Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[45]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[44]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[45]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2017-02-16 14:56:54.725
	1	+2017-02-16 14:56:54.0

Caselist.CitesClass[44]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,49 @@
	1	+=1-off =
	2	+
	3	+
	4	+====A. Interpretation: The affirmative must defend that a hypothetical world where public colleges and universities implement the resolution. ====
	5	+
	6	+
	7	+
	8	+=Case =
	9	+O/V —- The 1a premise of rupturing the state/subject distinction is uniquely problematic in the context of individuals who NEED the state in order for their lives to be effective and for in order fairness – if we show why their method is problematic for those that need the government who are oppressed and why their method harms fairness – either of these reasons means you negate
	10	+
	11	+
	12	+==Racism Shell==
	13	+TURN — Debate is counterproductive without policies – the entire premise of the 1ac is based upon separating the subject from the state – our argument is that subjects are inherently tied to the state -
	14	+We should engage in policy discussions that have tangible realties for those who are oppressed by racist economic structures to change the sociological reality of those who are oppressed.
	15	+Dr. Tommy J. Curry The Cost of a Thing: A Kingian Reformulation of a Living Wage Argument in the 21^^st^^ Century. 2014
	16	+Despite the pronouncement of debate as an activity and intellectual exercise pointing to the real world consequences of dialogue, thinking, and (personal) politics when addressing issues of racism, sexism, economic disparity, global conflicts, and death, many of the discussions concerning these ongoing challenges to humanity are fixed to a paradigm which sees the adjudication of material disparities and sociological realities as the conquest of one ideal theory over the other. In "Ideal Theory as Ideology," Charles Mills outlines the problem contemporary theoretical-performance styles in policy debate and value-weighing in Lincoln-Douglass are confronted with in their attempts to get at the concrete problems in our societies. At the outset, Mills concedes that "ideal theory applies to moral theory as a whole (at least to normative ethics as against metaethics); ~~s~~ince ethics deals by definition with normative/prescriptive/evaluative issues, ~~it is set~~ against factual/descriptive issues."At the most general level, the conceptual chasm between what emerges as actual problems in the world (e.g.: racism, sexism, poverty, disease, etc.) and how we frame such problems theoretically—the assumptions and shared ideologies we depend upon for our problems to be heard and accepted as a worthy "problem" by an audience—is the most obvious call for an anti-ethical paradigm, since such a paradigm insists on the actual as the basis of what can be considered normatively. Mills, however, describes this chasm as a problem of an ideal-as-descriptive model which argues that for any actual-empirical-observable social phenomenon (P), an ideal of (P) is necessarily a representation of that phenomenon. In the idealization of a social phenomenon (P), one "necessarily has to abstract away from certain features" of (P) that is observed before abstraction occurs. This gap between what is actual(in the world), and what is represented by theories and politics of debaters proposed in rounds threatens any real discussions about the concrete nature of oppression and the racist economic structures which necessitate tangible policies and reorienting changes in our value orientations. As Mills states: "What distinguishes ideal theory is the reliance on idealization to the exclusion, or at least marginalization, of the actual," so what we are seeking to resolve on the basis of "thought" is in fact incomplete, incorrect, or ultimately irrelevant to the actual problems which our "theories" seek to address. Our attempts to situate social disparity cannot simply appeal to the ontologization of social phenomenon—meaning we cannot suggest that the various complexities of social problems (which are constantly emerging and undisclosed beyond the effects we observe) are totalizable by any one set of theories within an ideological frame be it our most cherished notions of Afro-pessimism, feminism, Marxism, or the like. At best, theoretical endorsements make us aware of sets of actions to address ever developing problems in our empirical world, but even this awareness does not command us to only do X, but rather do X and the other ideas which compliment the material conditions addressed by the action X. As a whole, debate (policy and LD) neglects the need to do X in order to remedy our cast-away-ness among our ideological tendencies and politics. How then do we pull ourselves from this seeming ir-recoverability of thought in general and in our endorsement of socially actualizable values like that of the living wage? It is my position that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s thinking about the need for a living wage was a unique, and remains an underappreciated, resource in our attempts to impose value reorientation be it through critique or normative gestures) upon the actual world. In other words, King aims to reformulate the values which deny the legitimacy of the living wage, and those values predicated on the flawed views of the worker, Blacks, and the colonized (dignity, justice, fairness, rights, etc.) used to currently justify the living wages in under our contemporary moral parameters.
	17	+
	18	+
	19	+====Two impacts: ====
	20	+
	21	+
	22	+====1. The aff gives bigots free reign to say whatever hateful thing they want to minorities. Affirming definitionally increases the number of times minorities hear hate speech, which causes minorities to internalize hate. The impact is disasterous:====
	23	+Delgado and Stefacic 09, Richard Delgado - University Professor, Seattle University School of Law; J.D., 1974, University of California, Berkeley. Jean Stefancic – Research Professor, Seattle University School of Law; M.A., 1989, University of San Francisco. "FOUR OBSERVATIONS ABOUT HATE SPEECH." WAKE FOREST LAW REVIEW. 2009. http://wakeforestlawreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Delgado_LawReview_01.09.pdf,
	24	+II. OBSERVATION NUMBER TWO: THE EVALUATION OF HARMS HAS BEEN INCOMPLETE One way
	25	+AND
	26	+, in person or on the radio, contributes to that result?97
	27	+
	28	+
	29	+====Turns the aff====
	30	+
	31	+
	32	+====2. their method fundamentally excluded black people who cannot "become" in a world marked by structural violence. ====
	33	+
	34	+
	35	+==Decadence Shell: ==
	36	+
	37	+
	38	+====I. The 1ac cannot just say vote aff as a thought experiment – this is fundamentally subjective and destroys the ability for us to engage an actual world of the 1ac – turns their subjectivity arguments since we are showing why subjectivity in the context of vote aff for pre fiat reasons is bad ====
	39	+Lewis Gordon 06—professor at philosophy, African and Judiac Studies at University of Connecticut Storrs—2006 (Disciplinary Decadence: Living Thought in Trying Times, p 28-29)
	40	+A striking feature (among many) of the contemporary intellectual climate, as I
	41	+AND
	42	+of past failures of certain social remedies take the form of perennial truths.
	43	+
	44	+
	45	+====II. Decadence allows the colonization of methods – turns the case ====
	46	+Lewis Gordon 14—professor of philosophy, African and Judiac Studies at the University of Connecticut—2014 ("Disciplinary Decadence and the Decolonization of Knowledge," Africa Development 39.1: 81-92, 88).
	47	+The first is regarding the political significance of this critique. For politics to exist
	48	+AND
	49	+approaches, even in the name of liberation, face a similar fate.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2017-02-16 14:56:58.73

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Tambe, Kadie, Dadah

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Sunset AB

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+45

Round

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

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+West Ranch Won Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+JANFEB - Stanford Quarters NC

Tournament

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