Aff Theory Essentials

Evazon Tournament Essentials
1 Aff Theory
Aff Theory Essentials

Aff Theory Essentials......................................................................................................................1 ***Conditionality Debate***..........................................................................................................3 Conditionality Bad 2AC..................................................................................................................4 Conditionality Bad 1AR..................................................................................................................5 1AR: Increases Critical Thinking....................................................................................................6 1AR: Dispo=Condo.........................................................................................................................7 1AR: Always Need Squo.................................................................................................................8 1AR: K Check Condo Perms/Perms Worse.....................................................................................9 1AR: Err Neg.................................................................................................................................10 1AR: Real World...........................................................................................................................11 1AR: Best Policy Option...............................................................................................................12 1AR: Reciprocal- Advs Prove......................................................................................................13 1AR: Counter-interp: One Condo Only.........................................................................................14 ***Other 2ACs***.......................................................................................................................15 Procedurals Before the K...............................................................................................................16 No Text to the Alt 2AC..................................................................................................................18 Floating PIK 2AC..........................................................................................................................19 Alt Condo Bad 2AC.......................................................................................................................20 Intl Fiat Bad 2AC.........................................................................................................................21 Agent CPs Bad..............................................................................................................................22 Multi-Actor Fiat 2AC....................................................................................................................23 Consult 2AC...................................................................................................................................24 Multiple Perms Legit 2AC.............................................................................................................25 K/DA Contradiction 2AC..............................................................................................................26 Conditioning Bad 2AC..................................................................................................................27 2NC CPs Bad 1AR.......................................................................................................................28 2NC Frameworks Bad 1AR...........................................................................................................29 Framework 2AC.............................................................................................................................30 Alt Must Be Structural 2AC..........................................................................................................31 Alternative Illigit 2AC...................................................................................................................32 Contradiction Bad 2AC..................................................................................................................33 Future Fiat Bad 2AC......................................................................................................................34 Attitudinal Fiat Bad 2AC/1NC......................................................................................................35 Aff Must Have a Plan 1NC............................................................................................................36
2 Aff Theory
3 Aff Theory
***Conditionality Debate***
4 Aff Theory
Conditionality Bad 2AC

Conditionality is bad and a voter for fairness and educationA. 2AC Time- the 2AC is the first place that we can lose the debate, condo makes aff argue multiple worlds, which devastates 2ac time and strat. B. Not Reciprocal- we are stuck with the aff and only the aff, the negative should have a single world. C. Dispo Solves Offense- they can have 2 worlds, but the 2AC should have the option of sticking them with the counterplan. This increases aff strategic choice, which is key to education.
5 Aff Theory
Conditionality Bad 1AR

Conditionality is BadA. Skews 2AC Time- 2AC is the most important speech in the debate, first place the aff can lose the debate. B. Destroys Comp Equity- were stuck with the plan, should get to stick them to an advocacy, this increases their structural advantages for the neg. C. Not Real World- argumentative irresponsibility is not logical reality, politicians are held responsible for their voting records and policy choices, 2004 election ads prove. D. Couterplans Are Like Other Args- if you straight turn a disad or advantage its a strategic choice to move the debate towards that issue. CP kicking is super bad because they solve the aff- means you err aff. E. Defense- dispo solves their multiple worlds offense, they can increase critical thinking, but our 2AC time and aff choice args are still DAs to always having SQ as an option.
6 Aff Theory
1AR: Increases Critical Thinking

1. No Critical Thinking- discourages 2ACs from going in depth on any one issue, or reading das to the cp, makes 2AR offense impossible. 2. Dispo Solves- aff choice in 2AC is best place for critical thinking, first place we can lose the debate, you make the 1AR strategy irrelevant.
7 Aff Theory
1AR: Dispo=Condo
1. Not Our Interp Of Dispo- if the 2AC straight turns the CP, the negative can not kick it, unless the negative reads theory other than dispo bad. Means that this cp is not conditional automatically. 2. Err Aff- 2AC needs to read DAs to CP, because it moots 1AC, any risk we get more ability to do this in our interp means we get our competitive equity args.
8 Aff Theory
1AR: Always Need Squo

1. Not Logical In Debate- ignores side and time constraints and aff burdens, like defending the case through the debate. 2. Reciprocity Answers This- not fair to aff, we cant alter our advocacy, they can steal ours, but we cant replan in the two. This means you err aff, because 2AC strategic flex outweighs 1NC flex in the era of the K and PIC. 3. Aff Presumption is a DA- unique strain on the 2AR versus the 2NR because the 2AR is forced to answer a world not mentioned in the 2NR. This allows judge intervention, because the judge has to consider the quo.
9 Aff Theory
1AR: K Check Condo Perms/Perms Worse

