| ... |
... |
@@ -1,14
+1,0 @@ |
| 1 |
|
-**The affirmative’s discourse is grounded in flawed methodology—their claims to understand China’s actions are inaccurate inevitably create China as a threat. Pan 04:** |
| 2 |
|
-Chengzin, dept of political science and IR @ Australian National University. "The "China Threat" in American Self-Imagination: The Discursive Construction of Other as Power Politics" 2004. |
| 3 |
|
- |
| 4 |
|
-Having examined how the "China threat" … "other" is perhaps not surprising. |
| 5 |
|
- |
| 6 |
|
-**Portraying China as a threat makes war more likely – critical questioning is a prerequisite to forging the possibility of peaceful coexistence. Vote negative to reject the concept of a “China threat” and China security representations—it’s a prerequisite to discussing the aff. Pan 04:** |
| 7 |
|
-Chengzin, dept of political science and IR @ Australian National University. "The "China Threat" in American Self-Imagination: The Discursive Construction of Other as Power Politics" 2004. |
| 8 |
|
- |
| 9 |
|
-I have argued above that … and debating China might become possible. |
| 10 |
|
- |
| 11 |
|
-**Representations must precede policy discussion. Crawford 02:** |
| 12 |
|
-Neta Crawford 2,PhD MA MIT, BA Brown, Prof. of poli sci at boston univ. Argument and Change in World Politics, 2002 p. 19-21 |
| 13 |
|
- |
| 14 |
|
-Coherent arguments are unlikely to … Hence framing is a meta-argument. |