Topic Analysis - LD Sep/Oct 2017 National Service

By: Indu Pandey

Introduction: 

The new LD topic for September and October is… Resolved: In the United States, national service ought to be compulsory.

In terms of definitions, there seems to be two areas of particular interest: the term of art “national service” and “compulsory.” In the literature, national service has a contentious definition. While some view it to be exclusively military service (similar to a draft), others view it more broadly, including agencies run by the Corporation for National and Community Service. That would include programs like AmeriCorps, Senior Corps, Peace Corps and the Social Innovation Fund.

“Compulsory” generally means that something is required by the law and obligatory. This raises interesting questions about exceptions for people with particular disabilities, religious beliefs, or health issues that may prevent them from mandatory service, which means affs will have to address these concerns.

AFF Ideas: 

There appears to be a wide variety of different affirmatives people can run on the topic, including plan and phil affirmatives. In terms of phil affs, we think communitarianism could be an interesting choice. There are also interesting social contract affirmatives that could be run. In terms of plans, we think people could specify just military service or different branches of the CNSC (AmeriCorps, Peace Corps, etc).

In terms of more policy-style whole rez affs, there is a lot of ground for big stick util impacts. For example, you could read a hege affirmative or a soft power affirmative. There is also room for more soft left affs. For example, people of lower socioeconomic status often join the military for economic benefits, so national conscription could level the playing field more. Another soft left aff idea is the idea that America will be less likely to go to war if everyone’s children would be forced to fight. It puts a more personal human price on war, which discourages fighting.

NEG Ideas: 

The neg seems to also have a wide range of positions. In terms of phil, a liberty or Kant NC seems particularly fitting. In terms of K ground, there is a lot of debate over forcing people to serve the United States and the idea of something being “national.” That would be a good place to start research.

In terms of policy arguments, you could read an econ disad about how the work force would shrink, which would cause inflation. You could also read a disad about how American military build-up causes pre-emptive strikes against the U.S. There is also room for a lot of process counterplans that deal with the term “compulsory.”

A lot of the best neg ground will be reactive to the particular aff plan and subject area. So, when prepping you should anticipate common affirmatives and craft case negs based on those.