Changes for page Lexington Roy Neg

Last modified by Administrator on 2017/08/29 03:37

From version < 46.1 >
edited by Vedant Roy
on 2017/02/17 23:59
To version < 27.1 >
edited by Vedant Roy
on 2017/02/17 23:52
< >
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Caselist.CitesClass[5]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,44 +1,0 @@
1 -T – Consequentialism
2 -
3 -Interpretation- The affirmative must defend act or rule util.
4 -
5 -Violation: His aff says “generic util turns do not apply”
6 -
7 -1. Ground
8 -
9 -A. Turn Ground- If only intent/phil based offense links to the standard then no negative ground links to the aff because they can always say that consequences don’t matter. Abstract ideals are incontestable goods- literature reviews that implementation difficulties are the only arguments to debate about
10 -
11 -B. Stable Ground- the 1AR can defend material consequences or defend intentions/philosophical implications of their affs against Ks, they can also skirt out of generic turns and DAs which also inherently prove that they are bad.
12 -
13 -Ground key to fairness- ensures both debaters have equal access to args
14 -
15 -2. Topic Literature
16 -
17 -Qualified immunity doesn't exist independent of empirical legislative decisions and police officer conduct- empirical actual focus is key
18 -
19 -TLR 4 2004 Texas Law Review "NOTE: The Paradox Of Qualified Immunity: How A Mechanical Application Of The Objective Legal Reasonableness
20 -Damage suits against government officials raise a number of competing interests. On the one hand, these suits deter unlawful conduct and offer the only realistic avenue for vindication of constitutional guarantees. 1 On the other hand, frivolous claims against government officials result in costs both to the defendants themselves and to society as a whole, including the expenses of litigation, the diversion of energy from pressing public matters, and the danger that fear of suit will dampen the ardor with which officials discharge their duties. 2 Qualified immunity is a judicially created doctrine designed to balance these competing interests. The primary purpose of qualified immunity is to shield government officials from "undue interference with their duties and from potentially disabling threats of liability." 3 A federal official may raise the affirmative defense of qualified immunity in response to a civil rights suit brought directly under the Constitution. 4 Likewise, a state or local official may interpose the defense when faced with a 1983 action. 5 Since qualified immunity constitutes an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability, it protects government officials not only from the ordeal of protracted litigation, but also from the burdens of pretrial concerns. 6 Unlike absolute immunity, however, in theory qualified immunity does not provide officials absolute exemption from personal liability for unconstitutional conduct. 7 Rather, as its name suggests, qualified immunity was designed to protect government officials only in limited situations. 8
21 -
22 -Focused topic education outweighs
23 -
24 -A. Reading a framework and policy solves phil ground- our interpretation allows for negative frameworks to be read
25 -
26 -B. LD is a values debate isn’t responsive- 1. That commits the is-ought fallcy, just because it is a values debate, doesn't mean it ought to be, 2. That makes an empirical claim without an empirical warrant
27 -
28 -C. Timeframe- we have 2 months to discuss the topic- but we can always get phi led from other places
29 -
30 -D. Debate’s strategic incentives bastardize phil debate
31 -Nebel et Al 13 Teaching Philosophy 36:3, September 2013 271 Teaching Philosophy through Lincoln-Douglas Debate JACOB NEBEL Wolfson College, Oxford University RYAN W. DAVIS Harvard University PETER VAN ELSWYK Rutgers University BEN HOLGUIN New York University
32 -Another cause of poorly justified relativism and skepticism in LD debate comes from judge expectations
33 -AND
34 -inclined to accept a controversial philosophical view about morality for the wrong reasons.
35 -
36 -E. Phil debate creates unrealistic phil decisions
37 -Nebel et Al 13 Teaching Philosophy 36:3, September 2013 271 Teaching Philosophy through Lincoln-Douglas Debate JACOB NEBEL Wolfson College, Oxford University RYAN W. DAVIS Harvard University PETER VAN ELSWYK Rutgers University BEN HOLGUIN New York University
38 -The LD debate community is on the hyper-methodist end of the spectrum.
39 -AND
40 -Holocaust wasn’t morally wrong if the debater in question is defending moral nihilism.
41 -
42 -F. Comparitive ethics debates are useless- in the real world people argue how actions apply under ethics
43 -
44 -G. philosophy is structured in a way that it is responsive in one direction i.e. Hegel is written in response to Kant, but not vice versa, smart negs will pick responsive fw’s without ground against them, only util allows answers from both sides.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2017-02-17 23:52:06.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -7
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -1
Team
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Lexington Roy Neg
Title
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -ND - T Consequentialism
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Caselist.CitesClass[6]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,67 +1,0 @@
1 -Humans are grounded in material conditions that create all thought – trying to abstract from material reality (i.e, not defending consequentialist turns) is another link to the K.
2 -
3 -Eagleton 11
4 -Eagleton, Terry (Is a prominent British literary theorist, critic and public intellectual. He is currently Distinguished Professor of English Literature at Lancaster University). Why Marx was right. Yale University Press, 2011
5 -In this sense, Marx was more of an antiphilosopher than a philosopher. In
6 -AND
7 -can fall victim to the illusion that it is thought which creates reality.
8 -
9 -The affirmative’s legalistic approach to police violence brings us further away from recognizing the economic forces at work that makes police violence inevitable. Lane 7/21.
10 -Alycee Lane (Alycee J. Lane is a former professor who taught African American literature and culture at UC Santa Barbara.), 7-21-16 “Violence, Death and Our Neoliberal Police,” CounterPunch, http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/07/21/violence-death-and-our-neoliberal-police/
11 -If what we are witnessing in these violent encounters with police is neoliberalism in action
12 -AND
13 -and training of police – that we absolutely have the power to change.
