The Wake Forest Demon Deacons have updated their new “Deacon Source” page for the first time. It includes the full text of the evidence that all of their teams read at the Georgia State National Debate Tournament.
Category Archives: Evidence/Research
Full Text Disclosure: Good, Bad, or Ugly?
The winners of last year’s inaugural 3NR Spirit of Disclosure Award—Bronx Science’s Zack Elias & Andrew Markoff—set a new standard for comprehensive disclosure in high school policy debate. Instead of posting only the tags, citations, and first-and-last words of the evidence they read in debates, Bronx disclosed the full text of their evidence on the NDCA Wiki. While others feared that doing so would put them at a competitive disadvantage, Zack and Andrew were pioneers that racked up an impressive array of accomplishments despite raising the bar for openness and transparency. By winning the NDCA Championships, reaching the quarterfinals of the TOC, and finishing fourth in the Baker Award standings, Bronx put to rest the notion that a top-tier team can’t stay competitive using an open-source-after-the-fact model.
Affs at Ghill RR
As listed on the wiki now
Carrolton- Japan BMD
Hooch- Afghan COIN
Dallas Jesuit-Japan
Damien- Japan
GBN-TNW
Ghill- Japan
Gulliver- End counter narcotics in Afghanistan
Homewood Flossmoor- Afghan COIN
Kinkaid- Korea
Lexington -Afghan COIN
Mountain Brook- Afghan PMCs
St. Francis- Korea
Westminster- Afghan COIN
List of Camp Disadvantages
Inspired by the list of camp affirmatives that was compiled by Christina Tallungan, Alex Agne of Detroit Country Day School has compiled a list of the disadvantages that were produced at this summer’s institutes. The complete list (in alphabetical order) is below the fold.
List of Camp Affs
Christina Tallungan assembled a list of the camp affs available online with thier plan texts and advantages.
Open Evidence Project at the NDCA web page
Is kicking into full gear, you can find it on their newly redesigned web page here
Heg Bad Articles
One of the important arguments to win when going for heg bad is a solvency takeout- not that the plan doesn’t boost hegemony, but that hegemony doesn’t reduce conflict. Here is a link to a sick cato article that has a bunch of links to other good articles in it on this point. So good it could be a blinders K card…
Most in Washington still embraces the notion that America is, and forever will be, the world’s indispensable nation. Some scholars, however, questioned the logic of hegemonic stability theory from the very beginning. A number continue to do so today. They advance arguments diametrically at odds with the primacist consensus. Trade routes need not be policed by a single dominant power; the international economy is complex and resilient. Supply disruptions are likely to be temporary, and the costs of mitigating their effects should be borne by those who stand to lose — or gain — the most. Islamic extremists are scary, but hardly comparable to the threat posed by a globe-straddling Soviet Union armed with thousands of nuclear weapons. It is frankly absurd that we spend more today to fight Osama bin Laden and his tiny band of murderous thugs than we spent to face down Joseph Stalin and Chairman Mao. Many factors have contributed to the dramatic decline in the number of wars between nation-states; it is unrealistic to expect that a new spasm of global conflict would erupt if the United States were to modestly refocus its efforts, draw down its military power, and call on other countries to play a larger role in their own defense, and in the security of their respective regions.
But while there are credible alternatives to the United States serving in its current dual role as world policeman / armed social worker, the foreign policy establishment in Washington has no interest in exploring them. The people here have grown accustomed to living at the center of the earth, and indeed, of the universe. The tangible benefits of all this military spending flow disproportionately to this tiny corner of the United States while the schlubs in fly-over country pick up the tab.
Cool feature of “General Onefile” database
There is a button on the right side that says “download as mp3” which you can use to download a computer voice reading the article.
K answers wave 1
Topics covered
-top level nonsense like value to life/ontology etc
-security
-IR Fem
-china threat
-zizek
-schmitt
Big thanks to all those who emailed in cards/files/cites
Excellent New Terrorism Impact Card
In response to the “bad cards” post about the popular “Corsi 2005” impact to terrorism, many readers requested suggestions for different cards that could be read to support the same basic argument. This is a difficult task; it is unlikely that a terrorist attack—even one using a nuclear device—would result in the extinction of humanity. But if that’s the argument you want to make, Akshay Bhushan from Greenhill School has cut an excellent card that he was nice enough to share here on The 3NR. Defenders of the Corsi evidence now have no excuse to continuing reading that card.
Nuclear terrorism is an existential threat—it escalates to nuclear war with Russia and China.
Robert Ayson, Professor of Strategic Studies and Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand at the Victoria University of Wellington, 2010 (“After a Terrorist Nuclear Attack: Envisaging Catalytic Effects,” Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, Volume 33, Issue 7, July, Available Online to Subscribing Institutions via InformaWorld)