Hegemony (Heg) Economic, military, and political influence a nation has. It’s America’s street cred Soft Power + Hard Power= Heg Amount of Soft + Amount of Hard= Smart Power How much you need of each to get the job done.

Soft power-  to attract and co-opt rather than coerce, use force or give money as a means of persuasion.  So it is ---- getting others to want the outcomes you want We both breathe the air- what can we do together?

Hard power To coerce, force, bribe, and threaten to achieve your way.

Polarity Multipolarity- more than one strong nation Bipolar- 2 strong nations 1945-1991 Unipolarity- 1strong nations US All cause war…..

In Policy Debate- Two teams- (2 people per team) Affirmative Negative Policy advocates a change in policy

Presumption Neg is given presumption If no one debates Neg automatically wins. Presumption view that Status Quo is fine. Must convince else wise Think Innocent until proven Guilty. Burden of Proof is on the Aff Aff FAILS to win presumption- Aff loses

Affirmative Team- Affirms (supports the resolution) Advocates CHANGE through your plan. Aff must overcome Presumption Presumption- the initial beliefs of the judge or audience about the resolution and the arguments. Meaning- Change MUST be Justified. If they are not doing anything illegal why do you care?

Aff’s Goal- Prove that the plan has substantial benefits Mitigates/solves the harms Mitigate- to make small or less severe Prove that the plan produces positive benefits over negative impacts. Ex- Pass BIT and investment jump starts //us economy.

Negative Team Upholds the Status Quo Status Quo- the current system/way of doing things. SQ=How things are now.

Neg claims they are this Aff will produce THIS

Negative Goals- Prove Aff plan not needed Prove Aff plan non-topical Outside the resolution Ex- their plan involves SK not china Prove Aff plan is being done now Prove Plan fails to bring positive or any change Prove plan will cause something far worse to occur. This is called a disadvantage Prove any 1- and you win!

Presumption We assume the status quo is the best course of action until proven otherwise.

Overcoming Presumption Prove there is a significant problem so we need to change. Do it through Sig/Harm Scenario

Prima Facie “At first glance”

Aff must present a convincing case when first presented Needs to show and demonstrate ALL stock issues. It overcomes presumption

Prima Facie A case proves enough to overcome a reasonable person's skepticism toward change. Has all stock issues- w/o them the fails to present a Prima Facie case.

Not this-

In Round As Neg you say- The Aff fails to present a Prima Facie Case therefore failed to overcome presumption. This is a negative ballot YOU MUST TELL specifically WHY aff does not over come presumption.

Fiat “Let it be done”

What is Fiat Theory? Aff’s power to say plan will be implemented and debate focuses on the merits of the case. Ex. Does it solve the Sig/Harms? If we abandon THAAD will US China reations really improve? Allows debate to focus on the solvency and plan. NOT whether or not it’s going to pass Congress.. Can’t say Congress would never pass.

Not a “magic wand” that allows all problems w/plan to disappear. Neg restricted to arguing post plan implications Disadvantages On case arguments (Arms race happens because US abandons SK.) Plan-meet-Advantages (PMA)

Making an Argument- Data- Evidence Claim- What you claim Warrant- it is the connection!

Warrants- The idea that makes the argument BALLER!

Warrants Warrants win debates!

Warrants… Link the claim and the data in an argument Answer the question, “What’s causing the author to say this?” or “Why does that data make your claim true?” Are often assumptions or beliefs about something

Can be implied or explicit Implied are not stated in the evidence Claim & Data in the card: CO2 levels have increase so has global temperatures Implied Warrant: increasing CO2 causes increase temperatures.

If there is no warrant stated in the evidence, attack it! In debate we can’t just make assumptions about claims. We have to ask why! Ex. Economic engagement Decreases violence. Decreasing foreign oil Decreases terrorism

Causation vs. Correlation Causation- the action of causing something. Correlation- the relationship between things that happen or change together A phrase used in science and statistics to emphasize that a correlation between two variables does not necessarily imply that one causes the other.

Be looking for correct correlation Need to know WHY and HOW it does. When US allows China space coop why does it mend relations.