14 -
15 -Civil suits put an asking price on people’s suffering.
16 -
17 -Abel 81
18 -Richard L. Abel, Prof of Law @ UCLA, ’81 (British Journal of Law and Society 8:1, “A Critique of American Tort Law,” jstor)
19 -Finally, tort law responds to intangible injury by extending that fundamental concept of capitalism
20 -AND
21 -the compensation system is working well if anything, too well. 116
22 -
23 -Tort law commodifies suffering as loss of earning power – kills value to life.
24 -
25 - Abel 81
26 -Richard L. Abel, Prof of Law @ UCLA, ’81 (British Journal of Law and Society 8:1, “A Critique of American Tort Law,” jstor)
27 -Capitalism also shapes the experience of injury. First (and this enumeration is not
28 -AND
29 -, care, emotional and physical integrity, and ultimately love with money.
30 -
31 -Commodification is the worst impact under Levinas – we treat the other as equivilant to currency, which denies its value and opens it to infinite violence.
32 -
33 -This turns the aff – police violence is a direct result of neoliberalism. A failure to recognize that makes violence inevitable.
34 -
35 -Lane 7/21
36 -Alycee Lane (Alycee J. Lane is a former professor who taught African American literature and culture at UC Santa Barbara.), 7-21-16 “Violence, Death and Our Neoliberal Police,” CounterPunch, http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/07/21/violence-death-and-our-neoliberal-police/
37 -If we examine through the prism of neoliberalism the killing of Philando Castile – that
38 -AND
39 -this was true as well for Officer Darren Wilson of Ferguson, Missouri.
40 -
41 -Lane outweighs the aff – we allow the other to be violently subjugated.
42 -
43 -Tort law and neolib’s commodification of life anonymizes suffering, which kills our ability to recognize the other.
44 -
45 -ZIZEK AND DALY 04
46 -Slavoj Zizek and Glyn Daly, Conversations with Zizek, 2004 page 14-16.
47 -For Zizek it is imperative that we cut through this Gordian knot of postmodern protocol
48 -AND
49 -) social antagonisms and to absorb them within a culture of differential affirmation.
50 -
51 -The alternative is an embrace of class-consciousness as a method of critiquing neoliberalism’s grip on policing.
52 -
53 -LaVenia 15
54 -Peter A. LaVenia PhD in Political Science from the University at Albany, SUNY. He is the Secretary of the NY State Green Party and manages Matt Funiciello’s campaign for Congress. JANUARY 16, 2015 “Police Behavior and Neoliberalism” http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/01/16/police-behavior-and-neoliberalism/
55 -The cause of impotence on the part of elected officials even in the face of
56 -AND
57 -likely to see nothing but equivocation by local officials and big city mayors.
58 -
59 -The role of the judge is to be a critical analyst testing whether the underlying assumptions of the AFF are valid. This is a question of the whether the AFF scholarship is good – not the passage of the plan.
60 -
61 -Neoliberalism sustains itself by operating by propagating a narrow lens of what it means to be ‘political.’ We situate the judge as a critical educator who steps back to evaluate the frames through which we view policy first. Reps prior.
62 -
63 -Blalock, 2015
64 -(Corinne (Graduate Student. Studies Critical Theory, Legal Theory, and Law, has a JD), “NEOLIBERALISM AND THE CRISIS OF LEGAL THEORY”, Duke University, LAW AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS Vol. 77:71)
65 -RECOVERING LEGAL THEORY’S RELEVANCE? The lens of neoliberalism not only allows one to see
66 -AND
67 -they are in a world that constantly insists that there is no alternative.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2017-02-17 23:54:06.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -8
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -1
Team
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Lexington Roy Neg
Title
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -JF - Cap K
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Caselist.CitesClass[7]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,35 +1,0 @@
1 -Warming DA
2 -
3 -Uniqueness
4 -Nuclear power is combating warming – a prohibition is catastrophic
5 -Harvey 12
6 -Fiona Harvey - award-winning environment journalist for the Guardian, used to work for financial times. “Nuclear power is only solution to climate change, says Jeffrey Sachs.” The Guardian. May 3, 2012. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/may/03/nuclear-power-solution-climate-chang
7 -Combating climate change
8 -AND
9 -scientists," he said.
10 -
11 -Link
12 -A prohibition causes a shift to fossil fuels – Japan proves
13 -Chameides 12
14 - Chameides, Bill (Dean of Nicholas School of the Environment 2007-2014, Professor Emeritus at Duke University). "The Nuclear Power Conundrum." Nicholas School of the Environment. Duke University, 5 July 2012. Web. http3A2F2Fblogs.nicholas.duke.edu2Fthegreengrok2Fnuke-conundrum2F
15 -
16 -What to do when
17 -AND
18 -or the other.”
19 -
20 -Internal Link
21 -Fossil fuels increase CO2 emissions - strongest link to warming
22 -NWF 15
23 -National Wildlife Federation, 2015. “Global Warming is human caused”. National Wildlife Federation. https://www.nwf.org/Wildlife/Threats-to-Wildlife/Global-Warming/Global-Warming-is-Human-Caused.aspx.
24 -Scientists have concluded
25 -AND
26 -recent warming trends.
