You are on page 1of 396

Agents Provocateurs Af

Key: if it has an * then its good


Vocab
Sting: an extremely illegal operation, such as the bribing
of public officials, often used by undercover agents to
collect evidence of wrongdoing.
Agent provocateur (ap): a person who induces others to break the law
so that they can be convicted. In our case an FBI agent.

The 1AC
In December 2001, the FBI arrested Shahed Hussain for running a fake driver's
license scam. He was a Pakistani immigrant granted political asylum in the 1990s, and now faced federal
charges and deportation. Like many Muslim immigrants after 9/11 who were charged with criminal offenses, he
was offered the chance to stay in the US without time in prison if he agreed to work
as an informant for the FBI. And Hussain soon discovered that his abilities as a fraudster could be of use
to the government. In 2003, based in Albany, New York, he manipulated two law-abiding men-Mohammed Hossain
and Yassin Aref-into involvement in what they thought was a business loan deal. When prosecutors brought the case
to court they presented the deal as a terrorist fund-raising operation, and the two men received fifteen-year
sentences. When the prosecuting attorney was asked by journalists whether there was anything to connect Aref to
terrorism, he said: "Well, we didn't have the evidence of that, but he had the ideology:'" The FBI then used Hussain
for other covert work, in Pakistan and London, before he returned to the US and settled in Newburgh, a dilapidated,

he implanted himself in the local


Muslim community, posing as a wealthy businessman. After a year searching for
would-be targets, most of whom guessed he was an FBI agent, he met James
Cromitie, a forty-five-year-old African American who was an occasional visitor to the
local mosque. He worked night shifts at Walmart, and had served two years in
prison in the 1980s for selling crack cocaine. When they first met in the mosque
parking lot, Cromitie said: "Did you see what they did to my people over there? In
Afghanistan. Those motherfuckers:' Hussain had found his quarry.18 Hussain worked on Cromitie for
four months, showering him with flattery, cash, and free meals . These conversations were
poverty-stricken town sixty miles north of New York City, where

not recorded by the FBI (and many later recordings had gaps-again, equipment malfunction was blamed), but by
the end of it, it seems Cromitie was captivated by the lavish generosity of his new rich friend and happily joined in
conversations laced with anti-Semitism about attacking synagogues. But he was less than enthusiastic about doing

When Hussain gave him a camera to photograph potential targets,


he immediately sold it for fifty dollars. For months, he did nothing. Then he
disappeared for six weeks, telling Hussain that he was moving to North Carolina; in fact,
he remained in Newburgh and just wanted Hussain to stop pursuing him. But Hussain kept up the
anything beyond talk.

pressure, telling Cromitie he had not done anything to advance the plan: "You've not started on the first Step,

Only when Cromitie lost his job and became desperate for money did
he get back in touch with Hussain, who offered to pay him $250,000, provide him
with a two-week holiday in Puerto Rico, a barbershop business, and a BMW if he
agreed to participate in a scheme to bomb two Bronx synagogues . "I told you, I can make
brother. Come on.

you $250,000, but you dont want it, brother," Hussain said. Cromitie, who knew Hussain by the fake name Maqsood,
gave in: "OK, fuckit. I don't care. Ah, man. Maqsood, you got me:' Hussain later testified in court that "$250,000"
was code for the plot, not an offer of payment, but this seems unlikely-he acknowledged that he had told neither his
FBI handlers nor Cromitie about the sum's supposed secret meaning. Later Cromitie tried to withdraw from the
scheme, telling Hussain he could not do it, to which Hussain replied that his terrorist "brothers" might cut off his

Cromitie was given the task of recruiting others from Newburglls Muslim
community. Three other African-American men-Onta Williams, Laguerre Payen, and David Williams
(not a relative of Onta)-were all roped in and also offered large sums of money . Onta Williams,
head.19

whose mother had a crack cocaine addiction, had started selling drugs at the age of fourteen and had spent time in
prison. Payen suffered from schizophrenia, had been in and out of mental health facilities, and kept bottles of urine
in his bedroom. 20 David Williams had become a Muslim as a teenager after an uncle had introduced him to the
religion. But other relatives had introduced him to selling drugs, and he served five years in prison. He settled in
Queens, New York; when he was released at the age of twenty-four he found a job in a restaurant and enrolled in
college. But when his younger brother Lord fell ill with liver cancer, he decided to return to Newburgh to help his
mother, who had to leave her job to care for him. Realizing David feared for his brother's life and the family was
unable to afford adequate health care, Hussain offered to pay for a liver transplant on the understanding that David
would join his scheme.21 Payen said barely anything in the meetings between Hussain and the four other Newburgh
men. But Cromitie and the two Williamses soon realized that the more extravagant their conversations about
criminal activity became, the more money Hussain handed out. They began to put on a show for him, saying things
they thought he would like to hear and expecting to be rewarded with cash. Cromitie claimed to have stolen guns,

thrown bombs at police stations, been jailed for murder, and visited Afghanistan, none of which was true. Little did

When
Hussain was not around to harangue the others into developing the plot, nothing
happened. The supposed terrorists preferred to sit around getting stoned and playing video games. According to
he realize that Hussain was manipulating him far more effectively than he was manipulating Hussain.

his aunt, David Williams was hallucinating on PCP throughout the entire period, barely aware of what was
happening.22 Indeed, he would have likely been in prison at this time were it not for FBI agents pulling strings to

None of the four


men had money, cars, contacts, weapons, or ideas of their own to contribute.
Hussain supplied the plan, the vehicles, and the equipment . When Hussain gave Cromitie
postpone a pending larceny case against him so he could be caught in their sting instead."

eighteen hundred dollars and asked him to buy a gun, the supposedly hardened criminal was unable to score a deal
and had to return with the money unspent.

A few days before the attacks Hussain had planned,


he drove the four men to Connecticut and showed them a fake missile system that
he said could be used to shoot down military airplanes-they talked about using the
weapon at Stewart Airport, near Newburgh. It is far from clear what the four Newburgh men were
thinking at this point. They later claimed they were planning to scam Hussain for the money they had been
promised (which they had been told was waiting for them in a UPS mailbox) and then disappear without actually

Hussain's
promises of vast sums of money may have tempted them to be part of a plot ; there is
some evidence that they thought it would only involve property damage to empty
buildings. What is certain is that without Hussain's money and manipulation, they
would never have been involved in terrorism. On May 20,2009, Hussain drove the four
men to the Bronx, where Cromitie had the job of placing what he thought were
explosive devices in the trunks of parked cars outside two synagogues while the
others acted as lookouts. An FBI SWAT team appeared as Cromitie returned to
Hussain's car, smashed through the car's windows, and arrested the men, charging
them with attempting to use weapons of mass destruction. The news coverage of
the case presented the four as America-hating terrorists dedicated to mass violence
and motivated by radical Islam.
doing anything. To a certain extent, this is consistent with their behavior. On the other hand,

(Narrative taken from: Arun Kundnani, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and
Communication at New York University, and teaches terrorism studies at John Jay
College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic War
on Terror (2012), p. 188-191)

Cromities story is far from unusual the use of Agent


Provocateurs for entrapment runs rampant in the post 9/11 era
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 188)

Martinez's story is far from unusual-it is in fact a textbook case of current FBI tactics
in the domestic war on terror. Investigative journalist Trevor Aaronson has examined
forty-nine terrorist prosecutions since 9/11 which involved an FBI agent provocateur .
Among them were most of the high-profile terrorism cases over the last ten years. In all of them someone
working for the FBI "provided not only the plan but also the means and opportunity
for the terrorist plot:'" Without the FBI's help in supplying money, weapons, and
often a specific plan of attack, the accused would not have had the capability to
carry out any plot. In many cases, there is evidence suggesting that FBI agents
provocateurs manipulated vulnerable people with mental health or drug addiction
problems into conspiring in acts of planned violence they would otherwise have had

no intention of carrying out.

The most significant conversations between the agents provocateurs and


the defendants were not recorded on these occasions (which, as Aaronson notes, is implausibly explained by
technical failures).

Advantage One is the Police State:


Provocation is the foundation stone for a corrupt police state
the FBI racially and ideologically profiles and targets,
infiltrating groups that resist white colonial power
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, pp. 195 198)

In 2008, a new set of guidelines was introduced by Ashcroft's successor, Michael Mukasey, that
explicitly defined the FBI as "an intelligence agency as well as a law enforcement
agency" and authorized the mass collection and circulation of surveillance data
regardless of its connection to any unlawful conduct as conventionally understood. "
(More recently, Mukasey has appeared at a conservative conference spouting Islamophobic conspiracy theories.) 34
From March 2009 to March 2011, FBI agents conducted 42,888 national security assessments-preliminary

which relax the requirement that


suspicions have a factual basis.35 In carrying out "assessments'' the FBI can use
informants, informal interviews, and physical surveillance without any time
limitation." By 2011, the bureau had introduced Field Intelligence Groups to all of its fifty-six field offices and
investigations of people or groups-following the new guidelines,

reportedly raised the number of intelligence analysts from 1,100 in October 2001 to nearly 3,000.37 Of its $8.1
billion budget, $4.9 billion was allocated to intelligence and counterterrorism3' Mark F. Giuliano, assistant director of
the FBI's Counterterrorism Division, boasted that they had successfuliy transformed it from an investigative agency
into an intelligence agency-in other words, the bureau was now gathering vast amounts of information unconnected

Models of radicalization gave the illusion that collecting


information this way was somehow still tethered to preventing crime. But the truth
was that the FBI's transformation had probably made it less effective at detecting
actual terrorist plots, while the ones it was busily manufacturing with agents
provocateurs gave the superficial appearance of an efficient counterterrorism
program. The use of agent provocateurs has a long history. In his account of the tsarist secret police, known as
the Okhrana, Maurice Laporte described provocation tactics as "the foundation stone"
of a police state.40 The Okhranis innovative filing system, in which cards were held on half a million Russiansto specific criminal acts.39

with cross-referenced political friends, nonpolitical acquaintances, and persons in contact with friends of the
suspect but not known to him personally-remains the basis of modern intelligence gathering-except today agencies
use specialty software applications that are capable of far more efficient processing of much greater amounts of
social network data than the paper-based techniques of a century ago.41 The model of the tsarist police state found
its way to the US colonial regime in the Philippines when the constabulary's Information Section was established
there in 1901 by Henry Allen, who had earlier worked as an American military attache in Russia in the 1890s.42 The
section cultivated hundreds of paid Filipino agents across the country, making it "scarcely possible for seditionary
measures of importance to be hatched without our knowledge;' as Allen wrote to President Theodore Roosevelt''

The techniques of compiling dossiers on dissidents' private lives, spreading


disinformation in the media, and planting agents provocateurs among militants were
applied to combating radical nationalist groups in Manila. Control over information proved as effective a
tool of colonial power as physical force. During World War I, notes historian Alfred W McCoy, police
methods that had been tested and perfected in the colonial Philippines migrated homeward to provide both
precedents and personnel for the establishment of a US internal security apparatus ... After years of pacifying an
overseas empire where race was the frame for perception and action, colonial veterans came home to turn the
same lens on America, seeing its ethnic communities not as fellow citizens but as internal colonies requiring
coercive controls.44 On this basis,

a domestic national security apparatus emerged. By the


late 1950s the FBI's COINTEL program had systematized these techniques, using
provocateurs and informants to infiltrate the Left, Puerto Rican nationalists, the

student movement, the civil rights movement, and some far Right groups :-About 1,500
of the 8,500 American Communist Party members were likely FBI informants in the early 1960s.Bythe end of the
decade, agents who had previously worked in US foreign intelligence were transferring to the burgeoning field of
domestic intelligence to spy on radical movements A key part of the strategy was the manipulation of political

Agents provocateurs
initiated disruptions of meetings and demonstrations, fights between rival groups,
attacks on police, and bombings." At least one provocation ended in death. On May 15, 1970, Seattle
activists into committing criminal acts so that the FBI could arrest and prosecute them.

police shot and killed Larry Eugene Ward as he fled the scene of an attempted bombing at a real estate office that
had been accused of maintaining racial segregation in the city. It emerged that Ward had been recruited to place
the bomb by an FBI informant as part of a plan to undermine the Black Panthers." As of 2008 the FBI had a roster of
at least fifteen thousand informants- the number was disclosed in a budget authorization request that year for the
$12.7 million needed to pay for software to track and manage them. The proportion who are assigned to infiltrate
Muslim communities in the United States is unknown but likely to be substantial, given the FBI's prioritization of
counterterrorism and its analysis of radicalization. told him: "We could go to a source and say, 'We know you're
having an affair. If you work-with us, we won't tell your wife:"49
so been at Occupy Wall Street provoking violence.

Agent provocateurs destroy civil liberties through their


blatantly unconstitutional, and universally immoral methods
Aziz 12 (Sahar Aziz is associate professor at Texas A&M School of Law where she
teaches national security and civil rights law. Aziz is the author of Caught in a
Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America. She formerly
served as a senior policy adviser to the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at
the US Department of Homeland Security. http://www.truthout.org/opinion/item/11043-creeping-counterterrorism-from-muslims-to-politicalprotesters)
The New York Police Department (NYPD) and other police departments
conducted mass group arrests without having probable cause to arrest the
group. Agent provocateurs infiltrated the Occupy movement to disturb
and disrupt civil political assembly. Similar to mosque congregants who made
like complaints, protesters accused the police of entrapping young people
who were mentally disabled, drug addicts or who had just experienced a
traumatic personal experience. Like their Muslim counterparts, Occupy
leaders were subjected to hostile interrogations by law enforcement
agents visiting their homes before a protest. The billions of dollars spent
on increasing our government's domestic surveillance capabilities, ostensibly to
protect Americans from "Islamist terrorists," is now used to spy on
political protesters. In New York City alone, over 3,000 cameras have been
installed to feed into a control center housed in a secret location, and $150 million
surveillance systems allowed the NYPD to closely monitor Occupy protests, identify
targets for infiltration and ultimately chill political activity. Hence the same
playbook used to frighten Muslims from critiquing American policies or
attending their mosques has now become the one used against the
Occupy protesters. And the same national security powers expanded after
9/11 under the guise of keeping us safe from the Muslims are now
enforced against political dissenters who challenge the economic
inequities ailing our nation. By believing in the fallacy of the "Muslim
terrorist other," we weakened our resolve to protect fundamental
American values. As a result, post-9/11 counterterrorism authorities are

used to spy, infiltrate, entrap, arrest and aggressively prosecute any


protesters. When we allow governments to forfeit our civil rights to
protect "us" from "them," we lose sight of how quickly we can become the
"them." So, how many more Americans must be subjected to civil liberties
violations before we realize that no one is immune from creeping
counterterrorism?

And, this surveillance apparatus functions as racialized


totalitarianism under the guise of a liberal democracy
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 281-282)

Everyday life for communities under state surveillance programs increasingly


resembles the patterns described in classic accounts of totalitarianism. There is the
same sense of not knowing whom to trust, of choosing one's words with special care
when discussing politics, and of the arbitrariness and unpredictability of state
power. The thousands of American Muslims on the US government's no-fly list, for
example, have no idea why their names are on it. Is it because they share a name with a
suspected terrorist? Is it because someone with a grudge has phoned the government with false information? There

No one can be sure whether the telephone call to relatives in Iran is


wiretapped, whether Facebook posts are read by officials, or whether the new face
in the mosque congregation is an informant . They have heard the stories, so they
are careful-just in case. Totalitarian rule thrives on its subjects' ignorance of the
extent to which the surveillance system is monitoring their lives . The possibility, rather
is no way of knowing.

than the fact, of surveillance is enough to generate fear, anxiety, and informal pressures to conform, to downplay

Thus an enforced culture of self-censorship


emerges in communities that used to express their political opinions freely . Linda
dissenting opinions, to declare one's absolute loyalty.

Sarsour, an Arab-American community activist from Brooklyn, New York, notes: Were Arabs, we talk about politics

This new idea


that we must be suspicious of those who speak about politics- something's wrong .26
all the time. Politics is all we do! Every coffee shop, it's either al-jazeera or a soccer game on TV.

Humor is often the way people cope with this subtle psychological terror. The jokes American Muslims tell about
state surveillance will be eerily familiar to those who lived under the East German Stasi; they are a way of

Occasions on which political issues might be tentatively


discussed by Muslim Americans usually begin with a humorous reference to the
wiretapped phone or the presence of an informant ." Such humor is also an
acknowledgment that the surveillance regime has been normalized in their
everyday lives. Sunaina Marr Maira, a New England community activist, has written of how she and her
acknowledging the same anxiety.

colleagues began to develop strategies to manage the unspoken anxiety about the intrusion of state powers into
everyday life, by self-consciously drawing attention to this constant possibility of surveillance. We made jokes about
FBI videotaping and wiretapping, dressing for the camera, and possible informants in our midst ... Our humor, I
think, was a way to grapple with the unknown and ever-present reach of state powers. 28 After repeated FBI
interrogations over a six-month period in 2002, in which he was asked about every aspect of his life, Hasan M. Elahi,
an artist and scholar at the University of Maryland, began to produce a Web site that automatically documented
every flight he took, every place he visited, every financial transaction, and every meal he ate-a darkly humorous
parody of the national-security state's obsession with quotidian detail. "There are 46,000 images on my site;' he
writes - -"I trust that the FBI has seen all of them."29

And, preemptive counterterrorism strategies specifically target


Muslims for undue surveillance
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, pp. 194-195)

After 9/11, the FBI adopted a preemptive stance on countering terrorism- what john
Ashcroft, then attorney general, repeatedly promoted as a new "paradigm of prevention :'"
The belief was that the usual principles of the rule of law-investigating individuals when there was a reasonable

Surveillance had to be broadened


to a wider group suspected of radicalization . In line with this, Ashcroft revised the FBI's guidelines
so that the threshold for counterterrorism investigations was significantly lowered .29
Whereas earlier, informants could be used only when there was strong evidence of
criminal activity, after 9/11 they could be employed much more widely . Philip Mudd, who
suspicion of criminal intent -were insufficient for tackling terrorism.

in 2006 became associate executive director of the National Security Branch of the FBI, explained the

there will be people


dragged into those investigations who did not do something wrong :'" Mudd was recruited
consequences of the new preventive approach: "By definition, if you are preventative,

to lead the process of transforming the FBI into a spy agency on the model of Britairis MIS, of moving the bureau
beyond investigating individual cases to a wideranging gathering of information on American Muslim communities
in general. He had previously been deputy director of the CIA:s Counterterrorism Center, during the period when it
tortured terrorism suspects, and in the run-up to the Iraq war, when he liaised with then secretary of state Colin

Mudd introduced
a program at the FBI called "domain management'' that involved producing
electronic maps showing in detail where ethnic groups were clustered, crossreferencing such information with databases of financial transactions, charitablegiving activities, jobs held, and so on. This then became the basis for allocating
resources and informant recruitment to specific neighborhoods-effectively, a form of
ethnic profiling.31 The FBI's Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide, which implements The Attorney
Powell prior to his notorious speech at the UN, which was based on fabricated intelligence.

