By: Jerry Sun

Date: 2/21/24

In this second post in this potpourri of debate series, we’ll break down the debate event of Lincoln Douglas debate.

In LD debate, you debate individually. There is an affirmative and a negative, and you will take one side in a debate. In LD debate, there is a resolution that you debate about with your opponent. The 2023-2024 March April resolution in high school LD debate is “Resolved: The primary objective of the United States criminal justice system ought to be rehabilitation”. In the debate, the affirmative debater will propose reasons why you ought to affirm the resolution, and the negative debater must propose reasons why you ought to negate the resolution.

In LD debate, a round typically lasts around 45 minutes. The round breakdown is as follows:

1AC (first affirmative constructive) - an 6 minute speech where the affirmative will provide their first case.

1AC Cross Examination - the negative will question the affirmative for 3 minutes.

1NC (first negative constructive) - an 7 minute speech where the negative will respond to the 1AC and provide its own case against the resolution.

1NC Cross Examination - the affirmative will question the negative for 3 minutes.

1AR (first affirmative rebuttal) - a 4 minute speech responding to the negative constructive.

2NR (second negative rebuttal) - a 6 minute speech responding to the 1AR.

2AR (second affirmative rebuttal) - a 3 minute speech responding to the 2NR.

By: Swara Dasari

Date: 2/01/24

Kritikal debate, also known as K debate or critical debate in LD, carries a huge significance. It provides an opportunity for debaters to break out of the typical lens of policy that they may hold, and provide a new perspective to think from.

Kritikal debate encourages research into new ideas and topics, such as postmodernism. Cutting cards from books and articles online that discuss these ideas is an invaluable education asset within the debate space, and provides an opportunity for debaters to research aspects of the topic that go beyond the scope of typical traditional LD debate.

With this special research burden, K debate provides the best avenue for exposing philosophical and critical theories that are found in these sources. Different ideologies that reflect certain aspects of the world may be explored, from economic theories regarding capitalism to racial identity. Especially in K v K debate, debaters may find nuanced interactions and clash over different methods that wouldn’t be available otherwise without K debate. Hence, K debate is evermore vital to LD debate.

There’s also a very importance real-world relevance that K debate carries with it. Debaters may typically think of this as a weakness of K debate and some may think that K debate has a hard time relating itself past simple abstract ideologies. However, injecting K debate into the broader context of societal challenges and issues that we face is super important. Analyzing the impacts of policies, values, and ethical frameworks is key through the K debate lens. Furthermore, debaters may analyze the specific connects and nuances that exist with regards to specific communities that K debates influence.

In general, K debate is a vital asset of LD debate that is hard to find in other forms of debate such as Congress or Parliamentary debate. Because of this, K debate uniquely bolsters a special sense of educational value that LD and Policy debates embody. Always remember, good K debate is good case debating.

By: Jerry Sun

Date: 10/15/23

As a novice first entering the realm of debate, I had no idea about the diversity of events that existed in debate. From Congress to Lincoln Douglas debate, the differences between each events were confusing and seemed to all overlap with one another. In this first post in this potpourri of debate series, we’ll break down the debate event of Policy debate.

In Policy debate, you debate with a partner. There is an affirmative and a negative in policy debate. You and your partner will both take the same side in a debate, working together to affirm or negate. In Policy debate, there is a resolution that you debate about with the opposing team. The 2023-2024 resolution in high school Policy debate is “Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase fiscal redistribution in the United States by adopting a federal jobs guarantee, expanding Social Security, and/or providing a basic income”. In the debate, the affirmative team will propose a plan, essentially a policy that supports the resolution. It is the burden of the negative to negate this plan, usually by proving that a world absent the plan is superior, typically done by demonstrating why the plan results in something bad (a disadvantage).

In Policy debate, a round typically lasts around an hour and a half. The round breakdown is as follows:

1AC (first affirmative constructive) - an 8 minute speech where the affirmative will propose the plan and provide its advantages.

1AC Cross Examination - the second negative speaker will question the first affirmative speaker for 3 minutes.

1NC (first negative constructive) - an 8 minute speech where the negative will respond to the 1AC and provide its own off case positions.

1NC Cross Examination - the first affirmative speaker will question the first negative speaker for 3 minutes.

2AC (second affirmative constructive) - an 8 minute speech responding to the 1NC.

2AC Cross Examination - the first negative speaker will question the second affirmative speaker for 3 minutes.

2NC (second negative constructive) - an 8 minute speech responding to the 2AC.

2NC Cross Examination - the second affirmative speaker questions the second negative speaker.

1NR (first negative rebuttal) - a 5 minute speech that continues responding to the 2AC.

*Note: the combination of the 2NC and 1NR is often referred to as the “negative block” or simply the “neg block”.

