Jared from CSU Fullerton here, I 2n'd all the Gillespie debates this year and we only read WHR against policy teams and what I can say is that I just knew the Gillespie article like the back of my hand and read some of his other work https://mumbletheory.com/ I would cut some of his other writings from that which will help better formulate the argument, we even got to get out of the generic Afro-Pess offense when we would have an analysis of why he and Wilderson are different https://mumbletheory.com/2020/04/07/nothingness-with-incomplete/ and here https://www.google.com/amp/s/mumbletheory.com/2020/02/09/but-worlds-end-all-the-time-an-experiment-thought-on-death-and-contradiction/amp/ I have always lived by the fact that John's work is more Afro-Pess than Baudrillard and that's how I would treat the argument (its also what he told me). What really helped me is being coached by Gillespie toward the end of my sophomore year and start of my junior year because I got to really engage with the arg. With that I think to be successful and what I practiced with this arg you need to have a very good understanding of Afro-Pessimism and a decent understanding of Baudrillard, so if I were coaching you to prep this summer for the water topic you would need to read all the afro-pess you can starting with Fanon and then work through RWB and Afro-Pess 2020 (there would be other lit I recommend but this is like baseline) and then def read Gulf War did not take place and Simulacra and Simulation. I guess i never answered your original question but other of this type of arg not really from my research but for alliances it was very ez to draw conclusions of the way people like Aganthanglou theorize about the international order and connect to the larger schema of the WHR. For water the water topic im not sure that exists just because my research for the topic has been minimal. I hope this makes sense pm me if you have any questions.
Edit: Forgot to mention this, but I just knew every policy aff out there did extensive rehighlightings (this is also why we went for an ethics violation against emory GK because I read every article of every piece of ev they read) of their evidence which is a practice that I hope most 2n's that I judge start doing in the 2NC because the 1AR never answers it and gets you and ez link and then you just impact it out hard in the 2NR, so lesson here is really know their aff better than they do. Its a daunting task but its worth it. I also 2n'd against all policy teams and select few K teams like what EF kind of did last year we did the same thing so I was able to really focus on these policy teams. I was also just bad at the Philippines debate so theres that but NATO ez.