General Guidelines, calls on agents to refrain from profiling "solely" on the b.asis of race, ethnicity, national origin,
or religion. But they permit the collection of informalion regarding ethnic behaviors "reasonably believed to be
associated with a particular criminal or terrorist element of an ethnic community" - which, given the FBI's model of

would allow for all kinds of Muslim religious practices to be subject to


surveillance. Also permitted is the identification of"locations of concentrated ethnic communities [and] the
radicalization,

locations of ethnic-oriented businesses and other facilities;' which presumably includes mosques. 32

Advantage Two is Terrorist Threat Construction


Agent provocateurs create terrorism scares that are used to
legitimate increased surveillance and securitization
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, pp. 201)

agent provocateur operations can also have


serious disruptive effects in particular localities . In October 2010, Farooque Ahmed was
arrested in northern Virginia after an operation involving an FBI agent provocateur.
He appears to have been planning to travel to Afghanistan to fight against the US
military presence there, but as part of a sting operation, the FBI hatched a plan for
him to bomb subway stations on the DC Metro. 56 Though the idea to attack the
Metro originated with the FBI, the arrest caused officials to become concerned that
As well as distorting the overall perception of threat,

the DC subway network was indeed vulnerable to terrorism. Security was beefed up
in response to the imagined plot, and physical and mechanical bag searches were
introduced. Officials argued that even if the idea to bomb the Metro had come from
the FBI, now that it was public, it had to be taken seriously as a plot that might be
emulated by others." Another hidden cost was the disbanding of a local women's group that called itself Hip
Muslim Moms, of which Ahmed's wife happened to be a member. The group was tarred by association after the
media coverage of his high-profile arrest and ended its activities, though his wife was not accused of any crime. It
had been involved in such radical activities as coupon clipping, exchanging recipes, and watching Sex and the City.
58

Muslim American groups are targeted more so than Far-Right


groups, even though Far-Right groups perform a substantially
greater number of terrorist acts. This is based of and further
perpetuates threat construction, stripping American Muslims
from their Constitutional rights, forcing then to be seen as
foreign.
Braine 15 (Braine, Naomi. "Terror Network or Lone Wolf? | Political Research Associates." Political Research
Associates. Political Research Associates, 19 June 2015. Web. 19 July 2015.
<http://www.politicalresearch.org/2015/06/19/terror-network-or-lone-wolf/#sthash.962f0kfC.dpbs>. Naomi Braine is
an Associate Professor in the Sociology Department at Brooklyn College, CUNY, and a lifelong activist in struggles
for social justice. Her political and intellectual work has addressed mass incarceration, the War on Drugs/drug
policy, HIV and collective action, and, more recently, the War on Terror.)

Terrorism, unmodified, is used to refer to international terrorism, involving people


or plans that include a demonstrated or attributed link to an international entity.
Cases involving Muslims that clearly originate in the U.S. are classified as
homegrown international terrorism, even though any links to international
networks or entities may exist only in the eyes of law enforcement. The
Congressional Research Service defines domestic terrorists as people who
commit crimes within the homeland and draw inspiration from U.S.-based militant
ideologies and movements.16 This somewhat confusing FBI and DoJ distinction
between homegrown and domestic terrorism produces interesting
contradictions: in domestic cases involving Christian militants, antisemitism is cast
as a U.S.-based ideology, but in homegrown cases, its evidence of global jihad
among Muslims. The DoJ lists 403 cases of (international) terrorism from September 2001 through March
201017: 11 percent non-Islamist (mostly FARC or Tamil Tigers), 45 percent Islamist, and 44 percent undetermined
(mostly cases of fraud or financial misconduct involving someone with an Arab-sounding name). The Islamist
category includes 30 cases considered to be homegrown. The FBI and DoJ do not provide publicly accessible lists
of domestic terrorism cases, which complicates direct comparisons between domestic and homegrown cases. The
data that do exist on domestic terrorism, or politically motivated violence, result from examining local, state, and
federal law enforcement activity to identify relevant cases. A few nonprofit institutes track domestic political
violence and terrorism cases, although their definitions and exact lists vary. For the purposes of this report, I have
drawn upon the two most extensive and widely cited. The Southern Poverty Law Center focuses primarily on right-

The period from September 2001


through December 2010 lists 50 cases, almost double the number of homegrown
wing activity, and has the most detailed and comprehensive list.18

Islamist cases in a similar period, and 21 of the 50 took place in 2009 and 2010,
following President Obamas inauguration. All 50 domestic cases involve elements
of the Far Right, from Christian Identity to various militia movements to the KKK and
other white supremacist groups. Terrorist acts often involved significant caches of
weapons and explosives, with targets ranging from the murder of government
representatives to assaults on synagogues or mosques and other Islamic centers.
According to the New America Foundation, 19 which tracks cases explicitly classified
as terrorism within the U.S., only 41 percent of jihadist plots in the U.S. since 9/11
involved weapons, and in almost one-third of those cases, the weapons were
supplied by U.S. government agents. By contrast, 89 percent of domestic terrorism
cases involved weapons, and in 92 percent of these cases the arms were acquired
without assistance from government agents. Based on the statistics and analysis of available
cases, there are significant differences in the procedures, charges, and penalties in domestic (non-Islamist) and

Despite the greater prevalence of incidents and deaths


resulting from right-wing violence, U.S. Muslims experience more aggressive
surveillance, greater use of informants, more severe charges, and greater use of
restrictive confinement once incarcerated. The differential treatment of right-wing
and Muslim cases draws attention to the political contexts surrounding terrorismrelated law enforcement, as these disparities only make sense within politicallydriven calculations. Mainstream conservative politicians and media personalities
protest depictions of right-wing militants as anything more than troubled but
patriotic Americans, while Muslim menparticularly young men are constantly
monitored as intrinsic security risks. In the process, Muslims lose Constitutional
protections for belief, speech, and associationforced to inhabit an ambiguous
territory as un-American and presumptively foreign .
homegrown (usually Islamist) cases.

And, fabricated terrorist attacks prove the nature of the


terrorist threat is in part a self-fulfilling prophecy. The FBIs
choice of whom to target determines the terrorist threat and
sustains racial violence in the War on Terror
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 199-200)

A second consequence of the provocation strategy is the distorting effect on


perceptions of the domestic terrorist threat. The FBI has generated a stream of
terrorist convictions that are considered genuine by policy makers and analysts.
That these cases would not have existed without FBI fabrication is ignored. This
means that mainstream analysis of the scale and nature of the terrorist threat is in
part a self-fulfilling prophecy, reflecting the FBI's choices of whom to target. If the
numbers of people arrested in a particular year go up, it is as likely to be because of

a step-up in the number of agent provocateur operations the FBI is carrying out as
the result of an independent increase in terrorist plotting. If Muslims constitute the
majority of those indicted for terrorism in the US, this is in large part a product of
whom the FBI is deciding to target in provocation operations rather than an
objective measure of where the threat of terrorism comes from. In the two decades
leading up to 2010, 348 people were killed in acts of political violence committed by
the American far Right in the United States. Of course, a much larger number of people died in the
9/11 attacks, carried out by Muslims present in the US as foreign visitors . But the number of people
killed in acts of political violence carried out by Muslim American citizens or longterm residents of the US is much smaller: twenty people between 1990 and 2010.51
Yet because the FBI considers Muslim Americans a special risk, it targets them with
agents provocateurs to a far greater degree than it does the far Right . The result is that
every two months or so the FBI announces another high-profile arrest of a Muslim
terrorist suspect, keeping the US on its war on terror footing and sustaining the
multi-billion dollar homeland security industry, while the far Right threat is
downplayed. In turn, the stereotype of Muslims as inherently prone to terrorism is
perpetuated.

Thus the Plan: The US Supreme Court should substantially


curtail the FBIs use of agents provocateurs.

The use of Agent Provocateurs should be expressly prohibited


to avoid the harms of entrapment expressed in both
advantages
Klemencic, 2006. (Goran, Faculty of Criminal Justice and Security Studies, University of Maribor, Slovenia.
Review of the Law on Operative Investigations of the Republic of Moldova. European Commission, Council of
Europe, Strasbourg, 12 October. http://old.parlament.md/download/expertises/912%20Molico%20Klemencic
%20expert%20legisl%20%20Law%20on%20operative%20Investigations%20PCRED%20DGI
%20EXP(2006)%2047.doc)

Expressly prohibit agents provocateurs


Use of undercover agents and investigative experiment , for all its benefits, is also
associated with a number of problems resulting in possibilities that they provoke
criminal activity and entrap an innocent person . Accordingly, the law should address
the issue of agents provocateurs by sanctioning entrapment / provocation which
falls beyond the scope of admissible law enforcement conduct . In accordance to the
decision of the European Court of Human Rights in Teixeira de Castro v Portugal (1999) 28 EHRR 101 the issue could
be address in the law

along the following lines:

In implementing the covert measures and in employing undercover agents the


competent agencies, their agents and persons cooperating with them are prohibited
to provoke criminal activity.
In determining whether the criminal activity was provoked, the court shall give
primary consideration to whether the measure as implemented led to the
committing of a criminal offence by a person who would otherwise not have been

prepared to commit this type of criminal offence . It shall not be deemed that the criminal activity
was provoked where it is obvious from all the circumstances that the state agencies and their agents did no more
(whether by passive or active means) then to provide the suspect the opportunity to commit the offence, of which
he or she freely took advantage in circumstances where it appears that he or she would have behaved in a similar
way if offered the opportunity by someone else.

If the criminal activity was provoked, this shall be a circumstance that excludes the
initiation of criminal proceedings for criminal offences committed in connection with
the measures.

Empirically the Courts have the ability to regulate the FBI's


surveillance, and through regulation it is necessary to
eliminate Agent Provocateurs to further restrict surveillance.
Holden, 2008 (Henry M. is an aviation historian and author. In 1994, Mr. Holden was cited in
the United States Congressional Record for his work in recording the history of American women in
aviation, and was the recipient of the Authors Award from the New Jersey Institute of Technology for
his book Her Mentor Was An Albatross The Autobiography of Pioneer Pilot Harriet Quimby. FBI 100
Years)

FISA Court
Throughout the twentieth century, the FBI used wiretaps and other surveillance
methods without a warrant when it felt that national security was at risk. In some
cases, the FBI and the CIA spied on domestic political groups, in clear violation for
the Fourth Amendment. In 1972, the Supreme Court ruled that the presidents authority
over national security did not justify using domestic wiretaps without a warrant:
The freedoms of the Fourth Amendment, said the court, cannot properly be
guaranteed if domestic security surveillances are conducted solely within the
discretion of the Executive Branch, without the detached judgment of a neutral
magistrate. Six years later, Congress responded by passing FISA in an attempt to
regulate the few cases (then) in which national security is at stake and in which law
enforcement agents are either unable to procure a traditional warrant because they
cannot show probable cause or are unwilling to do so because the information is
classified or time is critical .
Wiretapping is a more accurate and benign technique to penetrate terrorist
cells than the main alternative, which is recruiting informers, a dangerous and
unreliable way tactic. The narrower the governments surveillance powers, the more
it will rely on informants who provide information second-hand.

External restrictions are keythe FBI currently executes


changes as it sees fitonly external restrictions increase
public accountability and permanence.
ACLU, 13 (September 2013, UNLEASHED AND UNACCOUNTABLE; The FBIs Unchecked Abuse of
Authority, https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/unleashed-and-unaccountable-fbireport.pdf)//CB
The next section of the report discusses the ways the FBI avoids accountability by skirting internal and external
oversight.

The FBI, which Congress exempted from the Whistleblower Protection Act, effectively suppresses

internal dissent by retaliating against employees who report waste, fraud, abuse,
and illegality. As a result, 28 percent of non-supervisory FBI employees surveyed by the
Inspector General said they never reported misconduct they saw or heard about on the job.
The FBI also aggressively investigates other government whistleblowers, which has led
to an unprecedented increase in Espionage Act prosecutions over the last five years. And the
FBIs overzealous pursuit of government whistleblowers has also resulted in the inappropriate targeting of
journalists for investigation, infringing on free press rights. Recent coverage of overbroad subpoenas for telephone
records of Associated Press journalists and an inappropriate search warrant for a Fox News reporter are only the
latest examples of abuse. In 2010 the Inspector General reported the FBI used an illegal exigent letter to obtain
the telephone records of 7 New York Times and Washington Post reporters. And the FBI thwarts congressional
oversight with excessive secrecy and delayed or misleading responses to questions from Congress. Finally, the
report highlights evidence of

abuse that requires greater regulation , oversight, and public

accountability. These include many examples of the FBI targeting First Amendment activities by spying on
protesters and religious groups with aggressive tactics that infringe on their free speech, religion, and associational
rights. In 2011, the ACLU exposed flawed and biased FBI training materials that likely fueled these inappropriate
investigations. The FBI also operates increasingly outside the United States, where its activities are more difficult
to monitor. Several troubling cases indicate the FBI may have requested, facilitated, and/or exploited the arrests of
U.S. citizens by foreign governments, often without charges, so they could be held and interrogated, sometimes
tortured, and then interviewed by FBI agents. The ACLU represents two proxy detention victims, including Amir
Meshal, who was arrested at the Kenya border in 2007 and subjected to more than four months of detention in
three different East African countries without charge, access to counsel, or presentment before a judicial officer, at
the behest of the U.S. government. FBI agents interrogated Meshal more than thirty times during his detention.
Other Americans traveling abroad discover that their government has barred them from flying; the number of U.S.
persons on the No Fly List has doubled since 2009. There is no fair procedure for those mistakenly placed on the list
to challenge their inclusion. Many of those prevented from flying home have been subjected to FBI interviews after
seeking assistance from U.S. Embassies. The ACLU is suing the government on behalf of 10 American citizens and
permanent residents who were prevented from flying to the U.S., arguing that barring them from flying without due
process is unconstitutional. These FBI abuses of authority must end. We call on President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric
Holder to tighten FBI authorities to prevent unnecessary invasions of Americans privacy; prohibit profiling based on race, ethnicity, religion
and national origin; and protect First Amendment activities. And we call on Congress to make these changes permanent through
statute and improve oversight to prevent future abuse. The FBI serves a crucial role in protecting Americans, but it must protect our rights as
it protects our security.

2AC Blocks

Case

Advantage 1: The Police State


After 9/11 the FBI has increasingly been racially profiling, and
infiltrating groups that resist white colonial power. APs
contribute to a totalitarian like state that uses preemptive
counterterrorism strategies that strip citizens of their
constitutional rights specifically Muslims, and all without
probable cause.

Advantage 2: Terrorist Threat Construction


Agents provocateurs create terrorism scares or their own
probable cause thats used to rationalize surveillance and
securitization of threats. These fabricated terrorist attacks
allow the FBI to endlessly create their own terrorism threats,
and the creation of these false threats sustains racial violence
in Society, and the War on Terror today..

Solvency Extensions
1) Courts have the ability to rule on FBI surveillance
cases. Infringements such as: Surveillance through
domestic wire tapping, and warrantless
surveillance on political groups reveal the need for
court rulingThats Holden
2) Extend Our Klemencic evidence it gives clear
guidelines that
a. Bans any type of agent provocateur from
operating
b. Says that under the guidelines even if the FBI
does provoke someone, the victim will not be
subject to criminal trials or charges.
3) Only an external approach to regulating the FBI
pulls back the shower curtain, and solves for the
otherization of Muslims. By going through the
supreme court, the FBIs operations become
exposed to the public and theyll realize that the
majority of terrorist attacks by Muslims were
incited by agent provocateurs and there is no such
thing as an exclusively terrorist race. Thats
Kundnani, and ACLU.

AT: Inherency
They only talk about age old laws that our aff directly answers when our Aziz, Braine
, and Kundnani evidence cite several examples where aps are still fully operating
today.

Impact framing
NOTES: Must win ! framing, and Value to life. Dont concede the util debate. Util is
bad, because x,y,z

1ar O/v for util--- Here are reasons why youre voting aff, they arent winning !
framing. The reason why you have to weigh value to life over util is (insert
reasons) You have to prefer VTL over util calculability, and VTL is better than util
cause it allows convos of racism and oppression that would be skirted in the
1nc.