1AR (first affirmative rebuttal) - a 5 minute speech responding to the negative block.

2NR (second negative rebuttal) - a 5 minute speech responding to the 1AR.

2AR (second affirmative rebuttal) - a 5 minute speech responding to the 2NR.

By: Anonymous

Date: 5/6/23

If you want to read something interesting you should check out the Postmodernism Generator made by Elsewhere. It generates a random, completely made up postmodern text and usually contains a lot of the jargon you’ll see in postmodern literature. Whether you want to use it for spreading drills or want an entertaining time reading through some of the bizarre subjects it can generate, feel free to explore.

https://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/

By: Anonymous

Date: 5/4/23

Lacan’s theory begins with the basis of Freud’s psycho and diverges, i.e. the Id (caveman desires), Ego (filter on what we can do after our impulses), and Superego (the structure of society which we base ourselves around). There is also a Lacanian triad that basically describes the way we perceive society: the Real (ontological/empirical truth i.e. a triangle has 3 sides), the Imaginary (what you imagine between what is said and what you think), and the Symbolic (linguistics, when X is mentioned you imagine it). There are three primary things you should also focus on:

1) The Desire - what you want to do

2) The drive - the root cause of your desires. However you can never achieve/fulfill this, and when you do, it shifts to something else.

3) The Lost Object - what the endpoint/object of your drive is.

Additionally, there are theories of development, but there's only one real important stage which is the Alienation Stage. When you learn how to communicate, you aren’t able to truly express what you mean to everyone else. This is referred to as negative dialectics. You are never able to fully express what you mean to someone else. This gap in linguistics is called the Lacanian Lack (which is between the imaginary and real). It creates anxiety because it distracts us from what we have currently, and we forever chase the lost object. We end up destroying things to access the real, referred to as the destructive death drive. In debate, the alt is usually to embrace the Lack/death drive. It critiques the way that the affirmative continually reaches for the lost object, only making everything worse. Oftentimes, you will see a link to planning or extinction rhetoric. The Role of the Ballot is typically to analyze these drives and desires.

By: Anonymous

Date: 4/5/23

Georges Bataille was a French intellectual, writer, and philosopher who lived from 1897–1962. He was born in Billom, France. During the 1920s and 1930s, Bataille found himself associated with the Surrealist movement, contributing to avant-garde journals. His literary works, including texts like "Story of the Eye" and "Madame Edwarda," were well known for a unique exploration of eroticism, death, and the irrational. In philosophy, Bataille was heavily influenced by existentialism, surrealism, and the writings of Nietzsche. This influence may be seen in works like "Inner Experience" and "The Accursed Share”. In these works, Bataille grapples with concepts of excess, transgression, and the limits of rationality.

In the 1930s, he founded the secret society "Acéphale," where he explored themes of sacrifice, sacred rituals, and a new form of spirituality. This fascination with the sacred and the forbidden became a frequent theme in his philosophical explorations.

Post-World War II, Bataille continued developing his philosophies, where he co-founded the journal "Critique". His work has left a huge impact on literature, philosophy, and critical theory. His revolutionary ideas influenced subsequent French intellectuals, including Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida.

Bataille’s theory as applied in debate is as follows:

Energy exists as a cycle and continuity, usually, you take as much energy that sustains yourself and then the excess melts away and disappears. The idea that energy disappears is against the idea of the general economy. Production is not essentially doing something productive. It’s doing something for gain/consumption/accumulation. Wealth and accumulation can only be used for productive ends. The economy has been looked at in a specific way (restricted) rather than generally. The restricted economy doesn’t take into account the use/flow of energy. The movement of waste is what drives a person and even if you deny it, it will inevitably escape us. The idea that bataille brings up in the next segment is how when not exuded, waste accumulates and since we cannot train/use it, it implodes in the worst ways possible. Diversions of excess is never enough (because people are foolish and continue to accumulate). it ends up being exuded through wars, violence, and conquering other countries (ties into theories of colonialism). These conflicts are inevitable and the only way to divert is through infinite growth or wasteful expenditure. We have to overcome the ethics that entrap us in the restricted economy (reversal of thinking). The sun is the source of energy and one uses it until you stop growing/can sustain yourself. Basically, as long as you are sustaining yourself, it's not considered excess. There is some sort of thesis about pressure here, about how life always wants to take over in this limited space we are in. You cannot harness excess, as it is impossible. Result of this pressure is an extension into places that we aren't supposed to be, luxury and death. There are 3 luxuries: death, lust, and eating. We fear death because of our will, and we fear the exuberance that comes with it. Doing such destroys property and connects you with “senseless luxury and excess of death”. Justice is a farce where it conceals the truth, the luxury, freedom. There are two ways of looking at the world, general and particular. With the particular, one looks at it through a lens of deficit, i.e. poverty is caused by a lack of resources rather than the problems that follow accumulation. Sacrifice is good because it is the opposite of production and the thingness, and it reduces the objectification that has been placed on us. The victim and the sacrificer become one and you are able to see beyond the bounds that the restricted economy and society have placed onto us. One ought to look at what is now rather than what will be and leave the domain of the real, which allows for useless consumption. The sacrificial victim is analogous to the worker in today’s society in a way.

