[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Marcellus Wallace.

On Fri, 2 May 1997, Ryan Sparacino wrote:

> this is an irrelevant point in the debate about civil rights vs. se asia.
> neither has recieved a full topic dedicated to it, and both have recieved
> significant attention in other topics.  but here comes my "link turn" --
> when was the last time the college debate community discussed se asia???

My only answer here is that it doesn't matter because you can say the same
thing about SE Asia: if a team runs a big stick human rights case, the
same link-turn would eat one of your positions that come below or in a
later post....there are so many...

> civil rts issues were discussed this year with the environmental racism
> cases (which acounted for about 20% of matt and i's negative debates), on
> criminal procedure (mandatory minimums), and privacy (bowers among others).
> can you name a SE asia case that college has discussed in the last 10 years
> -- there's been the trade topic, but that wasn't with any of the topic
> countries, mideast, south asia, but not southeast asia.

Hrmmm...I think that you are forgetting about the numerous Asian War
scenarios run by many teams (from what I hear, including UGA).  But...that
isn't the answer I am going for.

> first of all, i think USC's s&m kritik is both foolish and offensive, but
> that's another rant for another day.  and i say this merely because i am a
> sarcastic hombre, not out of my unconscious leanings, as some usc debaters
> would have you believe... i was merely rebutting the claims made by people
> INUNDATED with the "need big impact" mentality.  but i also must confess
> that i don't have any shame relishing a good discussion about security in
> asia -- 

So which is it?  Are you advocating that we choose SE Asia b/c of the big
impact debates or not?  Your posts indicate so which would lead me to
believe that you are kinda double-turning (is that the word) yourself out,
champ ;).

> i think the experience of the united states in asia in the last half
> century has demonstrated that we pay an enormous price when the shit hits
> the fan in that region, pardon the language.

And, what about the US's treatment of people for the last 300 years!!!  I
guess it is ok to not debate about the fact that mental slavery pervades
our schools and inner-city communities or that women have only had the
right to vote for 78 years, and Blacks (among other minorities) have
really only had the true right to vote since the sixties.  Do you think
there is a problem?  Yessireee...

> i don't disagree with your claim michelin -- if there is a civil rts topic,
> this is an outstanding area that many affs should take advantage of.

Don't forget about the negs.  There is plenty o' ground for the negs on
the Civil Rights topic.

> it was a viable option on this topic (people could say black movements were
> mobilizing against envtl pollution), but the problem with that wasn't the
> communities indifference to the black panthers, but that the links/internal
> links to movement da's are almost always lame, and this was no exception.

So, that means then that it was viable, but not winnalble.  On that level,
you see that the substantive debate on this issue wasn't occuring even
last year.

> if we were debating i would grant the above argument, because it only HELPS
> my cause.  so long as people believe -- as michelin clearly does -- that se
> asia is only a "minute difference in region", it is a topic that needs to be
> discussed.  i have already outlined the differences between se asia and the
> rest of the world.  culture, religion, history of colonization, relations
> with other countries, system of government, historical us involvement -- se
> asia is a COMPLETELY unique area, and not just some "minute difference".  as
> long as the opponents of this topic continue to claim that its "just like
> china" or "just like south asia", they have their heads in the sand, and we
> NEED this topic.

But you forget that it would be a minute difference to SOUTH Asia which
would encompass the concerns of SE Asia.  Furthermore, I think we would
all agree that China or South Asia is much smaller of a difference than
say the ENTIRE canon of ideas surrounding human rights here in the US...

> i wouldn't rely on my high school backfiles as far as i can throw them :-)
> besides, here's another link turn (i'm getting good at this).  se asia relys
> on bad high school backfiles, which i would encourage all to avoid, but
> civil rights allows teams to bust out their MORE RECENT and COLLEGE
> backfiles (the impacts to the EJ case aren't going to get forgotten if we
> have a civil rights topic)  

Well, if you think that backfiles shouldn't be knocked as per your
analysis above, there is no reason to reject the impact ev. that comes
from the EJ cases that were run just this past year.  Second, as Mr.
Sparacino admits, the old HS backfiles are BAD.  On which level, they are
not as recent as the college backfiles, and the analysis of the ev. isn't
as good either.  So there...

> besides, whats with knockin backfiles, if you
> got em, use em.  the topic will be big enough that a few us china impacts
> won't make a difference either way.  also, take a gander at the claims made
> in my previous post regarding this subject.

I am sorry, I deleted them.  (I really am sorry).  Plus, see above as to
why you eat your own sentiments from above.

> emma and i had the school from chicago's number, as long as the debate
> wasn't occuring in kentucky, where we became property of messrs. hurder and
> heftman (hurder ended my year 2 yrs in a row) :-)

Or, as long as the debate really mattered.  Lest we forget St. Mark's.  I
think that you guys might have even beaten them in Prelims, but who took
home the big Texas-shaped trophy?  It wasn't Edison from VA; I know that
for sure...Second, GBN HH had a lot of people's numbers at the TOC.  They
won, remember.

> your pulp fiction knowledge is impressive, but i think it is time for the
> debate commuinity to just...
> "walk the earth .. you know like Kane in "kung fu" -- Samuel L. Jackson

Well, if we are to just walk the earth, it wouldn't make sense to run
disads (or cases) speaking with the mindset of wanting to prevent (or to
start) nuclear war.  If we were just "walking the earth," we wouldn't
act...

> in order for our walk to be fruitful, we need to know where we are going,
> and right now, it seems that not many debaters are knowledgable in the ways
> of se asia.

In order to walk the earth, we need to get out of the US first.  And, in
order to resolve such a thing, it is vital for us to understand the
conditions that exist within our country today.  Civil Rights ain't
lookin' so good.  I think that something needs to be done.

> til rd 3, the champ is waitin...

you only have a few fights left in ya', Butch.

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