Case (policy debate)
Encyclopedia
In policy debate
, a case, sometimes known as plan, is a textual advocacy presented by the affirmative team
as a normative
or "should" statement, generally in the 1AC. A case will often include either the resolution
or a rephrasing of it.
The case is the advocacy established by the affirmative
in the First affirmative constructive speech, often constructed around the support of a policy recommendation known as the affirmative plan. While the 1AC defines the parameters for the bulk of an affirmative's argument, the term "case" can be used to cover the entirety of the affirmative argument more broadly, referring, for instance, to additional advantages, counter-arguments, or rebuttal evidence that might be introduced in later speeches (if at all.)
and are labeled accordingly. For example:
Or:
These outlines are quite general, and different debaters may retain some or none of the above structural elements as their situations dictate. On an aesthetic level, for example, it is not uncommon for some cases to include creative titles for observations and advantages. A case increasing the number of pilots in the United States Air Force might call the first contention "Air Power."
On a more practical level, recent policy debate cases have made a habit of including one or more contentions which do not directly relate to the affirmative thesis, but are designed to preempt common negative attacks. For instance, a team running a case often considered non topical might devote 45 seconds of the first affirmative constructive to reading contextual definitions of disputed terms in order to frame the debate in a favourable light early on. (Because topicality is a "meta-issue" it is traditionally omitted from the opening presentation of the case, although historically an introductory contention where the affirmative defined the terms of the resolution was much more common.) Additionally, teams might decide to include "non-unique" contentions, where the information presented bears little on the overall affirmative argument other than to say that any negative disadvantage should have already occurred in the status quo.
could argue that such an operation would prevent nuclear war between India
and Pakistan
.
An advantage might also be more philosophical in nature. Loosely defined as "critical" or "kritikal" such advantages tend to eschew traditional cost-benefit analysis, claiming either that there are philosophical problems with the status quo such as prevalent racism
, heteronormativity
/homophobia
, patriarchy
, militarism
, which the plan can address, or that certain forms of analysis (for instance, Consequentialism
) are on face immoral and should be rejected as possible tools to evaluate the affirmative case.
Some more "critical" cases might also argue that the advocacy of the affirmative should not be reduced to a "plan" or policy advocacy, opting instead to defend it as a "speech act" or "discourse" more holistically.
Policy debate
Policy debate is a form of speech competition in which teams of two advocate for and against a resolution that typically calls for policy change by the United States federal government or security discourse...
, a case, sometimes known as plan, is a textual advocacy presented by the affirmative team
Affirmative (policy debate)
In policy debate, the affirmative is the team which affirms the resolution.The Affirmative side negates the negative.The affirmative team speaks first and last. They give four speeches:*First affirmative constructive...
as a normative
Norm (sociology)
Social norms are the accepted behaviors within a society or group. This sociological and social psychological term has been defined as "the rules that a group uses for appropriate and inappropriate values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors. These rules may be explicit or implicit...
or "should" statement, generally in the 1AC. A case will often include either the resolution
Resolution (policy debate)
In policy debate, a resolution or topic is a normative statement which the affirmative team affirms and the negative team negates. Resolutions are selected annually by affiliated schools....
or a rephrasing of it.
The case is the advocacy established by the affirmative
Affirmative (policy debate)
In policy debate, the affirmative is the team which affirms the resolution.The Affirmative side negates the negative.The affirmative team speaks first and last. They give four speeches:*First affirmative constructive...
in the First affirmative constructive speech, often constructed around the support of a policy recommendation known as the affirmative plan. While the 1AC defines the parameters for the bulk of an affirmative's argument, the term "case" can be used to cover the entirety of the affirmative argument more broadly, referring, for instance, to additional advantages, counter-arguments, or rebuttal evidence that might be introduced in later speeches (if at all.)
The Structure of the Case
The case is a form of on topic debate and can also be referred to as C, if done in the standard way C is a very affective way to win a case the case, is generally organized into sections called "observations" or "contentions", with advantages attached to the link or link break.Observation or Contention
A typical case includes between two and five observations/contentions, depending on the speed of the intended speaker and the length of the observations/contentions. Traditionally, observations/contentions address one of the stock issuesStock issues
In the formal speech competition genre known as policy debate, a widely-accepted doctrine or "debate theory" divides the deliberative elements of proving the resolution as affirmative affirmative into four logical issues, called the stock issues...
and are labeled accordingly. For example:
- Contention 1: Significant Harms
- Contention 2: Inherency
- Plan
- Contention 3: Solvency
Or:
- Observation 1: Inherency
- Plan
- Advantage 1
- Advantage 2
- Advantage 3
- Solvency
These outlines are quite general, and different debaters may retain some or none of the above structural elements as their situations dictate. On an aesthetic level, for example, it is not uncommon for some cases to include creative titles for observations and advantages. A case increasing the number of pilots in the United States Air Force might call the first contention "Air Power."
