McCordick argues that debate is becoming an inaccessible rhetorical monoculture; you point out a trend towards rhetorical diversification, affect theory, and personalization.
This is arguably competitive debate's biggest culture clash (though debaters from neither camp could be successful without proficiency in the other)––even if you believe them to be corrosive, it's misguided to construe them as parts of the same trend.
Additionally, it's interesting that you select 2014 CEDA finals as an example, which was not only criticized but also met with fairly vicious racism––why not the 2015 NDT, which exemplifies the kind of debate McCordick criticizes? Or the 2013 NDT, which shows the two styles in interaction?
This is arguably competitive debate's biggest culture clash (though debaters from neither camp could be successful without proficiency in the other)––even if you believe them to be corrosive, it's misguided to construe them as parts of the same trend.
Additionally, it's interesting that you select 2014 CEDA finals as an example, which was not only criticized but also met with fairly vicious racism––why not the 2015 NDT, which exemplifies the kind of debate McCordick criticizes? Or the 2013 NDT, which shows the two styles in interaction?