FIAT PROBABLY O.K.

FRONTLINE 1 / 4
FIRST, ROLE PLAYING DEBATES PROMOTE REAL WORLD UNDERSTANDING OF POLICY ANALYSIS AND POLICY OBJECTIVES, POLITICAL CRITICISM & THE PRINCIPLES OF LAW. THIS ALLOWS US TO TRANSFORM OUR CONCEPTIONS OF LAW AND POLITICS. Joyner (prof. of International law @ Georgetown) 1999
[TEACHING INTERNATIONAL LAW: VIEWS FROM AN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS POLITICAL SCIENTIST 5 ISLA Intnl & Comp. L 377 lexis//emporia state] First, students on each team must work together to refine a cogent argument that compellingly asserts their legal position on a foreign policy issue confronting the United States. In this way, they gain greater insight into the real-world legal dilemmas faced by policy makers. Second, as they work with other members of their team, they realize the complexities of applying and implementing international law, and the difficulty of bridging the gaps between United States policy and international legal principles, either by reworking the former or creatively reinterpreting the latter. Finally, research for the debates forces students to become familiarized with contemporary issues on the United States foreign policy agenda and the 8 role that international law plays in formulating and executing these policies. The debate thus becomes an excellent vehicle for pushing students beyond stale arguments over principles into the real world of policy analysis, political critique, and legal defense.
The debate exercises carry several specific educational objectives.

2.) THE K HAS ZERO RISK OF SOLVENCY A.THE SHIFT TO THE ALTERNATIVE CANNOT BE IMMEDIATE, THIS TYPE OF UTOPIAN QUESTIONING REQUIRES A VAST MINDSET SHIFT WHICH EITHER TAKES A LONG TIME AND OUR ADVANTAGES SWAMP SOLVENCY IN THE SHORT TERM. B.THE K CANT SOLVE OUR ADVANTAGES EITHER. THE DEFICIT BETWEEN VOTING NEGATIVE AND THE SOLVENT NATURE OF THE KS ALTERNATIVE MEANS THERES ROOM FOR DISADVANTAGES IN THE INTERIM. I.E. OUR ADVANTAGES HAPPEN BEFORE THE K CAN SOLVE THEM; THIS IS A REASON ALONE TO REJECT THE KRITIK.

FIAT PROBABLY O.K. FRONTLINE 2 / 4

3.) THEIR ADVOCACY DOESNT OCCUR IN A VACUUMTHEY MUST DEFEND THE DESIRABILITY OF THEIR ADVOCACY IN A WORLD WHERE THE UNITED STATES IS STILL FIGHTING THE WAR ON TERROR AND HAS HAWKS, DISPROVES ANY KIND OF IMMEDIATE MINDSET SHIFT BECAUSE THESE TYPES OF PEOPLE WONT CHANGE 4.) POLICY MAKING DEBATES EDUCATE STUDENTS ON THE UNDERSIDE OF FIAT AND THE POLITICAL PROCESS WE BECOME ADVOCATES & CULTURAL PARTICIPATES INSTEAD OF PASSIVE CONSUMERS Joyner (prof. of International law @ Georgetown) 2003
[DISSECTING THE LAWFULNESS OF UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY: CLASSROOM DEBATES AS PEDAGOGICAL DEVICES 9 ISLA Intnl & Comp. L 331 lexis//emporia state] By assessing the role of international law in United States policy making, students realize that United States actions do not always measure up to international legal expectations. At times, international legal rules are compromised or short- circuited for the sake of perceived national interests. Concepts and principles of international law, like in domestic law, can be interpreted, manipulated, and twisted in order to justify United States policy in various circumstances. In these ways, the debate format gives students the benefits ascribed to simulations and other "action learning" techniques, in that it "requires that students be actively engaged with their subjects, and not be [*338] mere passive consumers. Students should be seen as cultural participants, observing, reacting to, and structuring their world." 12

FIAT PROBABLY O.K. FRONTLINE 3 / 4

5.) THE NEGATIVES ADVOCACY IS A P.R. CAMPAIGN TO GET POLITICAL ELITES WITHIN THE OASIS OF DEBATESHOULD PRIORITIZE INWARD POLICY TESTING DEBATE INSTEAD, BECAUSE AN OUTWARD TURN COLLAPSES POSSIBILITIES FOR REAL WORLD CHANGE AND ACTIVISM, THIS IS AN ON-POINT DISAD TO THEIR FRAMEWORK Coverstone (WFU) 1995
[Alan, An Inward Glance: A Response to Mitchells Outward Activist Turn online @ http://www.wfu.edu/Studentorganizations/debate/MiscSites/DRGArticles/Coverstone1995China.htm //loghry] Debate teaches individual decision-making for the information age. No other academic activity available today teaches people more about information gathering, assessment, selection, and delivery. Most importantly, debate teaches individuals how to make and defend their
own decisions. Debate is the only academic activity that moves at the speed of the information age. Time is required for individuals to achieve escape velocity. Academic debate holds tremendous value as a space for training. Mitchell's reflections are necessarily more accurate in his own situation. Over a decade of debate has well positioned him to participate actively and directly in the political process. Yet the skills he has did

