Skip to content
November 27, 2011 / compassioninpolitics

On the seeming uselessness of unpredictable impact scenarios for big stick impact stories

How about the Lopez evidence (I think its from the financial times). If I’m not mistaken it allows you to access most impacts–all I know is its a laundry list card–so many of the impacts might be “unexpected” and its not the usual stock impact.

I’m not sure what value you get in running an off the map impact. If they are smart, they will just read the same de-development turns against you: Ted Trainer & the author de jure & some growth-bad impact modules.

What you want in an impact:
1) Size & credibility of impact
2) Ability to access their impacts (aka disad turns the case OR case solves their impact)
and perhaps 3) winnable (ie they don’t own either big viable links into it with the same degree of risk or credibility OR a very obvious uniqueness arguments which serves as terminal defense–this later is usually not as much an issue–but potentially can be).
4) do multiple things for you–if possible (ie 2 directions you can go with the impact–ie it access their impact & gives an external impact). For instance with relations impacts its not uncommon for them to list the economy & prolif or economy & terrorism. Obviously you’ve got to still read a terminal impact–but you’ve just given yourself another way to access a particular debate (now US/China & US/EU relations are far more important to the economy than say Indonesia/US relations or Austrailian/US relations….so the magnitude of the economy impact–or your access to it–varies with country–it can be an effective strategy).

One and two are by far more important. You don’t have to have something “unpredictable” in terms of econ impacts. I think the only place where unpredictable might seemingly help is–a standard impact that allows you to access their case impact–or one of the nexus questions in the debate (econ & hegemony & ethics & softpower/democracy & environment are probably the most common nexus questions).

Why is this the case–because when they read politics & counterplan & say disad turns the case they probably just solved your little unpredictable impact–and their extinction level impact (which they’ve probably read 2 minutes of impacts on in the block) is probably going to outweigh that little impact–and they might either access it or impact turn it–because its easy to do either with the economy. Let me be clear—its not a matter of if they can access it or not–its a mater of the magnitude of their access vs. the magnitude of your access.

The other main consideration is–is this an impact they will access with their usual counterplans? Because if it is, you probably need to focus on the impacts they can’t access with their counterplan–if at all possible (or the impacts they can only solve for 50%).


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: