29/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
10/14/21 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
1/13/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
1/13/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
1/13/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
1/13/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
11/20/21 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
11/20/21 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
1/13/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
2/13/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
11/20/21 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
11/20/21 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
1/13/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
1/13/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
10/15/21 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
10/16/21 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
2/13/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
2/13/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
2/13/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
1/28/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
2/13/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
2/13/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
4/18/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
2/19/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
2/19/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
3/1/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
3/1/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
3/1/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
| |
4/23/22 | kartik@alumnistanfordedu |
|