Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[9]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[11]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[9]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-09-24 14:20:27.233
	1	+2016-09-24 14:20:27.0

Caselist.CitesClass[11]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,44 @@
	1	+====An intriguing set of individuals once said that there was only one debate to be had – that of being vs becoming – perhaps they were correct. Or entirely wrong – we can't be sure. ====
	2	+
	3	+
	4	+====What does it mean to be "tabula rasa"? If such a concept exists, why do policy coaches become so confused by the strategic decisions of Lincoln-Douglas debaters? Why do groups outside of debate become concerned of our fast-talking, jargon language? The answer is simple – Tabula Rasa is dead, has been dead, and will be put to death. Our community has become determined in advance, already-always rigidly defined into predetermined models – without predetermined conceptions, none of the affirmatives arguments would be legitimate. ====
	5	+
	6	+
	7	+====The par-excellence representation of such a process is the theoretical framing arguments of the affirmative. Rhetorical preservation of community through standards and exclusion necessitates the death of community. Community cannot be produced – the very concept of community is impossible. The refusal to accept the impossibility of community – a community that is not one, unified, or whole – is the thesis of our argument. ====
	8	+Benjamin **Noys, 2k**
	9	+"Georges Bataille" pg 53-56.
	10	+He does not offer us a distanced 'safe' Nietzsche, but offers us a
	11	+AND
	12	+makes community possible and as that which makes it impossible to achieve communion.
	13	+
	14	+
	15	+====Their rhetorical strategies of theoretical framing are testament to their hierarchical understandings of community. Imposition of objective models is the cornerstone of the violent logic that expels difference and takes arms against deviance. Even if we don't produce a new model of community – perhaps that is the point – our dancing around the will to order should be sufficient. ====
	16	+Michael **Strysick,** 19**97**
	17	+"The End of Community and the Politic of Grammar" Cultural Critique, pg 195-215.
	18	+Community gains nothing from attempting to build and rebuild immanent, avowable empires. Violence
	19	+AND
	20	+to realize that all are "other" and none are the same.
	21	+
	22	+
	23	+====Vote negative to efface the singular construct of community in favor an open, fragmented, and imperfect community. We propose no set of alternatives, regulations, or functions – we instead call back to the basis of community – the stasis point of impossible possibility that enables its coming. ====
	24	+Jean-Luc **Nancy,** 19**86**
	25	+"The Inoperable Community" pg xxxviii-xli.
	26	+Finitude, or the infinite lack of infinite identity, if we can risk such
	27	+AND
	28	+which is to say, without community, deprived of our finite existence.
	29	+
	30	+
	31	+====We will defend a model of communication based around sacrifice. Communication can only function through this sacrifice – to be open beyond yourself, to the risk of another – their inability to leave themselves vulnerable ensures the destruction of community. It also seems logical that you should make sure to sacrifice the affirmative on the altar of debate at this point…====
	32	+Georges **Bataille,** 19**45**
	33	+"On Nietzsche" pg 18-19.
	34	+Thus "communication," without which nothing exists for us, is guaranteed by crime
	35	+AND
	36	+being suspended in the beyond of oneself, at the limit of nothingness.
	37	+
	38	+
	39	+====The production of a model with the end-goal of removing all negative elements devours itself. Their framing ensures that debate becomes so concerned with fairness as to makes debating itself impossible – you've heard of cancer right? How cells over defend themselves and end up eliminating both the good and the bad? It's like that – but for debate.====
	40	+Jean **Baudrillard,** 19**93**
	41	+"The Transparency of Evil; Essays on Extreme Phenomena" Translated by James Benedict, Verso London, New York. Page 106.
	42	+The uninterrupted production of positivity has a terrifying consequence. Whereas negativity engenders crisis and
	43	+AND
	44	+its own death warrant. This is the theorem of the accursed share.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-09-24 14:20:28.778

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Thomas Mayes

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+WDMV JM

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+9

Round

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

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Millard North Brown Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+1 - K - Sacrificial Community

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Mid America Cup