27 -
28 -Impact
29 -
30 -Warming causes extinction
31 -Flournoy 12
32 -Don Flournoy 12, Citing Feng Hsu, PhD NASA Scientist @ the Goddard Space Flight Center and Don is a PhD and MA from UT, former Dean of the University College @ Ohio University, former Associate Dean at SUNY and Case Institute of Technology, Former Manager for University/Industry Experiments for the NASA ACTS Satellite, currently Professor of Telecommunications @ Scripps College of Communications, Ohio University, “Solar Power Satellites,” January 2012, Springer Briefs in Space Development, p. 10-11
33 -In the Online Journal of Space Communication , Dr. Feng Hsu, a NASA
34 -AND
35 -is simply too high for us to take any chances” (Hsu 2010
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2017-02-17 23:56:53.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -9
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -1
Team
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Lexington Roy Neg
Title
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -SO - Warming DA
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Caselist.CitesClass[8]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,17 +1,0 @@
1 -INTERPRETATION: Debaters must specify a single country in which to ban nuclear power.
2 -
3 -VIOLATION: Case specific violation
4 -
5 -Standards
6 -
7 -Topic Literature
8 -
9 -World Nuclear Association 16
10 -World Nuclear Association, 7/16, N.P, http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/others/emerging-nuclear-energy-countries.aspx
11 -In different countries,
12 -AND
13 -are likely, including public-private partnerships.
14 -
15 -Ground
16 -
17 -VOTER:
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2017-02-17 23:59:12.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -10
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -1
Team
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Lexington Roy Neg
Title
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -SO - Must Spec Single Country
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Caselist.RoundClass[7]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -5
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -2017-02-17 23:52:04.0
1 +2017-02-17 23:52:04.696
Caselist.RoundClass[8]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -6
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2017-02-17 23:54:05.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -1
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Caselist.RoundClass[9]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -7
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2017-02-17 23:56:52.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -1
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Caselist.RoundClass[10]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -8
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2017-02-17 23:59:11.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -1
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Any
Caselist.CitesClass[0]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,17 @@
1 +INTERPRETATION: Debaters must specify a single country in which to ban nuclear power.
2 +
3 +VIOLATION: Case specific violation
4 +
5 +Standards
6 +
7 +Topic Literature
8 +
9 +World Nuclear Association 16
10 +World Nuclear Association, 7/16, N.P, http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/others/emerging-nuclear-energy-countries.aspx
11 +In different countries,
12 +AND
13 +are likely, including public-private partnerships.
14 +
15 +Ground
16 +
17 +VOTER:
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-10-14 18:27:21.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Any
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Any
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +0
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Lexington Roy Neg
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +NP - Must Spec
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Byram
Caselist.CitesClass[1]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,23 @@
1 +Australia empirically verifies coal tradeoff.
2 +
3 +Ben Heard 12
4 +Masters of Corporate Environmental Sustainability Management, Monash University, 2007, environmental activist, Director of ThinkClimate Consulting, “That day in December: the story of nuclear prohibition in Australia”, Decarbonise SA, 12 Sep 2012, BE
5 +Since the prohibition of nuclear power, while nuclear build has taken off around the
6 +AND
7 +greenhouse emissions from electricity production 18 higher since 1998 (Australian Greenhouse Emissions
8 +
9 +Warming causes extinction
10 +
11 +Flournoy 12
12 +Don Flournoy 12, Citing Feng Hsu, PhD NASA Scientist @ the Goddard Space Flight Center and Don is a PhD and MA from UT, former Dean of the University College @ Ohio University, former Associate Dean at SUNY and Case Institute of Technology, Former Manager for University/Industry Experiments for the NASA ACTS Satellite, currently Professor of Telecommunications @ Scripps College of Communications, Ohio University, “Solar Power Satellites,” January 2012, Springer Briefs in Space Development, p. 10-11
13 +In the Online Journal of Space Communication , Dr. Feng Hsu, a NASA
14 +AND
15 +simply too high for us to take any chances” (Hsu 2010 ).
16 +
17 +Moral uncertainty means extinction comes first
18 +
19 +Bostrom 13
20 +Nick Bostrom (Faculty of Philosophy at Oxford). “Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority.” Global Policy, Vol. 4, Issue 1. 2013. http://www.existential-risk.org/concept.html
21 +These reflections on moral uncertainty suggest an alternative, complementary way of looking at existential
22 +AND
23 +lot of value. To do this we must prevent any existential catastrophe.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-10-14 18:33:00.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Any
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Any
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Lexington Roy Neg
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +NP - Warming DA
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Byram
Caselist.CitesClass[2]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,108 @@
1 +1NC vs Spikes K
2 +
3 +Spikes K
4 +
5 +Their obfuscation and the use of spikes is antiethical to the ethic of intellectual integrity,
6 +
7 +TORSON 13
8 +“Debate and the Virtue of Intellectual Integrity by Adam Torson” March 25th, 2013. By Victory Briefs. http://vbriefly.com/2013/03/25/20133debate-and-the-virtue-of-intellectual-integrity-by-adam-torson/NB
9 +Against Purposeful Obfuscation Too often in debate, strategy devolves into sophistry. Debaters utilize
10 +AND
11 +as a very strange outcome in any debate event worthy of the name.
12 +
13 +Intellectual integrity is the biggest impact- it’s the point of debate.
14 +
15 +TORSON 13
16 +“Debate and the Virtue of Intellectual Integrity by Adam Torson” March 25th, 2013. By Victory Briefs. http://vbriefly.com/2013/03/25/20133debate-and-the-virtue-of-intellectual-integrity-by-adam-torson/NB
17 +Intellectual integrity denotes a commitment to the honest pursuit of truth through openness to evidence
18 +AND
19 +I encourage the examination of those practices through the lens of intellectual integrity.
20 +
21 +Reject the 1AC’s use of spikes to embrace argumentative responsibility- you know what you did wrong and know you better own up to it.
22 +
23 +TORSON 13
24 +“Debate and the Virtue of Intellectual Integrity by Adam Torson” March 25th, 2013. By Victory Briefs. http://vbriefly.com/2013/03/25/20133debate-and-the-virtue-of-intellectual-integrity-by-adam-torson/NB
25 +What We Can Do About It¶ Students¶ I encourage debaters to embrace the
26 +AND
27 +occur in the first place - denying this destroys the assumptions debate operates on
28 +
29 +AC Spikes
30 +
31 +Off of some of her spikes, - Counterinterp
32 +
33 +A. INterp Debaters must not make their opponent ask in cross-ex for theory violations and deny the neg one conditional route to the ballot and claim that the theory on affirmative spikes is drop the argument and claim that aff theory is a reason to drop the debater.
34 +
35 +B. VIOLATION: all these spikes are in the 1AC
36 +
37 +C. STANDARDS:
38 +a. Advocacy shift—CX checks allows the aff an opportunity to change its vision of a fair debate after the reading of the 1AC. Letting the 1AC flip-flop out of its original positions is unfair because it inevitably leads to the aff cherry picking which theory interps it will concede and not concede depending on who they are debating. Infinite prep solves for mutually exclusive interps – you can pick and frontline the ones you defend.
39 +Also links to strat skew because aff representing the AC differently based on who’s neg
40 +AND
41 +aff to waste negative CX time and keeps the neg from gaining concessions.
42 +
43 +d. norms setting
44 +
45 +CX checks prevents norms setting because the aff is never prevented form reading abusive things – either its dropped or they just get it removed in CX.
46 +
47 +Her aff spike that says neg theory on aff spike should be drop the arg is uniquely bad because then the neg can never check aff abuse since there is no deterrence effect.
48 +
49 +Norms setting outweighs on fairness since it ensures infinite better practices in the future.
50 +
51 +e. reciprocity
52 +
53 +saying aff theory is a reason to drop the debater but neg theory is a reason to drop the argument is a form of structural abuse because she gets extra routes to the ballot. Reciprocity key to fairness since I can’t win if I don’t have equal access to argumentation.
54 +
55 +D. VOTERS:
56 +Concede fairness is a voter from AC, but also because debate is a competitive activity so requires equitable access to the ballot
57 +Drop the debater on theory because a) fairness is a gateway issue, unfair
58 +AND
59 +to implement it, there is no way I can win the round.
60 +
61 +Off of UV affirming Harder
62 +Negating is harder
63 +
64 +1. Aff gets last word- strategic 2AR can collapse to the most important arg and can weigh whereas the 2NR has to multipoint every arg. I can't contest weighing beacuse there's no 3NR.
65 +
66 +2. Judge Psychology
67 +
68 +A. Judges remembers the last speech more clearly and is more likely to vote off initial aff offense
69 +
70 +B. Most people think affirming is harder- so there is an implicit bias in the mindset of the judge which makes affirming harder- outweighs cuz the neg can't overcome it
71 +
72 +3. Infinite prep time to find the perfect strat and frontline, whereas we have to either prep for all possible affa nd adapt to the aff strat. They can also write all their blocks with perfect efficiency which solves time skew
73 +
74 +4. Presuming aff lets them win on defense- which heavily skews the round in their favor because they have to win half the arguments
75 +
76 +5. 1AR and 2AR has 7 mins to uplayer against potential 1NC offense whereas we only have 6 mins in the 2NR, makes collapses especially effective
77 +This points have implicit clash with her affirming harder points – don’t let her say I conceded them because I did’t literally say “off of the b.) point
78 +
79 + (read if time) Presume Neg
80 +
81 +1. Prefer substantive reasons to presume over theoretical ones- if i win we ought to see the res as false then there's a risk of offense and i did the better debating to not need to go to the theory layer
82 +
83 +2. All propositions require positive justification before being accepted, otherwise one would be forced to accept the validity of logically contradictory propositions regarding subjects one knows nothing about i.e. if one knew nothing about P one would have to presume that both P and -P are true
84 +
85 +3. Key to check tricky affs- otherwise they can extend blippy spikes and take out swaths of 1NC speech time with a presumption trigger
86 +
87 +4. To negate is defined as "to deny the truth of", negating requires no positive justification, so we always presume neg
88 +
89 +5. Resolved means firmly determined to do something, we would not affirm unless there is a pro-active motivation to take an action
90 +
91 +6. Assuming statements true w/o positive justification is uneducational since real life exposes ones to situations where we blindly follow authority figures which allows them to oppress us
92 +7. Statements are more likely false because there are an infinite amount of ways to contest them,
93 +
94 +Off of One Uncondo route UV arg
95 +
96 +Off strat skew
97 +1. Their interp causes a double bind- I can only read one offensive theory shell, which means there's never any substantive education or engagement of the aff, I'm forced to read theory, at which point they can win on rvi or substance, and sub edu key in LD
98 +2. I can't read counterinterps to aff theory- each of those are uncondo
99 +AND
100 +either on the same layer or several turns explains why its better for you
101 +
102 + Off of theory on ac spikes are drop debater UV arg
103 +1. She says they are incitement of bad debate norms but we prove they are actually good
104 +2. She says she shouldn’t be dropped because they aren’t her advocacy, 1.) non unique – people get dropped by things that aren’t in their adovacy all the time i.e. meta theory 2.) cross apply the RVI reasons above. If you don’t drop her she will keep reading this false interp, it’s a no risk issue if its drop the arg. Dropping debater creates change – bracket theory proves
105 +
106 +Off of aff theory is drop debater UV arg
107 +1.) You say 4 min 1ar isn’t enough to win substance and theory – get faster, do strategy skills, don’t punish me for ur lack of drilling
108 +2.) We will concede this is you concede neg gets RVIs, reciprocity which is key to fairness. If you don’t concede that’s not reciprocal because your theoretical arguments are drop the debater but mine arn.t
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-12-03 04:30:39.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Varun Bhave
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Scarsdale NI
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +4
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Lexington Roy Neg
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +QI - 1NC vs Scarsdale NI
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Princeton
Caselist.CitesClass[3]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,155 @@
1 +1NC vs Xavier Levinas
2 +
3 +T – Consequentialism
4 +
5 +Interpretation- The affirmative must defend a consequentialist ethical theory.
