Summary

• Objects (2 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[2]
  • Caselist.RoundClass[3]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[2]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[2]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-10-16 08:08:47.911
	1	+2016-10-16 08:08:47.0

Caselist.RoundClass[3]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-10-16 08:09:29.778
	1	+2016-10-16 08:09:29.0

Caselist.CitesClass[2]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,76 @@
	1	+====A. Interpretation: Acceptance of being affirmative in a debate round constitutes acceptance to advocate for prohibiting the production of nuclear power through a politically implementable advocacy. ====
	2	+This does not mean that the affirmative must defend implementation, only defines what the aff advocacy should be. For example, the aff may defend whatever they want, such as _____ as long as it is roleplaying policymaking.
	3	+
	4	+
	5	+====Resolved implies action ====
	6	+OED (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/resolved)
	7	+Definition of resolved in English: Firmly determined to do something
	8	+
	9	+
	10	+====Prohibit means to forbid by law, which means policymaking====
	11	+**Google** (https://www.google.com/search?num=100andsafe=strictandsite=andsource=hpandq=prohibitandoq=prohibitandgs_l=hp.3..0j0i20k1j0l5j0i20k1j0l2.207.1122.0.1205.9.8.0.1.1.0.170.784.1j5.6.0....0...1c.1.64.hp..2.6.633.0..0i131k1j35i39k1j0i131i46k1j46i131k1.45FprkGn3gc)
	12	+pro·hib·it prəˈhibit,prōˈhibit/Submit verb formally forbid (something
	13	+AND
	14	+forbidded the production and sale of alcohol through law in the United States.
	15	+
	16	+
	17	+====B. Violation: The aff violates the words "resolved: The ought to prohibit" and has not met its burden to advocate for governmental action, they have only read an affirmation without an agent or political action.====
	18	+
	19	+
	20	+====C. Standards====
	21	+1. Procedural Fairness: Debate is a competitive activity with rules designed to generate fair competition. The only content-based rule is that the topic of the debate is the resolution. Any interpretation of the role of the resolution must account for debate as a competition that must be fair. Competitive equity is an a priori issue. It is the nature of rules of competition that they cannot be outweighed and must be enforced regardless of the consequences. Specifically allowing an unresolutional aff advocacy would moot the resolution entirely. That creates a tremendous aff side bias. Aff would only need to take the easiest step of identifying a problem in the status quo without the challenging part, which is proposing a solution. Almost all negative substantive arguments—Das, T violations and coutnerplans disappear—there is literally 0 substantive ground I can engage in that I prepared by looking at the resolution only—neg is reactionary. With no boundary to the possible aff cases exploding limits, no team would have an incentive to create quality debate through research and preparation. Furthermore, my arguments will always be no-lilnked or permuted because they can just say activism solves it in the future, or we're not specific enough.
	22	+2. Education: Debate is a unique forum that has multiple educational benefits of varying importance. Education deriving from the competitive and interactive nature of debate outweighs education a person could access while alone with the internet.
	23	+
	24	+
	25	+====a. real world decision-making skills are the decision rule, and outweigh the content of our arguments====
	26	+Strait and Wallace 7 ~~L. Paul, **George Mason University, and **Brett** Wallace, George Washington University Communications Professors** "The Scope of Negative Fiat and the Logic of Decision Making", http://groups.wfu.edu/debate/MiscSites/DRGArticles/2007/The20Scope20of20Negative20Fiat20and20the20Logic20of20Decision20Making.pdf, p. A-5, accessed 7/6/13, ALT~~
	27	+More to the point, debate certainly helps teach a lot of skills, yet
	28	+AND
	29	+like policy with slightly different norms—I did policy for 3 years.
	30	+
	31	+
	32	+====b. Policy Simulation is key to strategic decision-making and culture change====
	33	+Eijkman 12 ~~Henk, visiting fellow at the University of New South Wales at the Australian Defence Force Academy and is Visiting Professor of Academic Development, Annasaheb Dange College of Engineering and Technology in India, has taught at various institutions in the social sciences and his work as an adult learning specialist has taken him to South Africa, Malaysia, Palestine, and India, "The role of simulations in the authentic learning for national security policy development: Implications for Practice," http://nsc.anu.edu.au/test/documents/Sims_in_authentic_learning_report.pdf~~
