| Negative Responsibilities |
|
The Central question in any policy debate is: Do the benefits of adopting the proposition outweigh the risks / disadvantages of its adoption? If the answer is yes, the affirmative prevails, if the answer is no, the negative prevails. Negative Approaches 1st Negative Constructive:
*1st Negative Constructive casts all arguments in terms of the above--tell your judge that your attacks strike at the relevance of the case, undermine the justification for action, and show the futility of the affirmative's plan. At the end of your constructive speech, you should be able to recap why there is no reason to vote for the affirmative. Your only job is to demonstrate reasons to vote against the affirmative. Since your partner has shown there is no advantage to be gained from the affirmative position, you solidify your team's stance by demonstrating that there are substantial problems (harms, disadvantages) associated with the affirmative proposal. In short, the disadvantages associated with the affirmative position are greater than the advantages offered. You may do this by:
Basic Negative Moves Keep reminding the judge that your team's position undermines the rational for change (case-side attacks) and that even if there is something left on "case-side" it is outweighed by the disadvantages offered. |