6 +
7 +Violation: His aff says “generic util turns do not apply”
8 +
9 +1. Ground
10 +
11 +A. Turn Ground- If only intent/phil based offense links to the standard then no negative ground links to the aff because they can always say that consequences don’t matter. Abstract ideals are incontestable goods- literature reviews that implementation difficulties are the only arguments to debate about
12 +
13 +B. Stable Ground- the 1AR can defend material consequences or defend intentions/philosophical implications of their affs against Ks, they can also skirt out of generic turns and DAs which also inherently prove that they are bad.
14 +
15 +Ground key to fairness- ensures both debaters have equal access to args
16 +
17 +2. Topic Literature
18 +
19 +Qualified immunity doesn't exist independent of empirical legislative decisions and police officer conduct- empirical actual focus is key
20 +
21 +TLR 4 2004 Texas Law Review "NOTE: The Paradox Of Qualified Immunity: How A Mechanical Application Of The Objective Legal Reasonableness
22 +Damage suits against from personal liability for unconstitutional conduct. 7 Rather, as its name suggests, qualified immunity was designed to protect government officials only in limited situations. 8
23 +
24 +Focused topic education outweighs
25 +
26 +A. Reading a framework and policy solves phil ground- our interpretation allows for negative frameworks to be read
27 +
28 +B. LD is a values debate isn’t responsive- 1. That commits the is-ought fallcy, just because it is a values debate, doesn't mean it ought to be, 2. That makes an empirical claim without an empirical warrant
29 +
30 +C. Timeframe- we have 2 months to discuss the topic- but we can always get phi led from other places
31 +
32 +D. Debate’s strategic incentives bastardize phil debate
33 +Nebel et Al 13 Teaching Philosophy 36:3, September 2013 271 Teaching Philosophy through Lincoln-Douglas Debate JACOB NEBEL Wolfson College, Oxford University RYAN W. DAVIS Harvard University PETER VAN ELSWYK Rutgers University BEN HOLGUIN New York University
34 +Another cause of poorly justified relativism and skepticism in LD debate comes from judge expectations
35 +AND
36 +inclined to accept a controversial philosophical view about morality for the wrong reasons.
37 +
38 +E. Phil debate creates unrealistic phil decisions
39 +Nebel et Al 13 Teaching Philosophy 36:3, September 2013 271 Teaching Philosophy through Lincoln-Douglas Debate JACOB NEBEL Wolfson College, Oxford University RYAN W. DAVIS Harvard University PETER VAN ELSWYK Rutgers University BEN HOLGUIN New York University
40 +The LD debate community is on the hyper-methodist end of the spectrum.
41 +AND
42 +Holocaust wasn’t morally wrong if the debater in question is defending moral nihilism.
43 +
44 +F. Comparitive ethics debates are useless- in the real world people argue how actions apply under ethics
45 +
46 +G. philosophy is structured in a way that it is responsive in one direction i.e. Hegel is written in response to Kant, but not vice versa, smart negs will pick responsive fw’s without ground against them, only util allows answers from both sides.
47 +
48 +D. Voter
49 +
50 +1. Fairness, debates a competitive activity, 2. Education, only portable impact. Drop the debater because A. Norms- a loss deters future abuse, B. Timeskew- drop the arg means they can kick their offense for a positive time tradeoff. C. Gateway issue- unfair args skew the rest of the round. Evaluate Competing Interps, A. reasonability is arbitrary and invites judge intervention, B. deterrence- debaters can get away with defense on theory, C. reasonability collapses into competing itnersp because we have offense defense debates about brightlines
51 +
52 +No RVI
53 +
54 +1. Denies the antecedent- just because you’re fair doesn't mean you should win- logic is a litmus test for arguments so it outweighs theoretical reasons
55 +
56 +2. Chilling Effect- A. Race 2 Bottom- They deter negatives from reading theory against abusive affs- good debaters will just prep out shells.
57 +
58 +3. Substance- Incentivizes borderline abuse to bait theory which kills substance, and if theory causes reciprocal skews to both sides we can still go back to substance but under their interp the round ends on theory
59 +
60 +No drop arg on T – cross-apply norms setting which outweighs since it’s a question of infinite abuse.
61 +
62 +Cap K
63 +
64 +Humans are grounded in material conditions that create all thought – trying to abstract from material reality (i.e, not defending consequentialist turns) is another link to the K.
65 +
66 +Eagleton 11
67 +Eagleton, Terry (Is a prominent British literary theorist, critic and public intellectual. He is currently Distinguished Professor of English Literature at Lancaster University). Why Marx was right. Yale University Press, 2011
68 +In this sense, Marx was more of an antiphilosopher than a philosopher. In
69 +AND
70 +can fall victim to the illusion that it is thought which creates reality.
