A policy debate argument which attempts to undermine the fundamental basis of the affirmative. More often than not revolves around ludicrous "revolution" style alternatives that a bunch of cafe intellectuals doing acid in the ivory tower came up with. The spelling itself - German for "critique" - represents the feel-good attitude of the guys who came up with it.
The poster child: Slavoj Zizek.
The poster child: Slavoj Zizek.
Kritiks only smear shit on policy debate's already elitist image.
"John always tries to show off in history whenever Dr. Rosenblum talks about the motivation for the Cold War."
"What does he do?"
"Duh, he's a fucking debater, so he tries to pull this thing called a kritik on him. Says the only way out of the 'recurring cycle of violence' is to have a 'total proletariat subconsciative otherization of the real'."
"Is the dude on acid or what?"
"No.. he's a debater, remember? He's the guy who whines about starving kids in Africa all the time from his Benz."
"John always tries to show off in history whenever Dr. Rosenblum talks about the motivation for the Cold War."
"What does he do?"
"Duh, he's a fucking debater, so he tries to pull this thing called a kritik on him. Says the only way out of the 'recurring cycle of violence' is to have a 'total proletariat subconsciative otherization of the real'."
"Is the dude on acid or what?"
"No.. he's a debater, remember? He's the guy who whines about starving kids in Africa all the time from his Benz."
by Kazhakkey Szervusz-Thackur November 26, 2006
A policy debate argument based on the assumptions of the aff plan. Much like a disadvantage without a uniqueness argument. Very complex. Not cheating.
by Ed August 4, 2006
(1)"I pwned those novices on a Foucault kritik last round."
(2)"I pwned those novices on a Foucault kritik last round."
(2)"I pwned those novices on a Foucault kritik last round."
by CoolestFreakingDebaterEver July 15, 2006