2ac O/v Case turns their impacts- extend the entire 1ac, its
whole preface is that util is terrible, and impact turns any util
good args. We outweigh on magnitude, our ev talks about
racialized violence, and makes the arg that minority groups are
being severely screwed over through racial profiling by FBI
surveillance. This destroys any VTL, and VTL is infinitely more
important than util cause it allows policies to solve for racism
and oppression, which is skirted in the 1nc. We also outweigh
on probability, and timeframe, in the sqou aps intentionally
create, and sustain the otherization of Muslims. This means
that Muslims lives are degraded to nothing, and they are
doing this to rationalize the large increase in securitization,
and surveillance that the state uses. The government uses this
surveillance to infiltrate and destroy activist groups that resist
white colonial power, which strips citizens civil liberties, and
perpetuates racial profiling. Probability is the most important
measurement for debate because
Value to life is Not Based on Duration or Longevity Living As
If Were Never-Going-to-Die, Just Means We Will Die HavingNever-Really-Lived.
Razinsky 9-Lecturer in the Program for Hermeneutics and Cultural Studies @ Bar-Ilan University
[Liran Razinsky, How to Look Death in the Eyes: Freud and Bataille SubStance, Issue 119 (Volume 38, Number 2)
2009 Pg 76-81 ProjectMuse]

Thus far we have mainly discussed our first two questions: the limitation in imagining death and the possible solution through a form
of praxis, in either a channeled, ritualized or a spontaneous encounter with the death of an other, overcoming the paradox of the
impossibility of representation by involving oneself through deep identification. We shall now turn to our third question, of the value
of integrating death into our thoughts. We have seen that Batailles perspective continuously brings up the issue of the value of
approaching death. The questions of whether we can grasp death and, if we can, how, are not merely abstract or neutral ones. The

encounter with death, that we now see is possible, seems more and more to emerge as possessing a positive value, indeed
as fundamental. What we shall now examine is Freuds attempt to address that positive aspect directly, an attempt that betrays,
however, a deep ambivalence. As mentioned, Freuds text is very confused, due to true hesitation between worldviews (see
Razinsky, A Struggle). One manifestation of this confusion is Freuds position regarding this cultural-conventional attitude: on the
one hand he condemns it, yet on the other hand he accepts it as natural and inevitable. For him, it results to some extent from
deaths exclusion from unconscious thought (Thoughts 289, 296-97). Death cannot be represented and is therefore destined to
remain foreign to our life.17 But then Freud suddenly recognizes an opposite necessity: not to reject death but to insert it into life.
Not to distance ourselves from it, but to familiarize ourselves with it: But this attitude [the cultural-conventional one] of ours towards

Life is impoverished , it loses in interest, when the


highest stake in the game of living, life itself, may not be risked . It becomes as

death has a powerful effect on our lives.

shallow and empty as, let us say, an American flirtation, in which it is understood from the first that nothing is to happen, as
contrasted with a Continental love-affair in which both partners must constantly bear its serious consequences in mind. Our
emotional ties, the unbearable intensity of our grief, make us disinclined to court danger for ourselves and for those who belong to
us. We dare not contemplate a great many undertakings which are dangerous but in fact indispensable, such as attempts at artificial
flight, expeditions to distant countries or experiments with explosive substances. We are paralyzed by the thought of who is to take

Thus the
tendency to exclude death from our calculations in life brings in its train
many other renunciations and exclusions. Yet the motto of the Hanseatic League ran: Navigare
the sons place with his mother, the husbands with his wife, the fathers with his children, if a disaster should occur.

necesse est, vivere non necesse. (It is necessary to sail the seas, it is not necessary to live.) (Thoughts 290-91) Readers
unfamiliar with Freuds paper are probably shaking their heads in disbelief. Is it Freud who utters these words? Indeed, the oddity of
this citation cannot be over-estimated. It seems not to belong to Freuds thought. One can hardly find any other places where he
speaks of such an intensification of life and fascination with death, and praises uncompromising risk-taking and the neglect of
realistic considerations. In addition to being unusual, the passage itself is somewhat unclear.18 The examplesnot experimenting

It is not quite clear if the


problem is that we do not bring death into our calculations, as the beginning seems
to imply, or that, rather, we actually bring it into our calculations too much, as is
suggested at the end But what I wish to stress here is that the passage actually
opposes what Freud says in the preceding passages, where he describes
the cultural-conventional attitude and speaks of our inability to make death part of
our thoughts. In both the current passage and later passages he advocates
including death in life, but insists, elsewhere in the text, that embracing death is
impossible. In a way, he is telling us that we cannot accept the situation where death is
constantly evaded. Here again Bataille can be useful in rendering Freuds position more intelligible. He seems to articulate
with explosive substancesseem irrelevant and unconvincing. The meaning seems to slide.

better than Freud the delicate balance, concerning the place of death in psychic life, between the need to walk on the edge, and the
flight into normalcy and safety. As I asserted above, where in Freud there are contradictory elements, in Bataille there is a

It might be that, guided by our instincts,


we tend to avoid death. But we also seem to have a need to intersperse this flight
with occasional peeps into the domain of death. When we invest all of our efort
in surviving , something of the true nature of life evades us . It is only when the
finite human being goes beyond the limitations necessary for his
preservation, that he asserts the nature of his being (La Littrature 214; 68). The approaches of
dialectic. Bataille, as we have seen, presents the following picture:

both Bataille and Freud are descriptive as well as normative. Bataille describes a tendency to distance ourselves from death and a
tendency to get close to it. But he also describes Mans need to approach death from a normative point of view, in order to establish
his humanity: a life that is only fleeing death has less value . Freud carefully describes our
tendency to evade death and, in the paragraph under discussion, calls for the contrary approach. This is stressed at the end of the
article, where he encourages us to give death the place in reality and in our thoughts which is its due (Thoughts 299).
Paradoxically, it might be what will make life more tolerable for us once again (299). But since Freud also insists not only on a
tendency within us to evade death, but also on the impossibility of doing otherwise, and on how death simply cannot be the content
of our thought, his sayings in favor of bringing death close are confusing and confused. Freud does not give us a reason for the need
to approach death. He says that life loses in interest, but surely this cannot be the result of abstaining from carrying out
experiments with explosive substances. In addition, his ideas on the shallowness of a life without death do not seem to evolve
from anything in his approach. It is along the lines offered by Batailles worldview that I wish to interpret them here. Sacrifice,
Bataille says, brings together life in its fullness and the annihilation of life. We are not mere spectators in the sacrificial ritual. Our
participation is much more involved. Sacrificial ritual creates a temporary, exceptionally heightened state of living. The sacred
horror, he calls the emotion experienced in sacrifice: the richest and most agonizing experience. It opens itself, like a theater
curtain, on to a realm beyond this world and every limited meaning is transfigured in it (Hegel 338; 288). Bataille lays stress on
vitality. Death is not humanizing only on the philosophical level, as it is for Hegel or Kojve. Bataille gives it an emotional twist.

The presence of death, which he interprets in a more earthly manner, is


stimulating, vivifying, intense. Death and other related elements

(violence) bring life closer to a state where individuality melts, the


mediation of the intellect between us and the world lessens, and life is
felt at its fullest . Bataille calls this state, or aspect of the world, immanence or
intimacy: immanence between man and the world, between the subject and the object (The
Festival 307-311; 210-213). Moments of intensity are moments of excess and of fusion of beings (La Littrature 215; 70). They
are a demand of life itself, even though they sometimes seem to contradict it. Death is problematic for us, but it
opens up for us something in life. This line of thought seems to accord very well with the passage in Freuds text with which we are

Life without death is life lacking in intensity , an


impoverished, shallow and empty life . Moreover, the repression of death is generalized and extended:
the tendency to exclude death from our calculations in life brings in its
train many other renunciations and exclusions. Freud simply does not seem to have the
dealing here, and to extend it.

conceptual tools to discuss these ideas. The intuition is even stronger in the passage that follows, where Freud discusses war
(note that the paper is written in 1915): When war breaks out, he says, this cowardly, conservative, risk-rejecting attitude is broken
at once. War eliminates this conventional attitude to death. Death could no longer be denied. We are forced to believe in it. People

Thus what is
needed is more than the mere accounting of consequences , taking death
into consideration as a future possibility. What is needed is exposure to
death , a sanguineous imprinting of death directly on our minds, through
the accumulation of deaths of others. Life can only become vivid, fresh, and interesting when death
really die. . . . Life has, indeed, become interesting again; it has recovered its full content (Thoughts 291).

is witnessed directly. Both authors speak of a valorization of death, and in both there is a certain snobbery around it. While the
masses follow the natural human tendency to avoid death, like the American couple or those who are busy with the thought of who
is to take our place,

the individualists do not go with the herd, and by allowing


themselves to approach death, achieve a fuller sense of life, neither
shallow nor empty.19 Yet again, Freuds claims hover in the air, lacking any theoretical background. Bataille supplies
us with such background. He contests, as we have seen, the sole focus on survival. Survival, he
tells us, has a price. It limits our life. As if there were an inherent tension
between preserving life and living it. Freud poses the same tension here. Either we are
totally absorbed by the wish to survive, to keep life intact, and therefore
limit our existence to the bare minimum , or else we are willing to risk it
to some extent in order to make it more interesting, more vital and
valuable. Our usual world , according to Bataille, is characterized by the duration of
things, by the future function, rather than by the present . Things are
constituted as separate objects in view of future time . This is one reason for the
threat of death : it ruins value where value is only assured through duration .
It also exposes the intimate order of life that is continuously hidden from
us in the order of things where life runs its normal course. Man is afraid of death as
soon as he enters the system of projects that is the order of things (The Festival 312; 214). Sacrifice is the opposite of production

Death is not so much a negation of life, as it is an affirmation of


the intimate order of life, which is opposed to the normal order of things
and is therefore rejected. The power of death signifies that this real
world can only have a neutral image of life []. Death reveals life in its
plenitude (309; 212). Batailles neutral image of life is the equivalent of
Freuds shallow and empty life. What Freud denounces is a life trapped
within the cowardly economical system of considerations . It is precisely
the economy of value and future-oriented calculations that stand
in opposition to the insertion of death into life. Who is to take the sons place with his mother,
and accumulation.

the husbands with his wife, the fathers with his children. Of course there is an emotional side to the story, but it is

this insistence on replacement that leaves us on the side of survival and

stops us sometimes from living the present . The need for duration , in
the words of Bataille, conceals life from us (The Festival 309; 212). For both authors, when death is
left out, life as it is is false and superficial .

Utilitarian calculability justifies mass atrocity and turns its own


end
Weizman 11-professor of visual and spatial cultures at Goldsmiths, University of London (Eyal Weizman,
2011, The Least of All Possible Evils: Humanitarian Violence from Arendt to Gaza, pp 8-10) The

theological
origins of the lesser evil argument cast a long shadow on the present. In fact the idiom
has become so deeply ingrained, and is invoked in such a staggeringly diverse set
of contexts from individual situational ethics and international relations, to
attempts to govern the economics of violence in the context of the war on terror
and the efforts of human rights and humanitarian activists to manoeuvre through
the paradoxes of aid that it seems to have altogether taken the place previously
reserved for the good. Moreover, the very evocation of the good seems to
everywhere invoke the utopian tragedies of modernity, in which evil seemed lurking
in a horrible manichaeistic inversion. If no hope is offered in the future, all that remains is to insure
ourselves against the risks that it poses, to moderate and lessen the collateral effects of necessary acts, and tend

In relation to the war on terror, the terms of the lesser


evil were most clearly and prominently articulated by former human rights scholar and leader of
Canadas Liberal Party Michael Ignatieff. In his book The Lesser Evil, Ignatieff suggested that in
balancing liberty against security liberal states establish mechanisms to regulate
the breach of some human rights and legal norms, and allow their security services
to engage in forms of extrajudicial violence which he saw as lesser evils in order
to fend off or minimize potential greater evils, such as terror attacks on civilians of
western states.11 If governments need to violate rights in a terrorist emergency, this should be done, he
thought, only as an exception and according to a process of adversarial scrutiny. Exceptions, Ignatieff states,
do not destroy the rule but save it, provided that they are temporary, publicly
justified, and deployed as a last resort .12 The lesser evil emerges here as a
pragmatist compromise, a tolerated sin that functions as the very justification for
the notion of exception. State violence in this model takes part in a necro-economy
in which various types of destructive measure are weighed in a utilitarian fashion,
not only in relation to the damage they produce, but to the harm they purportedly
prevent and even in relation to the more brutal measures they may help restrain. In
this logic, the problem of contemporary state violence resembles indeed an all-toohuman version of the mathematical minimum problem of the divine calculations
previously mentioned, one tasked with determining the smallest level of violence
necessary to avert the greater harm. For the architects of contemporary war this balance is trapped
to those who have suffered as a result.

between two poles: keeping violence at a low enough level to limit civilian suffering, and at a level high enough to
bring a decisive end to the war and bring peace.13 More recent works by legal scholars and legal advisers to states
and militaries have sought to extend the inherent elasticity of the system of legal exception proposed by Ignatieff

Lesser evil arguments are now used


to defend anything from targeted assassinations and mercy killings, house
demolitions, deportation, torture,15 to the use of (sometimes) non-lethal chemical
weapons, the use of human shields, and even the intentional targeting of some
civilians if it could save more innocent lives than they cost .16 In one of its more
into ways of rewriting the laws of armed conflict themselves.14

macabre moments it was suggested that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima might
also be tolerated under the defence of the lesser evil. Faced with a humanitarian A bomb, one might wonder what, in fact, might come under the definition of a greater
evil. Perhaps it is time for the differential accounting of the lesser evil to replace the mechanical bureaucracy of
the banality of evil as the idiom to describe the most extreme manifestations of violence. Indeed, it is through
this use of the lesser evil that societies that see themselves as democratic can
maintain regimes of occupation and neo-colonization . Beyond state agents, those practitioners
of lesser evils, as this book claims, must also include the members of independent nongovernmental organizations
that make up the ecology of contemporary war and crisis zones. The lesser evil is the argument of the humanitarian
agent that seeks military permission to provide medicines and aid in places where it is in fact the duty of the

The lesser evil is often the


justification of the military officer who attempts to administer life (and death) in an
enlightened manner; it is sometimes, too, the brief of the security contractor who
introduces new and more efficient weapons and spatio-technological means of
domination, and advertises them as humanitarian technology. In these cases the
logic of the lesser evil opens up a thick political field of participation belonging
together otherwise opposing fields of action, to the extent that it might obscure the
fundamental moral differences between these various groups. But, even according
to the terms of an economy of losses and gains, the conception of the lesser evil
risks becoming counterproductive: less brutal measures are also those that may be
more easily naturalized, accepted and tolerated and hence more frequently used,
with the result that a greater evil may be reached cumulatively, Such observations amongst
occupying military power to do so, thus saving the military limited resources.

other paradoxes are unpacked in one of the most powerful challenges to ideas such as Ignatieffs Adi Ophirs

Ophir developed an ethical system that is


similarly not grounded in a search for the good but the systemic logic of an
economy of violence the possibility of a lesser means and the risk of more damage
but insists that questions of violence are forever unpredictable and will always
escape the capacity to calculate them . Inherent in Ophirs insistence on the
necessity of calculating is, he posits, the impossibility of doing so. The demand of
his ethics are grounded in this impossibility .
philosophical essay The Order of Evils. In this book

-(if they concede util) Yo theyve conceded that is util bad


theres no analysis as to why their impact is worse in the world
of the af, which means we win that our impacts take
precedence to any other, and we still have value to life. Dont
let them bring this up in the 2nr they had 13 minutes in the
block. No new in the 2.
Note: if they concede util make ^^^ your o/v

-They say even if we lose util debate conditions are still


worsened by the d/as impacts. but weve already won ! d.

Aps intentionally create, and sustain the otherization of muslims. They are doing this to rationalize the large increase in securitization, and
surveillance that the state uses. The government uses this surveillance to infiltrate and destroy activist groups that resist white colonial
power. Without the plan the FBI gives other government agencies the ability to use surveillance as a tool to seek out threats, but there are
no actual threats that they survey. Our Kundnani evidence even says that right-wing extremist have been involved in 15x more terrorist
attacks than muslims in the past 2 decades, and almost all muslim terrorist attacks were provoked by the FBIs aps.

STOCK ISSUES FOR NOVICES

Significance
This answers the "why" of debate. All advantages and disadvantages
to the status quo and of the plan are evaluated under significance.
Significance is derived from calculating between advantages and
disadvantages, whereas significant policy changes are determined by
how much the policy itself changed (rather than how good or bad the
effects are). So significance is about the effects of the plan.

Solvency
The mechanics of the plan itself are defined in solvency. What it
causes and why. Here the harms are often demonstrated to be solved
by the plan, or the link to new advantages are shown. Without
solvency, a plan is useless. Thus, the affirmative loses a debate
without solvency, no matter how well it described problems of the
status quo.

Topicality
The affirmative case has affirm the resolution, or else it obviously
doesnt reside under the resolution which makes it unfair for the
negative team since your aff could be literally anything. Most affs will
be topical, as is ours, but there will always be that bell-air team that
reads weird stuff.

Harms
Harms are a way of quantifying the problems or short-comings of the status quo.
They give reasons why we shouldnt keep the status qou as it is.

Inherency
Inherency: Inherent barriers as to why the plan cant be passed in the status quo

-The FBI can use APs to do whatever they want them to do, and the Government
has basically allowed for this to happen because no one is stopping them from
doing it
-Not only will your plan overcome inherent barriers but also will pass, but you
really dont have to focus on the plan happening more if it happens, because you
need to win that its absolutely necessary for whatever reason.

Card Structure
Evidence in debates is organized into units called cards. Cards
are designed to condense an author's argument so that
debaters have an easy way to access the information. A card
is composed of three parts: the tag, the cite, and the body.
The tag is the debater's summary of the argument presented
in the body. Its usually only one or two sentences. The cite,
the author, date of publication, journal, title, etc.. In round
youll just read the authors last name, and date for a citation.
Some teams will also read the author's qualifications if they
wish to emphasize this information. The body of a card is
often underlined or highlighted in order to eliminate
unnecessary or redundant sentences when the card is read in
a round. So again, In a round, the tag is read first, followed by
the cite and the body.
- Next is the argument structure of a card
- Claim: a claim is a statement you are advancing as true. The claim is
usually summarized in the cards tag. Even when youre not reading
evidence, a claim is any declarative statement that you are trying to
establish as true within the debate.
-

Warrant: Warrants are what you use to create legitimacy for your claims.
They are the reasons why the claim is true. You should dedicate a
substantial amount of your time to debating about warrants

Impact: The impacts are why someone should care about your argument.
Impacts connect small pieces of the debate to the broader picture. They
help the judge decide what decision is best.

Other case stuf


Adv 1
EXT Kundnani 12 evidence stating that Provocation is the
foundation stone for a police state the FBI racially and
ideologically profiles and targets, infiltrating groups that resist
white colonial power. Kundnani does a really good job
explaining this by showing how informants can be used at no
expense and have empirically been used to break up social
justice movements, the exact example cited is the COINTEL
program infiltrating the civil rights movement and Puerto
Rican nationalists.
EXT Kundnani 12 evidence stating that the surveillance
apparatus functions as racialized totalitarianism under the
guise of a liberal democracy; the fact that there is now
questioning and uncertainty within Muslim American
communities that promotes self-censorship is blunt thoughtpolicing

AT: FBIs racial profiling


They say that the af cant gain access to solvency
because it doesnt include the entirety of FBI operations
against racial profiling. Even if the af doesnt address the
entirety of the FBI, only the absence of agent
provocateurs can uniquely solve for terror threat
construction. Extend the first piece of Kundnani evidence
in the 2nd advantage. This card cites the instance in which
the FBI itself came up with the idea to bomb the DC Metro
station, and then after the FBI agent provocateurs
encouraged a Muslim to act on it, they beefed up security
and used it as a way to justify an increase in surveillance.
This gives way to unnecessary terror threat construction,
because the threat in question would not have existed
without it being carried out in part or constructed by
agent provocateurs.
AND Extend our Kundnani 12 evidence stating the FBIs
choice of whom to target via terrorist threat construction
sustains racial violence in the War on Terror. Kundnani
does a really good job by comparing the death numbers of
those victim to Far Right terrorist acts vs Muslim American
terrorist acts and how even though the Far Right is
substantially more, because Muslim Americans are
deemed as a special risk to America, the FBI targets them.
This means that because of terror threat construction,
that is what stems the racial aspect of what a terrorist
looks like or the characteristics of a terrorist that
drives the FBI to target in the first place, therefore by
solving (which our plan does) the terror threat
construction, the FBI will no longer be able to target in the
first place.
AND cross-apply the Kundnani 12 evidence stating that
provocation is the foundation stone for a police state and
that the police state of the FBI is what ideologically
profiles and targets groups. This means that because
provocation is what drives profiling and targeting, the af

garners solvency for provocation, then, prohibiting the


use of agent provocateurs uniquely solves profiling and
targeting of the entirety of the surveillance apparatus.

Durable Fiat (Pretty Gucci)


Durable FIAT is good, and FIAT solves for the plan
enforcement. When plan goes into efect, its implemented
fully, allowing it to be enforced without any
circumvention. More importantly whether or not plan is
later overturned is irrelevant as far as policy debate is
concerned - the purpose of policy debate is to test a
fictional world in where the plan is deemed a good or bad
idea. Since they havent given a single reason why the af
is a bad idea, whether or not it will be later overturned
doesn't matter because the benefits to plan outweigh the
ramifications of not doing plan.

Racial Profiling Extensions

Racial Profiling Link


FBI Agent provocateurs specifically target Muslim
communities for unwarranted, illegal surveillance
Freeland 11 [Bridget, Muslims Say FBI Informant Dealt Drugs While Snooping on
Believers' Sex Lives, 2/24/11, Courthouse News,
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/02/24/34410.htm]
LOS ANGELES (CN) - In a federal class action, Muslims claim the FBI hired an "agent
provocateur" to infiltrate mosques and "indiscriminately collect personal information
on hundreds and perhaps thousands of innocent Muslim Americans in Southern
California." The class claims the agents had their snitch provide illegal drugs to
Muslims and snoop on their sex lives, and that the fruitless "dragnet investigation"
did not end until "members of the Muslim communities of Southern California
reported the informant to the police because of his violent rhetoric, and ultimately
obtained a restraining order against him." Represented by the ACLU and Council on
American-Islam Relations, the three named plaintiffs say the FBI's agent
provocateur's "violent rhetoric" about "jihad and armed conflict" disrupted their
religious practice. The class claims the FBI has been profiling Muslim communities
since Sept. 11, 2001, and requested interviews with hundreds of Muslims, "often by
sending FBI agents to appear unannounced" to their homes or workplaces, to
question them about religious practices. This despite the fact that in 2006, the FBI's
Assistant Director for the Los Angeles area, Stephen Tidwell, assured a Muslim
group that the FBI would never send an undercover informant to spy on believers.
But in July 2006, FBI agents Kevin Armstrong and Paul Allen directed undercover
informant Craig Monteilh to infiltrate the mosques in Southern California and paid
him $6,000 to $11,000 per month create video and audio recordings of Muslim
activities, the plaintiffs claim. They add that Monteilh was provided with
"sophisticated audio and video recording devices." Monteilh then publicly declared
his Muslim faith during a prayer in front of hundreds of members of the Islamic
Center of Irvine (ICOI), and immersed himself in the religion, the class says.
Monteilh went to 10 mosques in the area to interact with followers, and attended up
to four mosques in one day. Armstrong and Allen ordered him to "gather as much
information on as many people in the Muslim community as possible," the class
claims. Armstrong and Allen told Monteilh "that they could get in a lot of trouble if
people found out what surveillance they had in the mosques, which Monteilh
understood to mean that they did not have warrants," the complaint states. It
continues: "Nonetheless, Agent Armstrong told Monteilh that the FBI had every
mosque in the area under surveillance - including both the ones he went to and
the ones he didn't." Halfway through the 75-page complaint, the class claims:
"Agents Armstrong and Allen were well aware that many of the surveillance
tools that they had given Monteilh were being used illegally . Agent
Armstrong once told Monteilh that while warrants were needed to conduct most
surveillance for criminal investigations, 'National security is different. Kevin is God.'
Agent Armstrong also told Monteilh more than once that they did not always need
warrants, and that even if they could not use the information in court because they
did not have a warrant, it was still useful to have the information. He said that they

could attribute the information to a confidential source if they needed to." The class
claims: "Apart from the electronic surveillance program, Agents Armstrong and Allen
also directed their surveillance at people on the basis of their religion by
instructing Monteilh to look for and identify to them people with certain religious
backgrounds or traits, such as anyone who studied fiqh (a strand of Islamic law
concerning morals and etiquette), who was an imam or sheikh; who went on Hajj;
who played a leadership role at a mosque or in the Muslim community; who
expressed sympathies to mujahideen; who was a 'white' Muslim; or who went to an
Islamic school overseas." They also told Monteilh to look particularly for people
attracted younger Muslims, and to discuss extreme Islamic attitudes and leaders to
observe people's reactions, the class claims. Monteilh was ordered to work under
cover as a "fitness consultant," and, following orders, he "worked out with Muslims
in various gyms around the Orange County area and elicited a wide variety of
information, including travel plans, political and religious views," the class claims.
He collected names, phone numbers, email addresses and license plate numbers of
mosque members and turned them over to his handlers, the class says. The agents
sought to collect incriminating information about certain Muslims - "such
as immigration issues, sexual activity, business problems, or crimes like
drug use. Agents Armstrong and Allen instructed Monteilh to pay attention to
people's problems, to talk about and record them, including marital problems,
business problems, and petty criminal issues. Agents Armstrong and Allen on
several occasions talked about different individuals that they believed might be
susceptible to rumors about their sexual orientation, so that they could be
persuaded to become informants through the threat of such rumors being started,"
the complaint states. The agents told Monteilh that "everybody knows somebody,"
and then "explained" what that meant: "They explained that if someone is from
Afghanistan, that meant that they would likely have some distant member of their
family or acquaintance who has some connection with the Taliban. If they are from
Lebanon, it might be Hezbollah; if they are from Palestine, it might be Hamas. By
finding out what connections they might have to these terrorist groups, no matter
how distant, they could threaten the individuals and pressure them to provide
information, or could justify additional surveillance. "Agents Armstrong and Allen
also instructed Monteilh to engage in acts that would build his reputation as a
devout Muslim who had access to black market items. On one occasion, Agents
Armstrong and Allen instructed Monteilh to provide Vicodin to a person whose father
was sick in a foreign country. On another occasion, Agent Allen instructed Monteilh
to provide prescription anabolic steroids to another two individuals to similarly
further his credibility, which he did." In early 2007, the agents told Monteilh "to start
asking more pointedly about jihad and armed conflict, then to more openly suggest
his own willingness to engage in violence," according to the complaint. "Pursuant to
these instructions, in one-on-one conversations, Monteilh began asking people
about violent jihad, expressing frustration over the oppression of Muslims around
the world, pressing them for their views, and implying that he might be willing or
able to take action. "In about May 2007, on instructions from his handlers, Monteilh
told a number of individuals that he believed it was his duty as a Muslim to take
violence actions, and that he had access to weapons. Many members of the Muslim
community at ICOI then reported these statements to community leaders, including

Hussam Ayloush. Ayloush both called the FBI to report the statements and
instructed the individuals who had heard the statements to report them to the Irvine
Police Department, which they did. "As a community, ICOI also brought an action
for a restraining order against Monteilh to bar him from the mosque. A California
Superior Court granted the restraining order in June 2007." Monteilh's identity was
eventually revealed, "first in court documents where the FBI and local law
enforcement revealed his role, and then through his own statements which were
reported widely in the press," the class claims. Monteilh sued the FBI for $10
million in January 2010. As Courthouse News reported at the time, Monteilh claims
he "was arrested in December 2007 and 'forced under the color of authority by the
FBI and its agents, to plead guilty to grand theft, suffer a felony conviction, and
endure sixteen months in prison for work performed at the direction of the FBI.'" He
also claimed that he was endangered by being placed in the general population in
prison after it was revealed that he was an FBI snitch. In the new class action,
named plaintiff Sheikh Yassir Fazaga, an imam with the Orange County Islamic
Foundation, says that he can no longer counsel congregants at the mosque because
they fear surveillance. Fazaga claims that since having contact with Monteilh, he
"has also been subjected to secondary screening and searches upon return to the
U.S. from various international trips, being held up between 45 minutes and three
hours most times he travels." The complaint states: "By targeting Muslims in the
Orange County and Los Angeles areas for surveillance because of their religion and
religious practice, the FBI's operation not only undermined the trust between law
enforcement and the Southern California Muslim communities, it also violated the
Constitution's fundamental guarantee of government neutrality towards all
religions." It adds that the 14-month "dragnet investigation did not result in even a
single conviction related to counterterrorism." "Approximately 500,000 Muslims live
in Southern California, more than 120,000 of them in Orange County, making the
area home to the second-largest population of Muslims in the United States," the
complaint states. The class demands damages from the FBI, its Director Robert
Mueller, Assistant Director Steven Martinez, Agents Armstrong and Allen and three
other agents, for violations the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments, the Privacy Act,
the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
The class also wants destruction of the information the FBI obtained illegally. Its lead
counsel is Peter Bibring with the ACLU of Southern California.

Far Right Not Profiled


Almost half of Islamic terrorism cases involved an agent
provocateur attacks from the Far-Right are rarely built
through stings.
Braine 15 (Braine, Naomi. "Terror Network or Lone Wolf? | Political Research Associates." Political Research
Associates. Political Research Associates, 19 June 2015. Web. 19 July 2015.
<http://www.politicalresearch.org/2015/06/19/terror-network-or-lone-wolf/#sthash.962f0kfC.dpbs>. Naomi Braine is
an Associate Professor in the Sociology Department at Brooklyn College, CUNY, and a lifelong activist in struggles
for social justice. Her political and intellectual work has addressed mass incarceration, the War on Drugs/drug
policy, HIV and collective action, and, more recently, the War on Terror.)
The disparate treatment of the two groups of alleged terrorists begins before charges are ever filed, with how the
two are investigated. Covert surveillance is, by definition, difficult to prove unless specific prosecutions or other
evidence bring it into public view. A report by the New York University School of Law20 describes systematic
surveillance of Muslim communities by the NYPD, FBI, and other law enforcement entities in the U.S. The

No
evidence exists of similar routine surveillance of communities with significant rightwing activity, and reports and other materials about the Right produced by the FBI,
DHS, and Congressional Research Service all emphasize the right to freedom of
speech and expression, including the importance of differentiating beliefs from
actions. Based on available case summaries, the majority of domestic terrorism
prosecutions occur after the perpetrator has taken concrete action or as a
consequence of other law enforcement contact, which suggests a low level of
ongoing surveillance of right-wing movements. The New America Foundation data
indicate that 46.8 percent of Islamic terrorism cases involve use of an informant but
only 27.5 percent of non-Islamic cases do.21 According to a report by Columbia
University Law School and Human Rights Watch, 50 percent of federal
counterterrorism convictions resulted from informant-based cases, and almost 30
percent were stings.22 (A sting refers to a case in which an informant or
undercover agent actively developed the case, leading defendants to escalate their
activity and often providing explosives or other materials.) The Columbia Law
School report found that all but four of the high-profile homegrown terrorism plots of
the last 10 years were FBI sting operations. While informants play a role in domestic
cases, there is little recent evidence of right-wing cases being built through stings
(although there is some history of FBI stings with environmental activists in the
early 2000s). A 2009 case in Newburgh, NY, that became known as the Newburgh Four23, 24 provides an
widespread use of informants in homegrown terrorism cases also indicates an ongoing undercover presence.

example of an FBI sting operation. Newburgh is a small, formerly industrial city about 60 miles north of New York
City, with a substantial African-American population and relatively high poverty rate. In 2011, the city was declared

In the winter of 2009, an FBI informant developed a


relationship with an openly antisemitic Muslim man who had a history of drug
addiction. The informant offered him $250,000 plus additional luxuries if he would
gather a group of Muslims to carry out a terrorist attack. The man recruited three
the murder capital of New York state.

friends, each of whom had significant financial needs. Each received small amounts
of cash during the time the informant guided them in developing a plan to attack
Stewart Air National Guard Base and bomb a local synagogue, using explosives and
a vehicle provided by the informant. The men were arrested after the informant
delivered the men and the explosives to cars provided by the FBI. All four were
charged with conspiracy, attempt to use weapons of mass destruction, and plotting
to kill U.S. government employees, and were sentenced to 25 years in prison. A
judge rejected an appeal based on entrapment, accepting the governments
rationale that the men would have eventually committed terrorism on their owna
theory called radicalization that has been used in multiple prosecutions of accused
Muslim terrorists. In contrast, the participation of informants and undercover agents
in right-wing cases has been much more limited, and does not involve either
initiating a plot or being the only source of weapons or explosive materials . In 2002,
Larry Raugust, an anti-government militant well known to law enforcement, gave an
explosive device to an undercover agent; he ended up pleading guilty to 15 counts
of making bombs, and served just over five years in a federal prison.25 Similarly, in
2005, Gabriel Carafa, a man with ties to the neonazi World Church of the Creator
and a racist organization called The Hated, was arrested after he and another man
asked an informant to build them a bomb. They were charged with selling 11 guns
illegally to police informants and providing 60 pounds of urea for use in building a
bomb; Carafa was sentenced to seven years and his accomplice to 10. 26 In both of
these cases, not only did the defendants acquire their own weapons and explosive
materials, but the men had extensive histories of right-wing activism. The Internet plays
an increasingly central role in the development and communication of beliefs, as well as law enforcement
monitoring of potentially violent activity. However, the consequences of posting beliefs that signal the potential for
violence varies considerably by religion. Adel Daoud was a socially isolated 17-year-old Muslim boy in suburban
Chicago who found refuge online. In 2012, he began to post on message boards and write emails relating to violent
jihad, at which point the FBI drew him into planning an attack with an undercover agent. In 2013, the agent drove
Daoud to a jeep filled with fake explosives, and he was arrested after he tried to trigger the explosives outside a bar
they had agreed to target. He was charged with attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction, and the case is
still in court.27 Compare that to the 2010 case of 26-year-old Justin Carl Moose, who described himself as the
Christian counterpart to Osama bin Laden and posted threats of violence against abortion providers along with
information about the use of explosives on his Facebook page. The FBI were tipped off, and Moose pled guilty to
distributing information on the manufacture and use of explosives. He was sentenced to 30 months in prison and
was released early, despite having demonstrated knowledge of explosives and his alignment with a movement that
has an extensive track record of murders and destruction of medical facilities. 28

Right-wing violence is seen as individual while Muslim


American violence is assumed to be involved as part of a
worldwide terror network.
Braine 15 (Braine, Naomi. "Terror Network or Lone Wolf? | Political Research Associates." Political Research
Associates. Political Research Associates, 19 June 2015. Web. 19 July 2015.
<http://www.politicalresearch.org/2015/06/19/terror-network-or-lone-wolf/#sthash.962f0kfC.dpbs>. Naomi Braine is
an Associate Professor in the Sociology Department at Brooklyn College, CUNY, and a lifelong activist in struggles
for social justice. Her political and intellectual work has addressed mass incarceration, the War on Drugs/drug
policy, HIV and collective action, and, more recently, the War on Terror.)

While the discourse of terrorism situates Muslims accused of violence as part of a


worldwide terror network, their right-wing counterparts are usually depicted as
Lone Wolves, acting alone. As a result, the social and organizational contexts for
right-wing violence are systematically erased. When the authors of the April 2009
DHS report on right-wing extremism put out a draft version for review, the Office of
Civil Rights and Civil Liberties argued for a narrow definition of right-wing
extremist that would be limited to persons known to have committed violence
themselves and exclude those who were members of or who donated money to
organizations with well-known histories of violence, such as the KKK.47 The DHS
report maintained a broader definition that included groups and social movements,
but the overall trend has been toward viewing perpetrators of right-wing violence as
isolated actors. The February 2015 DHS report on right-wing extremists, for example, focused exclusively on
the sovereign citizen movement, which was described as engaging in low levels of often spontaneous violence that
take a highly individualized and non-symbolic form, such as a threat or assault towards a specific individual law
enforcement officer or government representative.48 For example, the DHS report describes an incident in which a
sovereign citizen in Alaska conspired to murder an Internal Revenue Service officer and a judge who oversaw legal

The individualized Lone Wolf model of viewing right-wing


violence reflects an intentional change in strategy by right-wing militant groups. In
proceedings against him.

1987, the government indicted a core group of 14 visible national leaders within right-wing militant movements, all
associated with the 1983 Aryan World Congress, on charges of conspiracy to overthrow the U.S. government. They
were acquitted at trial, but the experience led one of the men, Louis Beam, to republish an essay he had written

Over the past 10-15


years, most incidents of right-wing violence have been carried out by individuals or
small groups, in keeping with the philosophy of leaderless resistance and Lone Wolf
action. However, a decision to act alone does not mean acting outside of social
movement frameworks, philosophies, and networks. Research has shown that, at
the time they engage in political violence, the majority of so-called Lone Wolves are
over 30 years old. A comparison of case descriptions shows that many have had
significant histories of participation in hard-right movements.50 Preliminary findings from a
calling for leaderless resistance as a way to evade infiltration and surveillance. 49

study of individual radicalization point to the importance of social ties with other militants as a key element of the
radicalization process, again casting doubt on the model of the isolated actor. 51 Another study found that
organizations whose members commit violence have higher levels of interconnection with other movement
organizations than groups not associated with violence. 52 The findings from these two studies fit with the age and

movement experience of Lone Wolves while challenging the model of the isolated actor. Scott Roeder, Dr. Tillers
assassin, saw himself as acting as part of a movement even if he was not representing a specific organization.

Politically, the organizational and national contexts for right-wing activists disappear
in the focus on the individual, while the individuality and immediate social context
for the actions of Muslims are rendered invisible by the focus on the global.

AT: FBI circumvents policy


First, they say theres no 100% certainty the FBI will
comply durable fiat solves this, and Durable FIAT is good
for debate. FIAT solves for the enforcement. When the
plan goes into efect, its implemented fully, allowing it to
be enforced without any circumvention, but more
importantly whether or not the plan is later overturned is
irrelevant as far as policy debate is concerned - the
purpose of policy debate is to test a fictional world in
where the plan is deemed a good or bad idea. Since they
havent given a single reason why the af is a bad idea
then whether or not it will be later overturned doesn't
matter because the benefits to the plan outweigh the
ramifications of not doing plan.
Second the government is willing to comply anyways
Extend our ACLU evidence once the policy is passed, the
FBI will be pressured by the public as the issue of
surveillance has come into more careful scrutiny in the
eyes of civilians. And this is crucial for the FBIs image as
they engage and/or interfere with issues regarding other
countries and their surveillance. Moreover, the federal
judicial review checks true implementation of the plan as
well by creating another area of pressure from within the
government.

AT: Regulations Check


Extend ACLU lol go ham
Extend our first piece of Kundnani evidence that says there have been at least 49
incidents where an FBI AP was caught thoroughly provoking a terrorist attack, so
even if there are regulations they obviously arent working since aps are still
profiling races, and ethnicities with harmful intent. Passing the plan is the only
way to eliminate any chance of racial profiling.

There are no current successful regulations against racial


profiling
Aziz 11 (Sahar Aziz is associate professor at Texas A&M School of Law where she
teaches national security and civil rights law. Aziz is the author of Caught in a
Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America. She formerly
served as a senior policy adviser to the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at
the US Department of Homeland Security. Caught in a Preventive Dragnet:
Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America, 2011)
Prohibitions against racial profiling in law enforcement do not apply to religious or
ethnic origin profiling. n40 Therefore, the government profiles on account of religion
and ethnic origin in counterterrorism enforcement with no legal recourse for those
targeted. n41 Further, the Federal Bureau of Investigation [*439] ("FBI") diverts
resources to "map" U.S. communities based on religious, ethnic, and national-origin
characteristics, identifying particular "Arab-American and Muslim communities" as
"potential terrorist recruitment grounds." n42 The following cases demonstrate the
problematic relationship between counterterrorism enforcement and religious and
political activity.

