Our elite Mastership Sourcebooks for NCFCA and Stoa will release soon! Check them out here!

Lots of Ethos debaters are at nationals and we’re getting called and texted off the hook. Thankfully, we declined to write resolutions for such a time as this. Take a look at the “mess” of parli prep time, and how a strategy must be quickly formulated… plus what a winning strategy may look like.

FullSizeRender (1)



Isaiah Mcpeak:




Isaiah McPeak:

Sacrifice definition = “forced” – you have no say as the sacrifice victim.

As OPP, you stand here in the belief of VOLUNTARY sacrifice. You believe that humans will lay down their lives for history’s greatest causes.

Governments have a right to ask you to go on a suicide mission, but they have no right to demand it.

That’s your basic theory, and then prep “consequences” (disads to their way of thinking):

DA 1. Torture. If sacrifice is ok, then steps leading towards sacrifice is ok. Link: directly from rez. Internal link: innocent lives could be tortured for information. That’s you and me kids.

for all impacts include a historical application showing what WOULD HAVE BEEN. For that one: Japanese wouldn’t have been interned in camps, they would’ve been tortured.

DA 2. etc etc. (send your partner off to prep this)

NOW we get deep. What is “the greater good?” Aha. “who decides” is the issue.

Interpretation: A. Rez uses word “history” – meaning we’re debating actual events, not idealistic/theoretical events. B. Humans lead governments. C. This rez gives power to HUMANS IN GOVERNMENT to make the call. We’re not debating whether in theory, but whether we are willing to let GOVERNMENTS THAT WE KNOW OF decide when to sacrifice innocents!

 Impact 1. Rights don’t exist. Rights – both in anti-federalist and federalist perspectives – protect you from government because of Madison in Federalist 51: “No men are angels.” Governments are necessary, but we must fragment their power.

Impact 2: Have fun.

%d bloggers like this: