| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,31 @@ |
|
1 |
+====Interpretation—the aff should defend the implementation of a topical advocacy.==== |
|
2 |
+Dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/college) |
|
3 |
+college ~~kol-ij~~ noun 1. an institution of higher learning, |
|
4 |
+AND |
|
5 |
+and graduate degrees.Continental European universities usually have only graduate orprofessional schools. |
|
6 |
+ |
|
7 |
+ |
|
8 |
+====Violation—==== |
|
9 |
+ |
|
10 |
+ |
|
11 |
+====Topical debate is good—==== |
|
12 |
+ |
|
13 |
+ |
|
14 |
+====~~1~~ Monologue DA==== |
|
15 |
+ |
|
16 |
+ |
|
17 |
+====~~2~~ Preparation and clash==== |
|
18 |
+ |
|
19 |
+ |
|
20 |
+====~~3~~ Institutional knowledge – refusal to tie their ethical stance to any political process atomizes protest and collapses into self-satisfied, ineffective symbolism==== |
|
21 |
+David Chandler 7, Professor of History, The possibilities of post-territorial political community, Area, Volume 39, Issue 1, pages 116–119 |
|
22 |
+This paper argues that the lack of purchase of traditional territorial constructions of political community |
|
23 |
+AND |
|
24 |
+of community and the organic ties of the traditional social/political sphere. |
|
25 |
+ |
|
26 |
+ |
|
27 |
+====~~4~~ Democratic Deliberation—tailoring identity claims to common topics for deliberation is possible and desirable—arguments like topicality don't injure people, but policies do—avoiding democratic engagement means the aff can never actually transform the institutions that produce exclusion in the first place ==== |
|
28 |
+Amanda Anderson 6, Andrew W. Mellon Professor of Humanities and English at Brown University, Spring 2006, "Reply to My Critic(s)," Criticism, Vol. 48, No. 2, p. 281-290 |
|
29 |
+Probyns piece is a mixture of affective fallacy, argument by authority, and bald |
|
30 |
+AND |
|
31 |
+**and public debate has a vital role to play in such a task.** |