On a more practical level, recent policy debate cases have made a habit of including one or more contentions which do not directly relate to the affirmative thesis, but are designed to preempt common negative attacks. For instance, a team running a case often considered non topical might devote 45 seconds of the first affirmative constructive to reading contextual definitions of disputed terms in order to frame the debate in a favourable light early on. (Because topicality is a "meta-issue" it is traditionally omitted from the opening presentation of the case, although historically an introductory contention where the affirmative defined the terms of the resolution was much more common.) Additionally, teams might decide to include "non-unique" contentions, where the information presented bears little on the overall affirmative argument other than to say that any negative disadvantage should have already occurred in the status quo.
Advantages
While some high school regions prefer affirmative cases to be organized around the "stock issues," others have stressed an emphasis on a "comparative advantage" style case construction. The primary difference between the two forms of cases is one of style and emphasis, though in many instances the information presented can be almost identical. A case built around "advantages" stresses the superiority of the plan (or broader affirmative advocacy) to the status quo, through a series of direct comparisons between the plan and the status quo. The impact calculus offered within advantages can vary widely across different cases. Some might argue that the plan effects a "policy" change for the better, or prevents something that is bad that the status quo all but guarantees. For instance, an advantage to a plan increasing the strength of United Nations peacekeeping operations in KashmirKashmir
Kashmir is the northwestern region of the Indian subcontinent. Until the mid-19th century, the term Kashmir geographically denoted only the valley between the Great Himalayas and the Pir Panjal mountain range...
could argue that such an operation would prevent nuclear war between India
India
India , officially the Republic of India , is a country in South Asia. It is the seventh-largest country by geographical area, the second-most populous country with over 1.2 billion people, and the most populous democracy in the world...
and Pakistan
Pakistan
Pakistan , officially the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is a sovereign state in South Asia. It has a coastline along the Arabian Sea and the Gulf of Oman in the south and is bordered by Afghanistan and Iran in the west, India in the east and China in the far northeast. In the north, Tajikistan...
.
An advantage might also be more philosophical in nature. Loosely defined as "critical" or "kritikal" such advantages tend to eschew traditional cost-benefit analysis, claiming either that there are philosophical problems with the status quo such as prevalent racism
Racism
Racism is the belief that inherent different traits in human racial groups justify discrimination. In the modern English language, the term "racism" is used predominantly as a pejorative epithet. It is applied especially to the practice or advocacy of racial discrimination of a pernicious nature...
, heteronormativity
Heteronormativity
Heteronormativity is a term invented in 1991 to describe any of a set of lifestyle norms that hold that people fall into distinct and complementary genders with natural roles in life. It also holds that heterosexuality is the normal sexual orientation, and states that sexual and marital relations...
/homophobia
Homophobia
Homophobia is a term used to refer to a range of negative attitudes and feelings towards lesbian, gay and in some cases bisexual, transgender people and behavior, although these are usually covered under other terms such as biphobia and transphobia. Definitions refer to irrational fear, with the...
, patriarchy
Patriarchy
Patriarchy is a social system in which the role of the male as the primary authority figure is central to social organization, and where fathers hold authority over women, children, and property. It implies the institutions of male rule and privilege, and entails female subordination...
, militarism
Militarism
Militarism is defined as: the belief or desire of a government or people that a country should maintain a strong military capability and be prepared to use it aggressively to defend or promote national interests....
, which the plan can address, or that certain forms of analysis (for instance, Consequentialism
Consequentialism
Consequentialism is the class of normative ethical theories holding that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment about the rightness of that conduct...
) are on face immoral and should be rejected as possible tools to evaluate the affirmative case.
Some more "critical" cases might also argue that the advocacy of the affirmative should not be reduced to a "plan" or policy advocacy, opting instead to defend it as a "speech act" or "discourse" more holistically.