71 +
72 +The affirmative’s legalistic approach to police violence brings us further away from recognizing the economic forces at work that makes police violence inevitable. Lane 7/21.
73 +Alycee Lane (Alycee J. Lane is a former professor who taught African American literature and culture at UC Santa Barbara.), 7-21-16 “Violence, Death and Our Neoliberal Police,” CounterPunch, http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/07/21/violence-death-and-our-neoliberal-police/
74 +If what we are witnessing in these violent encounters with police is neoliberalism in action
75 +AND
76 +and training of police – that we absolutely have the power to change.
77 +
78 +Civil suits put an asking price on people’s suffering.
79 +
80 +Abel 81
81 +Richard L. Abel, Prof of Law @ UCLA, ’81 (British Journal of Law and Society 8:1, “A Critique of American Tort Law,” jstor)
82 +Finally, tort law responds to intangible injury by extending that fundamental concept of capitalism
83 +AND
84 +the compensation system is working well if anything, too well. 116
85 +
86 +Tort law commodifies suffering as loss of earning power – kills value to life.
87 +
88 + Abel 81
89 +Richard L. Abel, Prof of Law @ UCLA, ’81 (British Journal of Law and Society 8:1, “A Critique of American Tort Law,” jstor)
90 +Capitalism also shapes the experience of injury. First (and this enumeration is not
91 +AND
92 +, care, emotional and physical integrity, and ultimately love with money.
93 +
94 +Commodification is the worst impact under Levinas – we treat the other as equivilant to currency, which denies its value and opens it to infinite violence.
95 +
96 +This turns the aff – police violence is a direct result of neoliberalism. A failure to recognize that makes violence inevitable.
97 +
98 +Lane 7/21
99 +Alycee Lane (Alycee J. Lane is a former professor who taught African American literature and culture at UC Santa Barbara.), 7-21-16 “Violence, Death and Our Neoliberal Police,” CounterPunch, http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/07/21/violence-death-and-our-neoliberal-police/
100 +If we examine through the prism of neoliberalism the killing of Philando Castile – that
101 +AND
102 +this was true as well for Officer Darren Wilson of Ferguson, Missouri.
103 +
104 +The alternative is an embrace of class-consciousness as a method of critiquing neoliberalism’s grip on policing.
105 +
106 +LaVenia 15
107 +Peter A. LaVenia PhD in Political Science from the University at Albany, SUNY. He is the Secretary of the NY State Green Party and manages Matt Funiciello’s campaign for Congress. JANUARY 16, 2015 “Police Behavior and Neoliberalism” http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/01/16/police-behavior-and-neoliberalism/
108 +The cause of impotence on the part of elected officials even in the face of
109 +AND
110 +likely to see nothing but equivocation by local officials and big city mayors.
111 +
112 +The role of the judge is to be a critical analyst testing whether the underlying assumptions of the AFF are valid. This is a question of the whether the AFF scholarship is good – not the passage of the plan.
113 +
114 +Neoliberalism sustains itself by operating by propagating a narrow lens of what it means to be ‘political.’ We situate the judge as a critical educator who steps back to evaluate the frames through which we view policy first. Reps prior.
115 +
116 +Blalock, 2015
117 +(Corinne (Graduate Student. Studies Critical Theory, Legal Theory, and Law, has a JD), “NEOLIBERALISM AND THE CRISIS OF LEGAL THEORY”, Duke University, LAW AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS Vol. 77:71)
118 +RECOVERING LEGAL THEORY’S RELEVANCE? The lens of neoliberalism not only allows one to see
119 +AND
120 +they are in a world that constantly insists that there is no alternative.
121 +
122 +On Case
123 +
124 +Kantian state of reciprocal constraint doesn’t exist in the US – all USFG action is unilateral coercion and must be rejected – the alternative is to reject the aff’s view of the USFG as an ethical mandate to reclaim black social agency and value black existence
125 +Mills 15
126 +Charles Mills (the John Evans Professor of Moral and Intellectual Philosophy at Northwestern University). “Black Radical Liberalism (by Charles Mills).” PEA Soup, philosophy blog run by professors David Sobel and David Shoemaker. 23 February 2015. http://peasoup.typepad.com/peasoup/2015/02/black-radical-liberalism-and-why-it-isnt-an-oxymoron.html
127 +“Black radical liberalism” is my attempt to reconstruct from different and usually counterposed
128 +AND
129 +The concerns motivating a black radical liberalism would be addressed rather than evaded.
130 +
131 +Kant Case Turns
132 +
133 +But even if a priori Kantianism comes first, I win anyway-
134 +
135 +Negate:
136 +
137 +A. Universalizing a restriction on police efficacy is self defeating because it extends and restricts state power which precludes the omnilateral will
138 +
139 +B. Making officers responsible for foreseen consequences violates their conditions of agency since we only identify with what we intend
140 +
141 +A desire to ignore the consequences of their advocacy causes failure ~-~-- you must evaluate consequences of their proposal
142 +
143 +Bracey 6
144 +Christopher A. Bracey 6, Associate Professor of Law, Associate Professor of African and African American Studies, Washington University in St. Louis, September, Southern California Law Review, 79 S. Cal. L. Rev. 1231, p. 1318
145 +Second, reducing conversation on race matters to an ideological contest allows opponents to elide
146 +AND
147 +ideological exchange, which further exacerbates hostilities and deepens the cycle of resentment.
148 +
149 +Moral tunnel vision is complicit with evil.