1. Non-sensical- perms are a test of competition, cant garner artificial add-ons. No 2AR where the CP is kicked can perm be offense. 2. Dispo Solves- dispo deters multiple perms because of strat options, means block doesnt have to answer new aff worlds.
10 Aff Theory
1AR: Err Neg

1. Take a Stand- neg flex is out of control- aff loses 75% of debates, protect competitive equity to check structural neg advantages. 2. Err Aff- neg block, PIC and K ground devestate aff baises. 3. Choosing Topic Doesnt Solve- aff choice irrelevant with generic agent, process and rez Cps, along with Ks that preclude our offense. 4. Neg Gets Infinite Prep- can prep generics or for probably affsthey have to know because they go aff too. 5. Speaking 1st and Last Irrelevant- if we lose in the 2AC the 2AR going last doesnt matter, debate is already over.
11 Aff Theory
1AR: Real World

1. Less Real World- 2004 presidential campaign flip-flop ads prove that policymakers cant just not advocate positions randomly, they have to pick one and stick with it. 2. Debate Not Real World- real world not the educational part of debate- I know I wont be in politics. 3. No Impact- competitive equity before education- it is the fundamental basis of education in debate, other things in the activity provide enough real world that you should err aff on competitive equity.
12 Aff Theory
1AR: Best Policy Option

1. Not Recipricol- aff doesnt get to change plan to find the best policy option, slants side bais totally to neg. 2. Lack of Depth Makes Search Impossible- allowing multiple conditional worldviews encourages late developing, or poorly developed debates, which means we cant compare the validity of all options. 3. Justifies Replanning- we can always replan an fiat utopia- always best policy option.
13 Aff Theory
1AR: Reciprocal- Advs Prove

1. Kicking Doesnt Check- multiple conditional advocacies means we get no strategic advantage to kicking, neg sucks it up with CPs that solve the aff. We need stable external offense to offset. 2. Not the Same- we are still stuck to one worldview, we just have more than one net-benefit to the aff.
14 Aff Theory
1AR: Counter-interp: One Condo Only

1. Doesnt Solve our Offense- still hijacks 2AC time, plus we dont get two worldviews. 2. Arbitrary Interpretation- no theoretical reason that the neg gets to make a counter-interpretation- they should have to defend the picture of debate they justify- they just artificially limit. 3. Allows Contradictions- can concede arguments arguments from worldview to use as offense in the other, which uniquely magnifies abuse- it not only steals 2AC strategy, but steals it and makes it offense, without contradicting it.
15 Aff Theory
***Other 2ACs***
16 Aff Theory
Procedurals Before the K

1. Debate is not violence- nothing that happens in the round is actually violence- there is a big difference between having a similar mindset to someone who committed genocide and actually killing people. 2. Ev Not In Context- no offense- this evidence doesnt talk about violence in debate, but the broader world, it is at best metaphorical violence, which doesnt outweigh real loss of worth in the debate. 3. Non-unique- their evidence proves this thought already occurs in the squo, voting for a diluted instance of it would not change anything. 4. No impact- they say no impact to voting for us- no true change voting for the K. 5. A priori- if we win they did something procedurally wrong then the debate should never have happened and their abusive argument should go away. This means theory is a gateway issue for the K.
17 Aff Theory
6. Visibility Turn- claims that the invisible are powerless are wrong, the otherized are actually empowered, while the visible are caught in colonialist/imperialist thinking.
Phelan in 93 [Peggy, Chairman of the Arts School @ Stanford University, Unmarked: the Politics of Performance, Pg. 6-7, Questia] The current contradiction between "identity politics" with its accent on visibility, and the psychoanalytic/deconstructionist mistrust of visibility as the source of unity or wholeness needs to be refigured, if not resolved. As the Left dedicates ever more energy to visibility politics, I am increasingly troubled by the forgetting of the problems of visibility so successfully articulated by feminist film theorists in the 1970s and 1980s. I am not suggesting that continued invisibility is the "proper" political agenda for the disenfranchised, but rather that the binary between the power of visibility and the impotency of invisibility is falsifying. There is real power in remaining unmarked; and there are serious limitations to visual representation as a political goal. Visibility is a trap ("In this matter of the visible, everything is a trap": Lacan, Four Fundamental Concepts: 93); it summons surveillance and the law; it provokes voyeurism, fetishism, the colonialist/imperial appetite for possession. Yet it retains a certain political appeal. Visibility politics have practical consequences; a line can be drawn between a practice (getting someone seen or read) and a theory (if you are seen it is harder for "them" to ignore you, to construct a punitive canon); the two can be reproductive. While there is a deeply ethical appeal in the desire for a more inclusive representational landscape and certainly under-represented communities can be empowered by an enhanced visibility, the terms of this visibility often enervate the putative power of these identities. A much more nuanced relationship to the power of visibility needs to be pursued than the Left currently engages. Arguing that communities of the hitherto under-represented will be made stronger if representational economies reflect and see them, progressive cultural activists have staked a huge amount on increasing and expanding the visibility of racial, ethnic, and sexual "others." It is assumed that disenfranchised communities who see their members within the representational field will feel greater pride in being part of such a community and those who are not in such a community will increase their understanding of the diversity and strength of such communities. Adrian Piper, the visual artist and philosopher, has demonstrated that part of the meaning of race resides in the perpetual choice to acknowledge or ignore its often-invisible markings.
18 Aff Theory
No Text to the Alt 2AC

