[eDebate] Physical Assault in debate
Tue Mar 18 08:16:13 CDT 2008
Right... and don't forget the considerable amount of applause from factions
in the Middle East celebrating and glorifying suicide bombing in response to
various types of oppression. Those cards are not hard to find.
Of course - one downside to engaging in suicide bombing as a form of
performance in an academic policy debate round is that the most you can
achieve is a record of 1-0... assuming your judge survives long enough to
sign the ballot...
On 3/18/08, scottelliott at grandecom.net <scottelliott at grandecom.net> wrote:
> Why draw the line at physical assault?
> Since we have allowed people to do anything in the name of Lritils, I am
> at a
> loss as to we people so quickly draw the line at physical assault. (insert
> sarcasm here) There is plenty of critical literature out there on why
> is often justified in response to oppression. If X's team's rhetoric is so
> oppressive tot he other team, why not allow the opposing team the
> to slap the other team down as a performance and then have the partner
> "interpret" and justify the violent act with some really cool Sendero
> philosophy of revolution cards? Why can't a team, in response to a
> Kritik, simply run the other team head first into a brick wall, grab the
> and give themselve the win as a permutation to the K?
> I find it rather interesting that a community that allows revolutionary
> forms of
> criticism and the "there are no rules in debate" mentality, all of the
> become white-bread conservatives when it comes to violence. Don't you all
> the appeals to the CEDA Constitution and other "rules" of debate to be
> inconsistent with the entire kritical theory movement in debate? To
> deconstruct, why is violence a line that people do not want to cross, but
> allowing people to act out rape scenes is legit? Why is violence verboten,
> someone taking a dump in a plastic bag is cutting edge?
> For the record, I don't think violence is legit for the same reasons why I
> affirmative's get fiat and topicality is a voting issue---because debate
> is an
> academic game. As a game, there should be certain rules. The real issue is
> where to draw the line and create such rules. People that take the game as
> of their "personal advocacy" open up the activity to a whole host of
> that will make a pie in the face seem rather passe.
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman