Using Your Case to Refute and Rebut

Oftentimes, arguments in your own case can be used to attack your opponent’s. Constructing a solid case of your own will save you a lot of time during your refutation.

Identify points of similarity between both cases; pointing out similarities before going onto explaining why your reasoning is correct enables you to “hijack” their point and flip it to yours, and seem like you understand your opponents’ case better than they do.

Example

“Side government says that we should make tipping mandatory in order to improve the quality of life for many American laborers. We agree that adequate compensation is key to quality of life, we believe that making tipping mandatory will only encourage employers to lower the wages they pay to their employees.”

Counterplanning

This can also be done by creating a case that takes their points and net benefits and turns them into ones of your own. The way to go about this (often only on the negative/opposition side) is to create a counterplan: agree with the reasoning they give for their plan/policy, agree with whichever points they have that still exist under your counterplan, and then explain how your plan gets rid of extra contingencies and/or produces more net benefits in a unique fashion. This way, you can take their positive points and add your own that they can’t then just add on as well.

Example

“Side government, in their plan to give all eligible Dreamers under the DACA Act citizenship, has stated that it will provide clear economic benefits to the country and will not leave these people out to dry. Side opposition agrees with these wholeheartedly. We believe that it is incredibly important to America, both on the side of business and that of morality, to let these Dreamers stay. However, we believe there is a better course of action– we propose as a counterplan that we instead give them green cards. These will keep all the benefits that side government has proposed, while also erasing problems created by side government’s plan– that of giving possible criminals full, unabated citizenship and that of unfairness between other attempted immigrants and those who simply happened by chance to have been born here to illegal immigrants.”