Kritik

Critiques the methodology (method to do the plan),

epistemology (how we know what we know), anthology
behind the plan.
Has a link/uniqueness evidence that explains how the plan
links to this flawed view that the argument is critiquing, and
impact (why that bad thing actually matters and why it
should be valued)
Is the plan text for the K.
Will try to weigh impact of K against impact of the case.
Alternative: Functions as a plan text for the K (tells what the
K can do)
Can say solve for K, and possibly case.
Alternative for Anti-Black K: Start by solving for black people,
and that is a net better to solve than plan. Answer: Case
solves better, because what we advocate for is using the
state (the USFG) to compensate for all the violence that we
gave for them. Is better to solve for the TO through the
state. (Case solves K in the end)

Cross-X for K
1. What is the status of the K? Conditional, unconditional,
dispositional? If say dispositional, ask them to explain what
it means.
2. What is the world of the Alt.? What happens after the judge
vote Neg. on the K? (Want to test how well they know the K,
how are they going to get from point a to point b? Want a
very specific story.)
3. How is the Alt. and the Plan mutually exclusive? (Why cant
we do the Plan and the K at the same time? Want them to
say, Yes, can do at the same time. If said yes, best Aff.
offense: Perm.)
4. Whats the world/role of the ballot? (What does the ballot do
for the K in the round? Why does the judge need to vote for
you in order for you to solve?)
5. Who is we?
6. How does our plan uniquely link to this?
7. Do you use the state or oppose the state?
8. In your alternative, do you only reject the plan? If not, what
are you rejecting?
9. What is the net benefit of the plan?

2AC Answers

Perms
PERMS DO BOTH: ON THE K FLOW, DO THE K AND THE
PLAN AT THE SAME TIME WITHOUT TRIGGERING THE NEG.
PERMS DO ALT.: MAYBE CANT DO BOTH TOGETHER, BUT
CAN DO
2 TYPES OF COMPETITIVENESS: TEXTURAL AND
FUNCTIONAL.
TEXTURAL: CANT DO BOTH K AND PLAN TOGETHER.
FUNCTIONAL: K AND PLAN CANT FUNCTION TOGETHER.
HAVE TO PROVE THAT K AND PLAN CAN HAPPEN AT THE
SAME TIME BECAUSE ITS THE BEST FOR BOTH WORLDS.
Why the plan doesnt link to the K: In the world of the
plan, the US has already undone a lot of the bad mindsets
they are trying to link us to.
Impact: Want to do turns and try to take out their impact.
Want to blow up Nixon 11. We solve for structural
violence globally. We dont need to solve for spillover.
Want to cross-supply Nixon and Winterton/Leighton.
Plan solves for the Alt.
Should say why Alt. is bad.
Ks mean nothing until the other team explains it very
thoroughly.
HAVE TO TELL JUDGE WHY YOUR ARGUMENTS ARE
IMPORTANT.
POSTAL DONT HAVE TO DO IN THIS ORDER.
P PERMS
O OFFENSE
S SOLVENCY (WHY AFF. SOLVENCY IS BETTER)
T TURNS (STRAIGHT TURN THE K)
A ALTERNATIVE SOLVENCY (SPECIFICALLY ATTACK THEIR
K ALT. FUNCTION)

L LINKS

Framework
Which world should the judge vote for? Comes down to
which impact should be prioritized and tells the judge what
to do with the K, and tells judge how to evaluate the round
based on the impacts.
Cross-supply/use Nixon 11, Cooke 92, and Laduke 92.
What the Alt. really does is reject the plan.
Have to reject and do something after. We can say that fine,
reject, but then use the plan to fill in the void.
HAVE TO ADDRESS FRAMEWORK.
HAVE TO HAVE NEW FLOW FOR FRAMEWORK.
If dropped, judge has no option but to vote for the plan.
If both teams run structural violence, we say that we solve
faster, and for more people.

Counterplan
Going to say CP Text, 1 card that says that CP solves, super
short.
Put some perms on it. NEVER DROP A PERM.
Say why case outweighs.
Need to say why their means dont solve if they solve for the
same people, similar way.
Need to prove that the impact of your plan is more
important.
Net Benefit: A unique advantage to the CP that the Plan
cant access (Politics).
If the other team doesnt have a net benefit, then your plan
outweighs because theres nothing linking it to.
Time and Strat. Screw: Dont have enough time to answer
that in the 1AR.
Consult CP: Say we solve better than the CP, and weve
always consulted natives, but weve never taken them
seriously.

K of T

Is Kritik of Topicality; independent voter

Usually violate the term substantial
The TO are a minority, which isnt a majority, and they are being oppressed.
You are critiquing the way they run T against you.