Palacios,+Christian

__**Debate Philosophy**__

**Experience:** I debated 4 years of policy at Whitney Young High-school (32nd Seed at the ToC my senior year).

I’m not really sure how to structure the incoherence that makes up my philosophy, so I’ll just talk briefly about various off-case positions and you can ask me any questions you’d like before the round.

**Kritiks**: I’ll put this first because it’s what most people are interested in anyway. I’m a good judge for the criticism. Some of my favorite authors in high-school were Schopenhauer, Baudrillard, and Bataille, and I’m relatively familiar with most popular critical literature bases. I don’t think Kritik’s need alternatives and I’d prefer if the Affirmative engaged in the substance of the criticism (i.e I am much more likely to vote for capitalism, hegemony, or security rhetoric being good than I am to vote against the negative because their arguments are “unpredictable” or their authors have Nazi affiliations). When reading a K in front of me, please do specific link and impact work to the Affirmative. Even if your links are generic (as mine often were) I’d appreciate some sort of specific application to the Plan or its advantage areas.

**Performance**: Fine with it. You don’t have to have a plan text, or talk about curtailing domestic surveillance in the 1AC. Just be able to defend why you didn’t.

**Topicality**: I like topic specific specification arguments. Slow down when you’re reading analytic extensions of your standards please. I will not flow what I cannot understand.

**Theory**: I’m going to be honest. I don’t like listening to conditionality debates. Of course I’ll vote on it, but condo debates aren’t my favorite thing to judge. I’ll vote on any dropped theoretical objections if they are explained well, though I usually think that anything other than condo is a reason to reject the argument and not the team. If politics theory is conceded by the negative I will throw away the DA. I think Intrinsicness is a true argument and I don’t care who knows it.

**CP’s**: I like case specific PIC’s (but if the CP results in the entire plan then that’s probably unfair). Not the biggest fan of generic Consultation and Agent CP’s, but like anything I’ll vote on them. Also make sure to have a well articulated Net Benefit.

**Things that will get you higher speaks**: Making references to Mean Girls, Game of Thrones, or reading poetry (preferably poetry about death). I enjoy being shown pictures of baby monkeys or platipi. Also making fun out of basically any Whitney Young alum, including myself (other options include, but are not limited to: John Vitz, Jeron Dastrup, Kat Sears, Kevin Hirn, Misael G. or Elyse Conklin). Jon Sussman and Alex Bahls are also fair game.