Govt Action Key


The racial violence aps are creating is a social problem, and
governmental action must be taken immediately
Witte 14 (Rob Witte is a political scientist and has more than 25 years of
experience working in the government, academic, public and commercial sectors.
Racist Violence and the State: A Comparative Analysis of Britain, France and the
Netherlands, Routledge, 9/11/14, Print.)
Phase B: racist violence as a social problem When different groups in society
perceive racist violence as constituting a social problem, state action does not
automatically follow. Due to the marginal position of most victimised groups, the
attention of the public at large, and a widely shared public concern that state action
is taken, are essential (Cobb and Elder, 1983: 85). This may be achieved by
activities designed to attract public attention, and by formulating demands. Public
awareness and pressure on state authorities in favour of these demands may be
increased by organising demonstrations, publishing reports, exerting direct
influence on decision-makers, and so on. Of course, this does not mean that racist
violence is placed on the public, or even the formal, agenda after every
demonstration. Often demonstrations and other activities receive very little (media)
attention; if they do, their importance is often trivialised. Sometimes, these
activities do attract a lot of attention, only to be portrayed as a danger in
themselves with effects contrary to those intended. This seems to be the case
especially when state authorities, and for instance the mainstream media and the
public, disagree with the demands of the activists. Small disturbances during these
activities may even be enough to criminalise the activists, and to depoliticise and
trivialise their demands. Examples in the following chapters will include
demonstrations in which the demonstrators, partly as a result of over-policing, were
perceived as constituting the main problem. instead of the issues of racism or racist
violence against which they were demonstrating. Registering racist incidents,
publishing criticism of the (lack of) responses to incidents, and publishing reports
are other ways of increasing prcssure and drawing attention to racist violence.
Sometimes this increase in attention and pressure is realised by internal actors,
such as politicians and civil servants. All of these activities may contribute to a
perception of racist violence as a social problem in local or national society.

Civil Liberties
Agent provocateurs destroy civil liberties no matter who they
provoke
Aziz 12 (Sahar Aziz is associate professor at Texas A&M School of Law where she
teaches national security and civil rights law. Aziz is the author of Caught in a
Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America. She formerly
served as a senior policy adviser to the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at
the US Department of Homeland Security. http://www.truthout.org/opinion/item/11043-creeping-counterterrorism-from-muslims-to-politicalprotesters)
The New York Police Department (NYPD) and other police departments
conducted mass group arrests without having probable cause to arrest the
group. Agent provocateurs infiltrated the Occupy movement to disturb
and disrupt civil political assembly. Similar to mosque congregants who made
like complaints, protesters accused the police of entrapping young people
who were mentally disabled, drug addicts or who had just experienced a
traumatic personal experience. Like their Muslim counterparts, Occupy
leaders were subjected to hostile interrogations by law enforcement
agents visiting their homes before a protest. The billions of dollars spent
on increasing our government's domestic surveillance capabilities, ostensibly to
protect Americans from "Islamist terrorists," is now used to spy on
political protesters. In New York City alone, over 3,000 cameras have been
installed to feed into a control center housed in a secret location, and $150 million
surveillance systems allowed the NYPD to closely monitor Occupy protests, identify
targets for infiltration and ultimately chill political activity. Hence the same
playbook used to frighten Muslims from critiquing American policies or
attending their mosques has now become the one used against the
Occupy protesters. And the same national security powers expanded after
9/11 under the guise of keeping us safe from the Muslims are now
enforced against political dissenters who challenge the economic
inequities ailing our nation. By believing in the fallacy of the "Muslim
terrorist other," we weakened our resolve to protect fundamental
American values. As a result, post-9/11 counterterrorism authorities are
used to spy, infiltrate, entrap, arrest and aggressively prosecute any
protesters. When we allow governments to forfeit our civil rights to
protect "us" from "them," we lose sight of how quickly we can become the
"them." So, how many more Americans must be subjected to civil liberties
violations before we realize that no one is immune from creeping
counterterrorism?

Civil liberties are more important than counterterror and crime


Jones 15 (Jeffrey writes for the Washington times Assistant Director at Hoover
Institution research fellow - June 10, 2015 http://www.gallup.com/poll/183548/americans-say-liberties-trump-antiterrorism.aspx)

The new USA Freedom Act was passed in a public opinion environment very
different from that of the 2001 Patriot Act. Once the heightened concern about
terrorism evident in the first several months after 9/11 faded, Americans
began to place a greater emphasis on protecting civil liberties when
thinking about preventing further acts of terrorism . Importantly, those
shifts in public opinion occurred long before Snowden exposed the vast
government program of collecting data on Americans' electronic
communications. And Americans continue to place a greater emphasis on
civil liberties even as concern about terrorism has risen amid the growing
threat of ISIS. The change in the public opinion climate, which is reflected
in the views of elected representatives, may help explain why the newly
passed USA Freedom Act pulls back some of the powers the Patriot Act
provided to the government in its efforts to prevent terrorism.

There is no balance we need to prefer civil liberties to


everything. Protecting them increases security and
international relations.
Dorfman and Zudziak 14 (Mary Dudziak, Zack Dorfman Duziak is a leading
historian, Attended Yale, multiple awards for her work. Zack Dorfman, senior editor
of Carnegie Council's journal, Ethics & International Affairs. Attended University of
Chicago http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/publications/articles_papers_reports/0230.html)
The discussion about war and civil liberties often focuses on whether the
right "balance" has been achieved between liberty and security. But there
is no way of measuring this, and we have a long history of security
excesses, such as surveillance of U.S. civil rights leaders during the 1960s.
More importantly, rights and security are not oppositional, at least not
always. Sometimes protecting rights enhances securityby strengthening
patriotism and commitment to war aims. Sometimes, as happened during
the Cold War, protecting rights is important to the way peoples of the
world view the United States, so domestic rights protection can aid
international relations. It is better to see rights and security as two values
that should be pursued in relation to each other, rather than as a tradeof. And because there is ongoing projection of military force and the ongoing focus of
security in American life, there's no "peacetime" to serve as a civil liberties reset button. Just
as the nation is perpetually focused on security, we must also be perpetually

focused on maintaining constitutional liberty. Because the nation we're


securing is a constitutional democracy, full "security" should mean
securing constitutional rights.

Civil liberties > anti terrorism


Jones 15 (Jeffrey writes for the Washington times Assistant Director at Hoover
Institution research fellow - June 10, 2015 http://www.gallup.com/poll/183548/americans-say-liberties-trump-antiterrorism.aspx)

The new USA Freedom Act was passed in a public opinion environment very
different from that of the 2001 Patriot Act. Once the heightened concern about
terrorism evident in the first several months after 9/11 faded, Americans
began to place a greater emphasis on protecting civil liberties when
thinking about preventing further acts of terrorism . Importantly, those
shifts in public opinion occurred long before Snowden exposed the vast
government program of collecting data on Americans' electronic
communications. And Americans continue to place a greater emphasis on
civil liberties even as concern about terrorism has risen amid the growing
threat of ISIS. The change in the public opinion climate, which is reflected
in the views of elected representatives, may help explain why the newly
passed USA Freedom Act pulls back some of the powers the Patriot Act
provided to the government in its efforts to prevent terrorism.

Even in wartime civil liberties should come first


ShareAmerica 15 (April 6, 2015 ShareAmerica is managed by the Bureau of
International Information Programs within the U.S. Department of State. https://share.america.gov/civil-liberties-wartime/)
First, the United States has a long and unfortunate history of overreacting
to the perceived dangers of wartime. In each instance, we allowed our
fears to get the better of us. Second, it is often argued that in light of the
sacrifices we ask citizens (especially soldiers) to make in time of war, it is small
price to ask others to surrender some of their peacetime freedoms to help the war
effort. As the Supreme Court argued in Korematsu, hardships are part of war, and
war is an aggregation of hardships. This is a seductive, but dangerous argument.
To fight a war successfully, it is necessary for soldiers to risk their lives. But it is
not necessarily necessary for others to surrender their freedoms. That
necessity must be convincingly demonstrated, not merely presumed. And
this is especially true when, as is usually the case, the individuals whose
rights are sacrificed are not those who make the laws, but minorities,
dissidents and noncitizens. In those circumstances, we are making a
decision to sacrifice their rights not a very prudent way to balance
the competing interests.

APs and other counterterror operations destroy Muslim


communities and civil liberties they also fuel public racism
and discriminations. Civil liberties hold this country together
Aziz 12 (Sahar Aziz is associate professor at Texas A&M School of Law where she
teaches national security and civil rights law. Aziz is the author of Caught in a
Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America. She formerly
served as a senior policy adviser to the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at
the US Department of Homeland Security. The book this is from is called Caught in
a Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America.)

While post-9/11 preventive counterterrorism policies have adversely


impacted various groups of Americans, no group has been more
profoundly afected than the Muslim, Arab, and South Asian communities. n16
Mosque infiltration has become so rampant that some congregants assume they
are under surveillance as they fulfill their religious obligations. n17 Government
informants have ensnared numerous, seemingly hapless and
unsophisticated young men such that Muslims no longer know whom they
can trust among each other. n18 Aggressive prosecutions of Muslim
charities and individuals [*434] across the country have embittered
communities that now feel under siege by their government and
distrusted by their non-Muslim compatriots. n19 Selective
counterterrorism fuels public bias, as evidenced by the vitriolic discourse
surrounding the Park 51 Community Center in lower Manhattan in 2010. n20 As a
consequence, the vibrancy and development of civil society within these

communities has been significantly stunted. n21 Current counterterrorism eforts thus attack the social relationships, as well as the civil
liberties, long understood as the glue holding this country together.

Counter terrorism destroys civil liberties


Aziz 12 (Sahar Aziz is associate professor at Texas A&M School of Law where she
teaches national security and civil rights law. Aziz is the author of Caught in a
Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America. She formerly
served as a senior policy adviser to the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at
the US Department of Homeland Security. The book this is from is called Caught in
a Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America.)
This article focuses on three powerful components of the government's counterterrorism
preventive paradigm and the significant risks they pose to civil rights and civil liberties. Part
I examines the adverse consequences of the government's use of religiosity as a proxy for
terrorism. Specifically, the current preventative paradigm for countering

terrorism risks the First Amendment infringement of protected activities


and misdirects limited law enforcement resources away from criminal
activity. n22 In addition to wasting limited resources, religious and racial
profiling erodes trust between law enforcement and Muslim communities.
To the extent constructive relations between communities and law
enforcement bolster public safety, the [*435] government has an interest
in curtailing arbitrary and overreaching counterterrorism enforcement.

Aggressive counterterrorism destroys civil liberties and makes


other more efective programs fail
Aziz 12 (Sahar Aziz is associate professor at Texas A&M School of Law where she
teaches national security and civil rights law. Aziz is the author of Caught in a
Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America. She formerly
served as a senior policy adviser to the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at
the US Department of Homeland Security. The book this is from is called Caught in
a Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America.)
The current preventive paradigm for countering terrorism misguidedly
uses political beliefs and religious practices as proxies for criminal
activity. n34 Orthodox Muslims or those who openly critique U.S.
government policies find themselves targeted by aggressive

counterterrorism tactics. Not only does this practice undermine civil


liberties, it wastes limited law enforcement resources by monitoring legal
activity while ignoring unlawful activity committed by those not fitting the
religious profiles. Looking for evidence of radicalization through an
individual's clothing, facial hair, or religious observances diverts resources
from investigations of true threats.

APs fail even at the cost of civil liberties


Aziz 12 (Sahar Aziz is associate professor at Texas A&M School of Law where she
teaches national security and civil rights law. Aziz is the author of Caught in a
Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America. She formerly
served as a senior policy adviser to the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at
the US Department of Homeland Security. The book this is from is called Caught in
a Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America.)
While countering terrorism is no easy feat, it is remarkable that the
government was unable to prevent some major attempted attacks after
having invested so many resources into counterterrorism, often at the
expense of civil liberties of all Americans. Despite the creation of fusion spy
centers nationwide, the relaxation of surveillance laws, the use of technology to peer into
nearly every aspect of American life, and the reallocation of thousands of agents to
countering terrorism, the government has yet to show results proportionate to
the vested resources. n348 In the apt words of David Cole and Jules Lobel, we have

become both less safe and less free.

All of our surveillance destroys civil liberties and is inefective


we have been lucky
Aziz 12 (Sahar Aziz is associate professor at Texas A&M School of Law where she
teaches national security and civil rights law. Aziz is the author of Caught in a
Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America. She formerly
served as a senior policy adviser to the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at
the US Department of Homeland Security. The book this is from is called Caught in
a Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America.)
It is long overdue for Americans to reassess the successes and failures of
counterterrorism policies over the past ten years. Are we safer or are we
just lucky? n359 Has the PATRIOT Act made our government better able to prevent
terrorism? Is it time for Americans, as many congressional leaders of both parties have
proclaimed, to thoughtfully debate the efficacy of the PATRIOT Act and whether its
infringements on the civil liberties of all Americans are warranted? n360 Are we seeking

to rationalize our forfeiture of civil liberties by convincing ourselves that


our national security policies work, irrespective of the facts on the
ground? If we cannot answer these questions based on evidence, rather
than fear-based speculation, then we have little to account for the last ten
years of significant government expenditure, public anxiety, and civil
liberties costs.

Loss of civil liberties leads to a formation of a police state


Aziz 11 (Sahar Aziz is associate professor at Texas A&M School of Law where she
teaches national security and civil rights law. Aziz is the author of Caught in a
Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America. She formerly

served as a senior policy adviser to the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at
the US Department of Homeland Security. Caught in a Preventive Dragnet:
Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America, 2011)
Let the terrorists among us be warned: If you overstay your visa - even by one day we will arrest you. If you violate a local law, you will be put in jail and kept in
custody as long as possible. We will use every available statute. We will seek every
prosecutorial advantage ... . Our single objective is to prevent terrorist attacks by
taking suspected terrorists off the street. As the U.S. government adopted a notolerance policy to apprehending the terrorists, a fear-stricken public watched
images of nefarious, dark-skinned, and bearded Muslims flash across millions of
television screens. The message was, if there had ever been any doubt, that the
9/11 attacks confirmed Muslims and Arabs are inherently violent and intent on
destroying the American way of life. [*431] Heightened government scrutiny of
these communities was not only warranted, but a rational response to a perceived
existential threat to the country. Ten years later, the 9/11 terrorist attacks have
transformed the American way of life for the worse. In the hasty passage of the
expansive USA PATRIOT Act ("PATRIOT Act"), our fears gave way to the
government's demand for unfettered discretion to preserve national security at the
expense of civil liberties for all Americans. As a consequence, America has come to
resemble a police state where government surveillance extends into
almost every aspect of life.

Current counterterrorism eforts take away our civil liberties.


Aziz 11 (Sahar Aziz is associate professor at Texas A&M School of Law where she
teaches national security and civil rights law. Aziz is the author of Caught in a
Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America. She formerly
served as a senior policy adviser to the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at
the US Department of Homeland Security. Caught in a Preventive Dragnet:
Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America, 2011)
While post-9/11 preventive counterterrorism policies have adversely impacted
various groups of Americans, no group has been more profoundly affected than the
Muslim, Arab, and South Asian communities. n16 Mosque infiltration has become so
rampant that some congregants assume they are under surveillance as they fulfill
their religious obligations. n17 Government informants have ensnared numerous,
seemingly hapless and unsophisticated young men such that Muslims no longer
know whom they can trust among each other. n18 Aggressive prosecutions of
Muslim charities and individuals [*434] across the country have embittered
communities that now feel under siege by their government and distrusted by their
non-Muslim compatriots. n19 Selective counterterrorism fuels public bias, as
evidenced by the vitriolic discourse surrounding the Park 51 Community Center in
lower Manhattan in 2010. n20 As a consequence, the vibrancy and development of
civil society within these communities has been significantly stunted. n21 Current
counter-terrorism efforts thus attack the social relationships, as well as the civil
liberties, long understood as the glue holding this country together. This article
focuses on three powerful components of the government's counterterrorism
preventive paradigm and the significant risks they pose to civil rights and civil

liberties. Part I examines the adverse consequences of the government's use of


religiosity as a proxy for terrorism. Specifically, the current preventative paradigm
for countering terrorism risks the First Amendment infringement of protected
activities and misdirects limited law enforcement resources away from criminal
activity. n22 In addition to wasting limited resources, religious and racial profiling
erodes trust between law enforcement and Muslim communities . To the extent
constructive relations between communities and law enforcement bolster public
safety, the [*435] government has an interest in curtailing arbitrary and
overreaching counterterrorism enforcement. n23

Current counterterrorism methods that target specific ethnic


groups undermine civil liberties and divert from the
investigation of true threat
Aziz 11 (Sahar Aziz is associate professor at Texas A&M School of Law where she
teaches national security and civil rights law. Aziz is the author of Caught in a
Preventive Dragnet: Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America. She formerly
served as a senior policy adviser to the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at
the US Department of Homeland Security. Caught in a Preventive Dragnet:
Selective Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America, 2011)
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out - Because I was not a
Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out - Because
I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me - and there was no one left to
speak for me. - Martin Niemoller, 1892-1984 n33 The current preventive paradigm
for countering terrorism misguidedly uses political beliefs and religious practices as
proxies for criminal activity. n34 Orthodox Muslims or those who openly critique U.S.
government policies find themselves targeted by aggressive counterterrorism
tactics. Not only does this practice undermine civil liberties, it wastes limited law
enforcement resources by monitoring legal activity while ignoring unlawful activity
committed by those not fitting the religious profiles . Looking for evidence of
radicalization through an individual's clothing, facial hair, or religious observances
diverts resources from investigations of true threats. n35 [*438] Furthermore, it is
unlawful for the government to investigate and prosecute individuals solely based
on First Amendment protected speech, association, assembly, and religious
practices n36 - and for good reason. Our Founding Fathers were cognizant that
when the government exercises its authority to quash political opponents or
dissenting views, our democracy is threatened. n37 The Founding Fathers
experienced first-hand the devastating effects of state entanglement in religious
affairs. When one religion is disfavored among others, it results in a stigmatization
and shunning of the religion's congregants in the court of public opinion or, worse,
in a court of law. n38 Once the government is permitted to persecute a particular
group based on its protected constitutional rights, it is only a matter of time before
other groups are unfairly targeted. n39

