A side note on kritik theory (fwd) AT: Gragert

[Joseph Ramsey]

>So run it on the negative.  Or in any of the above listed forums.  Or run 
>it through the REAL FG to have the govt do something to heed perspectives.  
>And I beg to differ that its that educationally beneficial: a) as stated 
>above,everything that I've worked so hard on, the education that I've 
>strived to attain, is wasted.  b) it does nothing for Ft. Hays because they 
>never engage in the other debates which also have educational benefits,  c) 
>I gain nothing from it, without anything that applies, the negative just 
>strains for some strategy, or just goes for T in which very little is 
>learned, and d) the diversion from "normal" debate only makes me resent 
>their "project" so I do not open up my mind to what they have to say.  If 
>it was presented in something other than a competitive framework, then I 
>would gain much more of a pedagogical advantage from it.

I think this paragraph is a good summation of Sarah's argument excepting her 
wrong forum arguments which were a little more insulting in another part of 
the post.  I guess my 1st argument is why is policy discussion only limited 
to diad counterplan, that just locks us into our current notions of foriegn 
policy making.  recently i talked to a former Michigan debator who said that 
in her law school expreinces that it was kritik arguments that most effected 
her studies and decsions.  Your interpation of the game neccissates your 
vision of t and how to be in the world, exclusivly i might add. It means our 
positive poltics must always be toward a that body in D.C., we always must 
work within our legel defintions and the stuctures that they point to.  As 
for your wrong forum, this is the perfect forum.  We talk about policy 
around coffee and water coolers all the time, in classes, many other places. 
  In these disscussions we would not think it odd at all for someone to say, 
you know i don't know enough about this i should listen to what other people 
think. Or you know i think our defintion of development assistance is to 
limiting and has been used to serve colonal powers.  These would be valid 
arguments in class and should be valid especically in policy debate.  While 
i am not planning on being a so-called policy maker, many people i debate 
may be, and i think they should consider listening as action.  And not just 
our D.C. goverments idea of paternilising diplomatic talks but talk to the 
people who live there lives without a "say".

As for your argument that there are thousands of different ways to heed 
prespectives, that shows that you still miss the point of the project to 
heed prespectives.  not that one type is better or that you have to have 
blocks ready for music, another for dancing, another when we bring in Bunny 
Wailer.  Just research represention literature, you do it once and well 
enough and your ready to go.  you didn't wastr all your time maybe a few 
hours have to be spent researching different things, that good for research 
skills (turn), how Bush is popular know cards do you need.  Your b subpoint 
is insulting please don't tell me wether or not the debates we engage in are 
education.  Just because you don't think it is when you debate us doesn't 
mean we don't think it is, or other people debaters, judeges. Its not the 
only thing that is educational so is "traditional" polciy debate. your c 
subpoint is a repeat, and it just prove you are so closed that you 
don't/won't learn from something different, how do you confront other things 
which don't fit your world view, exclusion i bet,Your D subpoint is just a 
further reflection on this point.

to end i think sarah is a cool person and i respect her intensity in debate 
rounds, i just wish she would stop yelling at me in cross-ex and think in a 
different way.  I promise i will do the same.

peace

joe

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com