Patel,+Kush

Kush Patel

I debated in high school at the Greenhill School in Texas. I debated at Michigan State my freshman year in 2012. I have not debated for 3 years.

A few “meta” thoughts:


 * 1) More than anything else...**Smart arguments > evidence**. Willing to assign almost 0 risk to monocultures resulting in extinction or economic collapse resulting in nuke war. That is not to say I do not appreciate well thought out arguments and strong evidence, but it comes secondary to one's ability to persuade me in the back of the room.
 * 2) I will vote on the K. I do not read a lot of critical literature. Given that, a couple years removed from the activity has given me perspective on the way I used to demand unreasonable risk evaluation of nuclear war from an economic collapse stemming from grain underproduction in China etc. There is probably something amiss if our activity engenders students to think about the policymaking process in a way that prioritizes an evaluation of these scenarios over systemic harms. Real world vs. debate world I guess.
 * 3) I was a 2N for the majority of my career and I feel a strong affinity for case specific strategies. 2A's step your game up. I loved the 1AR, there were tons of fun things you could do in this speech.
 * 4) Dropped arguments are not automatically true.

Feel free to ask questions before the debate.