AT: Debate Never Fair
Obviously debate has some institutional issues, but that doesn’t justify their interpretation---a few arguments.
They make it worse because in an anything-goes model of debate, might makes right and the most powerful teams or institutions would be able to dominate---smaller schools or people who read tighter and more nuanced arguments, for example, would lose out because they wouldn’t have the ability to deal with everyone saying whatever the hell they wanted!
They don’t solve resource disparities---many of those stem from institutional dynamics like funding, filtered through university endowments and alumni donations---voting aff does nothing to alter those disparities! Inculcating debate based on nuanced testing, however, does provide the ability to navigate complex institutional dynamics and improve these kinds of resource disparities!
This isn’t a reason to abandon debate about the resolution---the topic still provides a relatively equitable frame for organizing debate, with a common literature base and limited set of advocacies---that maximizes the equity of in-round debate while training students to deal with structural inequities more broadly