150 +
151 + Issac 2
152 +—Professor of Political Science at Indiana-Bloomington, Director of the Center for the Study of Democracy and Public Life, PhD from Yale (Jeffery C., Dissent Magazine, Vol. 49, Iss. 2, “Ends, Means, and Politics,” p. Proquest)
153 +As a result, the most important political questions are simply not asked. It
154 +AND
155 +not true believers. It promotes arrogance. And it undermines political effectiveness.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-12-03 23:52:10.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Ben Ulene
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Xavier
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +5
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +4
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Lexington Roy Neg
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1NC vs Xavier Roberts-Gall
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Princeton

Schools

Aberdeen Central (SD)
Acton-Boxborough (MA)
Albany (CA)
Albuquerque Academy (NM)
Alief Taylor (TX)
American Heritage Boca Delray (FL)
American Heritage Plantation (FL)
Anderson (TX)
Annie Wright (WA)
Apple Valley (MN)
Appleton East (WI)
Arbor View (NV)
Arcadia (CA)
Archbishop Mitty (CA)
Ardrey Kell (NC)
Ashland (OR)
Athens (TX)
Bainbridge (WA)
Bakersfield (CA)
Barbers Hill (TX)
Barrington (IL)
BASIS Mesa (AZ)
BASIS Scottsdale (AZ)
BASIS Silicon (CA)
Beckman (CA)
Bellarmine (CA)
Benjamin Franklin (LA)
Benjamin N Cardozo (NY)
Bentonville (AR)
Bergen County (NJ)
Bettendorf (IA)
Bingham (UT)
Blue Valley Southwest (KS)
Brentwood (CA)
Brentwood Middle (CA)
Bridgewater-Raritan (NJ)
Bronx Science (NY)
Brophy College Prep (AZ)
Brown (KY)
Byram Hills (NY)
Byron Nelson (TX)
Cabot (AR)
Calhoun Homeschool (TX)
Cambridge Rindge (MA)
Canyon Crest (CA)
Canyon Springs (NV)
Cape Fear Academy (NC)
Carmel Valley Independent (CA)
Carpe Diem (NJ)
Cedar Park (TX)
Cedar Ridge (TX)
Centennial (ID)
Centennial (TX)
Center For Talented Youth (MD)
Cerritos (CA)
Chaminade (CA)
Chandler (AZ)
Chandler Prep (AZ)
Chaparral (AZ)
Charles E Smith (MD)
Cherokee (OK)
Christ Episcopal (LA)
Christopher Columbus (FL)
Cinco Ranch (TX)
Citrus Valley (CA)
Claremont (CA)
Clark (NV)
Clark (TX)
Clear Brook (TX)
Clements (TX)
Clovis North (CA)
College Prep (CA)
Collegiate (NY)
Colleyville Heritage (TX)
Concord Carlisle (MA)
Concordia Lutheran (TX)
Connally (TX)
Coral Glades (FL)
Coral Science (NV)
Coral Springs (FL)
Coppell (TX)
Copper Hills (UT)
Corona Del Sol (AZ)
Crandall (TX)
Crossroads (CA)
Cupertino (CA)
Cy-Fair (TX)
Cypress Bay (FL)
Cypress Falls (TX)
Cypress Lakes (TX)
Cypress Ridge (TX)
Cypress Springs (TX)
Cypress Woods (TX)
Dallastown (PA)
Davis (CA)
Delbarton (NJ)
Derby (KS)
Des Moines Roosevelt (IA)
Desert Vista (AZ)
Diamond Bar (CA)
Dobson (AZ)
Dougherty Valley (CA)
Dowling Catholic (IA)
Dripping Springs (TX)
Dulles (TX)
duPont Manual (KY)
Dwyer (FL)
Eagle (ID)
Eastside Catholic (WA)
Edgemont (NY)
Edina (MN)
Edmond North (OK)
Edmond Santa Fe (OK)
El Cerrito (CA)
Elkins (TX)
Enloe (NC)
Episcopal (TX)
Evanston (IL)
Evergreen Valley (CA)
Ferris (TX)
Flintridge Sacred Heart (CA)
Flower Mound (TX)
Fordham Prep (NY)
Fort Lauderdale (FL)
Fort Walton Beach (FL)
Freehold Township (NJ)
Fremont (NE)
Frontier (MO)
Gabrielino (CA)
Garland (TX)
George Ranch (TX)
Georgetown Day (DC)
Gig Harbor (WA)
Gilmour (OH)
Glenbrook South (IL)
Gonzaga Prep (WA)
Grand Junction (CO)
Grapevine (TX)
Green Valley (NV)
Greenhill (TX)
Guyer (TX)
Hamilton (AZ)
Hamilton (MT)
Harker (CA)
Harmony (TX)
Harrison (NY)
Harvard Westlake (CA)
Hawken (OH)
Head Royce (CA)
Hebron (TX)
Heights (MD)
Hendrick Hudson (NY)
Henry Grady (GA)
Highland (UT)
Highland (ID)
Hockaday (TX)
Holy Cross (LA)
Homewood Flossmoor (IL)
Hopkins (MN)
Houston Homeschool (TX)
Hunter College (NY)
Hutchinson (KS)
Immaculate Heart (CA)
Independent (All)
Interlake (WA)
Isidore Newman (LA)
