[eDebate] High School Civil Rights Topic Vs. College Executive Power Topic

Joseph Carver carrolltondebate
Wed Apr 12 10:30:41 CDT 2006


I have a few responses to what Whit has to say here:

On 4/12/06, Whit Whitmore <whit_whitmore at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I've witnessed a lack of creativity and diversity in answering the
> position at the high school level. I don't think I've heard all year a
> single team argue that the agency cp is object fiat.
>

You are critical of the communities creativity and your reaction is that
people should run object fiat? Uh, ok. Bottom line is that the resolution's
primary question is whether an external action of authority is preferrable
to internal reform. That IS the resolution so it makes sense that teams
would forego the "object fiat" route and defend a decrease in authority. And
not to be petty, but in 99% of the cases it isn't actually object fiat since
the agency itself is not the object of the harm.



> The literature for why different agents acting on this topic is really
> good though. It's not like a fopo topic where there will be hardly any
> evidence concerning the topic evidence and literally no evidence specific to
> the aff. I think it is a good topic because this literature exists and teams
> can use either the courts or congress. But I also think that teams who
> invest time in answering XO early on and establish they can beat it will
> force the NEG to diversify their options at a much quicker pace than has
> occured on the high school level.
>

Probably true although there are limits to how many legitimate defenses
there are to the agent debate meaning that this variety you write about will
be limited to a smaller core aff ground. Teams will limit themselves to affs
that can ONLY be done by their agent and the literature base for that is
simply smaller than you infer.


I will also say that the specific critical literature is amazing on this
> topic. The left's response to 9/11 and the War on Terror has been
> tremendous. This makes the potential for critical affs very good. Teams can
> draw from a variety of different authors (Churchill, Agamben, Zizek, Butler)
> who have all written or had articles written about their theories in the
> context of the topic.
>



Whit, you have to finish reading the articles too. None of these authors
will endorse a policy that is a decrease in a form of authority. You will
out lefted every single K round. That may be non unique but you go ahead and
strap in your Agamben aff and wait for someone to slap you around with their
critical alternative. The moderate lefts arguments in favor of reform are
garbage. This is a non starter.



My only concern is that incoming frosh will have debated this topic for a
> year already. I hope significant steps are taken to assure there isn't a lot
> of overlap between the topics.
>

This part confuses me. How do you expect the topic to engulf all of the
thrills of the high school topic that you highlight and intend to avoid
overlap?




_______________________________________________
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at ndtceda.com
> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20060412/2905e810/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list