| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,10 @@ |
|
1 |
+A. Interpretation: When defending an advocacy to solve some form of violence, the affirmative should specify and defend a concrete action as a strategy for resisting those harms. |
|
2 |
+B. Violation: |
|
3 |
+C. Standards: |
|
4 |
+First is argumentative clash. |
|
5 |
+ |
|
6 |
+Second is revolutionary politics. |
|
7 |
+The aff advocacy exists in the realm of amorphous abstractions. The failure to advocate concrete action dooms revolutionary politics. This is an independent voter because it means that the AFF is incapable of solving the harms identified in the 1AC, so you presume neg. Furthermore, this is an independent voter because the aff has turned the debate space into one that replicates existing social oppression, rather than training debaters to transform society. |
|
8 |
+Bryant ’12 (Levi Bryant is currently a Professor of Philosophy at Collin College. In addition to working as a professor, Bryant has also served as a Lacanian psychoanalyst. He received his Ph.D. from Loyola University in Chicago, Illinois, where he originally studied 'disclosedness' with the Heidegger scholar Thomas Sheehan. Bryant later changed his dissertation topic to the transcendental empiricism of Gilles Deleuze, “Critique of the Academic Left.” November 11, 2012, http://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/2012/11/11/underpants-gnomes-a-critique-of-the-academic-left/ — KW) |
|
9 |
+ |
|
10 |
+“What I wonder…luck with that.” |