Jack C Hays (TX)
James Bowie (TX)
Jefferson City (MO)
Jersey Village (TX)
John Marshall (CA)
Juan Diego (UT)
Jupiter (FL)
Kapaun Mount Carmel (KS)
Kamiak (WA)
Katy Taylor (TX)
Keller (TX)
Kempner (TX)
Kent Denver (CO)
King (FL)
Kingwood (TX)
Kinkaid (TX)
Klein (TX)
Klein Oak (TX)
Kudos College (CA)
La Canada (CA)
La Costa Canyon (CA)
La Jolla (CA)
La Reina (CA)
Lafayette (MO)
Lake Highland (FL)
Lake Travis (TX)
Lakeville North (MN)
Lakeville South (MN)
Lamar (TX)
LAMP (AL)
Law Magnet (TX)
Langham Creek (TX)
Lansing (KS)
LaSalle College (PA)
Lawrence Free State (KS)
Layton (UT)
Leland (CA)
Leucadia Independent (CA)
Lexington (MA)
Liberty Christian (TX)
Lincoln (OR)
Lincoln (NE)
Lincoln East (NE)
Lindale (TX)
Livingston (NJ)
Logan (UT)
Lone Peak (UT)
Los Altos (CA)
Los Osos (CA)
Lovejoy (TX)
Loyola (CA)
Loyola Blakefield (MA)
Lynbrook (CA)
Maeser Prep (UT)
Mannford (OK)
Marcus (TX)
Marlborough (CA)
McClintock (AZ)
McDowell (PA)
McNeil (TX)
Meadows (NV)
Memorial (TX)
Millard North (NE)
Millard South (NE)
Millard West (NE)
Millburn (NJ)
Milpitas (CA)
Miramonte (CA)
Mission San Jose (CA)
Monsignor Kelly (TX)
Monta Vista (CA)
Montclair Kimberley (NJ)
Montgomery (TX)
Monticello (NY)
Montville Township (NJ)
Morris Hills (NJ)
Mountain Brook (AL)
Mountain Pointe (AZ)
Mountain View (CA)
Mountain View (AZ)
Murphy Middle (TX)
NCSSM (NC)
New Orleans Jesuit (LA)
New Trier (IL)
Newark Science (NJ)
Newburgh Free Academy (NY)
Newport (WA)
North Allegheny (PA)
North Crowley (TX)
North Hollywood (CA)
Northland Christian (TX)
Northwood (CA)
Notre Dame (CA)
Nueva (CA)
Oak Hall (FL)
Oakwood (CA)
Okoboji (IA)
Oxbridge (FL)
Oxford (CA)
Pacific Ridge (CA)
Palm Beach Gardens (FL)
Palo Alto Independent (CA)
Palos Verdes Peninsula (CA)
Park Crossing (AL)
Peak to Peak (CO)
Pembroke Pines (FL)
Pennsbury (PA)
Phillips Academy Andover (MA)
Phoenix Country Day (AZ)
Pine Crest (FL)
Pingry (NJ)
Pittsburgh Central Catholic (PA)
Plano East (TX)
Polytechnic (CA)
Presentation (CA)
Princeton (NJ)
Prosper (TX)
Quarry Lane (CA)
Raisbeck-Aviation (WA)
Rancho Bernardo (CA)
Randolph (NJ)
Reagan (TX)
Richardson (TX)
Ridge (NJ)
Ridge Point (TX)
Riverside (SC)
Robert Vela (TX)
Rosemount (MN)
Roseville (MN)
Round Rock (TX)
Rowland Hall (UT)
Royse City (TX)
Ruston (LA)
Sacred Heart (MA)
Sacred Heart (MS)
Sage Hill (CA)
Sage Ridge (NV)
Salado (TX)
Salpointe Catholic (AZ)
Sammamish (WA)
San Dieguito (CA)
San Marino (CA)
SandHoke (NC)
Santa Monica (CA)
Sarasota (FL)
Saratoga (CA)
Scarsdale (NY)
Servite (CA)
Seven Lakes (TX)
Shawnee Mission East (KS)
Shawnee Mission Northwest (KS)
Shawnee Mission South (KS)
Shawnee Mission West (KS)
Sky View (UT)
Skyline (UT)
Smithson Valley (TX)
Southlake Carroll (TX)
Sprague (OR)
St Agnes (TX)
St Andrews (MS)
St Francis (CA)
St James (AL)
St Johns (TX)
St Louis Park (MN)
St Margarets (CA)
St Marys Hall (TX)
St Thomas (MN)
St Thomas (TX)
Stephen F Austin (TX)
Stoneman Douglas (FL)
Stony Point (TX)
Strake Jesuit (TX)
Stratford (TX)
Stratford Independent (CA)
Stuyvesant (NY)
Success Academy (NY)
Sunnyslope (AZ)
Sunset (OR)
Syosset (NY)
Tahoma (WA)
Talley (AZ)
Texas Academy of Math and Science (TX)
Thomas Jefferson (VA)
Thompkins (TX)
Timber Creek (FL)
Timothy Christian (NJ)
Tom C Clark (TX)
Tompkins (TX)
Torrey Pines (CA)
Travis (TX)
Trinity (KY)
Trinity Prep (FL)
Trinity Valley (TX)
Truman (PA)
Turlock (CA)
Union (OK)
Unionville (PA)
University High (CA)
University School (OH)
University (FL)
Upper Arlington (OH)
Upper Dublin (PA)
Valley (IA)
Valor Christian (CO)
Vashon (WA)
Ventura (CA)
Veritas Prep (AZ)
Vestavia Hills (AL)
Vincentian (PA)
Walla Walla (WA)
Walt Whitman (MD)
Warren (TX)
Wenatchee (WA)
West (UT)
West Ranch (CA)
Westford (MA)
Westlake (TX)
Westview (OR)
Westwood (TX)
Whitefish Bay (WI)
Whitney (CA)
Wilson (DC)
Winston Churchill (TX)
Winter Springs (FL)
Woodlands (TX)
Woodlands College Park (TX)
Wren (SC)
Yucca Valley (CA)