Baudrillard Parts 4-6

These are the next 3 parts, parts 4-6, in a 12 part video series that Nae did on Baudrillard. This Baudrillard series is a part of a larger series on postmodernism. The other parts will be released in the coming days. If you’re unfamiliar with Baudrillard, Nae did an introduction to Baudrillard video as a precursor to this series. I also recommend watching parts 1-3 before these 3 parts.

In part 4, Nae finishes talking about policy responses to Baudrillard. Nae stresses this series overall is helpful in identifying what arguments on the flow you need to focus on as a debater. For the link portion of the debate, it’s important to answer back the thesis level of their argument with potential examples of why politics is possible. A lot of teams struggle in justifying why their aff is important outside of just making impact argument justifications. For instance, there’s a reason why you should learn about law or IR and not just advocacy. For permutations, teams should explain why the alternative also has to grapple with the large scale type aspects your impacts likely focus on. Answering the thesis of the debate also helps with your permutation because it also explains the perm’s relationship to politics and advocacy. Nae talks about how to better utilize utilitarian impact justifications in the standard for the judge should evaluate the debate. Nae finally talks about how to attack the alternative by framing the aff against the status quo.

In part 5, Nae starts talking about how to read Baudrillard on the negative against critical teams. Nae thinks Baudrillard can be particularly useful because it makes a distinction between form and content. Nae talks about how reading the Baudrillard K as an Academy K would be useful and references Academy K videos that he has done that I will hopefully get to releasing soon. The form/content distinction is important against the academy because while it allows radical scholarship that criticizes the academy and it’s normative functions, it doesn’t change the form or structure. Nae uses a picture frame as an analogy for form and the picture as the content. The frame makes it that so regardless what is in the picture doesn’t matter because the function is the same because the frame is the same. Nae talks about how you can make link arguments through how they frame suffering through the debate round.

In part 6, Nae continues talking about reading Baudrillard on the negative against critical teams. Nae talks about how 1ac representations can create form/content links for the neg. You can use how Baudrillard talks about academia and apply that to how debate functions. For links against K teams, it will obviously change against each specific team, but there are some central link arguments you can make against critical affs. Images of suffering to motivate politics or create a new way of thinking or radical change are all easy places to start to find sign/signifier link arguments. The more specific you adapt to the language of the 1AC, the better off you will be. Nae gives some advice about how to handle permutations, especially using the form/content links that were discussed in part 5. Also important for the perm is winning the uniqueness component of the debate. A simple alternative of refusal can be useful to not overcomplicate a debate that’s complicated and allows you to read a lot of the rest of the arguments on the flow as net benefits to a refusal alternative.