[eDebate] Reparations Topic

David Glass gacggc
Sun Apr 6 08:12:40 CDT 2008


hi josh,
well, it will be easier to see if you're right or wrong once we have some
wordings in front of us...

andy... the challenge will be to make yourself happy on both sides of the
topic wording...

-d


On 4/5/08, Josh <jbhdb8 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In fact, I suspect the real debate would be over "making" the affirmative
> use the USFG because its "inherently" racist etc.
>
> Josh
>
>
>  On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 10:30 PM, Josh <jbhdb8 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey,
> >
> > I rarely disagree with Doctor Glass but,
> >
> > That is the sq....we have that debate all the time whenever we debate
> > not-T race affirmatives.  Better when at least we have a predictable
> > affirmative to base debate around (cps etc).  And its a valuable topic for
> > consideration,
> >
> > Josh
> >
> >
> >   On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 10:27 PM, David Glass <gacggc at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > I dunno... you need to give ground to the negative... and in the
> > > debate climate it is highly doubtful spending disads will outweigh claims of
> > > racial justice... (and it is the sheer cost that is the most common argument
> > > about reparations, in addition to even more problematic args about who are
> > > the true "victims" deserving reparations)
> > >
> > > good luck finding a wording that doesnt force one side or the other to
> > > defend a position they or others might find to be offensive
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 10:18 PM, Josh <jbhdb8 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Over many years I have consistently supported the idea of a race
> > > > topic as an alternative to "no topic/race based alternatives" I would
> > > > certainly support a topic (if well-worded) on a subject like this,
> > > >
> > > > Josh
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >   On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 9:45 PM, Andy Ellis <andy.edebate at gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >  I am thinking about   a paper that focuses around the controversy
> > > > > of reparations. It could be as narrow as to be tied to a specific
> > > > > aggrieved community or it could be expanded to include more. Inclusion and
> > > > > exclusion make for core ground in a wide variety of  disciplines.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > There are a few reasons this is good
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) Mainstream Policy Literature- Plainly there is a ton,
> > > > > reparations for various American injustices have been a wildly popular
> > > > > discussion in law reviews and policy literature for at least the last 50
> > > > > years, there is so much internal disagreement amongst various scholars that
> > > > > there is a nuance to the debate that can sustain year round debates. The
> > > > > fact that we as a community may find that claim dubious until we do some
> > > > > research or see the topic paper is perhaps even more reason to debate this
> > > > > topic.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2) Literature based impact comparisons that get to the heart of
> > > > > the discussion. The full big stick reparations for slavery case links hard
> > > > > to politics, hege, econ disads, and extinction level link chains...Give back
> > > > > the land does too. No contrived links, but instead a head on literature
> > > > > based debate between risk calculus based authors and justice calculus based
> > > > > authors. This is the best in depth risk calculus debate we will ever have.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 3)This community often builds mechanisms of skirting or relegating
> > > > > the debate about race to the teams that want to engage it, as some of you
> > > > > found out in the last few weeks this literature base is deep and responsive,
> > > > > yet many of us dont have to touch into the depth of scholarship ever if we
> > > > > dont want to. This topic provides a good entry point into the core of the
> > > > > literature with a specific policy focus.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 4)Uniquely timely--There has not been a time in the last 200 years
> > > > > when reparations for injustices would not be a timely topic, but perhaps
> > > > > here and now in a community that may be well poised to talk about the
> > > > > racialized nature of its practices, we have a unique opportunity. Perhaps
> > > > > though we will push the uncomfortable topic to the side...again.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 5) Stupid Stem and branch topics and an over determined focus on
> > > > > terms of art do not rob as much from this topic as others. For example at
> > > > > its worst:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > r: the usfg should provide one or more of the following aggrieved
> > > > > communities: people of African descent: Asian American immigrants:
> > > > > indigenous Americans; middle eastern Americans, or Latino/as reparations
> > > > > consisting of:land, sovereignty, wealth transfers, social institutions.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Because of where it starts it survives that process better.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > much better wordings than that can be crafted.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 6) Recruiting. Tell people the topic is reparations. i guarantee
> > > > > they will have a stance on it. Honestly i cannot think of a better topic for
> > > > > on campus recruiting. I know some of you will say but not on my campus...i
> > > > > think urban reform or intellegence reform are less likely to excite interest
> > > > > than reparations.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 7) More to come as the paper gets written
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > eDebate mailing list
> > > > > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > > > > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > eDebate mailing list
> > > > eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> > > > http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20080406/37dca10d/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list