SE Asia and the intentions of the writers.

[Michelin Christopher Massey <Michelin.Massey@Colorado.EDU>]

Although I am not one who believes SE Asia to be the best topic, I think
that there are few things (ok, maybe one or two) that should be cleared
and brought up.

1.  Yeah, there will be MANY China links in this instance!!!  And, the big
justification for many in their expressions to debate this topic stem b/c
the impact comparisons will be HUGE and that nuke war scenarios will be
flying!!!  That may not have been the original intent of the authors, but
that doesn't negate the fact that is the reason many, many people like the
topic area.

2.  I find it strange that the same concerns about Civil Rights aren't
being voiced for the SE Asia topic.  For the China topic, just last year
for HS students, there were HUNDREDS of cases out there.  China is only
ONE of the countries in SE Asia!  Where is the neg. ground, there?  I
wonder why (up until now) people haven't talked about the fact that you
are just multiplying the number of cases that you would like to run by 10
(or more) if you include the ENTIRE region.  Heck, you can have a case
where you can boycott Narita Int'l Airport in Japan b/c they are thinking
about stopping night flights.  You can do so many different things in
order to make sure that your case is so damn small that there is an
ability for people to have enough links to the disads.  At least in terms
of Civil Rights (or even Space, which is a BAD topic, or even the
treaties, which still will be rather large or even CFR), you have some
place to start.  With SE Asia, you can run stuff that is so squirrely, the
number of aff wins can skyrocket!!!  

If you think it would be tough to find ev. on the civil rights topic, the
SE Asia topic would be EVEN worse of a burden.  If there were hundreds of
cases for China, what about Japan, S. Korea, N. Korea, etc.?  I think that
this is a large concern that can't be overlooked, esp if you are in favor
of the neg. research burden.  That would be a tiger whose tail would be
too enormous to grab a hold to.  I would say at least say that you should
apply the same concern for Civ. Rights (or any other topic) to this one.
It's not such a winner when you do...

Michelin Massey.

---

Follow-Ups:

• Re: SE Asia and the intentions of the writers.
• From: STACEY K SOWARDS <staceyk@utep.edu>

---

• Prev by Date: Re: Billy's grammar confusion re: "pimping"
• Next by Date: Pimping and Billy Part 2
• Prev by thread: In defense of Matt and not a defense of Matt.
• Next by thread: Re: SE Asia and the intentions of the writers.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page