Current counterterrorism methods that specifically target


religious and ethnic groups are inefective; they fail to
separate the fake from the real terrorists
Aziz 11 (Sahar Aziz is an Associate Professor of Law at Texas Wesleyan University
School of Law. She previously served as a Senior Policy Advisor with the Office for
Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and as
an Adjunct Professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, where she taught
national security and civil rights law. Prior to entering academia, she practiced civil
rights law where she focused on post-9/11 discrimination in employment,
immigration, and law enforcement, Caught in a Preventive Dragnet: Selective
Counterterrorism in a Post-9/11 America, 2011)
Focusing on religiosity and ethnic origin wastes government resources when only a
small portion of investigations result in criminal charges. n113 It also diverts
resources away from persons who do not fit the post-9/11 profile of a Muslim
terrorist. n114 As shown by recent attempted plots, bona fide terrorists [*449] often
operate covertly with no connections to established institutions, such as mosques or
other religious institutions. n115 There is little evidence to suggest that such
individuals operate overtly through protests, public campaigns, or other lawful
means for seeking social change. Hence, when law enforcement directs its resources
toward groups and individuals openly expressing their political dissent, true
terrorists - whether Muslim or not - proceed with their plans undetected. n116 Evidence of the
failure of counterterrorism strategies is ample. Notably, t he government has failed to prevent some
of the most serious terrorist plots attempted over the past few years . For instance, but for
a fortuitous technical failure and the rapid response of a bystander, thousands of people could have been killed in
Times Square in 2010. n117 Similarly, the 2009 Nigerian Christmas day bomber would have successfully killed
hundreds on an airplane headed for Detroit but for the failure of his bomb to ignite. n118 Despite the massive
[*450] intelligence infrastructure created post-9/11, the intelligence community failed to act on his father's
warnings to the U.S. embassy in Nigeria, as well as other relevant intelligence. n119 Meanwhile ,

terrorists who
do not fit the "Muslim terrorist" profile are fortuitously stopped or in some cases
tragically missed. White supremacist James Cummings, for example, was actively constructing a lethal dirty
bomb undetected by the FBI. n120 Only after his wife shot him in self-defense did the government discover his
terrorist plot. n121 Similarly, Joseph Stack flew an airplane into an IRS building in Austin, Texas in protest of the
IRS's demands that he pay his taxes. n122 Stack's terrorist attack killed an IRS employee who was a military
veteran. n123 Had the attack occurred at a different time of day, however, hundreds of IRS employees could have
been killed. Donny Eugene Mower threw a Molotov cocktail into a Planned Parenthood clinic in California, causing $
26,000 of damage. n124 That he did not injure or kill anyone was only because he acted "in the early morning
hours." n125 Another white supremacist was charged with murdering a security guard at the Holocaust Memorial
Museum in Washington, D.C., and an anti-abortion extremist was convicted of murdering abortion-provider George
Tiller in his church in Wichita, Kansas. n126 Finally, in Tucson, Arizona, Jared Loughner shot and killed six people
while wounding fourteen others, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. n127 [*451] Despite these incidents,
the United States Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") shortsightedly focuses almost exclusively on domestic
Muslim groups. n128 Yet in 2009 DHS issued an internal intelligence report entitled "Rightwing Extremism," warning
of rising terrorism by right-wing domestic groups. n129 The backlash to the report was remarkable: more than a
dozen organizations representing the political right called for the immediate removal of DHS Secretary Janet
Napolitano, prompting her to apologize for the report, dismember the analytical unit that produced the report, and
block the distribution of definitions for terms such as "white supremacist" and "Christian Identity" from its analytical
digest. n130 This occurred despite the well- [*452] documented evidence n131 of right-wing groups using or
attempting to use weapons of mass destruction. n132 For example, the Washington Post reported several cases of
similar right-wing extremism in 2010:

Terrorism creates an overreaction - it leads to neo-imperialist


wars and legitimizes securitization
Koppel 13 (Ted Koppel is a special correspondent for NBC News and news analyst
for NPR. Ted Koppel: America's Chronic Overreaction to Terrorism, Wall Street
Journal, 8/6/14,
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324653004578650462392053732)
June 28, 2014, will mark the 100th anniversary of what is arguably the most eventful terrorist attack in history. That
was the day that Gavrilo Princip, a Bosnian Serb, shot and killed the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne. In one of
those mega-oversimplifications that journalists love and historians abhor, the murder of the Archduke Franz
Ferdinand and his pregnant wife, Sophie, led directly and unavoidably to World War I. Between 1914 and 1918, 37
million soldiers and civilians were injured or killed. If there should ever be a terrorists' Hall of Fame, Gavrilo Princip

Terrorism, after all, is designed to


produce overreaction. It is the means by which the weak induce the powerful
to inflict damage upon themselvesand al Qaeda and groups like it are surely
counting on that as the centerpiece of their strategy. It appears to be working. Right
will surely deserve consideration as its most effective practitioner.

now, 19 American embassies and a number of consulates and smaller diplomatic outposts are closed for the week
due to the perceived threat of attacks against U.S. targets. Meantime, the U.S. has launched drone strikes on al
Qaeda fighters in Yemen. By the standards of World War I, however, the United States has responded to the goading

during almost a decade of terrorist


provocation, the U.S. government showed the utmost restraint . In February of 1993, before
of contemporary terrorism with relative moderation. Indeed,

most of us had any real awareness of al Qaeda, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who would later be identified as the
principal architect of 9/11, financed an earlier attack on the World Trade Center with car bombs that killed six and
injured more than 1,000. Five years later, al Qaeda launched synchronized attacks on U.S. embassies in Kenya and
Tanzania, killing more than 220 and injuring well over 4,000 people. In October 2000, al Qaeda operatives rammed
a boat carrying explosives into the USS Cole, which was docked in Yemen. Seventeen American sailors were killed

In each case, the


U.S. responded with caution and restraint. Covert and special operations were
launched. The U.S. came close to killing or capturing Osama bin Laden at least
twice, but there was a clear awareness among many policy makers that bin Laden
might be trying to lure the U.S. into overreacting. Clinton administration
counterterrorism policy erred, if at all, on the side of excessive caution. Critics may
argue that Washington's feckless response during the Clinton years encouraged al
Qaeda to launch its most spectacular and devastating attack on Sept. 11, 2001. But
President George W. Bush also showed great initial restraint in ordering a response
to the 9/11 attacks. Covert American intelligence operatives working with special operations forces
and 39 were injured. Each of these attacks occurred during the presidency of Bill Clinton.

coordinated indigenous Afghan opposition forces against the Taliban on the ground, while U.S. air power was

It was only 18 months later,


with the invasion of Iraq in 2003, that the U.S. began to inflict upon itself a
degree of damage that no external power could have achieved. Even bin Laden
must have been astounded. He had, it has been reported, hoped that the U.S. would be drawn into a
ground war in Afghanistan, that graveyard to so many foreign armies. But Iraq! In the end, the war left
4,500 American soldiers dead and 32,000 wounded. It cost well in excess of a trillion
dollarsevery penny of which was borrowed money . Saddam was killed, it's true, and the world
directed against the Taliban and al Qaeda as they fled toward Pakistan.

is a better place for it. What prior U.S. administrations understood, however, was Saddam's value as a regional

It is hard to look at Iraq today and find that the U.S. gained much
for its sacrifices there. Nor, as we seek to untangle ourselves from Afghanistan, can
U.S. achievements there be seen as much of a bargain for the price paid in
blood and treasure. At home, the U.S. has constructed an antiterrorism
enterprise so immense, so costly and so inexorably interwoven with the
defense establishment, police and intelligence agencies, communications systems,
counterweight to Iran.

and with social media, travel networks and their attendant security apparatus, that
the idea of downsizing, let alone disbanding such a construct, is an exercise in
futility. The Sunday TV talk shows this past weekend resonated with the rare sound of partisan agreement: The
intercepted "chatter" between al Qaeda leader Ayman al Zawahiri and the leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula was sufficiently ominous that few questions have been raised about the government's decision to close
its embassies. It may be that an inadequate response to danger signals that resulted in the death of the U.S.
ambassador in Benghazi last September contributed to an overreaction in the current instance. Clearly, it does not
hurt, at a time when the intelligence community is charged with being overly intrusive in its harvesting of
intelligence data, that we be presented with dramatic evidence of the program's effectiveness. Yet when all is said
and done, al Qaedaby most accounts decimated and battered by more than a decade of the worst damage that
the world's most powerful nation can inflictremains a serious enough threat that Washington ordered 19 of its
embassies to pull up their drawbridges and take shelter for fear of what those terrorists still might do. Will terrorists
kill innocent civilians in the years to come? Of course. They did so more than 100 years ago, when they were called
anarchistsand a responsible nation-state must take reasonable measures to protect its citizens. But there is no

We
have created an economy of fear, an industry of fear, a national psychology of fear.
Al Qaeda could never have achieved that on its own. We have inflicted it on
ourselves. Over the coming years many more Americans will die in car crashes, of
gunshot wounds inflicted by family members and by falling off ladders than from
any attack by al Qaeda. There is always the nightmare of terrorists acquiring and
using a weapon of mass destruction. But nothing would give our terrorist enemies
greater satisfaction than that we focus obsessively on that remote possibility, and
restrict our lives and liberties accordingly.
way to completely eliminate terrorism. The challenge that confronts us is how we will live with that threat.

Complete elimination of terrorism is impossible, terrorism is


inevitable
Koppel 13 (Ted Koppel is a special correspondent for NBC News and news analyst
for NPR. Ted Koppel: America's Chronic Overreaction to Terrorism, Wall Street
Journal, 8/6/14,
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324653004578650462392053732)
It may be that an inadequate response to danger signals that resulted in the death of the U.S. ambassador in
Benghazi last September contributed to an overreaction in the current instance. Clearly, it does not hurt, at a time
when the intelligence community is charged with being overly intrusive in its harvesting of intelligence data, that

when all is said and done, al


Qaedaby most accounts decimated and battered by more than a decade of the
worst damage that the world's most powerful nation can inflictremains a serious
enough threat that Washington ordered 19 of its embassies to pull up their
drawbridges and take shelter for fear of what those terrorists still might do. Will
terrorists kill innocent civilians in the years to come? Of course. They did so more
than 100 years ago, when they were called anarchistsand a responsible nationstate must take reasonable measures to protect its citizens. But there is no way to
completely eliminate terrorism. The challenge that confronts us is how we will
live with that threat. We have created an economy of fear, an industry of fear, a national psychology of fear.
we be presented with dramatic evidence of the program's effectiveness. Yet

Al Qaeda could never have achieved that on its own. We have inflicted it on ourselves. Over the coming years many
more Americans will die in car crashes, of gunshot wounds inflicted by family members and by falling off ladders

There is always the nightmare of terrorists acquiring


and using a weapon of mass destruction. But nothing would give our terrorist
enemies greater satisfaction than that we focus obsessively on that remote
possibility, and restrict our lives and liberties accordingly .
than from any attack by al Qaeda.

Political Movements
Agent provocateur force can transform peaceful movements into
masses of violence.
Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers 12 --Kevin Zeese JD and Margaret Flowers MD host Clearing the FOG
on We Act Radio co-direct It's Our Economy and are organizers of the PopularResistance.org.
(http://www.sott.net/article/242299-The-Agent-Provocateurs-in-Occupys-Midst )

On the very first day of the Occupation of Wall Street, we saw infiltration by the
police. We were leaving Zuccotti Park and were stopped in traffic. We saw the doors of an unmarked
van open and in the front seat were two uniformed police. Out of the back came two men
dressed as Occupiers wearing backpacks, sweatshirts and jeans. They walked into
Zuccotti Park and became part of the crowd. In the first week of the Occupation of
Freedom Plaza in Washington, D.C., we saw the impact of two right wing infiltrators. A
peaceful protest was planned at the drone exhibit at the Smithsonian Institution. The plan
was for a banner drop and a die-in under the drones. But as protesters arrived at the
museum, two people ran out in front, threatening the security guards and
causing them to pepper spray protesters and tourists. Patrick Howley, an
assistant editor at the American Spectator, wrote a column bragging about his
role as an agent provocateur. A few days later we uncovered the second
infiltrator, Michael Stack, when he was urging people on Freedom Plaza to
resist police with force. We later learned he was from the Leadership Institute, which trains
youth in right wing ideology and tactics. We were told he had al

Agent provocateurs instill fear into those who would start a


movement prevents the formation of political movements.
Jackie Goldberg 62 -- Jackie Goldberg is an American politician and teacher, and a
member of the Democratic Party. She is a former member of the California State Assembly.
(http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/coldwar/interviews/episode-13/goldberg1.html)
INT: There are two other things that I would like to pick up on, first there's the business of harassment, you
mentioned that you were labeled communist and the rest of it, can you tell me a little bit about what you personally
experienced on an everyday level, in terms of being followed and harassment. JACKIE: You know if you don't ever

my phone
was tapped, everyday when I left there was one or two men who would follow me to
campus who would wait outside my classrooms, who would follow me to lunch, and
experience in your life, you just don't believe it, I mean that was my view anyway. I didn't believe it,

after a while we would, we would speak, I mean Hi how are you, I mean do you think it's going to rain today, you
know, I mean there was sort of nothing that you could do about it. and then we started, we started getting, because
it was very unnerving in spite of what everybody will tell you, it is very unnerving, and they did it openly, I think

but we do things like pick up the telephone and say


that this is S251J to 40693, Mary had a little lamb, eat pizza 7 and hang up, it was
gibberish and meant absolutely nothing, but we hoped that we were keeping them busy
trying to figure out what these codes were, and there were of course no codes. you do
things like that, but it was very unnerving. There were rumors continuously, there were agent
provocateurs, there were, we were completely infiltrated because we knew we were completely
infiltrated because we'd keep finding people in the steering committee meetings that
nobody could ever find their address or where they lived or what classes they were
taking, and basically we decided really as a policy to just assume that everything that we
said and did was immediately known by the police and anybody else who was against what we
because the point was to unnerve you.

were doing. there were rumors, frequently that that in the middle of the night, all of the leadership was going to be

arrested, on conspiracy charges, at one point all of us did secretly select another person who only knew you and

We all thought we
the FBI and the red squad of Oakland police, passed these rumors through other students
all the time so that we would be kind of off our guard, not off our guard, on guard part of that all of us
all the time, I just remembered a friend of mine had an apartment and he had trouble getting a
dial tone and he just called the telephone company to have them come and figure out what
was wrong with his phone, and they kept coming inside and we were all just hanging out that afternoon, it was
a Friday afternoon after classes, and finally the guy came in from the phone company obviously
nobody had informed him, but he said I just can't figure out, there are about five
lines on your line, I don't know where any of them are coming from or going to he said but I took them all
one other person to immediately form a new steering committee if we were taken away.
were,

off, [y]our phone should be alright now you know. so there was, we all took it in kind of stride, but I don't think that
anybody was really unaffected by it, the notion that you really do believe that you could be snatched off at any time

your phones were tapped, that


you're you are being followed and no-one denied that you were being
followed. it was all you know pretty scary and of course made us all wonder what they
were doing about real criminals and real crime if they were expending this
amount of resources on those of us who were trying to promote the first
amendment. it made me worry about how they expend they're resources. I figured that you know, I much
and arrested, that for conspiracy charges, that you could, that

rather them be trying to do something about organized crime or something in the city than to follow us, we were
pretty benign people around, but it was very unnerving. There was no doubt about it, I can remember the emotions
I had at the time about it.

APs infiltrate political movements

Gary T. Marx 2012. -- Gary T. Marx is Professor Emeritus from M.I.T. He has worked in the
areas of race and ethnicity, collective behavior and social movements, law and society and
surveillance studies. (http://web.mit.edu/gtmarx/www/agentsprovocateursfaux.html)
When authorities or elites are challenged by a social movement, they may ignore it
or respond with a variety of tools from cooptation to redirection to repression with many points in between.
One extreme form of the latter is provocation. The idea of the agent provocateur entered
popular consciousness in the 19th century as Europe experienced dislocation and
conflicts associated with industrialization and urbanization. The concept initially
referred to an activist secretly working with authorities who might provide
information, sow suspicion and internal dissension, and/or provoke violent
actions that would turn public opinion against a social movement and ofer
legal and moral grounds for its repression. The term has entered popular culture as the name of a
lingerie brand and British electronica band. There are many historical examples. Some of the most dramatic occurred in Russia
where, lacking basic democratic rights, clandestine groups sought to overthrow the
Tsar. Police responded by infiltrating existing groups and, in a strategy
that could backfire, creating their own. Roman Malinovsky, a highly paid agent of the Russian secret
police (Okhrana), was an important Bolshevik leader. The English Cato Street conspiracy offers a classic case . Joseph Conrad's novel
The Secret Agent provides a fictional account. Social movements in the United States in the
1960s saw many examples of provocation, some in conformity with the
FBI's Counter Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO.) (Donner 1990; Cunningham 2005.) A
New York detective helped open and headed the Bronx chapter of the
Black Panthers, and Malcolm X's bodyguard, who tried to resuscitate him when he was shot,
was an undercover police officer.

AT: CP

Civil Business

AT States CP
Actions trickle down from the intelligence agencies to the federal and state
governments
Nathan Freed Wessler 14 -- Nathan Freed Wessler is a staff attorney with the ACLUs Speech,
Privacy and Technology Project, handling cases involving free speech and privacy issues.
(http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/7/surveillance-lawenforcementnsastringray3.html)

Cell site simulators, also known as stingrays, are devices that trick cellphones into
reporting their locations and identifying information . They do so by mimicking cellphone towers
and sending out electronic cues that allow the police to enlist cellphones as tracking devices, thus revealing

The equipment also sends intrusive electronic


signals through the walls of private homes and offices, learning
information about the locations and identities of phones inside. Initially
the domain of the National Security Agency (NSA) and other intelligence
agencies, the use of stingrays has trickled down to federal, state and local
law enforcement. In one Florida case, a police officer explained in court
that he quite literally stood in front of every door and window with his
stingray to track the phones inside a large apartment complex.
peoples movements with great precision.

Impact Civil Liberties


Using social agencies as ideology police is a violation of civil
liberties
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 175)
It is entirely appropriate for the police and MIS to place Muslims under surveillance if there is a reasonable suspicion
of their active involvement in terrorism. It is also right that channels are available for other professionals, such as
youth workers and teachers, to provide information to the police if there are reasons to believe an individual is

Prevent sought to draw professionals providing


nonpolicing local services into routinely providing information to the counterterrorist
police not just on individuals who might be about to commit a criminal offense, but
also on the political and religious opinions and behaviors of young people . A major part
involved in criminality. But, as noted above,

of Prevent was the fostering of much closer relationships between the counterterrorist policing system and
providers of nonpolicing local services to facilitate these kinds of flows of information on individuals considered at

The attempt to integrate policing with agencies of local government


can be traced back to the early 1980s, with the reorganization of policing under Metropolitan Police
risk of extremism.

Commissioner Kenneth Newman (who had previously served as chief constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary in
Northern Ireland).