the relative isolation of academic debate is one of its virtues. Instead of turning students of debate immediately outward, we should be encouraging more to enter the oasis. A thirsty public, drunk on the product of anyone who claims a decision, needs to drink from the pool of decision-making skills. Teaching these skills is our virtue. Second, Mitchell's argument underestimates the risks associated with an outward turn . Individuals trained in the art and practice of debate are, indeed, well suited to the task of entering the political world . At some unspecified point in one's training, the same motivation and focus that has consumed Mitchell will also consume most of us. At that point, political action becomes a proper endeavor. However, all of the members of the academic debate community will not reach that point together. A political outward turn threatens to corrupt the oasis in two ways. It makes our oasis a target, and it threatens to politicize the training process. As long as debate appears to be focused inwardly, political elites will not feel threatened. Yet one of Mitchell's primary concerns is
not develop overnight. Proper training requires time. While there is a tremendous variation in the amount of training required for effective navigation of the public sphere, recognition of our oasis in the political world. In this world we face well trained information managers. Sensing a threat from "debate," they will begin to infiltrate our space. Ready made information will

Not yet able to truly discern the relative values of information, young debaters will eventually be influenced dramatically by the infiltration of political elites. Retaining our present anonymity in political life offers a better hope for reinvigorating political discourse. As perhaps the only truly non-partisan space in American political society, academic debate holds the last real possibility for training active political participants. Nowhere else are people allowed, let alone encouraged, to test all manner of political ideas. This is the process through which debaters learn what they believe and why they believe it. In many ways this natural evolution is made possible by the isolation of the debate community. An
increase and debaters will eat it up. example should help illustrate this idea. Like many young debaters, I learned a great deal about socialism early on. This was not crammed down my throat. Rather, I learned about the issue in the free flow of information that is debate. The intrigue of this, and other outmoded political arguments, was in its relative unfamiliarity. Reading socialist literature avidly, I was ready to take on the world. Yet I only had one side of the story. I was an easy mark for the present political powers. Nevertheless, I decided to fight City Hall. I had received a parking ticket which I felt was unfairly issued. Unable to convince the parking department to see it my way, I went straight to the top. I wrote the Mayor a letter. In this letter, I accused the city of exploitation of its citizens for the purpose of capital accumulation. I presented a strong Marxist critique of parking meters in my town. The mayor's reply was simple and straightforward. He called me a communist. He said I was being silly and should pay the ticket. I was completely embarrassed by the entire exchange. I thought I was ready to start the revolution. In reality, I wasn't even ready to speak to the Mayor. I did learn from the experience, but I did not learn what Gordon might have hoped. I learned to stop reading useless material and to keep my opinions to myself. Do we really want to force students into that type of situation? I wrote the mayor on my own. Debaters will experiment with political activism on their own. This is all part of the natural impulse for activism

, an outward turn threatens to short circuit the learning process. Debate should capitalize on its isolation. We can teach our students to examine all sides of an issue and reach individual conclusions before we force them into political exchanges. To prematurely turn debaters out threatens to undo the positive potential of involvement in debate.
which debate inspires. Yet, in the absence of such individual motivation

FIAT PROBABLY O.K. FRONTLINE 4 / 4

6.) THEY SHOULD BE LIABLE FOR THE IMPLICATIONS OF THEIR ADVOCACY, ALLOWING THEM TO JUST IGNORE OFFENSIVE REASONS WHY WHAT THEY ADVOCATE IS BAD WOULD RESULT IN STRATEGY SKEW BY ALLOWING THEM TO WAVE AWAY ALL OUR OFFENSE MEANING NEGATIVES WOULD ALWAYS WIN WHICH IS DAMAGING TO EDUCATION AND EQUITY BECAUSE WE CANT LEARN ABOUT THE ALTERNATIVE AND AFFS ALWAYS LOSE. ITS ALSO AN ISSUE OF CONDITIONALITY WHICH ALLOWS THEM TO SPIKE OUT OF OUR ALTERNATIVE TURNS. VOTING ISSUE. COMPETITIVE EQUITY. <READ LIKE HEG GOOD OR SOME KIND OF TURN TO THE ALTERNATIVE OR SOMETHING IN ADDITION FOR IT TO WORK> 7.) NO EVIDENCE TALKS ABOUT HOW THE TRANSITION GOES DOWN, THEY DONT HAVE ANY TYPE OF COMPARATIVE SOLVENCY EVIDENCE THAT SAYS THAT A SHIFT TO THE ALTERNATIVE FANTASY WORLD WOULD OCCUR IN THE ACTUAL WORLD WE LIVE IN. 8.) THEIR SOLVENCY IS PREDICATED ON A SUCCESSFUL SHIFT TO ________________________________________________________________, IF WE WIN THAT SOMETHING WOULD MONKEY WRENCH THAT PROCESS, OR THAT THE RESULT OF THE TRANSITION IS BAD, I.E. IT CAUSES CONFLICT THEN THEIR SOLVENCY IS FUNCTIONALLY RENDERED TO ZERO