A. Interpretation- the negative must have a clearly marked and defined alternative text that does not shift through the round. They dont. B. Voter1. No Perms- cant check the link of a non-advocacy- it makes our job impossible. 2. Not Reciprocal- were tied to a plan and the negative can shift their advocacy in the block. Undercuts 2AC strat, allows shifting to spike offense.
19 Aff Theory
Floating PIK 2AC

No shifting the alternatives function- voter for fairness and education: A. Moots Perms- cant check the link of a shifting advocacy- it makes our job impossible. B. Not Reciprocal- were tied to a plan and the negative can shift their advocacy in the block. C. Undercuts 2AC Strat- allows shifting to spike offense or solve it.
20 Aff Theory
Alt Condo Bad 2AC

Conditional alts are a voter for competitive equity and education: A. Detracts from The K- we lose K education, which also undercuts our agency, turning the K. B. Moving Target- condo magnifies abuse of having no text or a shifting alt- makes it so they can kick the K without answering our theoretical objections. C. Not Reciprocal- were stuck with the plan, even though the 1NC altered the framework. Either we get to kick our advocacy and they only get their discursive links to our new advocacy, or you reject their skewing strat.
21 Aff Theory
Intl Fiat Bad 2AC

International Fiat is bad and a voter for fairness and education: A. Hyper-Regressive- 192 different countries in any combinationnot possible for aff to have offense to each, plus moots 1AC offense, magnifies abuse. B. Disads Solve Your Offense- net-benefits and relations disads give us your education. C. No Opportunity Cost- no body can decide which actor will take on an initative, all their decision making is independent, their education is bankrupt.
22 Aff Theory
Agent CPs Bad

Agent counterplans are a voter for fairness and education: A. Ground- steals 1AC, forces us to debate ourselves, nullifies offense. B. Vauge Plans- encouraged to spike out of unpredictable actors. C. Unpredictable- impossible to have offense response to any possible agent. D. Topic Education- agent cps run on every topic, no unique education, runs people out of debate.
23 Aff Theory
Multi-Actor Fiat 2AC

Multi-actor fiat is a voter for fairness and education: A. Unpredictable- no literature base and an infinite number of combinations, impossible to have offensive response to the combination and no way to see it coming. B. Not and Opportunity Cost- no agent is capable of deciding these combinations of actors, not a true trade-off. C. Single actor fiat solve your offense.
24 Aff Theory
Consult 2AC
Consultation counterplans are a voter for fairness and education: A. Unpredictable- infinite amount of agents that could be consulted, no way to have offensive justification and say no cards for each one. B. Timeframe Competition is Bad- not true tradeoffs with the plan, kills permutations and disads, because they link to the plan. C. Hyper-Conditional- three worldviews within one- they can say no, say yes or make mods and claim net benefits off of it, without sticking to one. Skews 2AC offense and strat. D. IR disads solve your offense.
25 Aff Theory
Multiple Perms Legit 2AC

Multiple permutations are totally fine: 1. Just No Link Arguments- the cp/K is an opportunity cost to the plan, which makes a perm a no link, or not intrinsic argument, not a separate world, no offense and proves its key to aff strat. 2. Neg Block Checks Abuse- they get 13 minutes to answer the 2AC, we get 5 minutes to extend the perms, well have to kick some. 3. Reject the arg not the team.
26 Aff Theory
K/DA Contradiction 2AC

The K and DA contradict, voter for fairness and education: A. 2AC Strat- impossible to generate offense on both, they can use it to prove the other position. Makes half of the 2AC irrelevant and slants the side bias heavily negative. B. Link to Themselves- reject both, they link to their kritik, that turns the disad and either proves the alt can overcome the residual link with the perm, or that voting neg cant overcome their in round discourse. C. Perm: Do both.
27 Aff Theory
Conditioning Bad 2AC

Conditions counterplans are a voter for fairness and education: A. Artifically Competative- the net-benefit does not link to the plan, but the status quo. This is bad for education, because the cp doesnt clash, which removes policy comparisons. B. Aff Ground- the neg can always generate ground on topics outside the aff, no way to generate offense on all of them, slants debate to the neg. C. Infinite Conditions- always can create a new condition for the plan, no way for the aff to have offensive answer to each. D. Justifies Timeframe Perms- counterplan introduces the element of time-based competition, have to prove you cant sequence the aff to solve the cp. You can- perm: condition aid on _______ then do the plan. E. Reading the net-benefit as a DA solves your offense.
28 Aff Theory
2NC CPs Bad 1AR