	34	+However, whether as an approach to learning, innovation, persuasion or culture shift
	35	+AND
	36	+of critical theory does not nor cannot solve for the impacts of the AC
	37	+
	38	+
	39	+====3. Strategies for Change: spotting an injustice is the easy part, the challenge is assessing the opportunity costs and tradeoffs of a mechanism for change. Aff ducks that question, which sacrifices an opportunity to debate strategies for change and thereby locks in the status quo.
	40	+
	41	+Their focus on abstract resistance rather than concrete policy is the re-entrenches mechanisms that produce oppression, and withers real Left political change to where they will NEVER be able to solve for their impacts—cedeing the political turns the case====
	42	+Gregory Smulewicz-Zucker and Michael Thompson, September 2015, Radical Intellectuals and the Subversion of Progressive Politics: The Betrayal of Politics, (Political Philosophy and Public Purpose) (Kindle Locations 263-270). Palgrave Macmillan. Kindle Edition. Thompson is a Political Scientist @ William Patterson University, Smulewicz-Zucker is a philosophy professor @ Baruch
	43	+On our reading, there is not only a theoretical but also a deeply political
	44	+AND
	45	+) (Kindle Locations 263-270). Palgrave Macmillan. Kindle Edition.
	46	+
	47	+
	48	+====Aff's failure to present policy solutions produces a retreat from activism into disengagement====
	49	+McClean 14 (David E. McClean, Richard Rorty, Liberalism and Cosmopolitianism, Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, Ph.D. in philosophy from the New School, lecturer in philosophy, Molloy College and Rutgers University, p. 74-76)
	50	+These critics took, and take, Rorty's frequently expressed notion of 'we',
	51	+AND
	52	+to the problems of its country. Disengagement from practice produces theoretical hallucinations.
	53	+
	54	+
	55	+====The Aff's rejection of political engagement disincentivizes concrete resistance and empowers the socially privileged. It turns their entire advocacy. You can only win if you play the game. ====
	56	+Flinders, 12 (Matthew, Professor of Parliamentary Government and Governance @ University of Sheffield, Defending Politics: Why Democracy Matters in the Twenty-First Century, p. 188-189)
	57	+Away from the bear pit of the legislature or television studio, political life is
	58	+AND
	59	+of democratic politics and in future dare to sing out in its defence.
	60	+
	61	+
	62	+====Critique without proposal fails to confront the forces that control governments====
	63	+McClean 14 (David E. McClean, Richard Rorty, Liberalism and Cosmopolitianism, Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, Ph.D. in philosophy from the New School, lecturer in philosophy, Molloy College and Rutgers University, p. 78)
	64	+There are probably very few unscrupulous optimists – reformers who plunge ahead without counting the
	65	+AND
	66	+real politics or the workings of real institutions to bring about any case.
	67	+
	68	+
	69	+====4. Extra topicality—the aff garners prefiat offense thru the use of poetry—the performance of the 1AC is framed a s a REASON to vote for the affirmative—it's got nothing to do with the topic –independent reason to negate because if extra t is allowed, explodes limits because they just have to relate to the topic and add whatever they want to the end====
	70	+
	71	+
	72	+====D. Voters====
	73	+1. The role of the ballot is to vote for who provides the best methodology for upholding competitive equity. Fairness and likewise competitive equity are voting issues—topical fairness requirements area key to meaningful dialogue—monopolizing strategy and prep makes the discussion one-sided and subverts any meaningful neg role Galloway '07
	74	+Debate as a dialogue ^^sets an argumentative table, where all parties receive a relatively ^^
	75	+^^AND^^
	76	+about as a negative kritik or plan-inclusive counter-advocacy with your

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-10-16 08:09:31.791

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Calen Martin

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Montgomery RM

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+3

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+4

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Albuquerque Academy Bay Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+T

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+St Marks