Oftentimes, you will find these theories incorporated within debates in the form of Kritiks or Kritikal Affirmatives (K-affs).

By: Jerry Sun

Date: 11/5/22

Spreading (speed reading) has become one of the most important tools in fast paced national circuit debate and it gives you the ability to communicate as much information as possible in the most efficient time frame. The best spreaders are those who know to prioritize clarity over speed, allowing the judge to clearly hear every argument. Spreading drills are a great way to get your spreading faster and more clear. Here are a couple that I personally recommend!

First Spread Through

You want to typically start your drills with a quick spread through of one of your cases. You preferably want to spread through something you haven’t seen before. Take a couple minutes to do this, somewhere between 5-10 minutes typically, though you may adjust the duration as you like.

Overenunciate Drill

Here, you want to over enunciate every word while reading through your case. This should be a rather slow process where you purposefully over exaggerate the vowels and consonants as you speak. For instance, you’d want to break down the word “associate” as “AYE-SOH-SHEE-AYE-TUH”. This forces greater flexibility of your mouth while speaking and makes you more clear.

“Watermelon” Drill

Here, you want to put a word (preferably greater in length) between every word you read. I refer to this drill as the “watermelon” drill since I use the word watermelon. This drill will make you more quick, and you will find yourself speaking the inserted word really quickly as you spread. For instance, “nuclear watermelon war watermelon causes watermelon extinction watermelon".

Backwards Drill

In this drill, you just want to read your case backwards. Start at the bottom and go to the top. This makes it so that your brain focuses less on the meaning of the words but rather on just speaking them.

Pen Drill

This is one of the most famous and effective drills that people have used throughout the history of debate. You want to take a (clean) pen and place it in the back of your mouth between your teeth. It’ll look like how a dog might carry a stick in its mouth. You’ll speak through your case with this pen in your mouth. The purpose of this drill is to increase your clarity.

Finishing Spread Through

At the end of whatever drills you might use, you want to finish off with a final spread through of your case or whatever you chose to be using for the drills. Ideally, you would see a faster time than your initial spread through. If not, that’s ok! Improving your spreading will take time and practice, but it’ll always pay off and with enough practice, you’ll get to where you want to be.

By: Jerry Sun

Date: 7/5/22

High school debate is a wonderful opportunity to make new friends, learn new skills, and have fun. This blog post will focus on why you should join debate. If you’re on the fence about it, hopefully this post will persuade you to join!

Critical Thinking

Debate is fundamentally about analyzing and evaluating information. No matter what event you join, it will certainly entail wrestling with new ideas and finding relations between them. Critical thinking is one of the most important skills that debate really trains you in. You use critical thinking skills when generating arguments and having round vision in terms of which arguments you should go for. You also use critical thinking skills when you build your cases to debate and when you research topics.

Communication

Obviously, the nature of debate necessitates effective communication. You’ll learn how to speak confidently and persuasively in debate, as well as learning how to speak to audiences and judges. You’ll be able to express your thoughts and ideas more easily through your voice. If you’re in a partner event such as Public Forum or Policy, you’ll also learn how to work and communicate as a team with your partner.

Research

The arguments we make in debate don’t just come out of thin air. We have to do lots of research and searching to find evidence that supports our claims. Oftentimes, people might perceive the research aspect of debate as boring and tedious. It’s much the opposite! Every topic we debate is unique and interesting in its own way, and doing the research is always fun. Furthermore, learning the skills in searching for good sources and learning how to research spills over to a lot of key life skills that you want to have. Learning effective researching skills will help you with many projects, papers, and more in the future.

Awareness

A consequence of the research and debating that you do is a greater awareness of the world around you and of current events. No where else are you forced to stay up to date with the world and learn as much as you can about it. After debating, you will realize that you’ve become a lot more open minded and a lot more aware of different philosophies, politics, and cultures around the world. You’ll find yourself more interested in the daily news and current events rather than neglecting them.

Debate can be one of the most rewarding and unforgettable experiences you have in your high school career. These four reasons illustrate only paint a small picture of the diverse range of benefits that debate provides. It’s never too late to join debate, and I recommend that everyone should consider it!