New advocacies in the block are a voter for fairness and education: A. 2AC Time- the 2AC is the first place that we can lose the debatenew advocacies means neg can shift out of our offense, which devastates 2ac time and strat. B. No reciprocity- aff cant replan out of negative offense, would make aff win every debate. C. Encourages Late Developing Debates- debate restarts in the 1AR, which leaves two speeches to debate, not enough to develop the issue. D. 2AC Strat- allows negative to steal crucial elements of the 2AC strategy, makes debating impossible, negative can read 30 counterplans and solve our turns.
29 Aff Theory
2NC Frameworks Bad 1AR

New frameworks in the block are a voter for fairness and education: A. 2AC Time- the 2AC is the first place that we can lose the debate, reframing the debate means neg can shift out of our offense, which devastates 2ac time and strat. B. No reciprocity- aff cant reframe out of negative offense, would make aff win every debate. C. Encourages Late Developing Debates- debate restarts in the 1AR, which leaves two speeches to debate, not enough to develop the issue.
30 Aff Theory
Framework 2AC
A. Interpretation- the affirmative gets to weigh their advantages on the same level as the K. B. Standards1. Predictability- key to check unpredictable kritiks, we need predictable basis of offense for any aff strategy. 2. Ground- advantages key to aff ground- must weigh them in order to measure the worth of the affirmatives advocacy. 3. Solves all your offense, net-benefit of ours.
31 Aff Theory
Alt Must Be Structural 2AC

The aff should not be held accountable for using a system if a structural alternative to that system cannot be posited in relation: A. Ground- we cant respond to what we cant see. B. Predictability- no way to predict infinite non-structural alternatives- could do anything and claim it had an effect, but it would be impossible to gauge. C. Voter for fairness and education.
32 Aff Theory
Alternative Illigit 2AC

Alternative is illigit and a voter for fairness and education. a. Utopian multi-private actor fiat- if they claim to solve their impacts everywhere or that everyone does the alt then they are fiating everyone complies with their mindset, which destroys aff ability to respond to the k, they can always fiat out of our offense. b. ASPEC- they dont specify who does the alternative, which makes it impossible to make role of the ballot arguments or specific alternative turns, which are vital to generating offense against the K.
33 Aff Theory
Contradiction Bad 2AC

First, Cross-apply their contradictory arguments to one anotherwell win offense on bothAnd, contradictions are a voter for fairness and educationA. 2AC Strat- impossible to generate offense on both, they can use it to prove the other position. Makes half of the 2AC irrelevant and slants the side bias heavily negative. B. Link to Themselves- reject both, they link to their kritik, that turns the disad and either proves the alt can overcome the residual link with the perm, or that voting neg cant overcome their in round discourse.
34 Aff Theory
Future Fiat Bad 2AC

Future fiat is a voter for education and fairness: A. Kills Solvency Deficits- undercuts a key part of aff strategy, kills ability to weigh the aff and magnifies abusive 1AC stealing. B. Object Fiat- they fiat solvency, which makes it impossible read turns, they can spike out of them. C. Err aff, there is no offensive justification for this.
35 Aff Theory
Attitudinal Fiat Bad 2AC/1NC

Attitudinal fiat is a voter for fairness and education: A. No solvency advocate- the aff/neg cant predict the cp/case if there is no literature base, makes research burden impossibly huge. B. Not Realistic- not a true opportunity cost/justification of the resolution because you cant just claim compliance. C. Utopian, Private Actor Fiat Bad- destroys aff/neg ability to respond to the cp/case, they can use the specificity of their fiat to spike out of our offense. D. Eff Aff/Neg- no offensive reason why this is good.
36 Aff Theory
Aff Must Have a Plan 1NC

Affirmative team must defend a plan, not doing so is a voter for education and fairness: A. Moving Target- we have no stable basis from which to generate links, which makes 2 sided debate impossible and crushes transformative potential of arguments. B. No Solvency- no solution to the problem they identify, just an interesting FYI. C. Critical Thinking- force them to create a clever way to mix political analysis with critical theory, increases their knowledge of philosophy. D. They Steal K Ground- they can shift their advocacy to co-opt any of the ground we might have left, which makes it impossible to answer the 1AC. E. We Defend the 1AC is a Bad Standard- no way to analyze the whole 1AC, and any ground we got would be untenable. Either we could PIC out of one word and read an insanely small analytical netbenefit, or we have to read theory. INANE DEBATE.

Aff Theory Essentials

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aff Theory Essentials

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evazon Tournament Essentials