Summary: The heart of this case points the negative spotlight on a brilliant concept known as “popular sovereignty,” the true source of government’s purpose, potency, and political power.
Released: Filed Under: Stoa Lincoln-Douglas
About "We the People (NEG)"
The heart of this case points the negative spotlight on a brilliant concept known as “popular sovereignty,” the true source of government’s purpose, potency, and political power. If you’ve ever read the Declaration of Independence, you know what I’m talking about (for the people, by the people). In this case, the value of Popular Sovereignty is run with three Reasons to Prefer (RTP). This means that your debate will be focusing primarily on the values clash. For those who would rather spend time fighting over evidence, you should consider removing one or two of the RTPs and adapting your argumentation accordingly. What this case says is that preemptive warfare directly conflicts with popular sovereignty. Affirm the resolution, and you reject the voice of the people. The resolutional analysis gives you ground to argue that thesis, and some convincing evidence helps solidify it.
If you want to be successful in the debate world, you must do two important things. First, you need to identify all your weak points. This goes for not only this case, but for every case that you will run. I know it’s quite tempting to grab a cool case the night before a tournament and then try to win all your rounds, but that’s a terrible idea.
Don’t go into any debate round without clearly knowing what your weakest spots are. Put yourself in your opponent’s shoes and ask, “If I was facing this new Popular Sovereignty stuff, how would I attack it?” Take detailed notes on everything that is wrong with this case. Fix what you can and be aware of what you cannot. This rule is just like the game of chess: you should never try to trap the other player – you should put yourself in his position, consider the best possible move he could make, and then figure out a way to beat it. Spend time exploring options to defeating your case, then formulate your strategy to counter that.
Second, you need to make the case your own. Judges can always tell when a debater is personally attached to his case. With a scrutinizing eye, you must go over every detail and mold it to your liking. Take this case and splash your personal style all over it. Change the rhetoric according to your personality. Edit the RTPs to whatever strategy you prefer, whether it be little politer stabs at your opponent, or full on nuclear blasts. Take time to find more killer evidence to step up the quality of your contentions. As it is, the case is not ready to be run yet. But if you follow these two guidelines, you will be way ahead of many other competitors especially by running with this argumentation.
One last note: this case begs for persuasion. You must forge a personal connection with your judge. Your opponent can bring up all the logic he has up his sleeve, but you should master both logic and persuasion. Logic and persuasion beat the pants off plain ole’ logic every time, and if you can use them together, your win/lose rate will improve dramatically. Now follow my guidelines, have fun, and God bless you.
- Download the document with the button above. Study this release and get to know it well. File and print as necessary to prepare for your upcoming competition.
- This download is exclusively for Monument Members participating in Season 18. Any use outside this membership is a violation of U.S. Copyright Law and violators will be prosecuted.
- As always, double check all claims, warrants, hyperlinks and the current news in case any changes have occurred that will affect your competition.
- NEW FEATURE! Do you have questions about this download? Tap in your comment at the bottom of the page. The author, the site owner, or another member will most likely reply.
Permission & Usage
Click Here for complete information on permissions. All membership content is proprietary intellectual content, so please respect its copyright. Simply put, if you are not a Monument Member, you may not use it or share its content. If one partner of a debate team is a member and the other is not, the one who is a Monument Member must be the controller of the logins, downloads and incorporation of the Monument Membership material. Sharing logins is strictly prohibited.