New legislation sought to incorporate social and welfare agencies into


the policing process. This was presented as a supportive form of "community policing; but
its purpose was to embed police surveillance in schools and other agencies
providing public services. This new approach, of coordinating police work with social agencies, was
reflected in the 1982 Police and Criminal Evidence Bill, which in its original version, proposed a power to search

Civil rights lawyer Paul Boateng noted that the bill


raised the prospect of civil liberties abuses as "the proper professional distinctions
between the roles of social workers, probation officers, local government workers,
teachers and policemen, become confused :'54 Grassroots campaigns for police accountability in
confidential records held by professionals. 53

the early 1980s led to some diminution of these dangers, and the power to search records was dropped by the time
the bill became the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. Nevertheless, the idea that social agencies should
coordinate their work with the police took hold, and it led to these multiagency partnerships becoming common
practice.

Impact Totalitarianism (cards need tags +


formatting)
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 282-283)

The East German Stasi is estimated to have had one intelligence analyst for every
166 citizens. Adding regular informants brings the number to one spy for every 66
citizens.30 The FBI reportedly has at present 10,000 intelligence analysts and
agents working on counterterrorism and 15,000 paid informants31 Exactly how
many of them are focused on Muslims in the United States is unknown; there is little
transparency in this area. But given the emphasis the FBI has placed on preventing
Muslim terrorism, it is reasonable to estimate that at least two-thirds are assigned
to spy on Muslims. Taking the usual estimate of the Muslim population in the United
States of2.35 million, this would mean that the FBI has a spy for every ninety-four
Muslims in the United States-before the resources of the National Security Agency,
regional intelligence fusion centers, and the counterterrorism resources of local
police departments, such as the NYPD, are added. This suggests that Muslims in the
United States are likely to be exposed to levels of state surveillance similar to that
which the East German population faced. The collapse of East Germany's
communist system and the opening of the Stasi's files gave regular citizens the
uncanny experience of discovering their names in state intelligence documents and
finding out who among their circles of friends was an informant. The 20ll leaking of
some NYPD intelligence files has already begun giving individual Muslims the same
disturbing experience. Numerous businesses, cafes, restaurants, and mosques in
New York became aware that the NYPD considers them hot spots and deploys
informants to monitor them. And the recent outing of a small number of NYPD
informants has meant that some have found out that relationships they thought of
as genuine friendships were actually covert attempts to gather intelligence. Asad
Dandia, a nineteen-year-old student at City University of New York, has spoken of
becoming aware that a friend was an informant. I met him through the Muslim
Student Associations Facebook connections. He had told me he wanted to become a
better person and to strengthen his faith. So I took him in, introduced him to all of
my friends, got him involved in our extracurricular activities. I would wake him up
for prayer every morning. He even slept over at my house ... When I was texted the
news [that he was an informant], the shock caused me to drop my phone. It took
me twenty-four hours to get myself together." Another student at City University,
Jawad Rasul, saw his name listed when a file on Muslim students became public in
2012, and that was when he discovered a friend of his was an informant. "You
always hear about the NYPD spying on this group or that group, having your name
come up, it just brings everything home:'"
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 283-284)

Our current models of totalitarianism, largely derived from the cold war, are poorly
equipped to make sense of these practices. Whether derived from fiction or

historical studies, they usually picture a narrow, ideologically driven elite controlling
the mass of the population. Such a state of affairs is normally assumed to be
incompatible with a formal democratic process and a liberal economy. But the
experience of the war on ten,or suggests that, if the same tools of totalitarian rule
are applied only to racialized groups rather than the population as a whole, the
trappings of democracy can be maintained for the majority. (Numerous other
examples such as China-have long demonstrated the compatibility of a liberalized
economy with state authoritarianism.) The key to such a seemingly inconsistent
"democratic totalitarianism'' is a racialized discourse offear that constructs Muslims
as a cultural threat to the liberal order. It is the race principle that enables the
separation of Muslims from the usual liberal norms of rights and citizenship. And it is
on the basis of race thinking that Muslim dissent is read only as the intrusion of
alien, illiberal cultural values into the public sphere and rarely as an attempt to use
the political process to hold states accountable to their own liberal standards. From
this perspective, the totalitarianism of the war on terror intersects with other
racialized regimes, such as the war on drugs and the militarized policing of
immigration, in which similar patterns of discriminatory surveillance, brutality, and
incarceration are central.34 So long as the unspoken assumption that these
measures will only be directed at racialized subjects-Muslims, African Americans,
undesired immigrants, asylum seekers-remains valid, then the consent of the
majority can be secured. And if this racialized totalitarianism begins to overreach
and step on the freedoms of others-through, for example, overbearing screening at
airports or by trying to introduce universal identity cards-such excesses can be
quickly corrected while preserving the essential structure of the system. Moreover,
since a transformative politics is more likely to emerge from racialized se~tions of
society, the special measures the state reserves for these populations prove useful
tools for maintaining the status quo. The analysis of totalitarianism today therefore
requires a critical understanding of the centrality of race-but in a more radical way
than managed by Hannah Arendt, who ultimately saw it as merely one of various
possible precursors.

AT: Due Process Checks


Empirically, civil trials do not protect victims against FBIs
encroachment on civil liberties juries accept government bias
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 192-193)

the FBI's provocation tactics should be held to account when cases come to
trial, but this has not happened. In every case where defendants have attempted an
entrapment defense in post- 9/11 terrorist trials, it has been unsuccessful . Such a
In theory,

defense involves two parts: first, showing by a preponderance of the evidence that the government induced the
defendant to commit the crime; second, if the defendant succeeds in proving inducement, the burden is on the
government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had a predisposition to commit the crime .

In
the end, these cases come down to a subjective judgment of whether the
defendants were predisposed to terrorism. So far juries have accepted the
prosecutors' flawed argument that radical views-such as anger at foreign policy-are
evidence of a predisposition to commit terrorist acts. Implicitly, juries in these cases
have endorsed the central proposition in the official analysis of radicalization:
ideology causes violence." In effect, Muslims have been criminalized for behaviors
associated with the early stages in a fallacious model of radicalization-though such
behaviors are entirely lawful, according to the First Amendment.

Cede the Political


Cede the political - Their method cant create institutional
change- the AFF is a DA to the alt and only the perm
solves- AFF is a better strategy
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 284-285)
But as even the Stasi eventually discovered, no system of surveillance can ever produce total knowledge. Indeed,
the greater the amount of information collected, the harder it is to interpret its meaning. The relevant information in
the majority of recent US terrorist attacks was somewhere in the government's systems, but its significance was

what is obscured by the demands for ever


greater surveillance and information processing is that security is best established
through relationships of trust and political empowerment. A society that has
blocked a section of its population from shaping a process of political transformation
is one that has hollowed out its democracy until what's left is an empty,
technocratic consensus in which real politics is disavowed. When radical political
contestation is suffocated, the processes by which societies reinvent themselves
and resolve their social tensions are neutered, and in the absence of a genuinely
emancipatory alternative, the only possible outlet for the impulses generated by
social and economic marginalization is the fake radicalism of armored identity
politics, conspiracy theories, and apocalyptic fantasies.
lost amid a morass of useless data. More significantly,

Topicality AP = Surveillance
Agent Provocateurs constitute an element of USFG
surveillance
Gitlin, 2013 (Todd Gitlin is a professor of journalism and sociology at Columbia University, the chair of the PhD
program in communications. The Wonderful American World of Informers and Agents Provocateurs, The Nation,
June 27. http://www.thenation.com/article/wonderful-american-world-informers-and-agents-provocateurs/)
Only Martians, by now, are unaware of the phone and online data scooped up by the

Agency

National Security

(though if it turns out that they are aware, the NSA has surely picked up their signals and crunched their

high-tech surveillance is not, however, the only kind around. Theres


also the lower tech, up-close-and-personal kind that involves informers and
sometimes government-instigated violence . Just how much of this is going on and in how
metadata). American

coordinated a way no one out here in the spied-upon world knows. The lower-tech stuff gets reported, if at all, only
one singular, isolated event at a time look over here, look over there, now you see it, now you dont. What is
known about such surveillance as well as the suborning of illegal acts by government agencies, including the FBI, in
the name of counterterrorism has not been put together by major news organizations in a way that would give us
an overview of the phenomenon. (The ACLU has done by far the best job of compiling reports on spying on
Americans of this sort.) Some intriguing bits about informers and agents provocateurs briefly made it
into the public spotlight when Occupy Wall Street was riding high. But as always, dots need connecting. Here is a
preliminary attempt to sort out some patterns behind what could be the next big story about government
surveillance and provocation in America.

APs are surveillance Scotland Yard Proves


Savage, 2011 (Michael Savage, Police under fire as trial collapses over 'agent provocateur' claims, The
Independent, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-under-fire-as-trial-collapses-over-agentprovocateur-claims-2181118.html)

Scotland Yard has come under pressure to reveal the extent of its covert
surveillance of peaceful protesters after the collapse of a case following the
unmasking of an undercover police officer. Prosecutors announced they were dropping charges
against six people accused of a 2009 plot to shut down the coal-fired Ratcliffe-on-Soar power station, in
Nottinghamshire, at Nottingham Crown Court yesterday. Lawyers acting for the protesters had demanded that the

the undercover officer,


PC Mark Kennedy, had played [a role] in aiding and encouraging the break-in. The
Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) should be forced by the trial judge to reveal what role

defence team was told on Friday that the prosecution was to drop the case rather than hand over details of PC
Kennedy's involvement. A recent video of PC Kennedy talking to an activist suggests he was not the only officer
infiltrating green activist groups. In the video shown on BBC's Newsnight programme last night he tells an activist:
"I'm not the only one by a long shot it's like a hammer to crack a nut. It's spun in different ways but, you know,
you start looking at the way the law is used and manipulated." Activists first suggested they had unmasked the
officer's real identity in October. Since beginning his covert work in 2000, he had assumed the identity of Mark
Stone and earned the nickname "Flash" because he seemed to have more money than his fellow protesters. He was
quickly put to use by the groups he infiltrated because of his driving skills. He was also a keen climber, who has
been photographed scaling pylons as part of anti-climate change protests. PC Kennedy subsequently fled overseas
and left the Metropolitan Police. Some suspect he is now in the United States. There was no reply from a string of
email addresses and mobile numbers he had used over the last decade. However, he has been in touch with
lawyers defending the six protesters due to go on trial yesterday and had recently indicated he was willing to give
evidence to help their case. All six claimed they had never finally agreed to aid the Ratcliffe protest. The extent of
the Met officer's involvement in helping to organise protests led some to accuse the police of entrapment. Bradley
Day, 23, a charity worker who has already faced trial for his involvement in the Ratcliffe-on-Soar plot, said PC
Kennedy had even paid to hire a van used to transport equipment. Mr Day added that, last January, PC Kennedy had
accompanied protesters on a reconnaissance trip to the power station. However, police waited for four months
before taking action. They arrested more than 100 people on 13 April last year when they raided a meeting of
activists held at Iona School in Sneinton, Nottingham. Mike Schwarz, the solicitor for the six protesters who saw the
case against them dropped, said police and the CPS had chosen to "hush up" details of the covert operation. He
said the Metropolitan Police should be forced to explain their policy for monitoring protest groups, adding that a
miscarriage of justice had been averted only when activists found a passport revealing PC Kennedy's identity.
"There should now be a publicly accountable process about how we came so close to a miscarriage of justice here,

if his identity had not been uncovered by protesters," Mr Schwarz said. " The

ball is in the court of the


police to answer a number of questions on the use of undercover officers to monitor
peaceful protesters. The police have still yet to explain PC Kennedy's role." The CPS denied the collapse of
the trial was triggered by the unmasking of PC Kennedy. A spokesman for the Met said the force was "not prepared
to discuss" PC Kennedy's involvement. Danny Chivers, a defendant in the trial, said the police must be forced to
answer questions about how they went about the operation. "The police appear to have waited for the opportunity
to arrest over 100 people," he said. "Political protest of the kind being planned that day presents no risk to the
public, yet the police consistently resort to the most extreme tactics they can muster." There were calls for Theresa
May, the Home Secretary, to answer questions in Parliament about the undercover officer. David Winnick, a Labour
member of the Commons Home Affairs committee, said she needed to answer accusations that PC

had acted as an "agent provocateur".

Kennedy

Topicality FBI = Domestic Surveillance


FBI handles all domestic surveillance
Podolsky, 2015. (Brett, JD/Criminal Defense Lawyer. What Is the Difference between the CIA, FBI and
Interpol? Criminal Law Blog. http://brettpodolsky.com/uncategorized/what-is-the-difference-between-the-cia-fbiand-interpol#sthash.qicHxcgi.dpuf)

The FBI and CIA are both federal agencies that gather intelligence on threats to the
United States and her citizens. Even so, the FBI is primarily a law enforcement agency that is responsible for
investigating federal crimes such as tax evasion, bank robbery and kidnapping. On the other hand, the CIA is mostly
concerned with gathering intelligence that will help senior government officials make decisions relating to national
security. The CIA also provides valuable information to commanders in combat zones in order to help them plan
their operations. Some other key differences include:

Territory-FBI agents work primarily within the U.S., while CIA agents tend to
operate outside her borders

The FBI may work in conjunction with local law enforcement agencies to solve crimes, whereas the CIA
operates independently.

All domestic surveillance is handled by the FBI, even when required by the CIA

Topicality

2AC T- Curtail
1. We meet: [CONTEXTUALIZE] The affirmative lessens or
reduces FBI domestic surveillance agent provocateurs
only make up a portion of FBI operations.
2. Prefer our counter-interpretation: Curtailment includes
complete elimination
FASB 85
(Financial Accounting Standards Board, EMPLOYERS' ACCOUNTING FOR
SETTLEMENTS AND CURTAILMENTS OF DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS AND FOR
TERMINATION BENEFITS (ISSUED 12/85))
Statement 87 continues the past practice of delaying the recognition in net periodic
pension cost of (a) gains and losses from experience different from that assumed,
(b) the effects of changes in assumptions, and (c) the cost of retroactive plan
amendments. However, this Statement requires immediate recognition of certain
previously unrecognized amounts when certain transactions or events occur. It
prescribes the method for determining the amount to be recognized in earnings
when a pension obligation is settled or a plan is curtailed. Settlement is defined as
an irrevocable action that relieves the employer (or the plan) of primary
responsibility for an obligation and eliminates significant risks related to the
obligation and the assets used to effect the settlement. A curtailment is defined as
a significant reduction in, or an elimination of, defined benefit accruals for present
employees' future services.

This is better for education because


A. Predictability: Tons of affs eliminate programs, rarely do they
ONLY reduce them
B. Ground: No Ground Loss Neg still has access to FBI specific CPs
and DAs, kritiks of method, and general links to offense, such as
the terror DA.
C. Limits: Their definition overlimits the topic and is infinitely
regressive. This excludes popular affs like banning all drone
surveillance. It also restricts possibilities for innovative thinking in
debate which dooms us to cyclical, un-educational rounds. This is
a DA to the negs interp.
3. Turn on fairness: It justifies banning 99% of all agent
provocateurs, drones, data collection, etc., so affirmatives
will be doomed to preserve the 1%. Affirmatives could
never win if their advantages function primarily on
eradicating any problem.

2AC lbl?
DONT SAY

1. Their _________(ex: Monahan 11) evidence is powertagged


their evidence they use to defend their interpretation is
talking about how after 9/11, the USFG has beefed up
security and has brought about a rise in spying programs
and innovation in surveillance tactics. This only talks
about how domestic surveillance includes these tactics,
not that these tactics are the only ones that characterize
domestic surveillance.

2AC T- Surveillance
1. We meet: APs are surveillance [CONTEXTUALIZE]
Agent provocation has been a tactic of surveillance long
before mere additions like wire-tapping and intensive
spying. As the card already contends existing forms of
surveillance, we can assume that agent provocation is
included.
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York
University, and teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia,
Extremism, and the Domestic War on Terror, p. 282-283)

The East German Stasi is estimated to have had one intelligence analyst for
every 166 citizens. Adding regular informants brings the number to one spy
for every 66 citizens.30 The FBI reportedly has at present 10,000 intelligence
analysts and agents working on counterterrorism and 15,000 paid
informants31 Exactly how many of them are focused on Muslims in the
United States is unknown; there is little transparency in this area. But given
the emphasis the FBI has placed on preventing Muslim terrorism, it is
reasonable to estimate that at least two-thirds are assigned to spy on
Muslims. Taking the usual estimate of the Muslim population in the United
States of2.35 million, this would mean that the FBI has a spy for every ninetyfour Muslims in the United States-before the resources of the National
Security Agency, regional intelligence fusion centers, and the
counterterrorism resources of local police departments, such as the NYPD, are
added. This suggests that Muslims in the United States are likely to be
exposed to levels of state surveillance similar to that which the East German
population faced. The collapse of East Germany's communist system and the
opening of the Stasi's files gave regular citizens the uncanny experience of
discovering their names in state intelligence documents and finding out who
among their circles of friends was an informant. The 20ll leaking of some
NYPD intelligence files has already begun giving individual Muslims the same
disturbing experience. Numerous businesses, cafes, restaurants, and
mosques in New York became aware that the NYPD considers them hot spots
and deploys informants to monitor them. And the recent outing of a small
number of NYPD informants has meant that some have found out that
relationships they thought of as genuine friendships were actually covert
attempts to gather intelligence. Asad Dandia, a nineteen-year-old student at
City University of New York, has spoken of becoming aware that a friend was
an informant. I met him through the Muslim Student Associations Facebook
connections. He had told me he wanted to become a better person and to
strengthen his faith. So I took him in, introduced him to all of my friends, got
him involved in our extracurricular activities. I would wake him up for prayer
every morning. He even slept over at my house ... When I was texted the
news [that he was an informant], the shock caused me to drop my phone. It
took me twenty-four hours to get myself together." Another student at City

University, Jawad Rasul, saw his name listed when a file on Muslim students
became public in 2012, and that was when he discovered a friend of his was
an informant. "You always hear about the NYPD spying on this group or that
group, having your name come up, it just brings everything home:'"

2. Counter- Interpretation-Agent Provocateurs constitute an element of USFG


surveillance
Gitlin, 2013 (Todd Gitlin is a professor of journalism and sociology at Columbia University, the
chair of the PhD program in communications. The Wonderful American World of Informers and Agents
Provocateurs, The Nation, June 27. http://www.thenation.com/article/wonderful-american-worldinformers-and-agents-provocateurs/)
Only Martians, by now, are unaware of the phone and online data scooped up by the

Security Agency

National

(though if it turns out that they are aware, the NSA has surely picked up their

high-tech surveillance is not, however,


the only kind around. Theres also the lower tech, up-close-and-personal
kind that involves informers and sometimes government-instigated
violence. Just how much of this is going on and in how coordinated a way no one out here in the
signals and crunched their metadata). American

spied-upon world knows. The lower-tech stuff gets reported, if at all, only one singular, isolated event
at a time look over here, look over there, now you see it, now you dont. What is known about such
surveillance as well as the suborning of illegal acts by government agencies, including the FBI, in the
name of counterterrorism has not been put together by major news organizations in a way that would
give us an overview of the phenomenon. (The ACLU has done by far the best job of compiling reports
on spying on Americans of this sort.) Some intriguing bits about

informers and agents

provocateurs briefly made it into the public spotlight when Occupy Wall Street was riding high.
But as always, dots need connecting. Here is a preliminary attempt to sort out some patterns behind
what could be the next big story about government surveillance and provocation

3. Prefer our counter-interp:


A. Predictability: We are predictable -- Functional limits
and other words check abuse -- even if the af violates
one word, other words in the resolution provide enough
limits for the af to be predictable. Also, Agent

Provocateurs are an important part of the FBI, one of


the largest surveillance agencies in the United
States, and is frequently used in its operations.
There are lots of affirmatives that curtail portions of
the FBI, so there is no reason that our specific
curtailment is unpredictable. If we are considered
unpredictable, so are all the FBI affirmatives that
exist, which places many limits on this debate and
hurts our education.
B. Ground: The FBI is one of the biggest agencies in the
United States that is used for surveillance, and agent

provocateurs are a critical part of FBI strategy. By


justifying exclusion of this critical part of the FBI,
they are destroying important affirmative ground and
creating debates that exclude a large portion of U.S.
surveillance.
C. Limits: We create a clear bright line for the topic; we
don't underlimit because there is only a small
number of affirmatives that use agent provocateurs.
Make them prove why the inclusion of agent
provocateurs would explode the limits. Furthermore,
they overlimit the topic because their interpretation
excludes any form of active surveillance, this severs
a huge part of the topic and limits our discussion on
the actual topic were doomed to having the same
debates over and over again. This prevents any
innovation to arguments that go beyond the scope of
passive surveillance. AND this turns education.
D. There is no internal link to their negative ground
arguments. The negative gets ample groundmake
them prove what ground they lose. We still link to
FBI DAs, CP's, and multiple Ks. And the negative
gets core generics such as terror DA's, as well as the
Politics DA.
E. Prefer education impacts over fairness -- education is the
only tool from debate that alter how you interact with the
world and provide a diferent perspective on prevalent
issues.

Surveillance refers to any method of investigation carried out


by law enforcement officials this includes agent provocateurs
whose main objective is to enforce the law AND includes
actions of provocation and government-instigated violence.
Simmons 13 Professor of Law, Moritz College of Law at The Ohio State
University
Ric, PRIVACY, SECURITY, AND HUMAN DIGNITY IN THE DIGITAL AGE: ENDING THE
ZERO-SUM GAME: HOW TO INCREASE THE PRODUCTIVITY OF THE FOURTH
AMENDMENT, Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, Spring 2013, Lexis
n13 Throughout this Article I will use the word "surveillance" to cover any method of
investigation carried out by law enforcement officials, from accessing a Department
of Motor Vehicles database to wiretapping a telephone to strip-searching a suspect.
This rather awkward terminology is required because the term "search" has a very
particular meaning in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence as a method of surveillance

that implicates the Fourth Amendment to the degree that it requires probable cause
or a warrant. See Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 350-53 (1967).

2AC-Substantial
1. We meet: Our plan is substantial because
[Contextualize]
2. Counter-interpretationSubstantial means considerable
Words & Phrases 7 (WORDS AND PHRASES CUMULATIVE SUPPLEMENTARY
PAMPHLET,2007, Vol. 40B, 07, 95.)
The term substantially in the ADA means considerable or to a large degree. Heiko v.
Colombo Savings Bank.

3. Prefer our counter-interpretation because:


A) predictability- Our interpretation is very predictable it is the
most common usage of the word.
B) Limits- allowing the negative to arbitrarily dictate what is
considered substantial and what is not substantial means that
the debate around substantiality become infinitely regressive.

C) There is no internal link to their negative ground


arguments. The negative gets ample groundmake them
prove what ground they lose. We still link to FBI DAs,
CP's, and multiple Ks. And the negative gets core
generics such as terror DA's, as well as the Politics DA.
D) Reasonability
A. Good is good enough - if the neg has disadvantages,
counterplans, and other forms of clash, then there is no reason
to exclude us from the topic. Clash is ultimately the point of
debate.
B. Insures ground, limits, and avoids abuse- reasonability even if arbitrary- allows the negative their disadvantage
ground and decent ground for other arguments - their
arguments all assume an affirmative that is beyond the
general realms of the resolution - which they will not win a link
to.

2AC- T is not a voter

T not a voter:
A. Clash checks abuse-if the negative has something to say against our aff
then there is no reason we should lose the round.

B. Literature checks abuse-the affirmative is grounded topic literature which


enables the negative to research against our affirmative.

C. Discourages research-voting on topicality justifies the negative not doing


any research and running topicality every round which destroys education.

AT: AP def outdated


Cross-apply Kundnani 12 ev stating that preemptive
counterterrorism strategies specifically target Muslims
for undue surveillance. Post-9/11, there was a surge in
AP usage. This means that agent provocateurs do meet
the definition of surveillance that was preexisting
before 9/11 and are included when discussing
developments of those programs.

Disads

2AC Terrorism DA
Case Outweighs the disad - Cross apply our Wiezman
evidence here that says Util is terrible, and focusing on
deterring non-existent threats destroys any value to life..
Value to life is critical cause it allows convos of racism
and oppression that are skirted in the 1nc.
No Impact Extend our first 3 pieces of Kundnani evidence
that proves that there are no actual terrorist threats, and
reveals how state agencies create their own fake terrorist
attacks only to justify other types of domestic surveillance
that oppress people. The af solves for racialization of the
state through eliminating their ability to rationalize a nonexistent threat.
No Link (specific) Their Mosendz evidence is terrible. It
just says that two women were accused of planning to
think about trying to commit a terrorist attack. First of all
the card is super power tagged there isnt a single
sufficient warrant in this card, and the situation is
completely hypothetical, Second of all, these women were
most likely provoked by APs to even think about
committing any kind of terrorist attack.
No Link: FBI uses APs to create terrorists these people would
not commit terrorist acts if it werent for provocation
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 191-192)

there was nothing to suggest Cromitie and his crew were potential al-Qaeda
recruits. What seemed to initially draw Cromitie into the FBI's plot was his anger at US foreign policy. For the
In reality,

other three, it was being Muslim, poor enough to be vulnerable to cash inducements, and gullible enough to believe
they were really going to receive thousands of dollars for an operation they were completely incapable of carrying
out. The three had not expressed radical views or outrage at the oppression of Muslims in other parts of the world

The Newburgh four were simply struggling to survive in the


face of poverty, addiction, and mental health issues. The money spent by the
government on securing their convictions-Hussain received $100,000 in wages and expenses
-could have given them the support they needed to turn their lives around, whether
a living wage in a regular job or the health care services they needed . David Williams's
prior to Hussain's appearance.

aunt, Alicia McWilliams, characterizes the case as a television show put on by the government rather than a
genuine criminal investigation. Instead of wasting all this money to make a TV production, you could open up a job
traiuing center in Newburgh. These are all ex-offenders. You know what Newburgh looks like. Newburgh is the most
impoverished county. She

compares what happened to her nephew to earlier government

programs directed at African-American activism. COINTELPRO. The Black Panthers.


The use of informants in churches, back in the 1940s and 1950s. This is happening
all over again. But now the profile is Muslims. It just has a different name, and they're using different terms.24
Although-judge Colleen McMahon gave each of the Newburgh four twenty-five-year
prison sentences, she nevertheless criticized the FBI's approach. Only the
government could have made a terrorist out of Mr. Cromitie , a man whose buffoonery is
positively Shakespearean in its scope ... I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that there
would have been no crime here except [that] the government instigated it, planned
it, and brought it to fruition."

Turn: One third of domestic terrorist attacks are instigated by


agent provocateurs
Gitlin, 2013 (Todd Gitlin is a professor of journalism and sociology at Columbia University, the chair of the PhD
program in communications. The Wonderful American World of Informers and Agents Provocateurs, The Nation,
June 27. http://www.thenation.com/article/wonderful-american-world-informers-and-agents-provocateurs/)

Who teaches bombers to build and plant


actual or spurious bombs? The history of the secret police planting agents
provocateurs in popular movements goes back at least to nineteenth century France
and twentieth century Russia. In 1905, for example, the priest who led St. Petersburgs revolution was
Who casts the first stone? Who smashes the first window?

some sort of double agent, as was the man who organized the assassination of the Czars uncle, the Grand Duke. As
it happens, the United States has its own surprisingly full history of such planted agents at work turning small
groups or movements in directions that, for better or far more often worse, they werent planning on going. One
well-documented case is that of Tommy the Traveler, a Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) organizer who
after years of trying to arouse violent action convinced two 19-year-old students to firebomb an ROTC headquarters
at Hobart College in upstate New York. The writer John Schultz reported on likely provocateurs in Chicago during the
Democratic National Convention of 1968. How much of this sort of thing went on? Who knows? Many relevant
documents molder in unopened archives, or have been heavily redacted or destroyed. As the Boston marathon
bombing illustrates, there are homegrown terrorists capable of producing the weapons they need and killing
Americans without the slightest help from the U.S. government. But

historically, its surprising how

relatively often the gendarme is also a ringleader. Just how often is hard to know, since
information on the subject is fiendishly hard to pry loose from the secret world. Through 2011, 508
defendants in the U.S. were prosecuted in what the Department of Justice calls
terrorism-related cases. According to Mother Joness Trevor Aaronson, the FBI ran sting
operations that resulted in prosecutions against 158 defendants about onethird of the total. Of that total, 49 defendants participated in plots led by an agent
provocateur an FBI operative instigating terrorist action . With three exceptions, all of
the high-profile domestic terror plots of the last decade were actually FBI stings .

Link Turn: SQ lack of trust due to FBI surveillance curtails


traditional avenues of political activism, which makes
terrorism more likely. Plan restores civil liberties, preventing
ideological violence
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 199)
The use of a provocation strategy to secure terrorism convictions among American Muslims has had a number of

Given the large numbers of


informants operating in Muslim-American communities, mosque congregations and
Muslim community organizations understand that there is the possibility of an
far-reaching consequences beyond the impacts on the individuals prosecuted.

informant jotting down names and conversations and passing the information to the
government. With the prosecutors of the war on terror blurring the distinctions between First Amendment
-protected speech and criminal activity, many feel it is safest to avoid discussing certain
topics, such as Western foreign policy , except with one's closest friends and family.
Relationships of trust within Muslim communities are thereby eroded, as people
consider open discussions risky. Those who hold views critical of the government
choose not to express themselves publicly. As fear takes hold, the traditional
avenues of political activism, such as taking to the streets to protest, are less likely
to occur. According to official theories of radicalization, an atmosphere in which
political opposition to US imperialism cannot be freely expressed by Muslims helps
prevent terrorism. But in reality, the more those angry at foreign policy see their
community paralyzed by fear and reluctant to express itself openly, the more likely
it becomes that some will end up supporting terrorism . A strong, active, and
confident Muslim community enjoying its civil rights to the full and able to engage
with young people on issues they feel strongly about is the best way of preventing
violence.

No Link and Turn: Radical behavior is not predictive of


propensity to commit terrorist attacks By isolating radicals
and luring them into attacks, the FBI makes it harder to isolate
real terrorism
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 193-194)

Even putting aside such civil liberties issues, there are serious problems from a
pragmatic point of view. At the very least, a significant statistical correlation between the
ideological indicators of radicalization and terrorist violence would have to be
demonstrated in order to give some support for the view that ideology causes
terrorism. It would also be necessary to show that provocation is the most effective
way for a counterterrorist system to respond to it. On both counts, there are serious
objections. As we saw in Chapter 4, academic attempts to substantiate a link betweenradicalization indicators (such as expressions of religious ideology) and terrorist violence fall flat
when properly scrutinized. Such studies always seek to trace the ways in which an individual's belief in a
radical ideology emerges, on the assumption that radical ideologies cause violence - but this is precisely what

expressing particular religious beliefs or


anger at foreign policy are poor predictors of the likelihood of an individual
becoming a terrorist. Moreover, a counterterrorism system that monitors radicalization indicators, assuming
needs to be demonstrated rather than assumed. In fact,

that they have predictive value, may well be worse at avoiding attacks than one focused more narrowly on

Amassing vast quantities of


information on large numbers of so-called radical persons makes it harder to spot
the terrorism intelligence that is actually significant . More often than not, when the US
individuals inciting, financing, or preparing to carry out acts of terror.

government has failed to prevent terrorist acts, it is not because the intelligence was missing but because its
significance was not identified amid the huge tracts of surveillance data the national security state collects.

Government harassment makes cooperation with police less


likely
Bertini, 2011 (Joseph, MA in Security Studies from Georgetown University. STINGS, STOOLIES, AND AGENTS
PROVOCATEURS: EVALUATING FBI UNDERCOVER COUNTERRORISM OPERATIONS. MA Thesis, Proquest)

Undercover counterterrorism operations have even greater negative effects on Muslim-American communities. In a
qualitative study of Muslim-American reactions to the USA PATRIOT Act, Tony Gaskew found that many

Muslims

reported feeling harassed and unfairly targeted by law enforcement

since September 11,


2001.28 A Pew Research Center study found that 54% of Muslims feel that they are being singled-out by the
government, and 74% reported that this bothered them either some or a lot.29 In a similar study, Schanzer, et al.

the use of infiltrators in counterterrorism operations was a substantial


source of tension between Muslim-Americans and law enforcement organizations .30
found that

Muslim-American civil society groups have begun to draw attention to the prevalence of undercover operations.31

undercover operations must be weighed with the knowledge


that their unpopularity in Muslim-American communities could conflict with other
counterterrorism methods such as community-based policing.32
The CRS report argues that

Only a risk that FBI surveillance strategies increase violent


terrorism
Gitlin, 2013 (Todd Gitlin is a professor of journalism and sociology at Columbia University, the chair of the PhD
program in communications. The Wonderful American World of Informers and Agents Provocateurs, The Nation,
June 27. http://www.thenation.com/article/wonderful-american-world-informers-and-agents-provocateurs/)

when it comes to informers, agents provocateurs, and similar


matters, four things are clear enough : Terrorist plots arise, in the United States as
elsewhere, with the intent of committing murder and mayhem. Since 2001, in the U.S.,
these have been almost exclusively the work of freelance Islamist ideologues like
the Tsarnaev brothers of Boston. None have been connected in any meaningful way
with any legitimate organization or movement. Government surveillance may in
some cases have been helpful in scotching such plots, but there is no evidence that
it has been essential. Even based on the limited information available to us, since September 11, 2001,
the net of surveillance has been thrown wide indeed. Tabs have been kept on members of quite
a range of suspect populations, including American Muslims, anarchists, and environmentalists, among others in
situation after situation where there was no probable cause to suspect preparations
for a crime. At least on occasion we have no way of knowing how often agents provocateurs on
government payrolls have spurred violence.
Whatever the fog of surveillance,

Civil Libs o/w Terror


Err af - Even in wartime civil liberties come first
ShareAmerica 15 (April 6, 2015 ShareAmerica is managed by the Bureau of
International Information Programs within the U.S. Department of State. https://share.america.gov/civil-liberties-wartime/)
First, the United States has a long and unfortunate history of overreacting
to the perceived dangers of wartime. In each instance, we allowed our
fears to get the better of us. Second, it is often argued that in light of the
sacrifices we ask citizens (especially soldiers) to make in time of war, it is small
price to ask others to surrender some of their peacetime freedoms to help the war
effort. As the Supreme Court argued in Korematsu, hardships are part of war, and
war is an aggregation of hardships. This is a seductive, but dangerous argument.
To fight a war successfully, it is necessary for soldiers to risk their lives. But it is
not necessarily necessary for others to surrender their freedoms. That
necessity must be convincingly demonstrated, not merely presumed. And
this is especially true when, as is usually the case, the individuals whose
rights are sacrificed are not those who make the laws, but minorities,
dissidents and noncitizens. In those circumstances, we are making a
decision to sacrifice their rights not a very prudent way to balance
the competing interests.

2AC Human Trafficking DA


Destroy this da please its trash
Case outweighs the Dis- AD in every aspect. The Dis-AD doesnt provide any type
of magnanimous or probable impact. Look to our klemencic evidence that
particularly states entrapment is happening now and is putting the minorities in
distress.
No Link- Their evidence is talking about ALL UNDERCOVER AGENTS and isnt
specific to agent provocateurs which are set out specifically to provoke the
minorities.

AND, Human trafficking is done through the department of


Defense not the FBI as the Neg would want you to believe (lol
gg you messed up bruh)

DHS 15 -

(http://www.dhs.gov/topic/human-traffickingCombating Human Trafficking)

Human trafficking is a form of modern-day slavery, and involves the use of force, fraud, or coercion to exploit
human beings for some type of labor or commercial sex purpose. Every year, millions of men, women, and children
worldwideincluding in the United Statesare victims of human trafficking. Victims are often lured with false
promises of well-paying jobs or are manipulated by people they trust, but instead are forced or coerced into

The U.S.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is responsible for investigating
human trafficking, arresting traffickers and protecting victims. DHS initiates
hundreds of investigations and makes numerous arrests every year, using a
victim-centered approach. DHS also processes immigration relief through Continued Presence (CP), T
prostitution, domestic servitude, farm or factory labor, or other types of forced labor.

visas, and U visas to victims of human trafficking and other designated crimes.

2AC Focus DA
Case Outweighs the disad Focusing on deterring nonexistent threats destroys any value to life thats our first
piece of Kundnani. And cross-apply our Weizman evidence
here that says value to life is critical cause it allows
convos of racism and oppression that are skirted in the
1nc.
Link Turn: Entrapment is a waste of bureaucratic energy plan
frees up resources to focus on real threats
Gitlin, 2013 (Todd Gitlin is a professor of journalism and sociology at Columbia University, the chair of the PhD
program in communications. The Wonderful American World of Informers and Agents Provocateurs, The Nation,
June 27. http://www.thenation.com/article/wonderful-american-world-informers-and-agents-provocateurs/)

Entrapment and instigation to commit crimes are in themselves genuine dangers to


American liberties, even when the liberties are those of the reckless and wild. But there is another
danger to such pursuits: the attention the authorities pay to nonexistent threats (or
the creation of such threats) is attention not paid to actual threats. Anyone
concerned about the security of Americans should cast a suspicious eye on the
allocation or simply squandering of resources on wild goose chases . Consider some
particulars which have recently come to light. Under the Freedom of Information Act, the Partnership for Civil Justice

in 2011 and 2012, the Department of Homeland


Security (DHS) and other federal agencies were busy surveilling and worrying about a good
number of Occupy groups during the very time that they were missing actual warnings about actual
Fund (PCJF) has unearthed documents showing that,

terrorist actions. From its beginnings, the Occupy movement was of considerable interest to the DHS, the FBI, and
other law enforcement and intelligence agencies, while true terrorists were slipping past the nets they cast in the
wrong places. In the fall of 2011, the DHS specifically asked its regional affiliates to report on Peaceful Activist

Aware that
Occupy was overwhelmingly peaceful , the federally funded Boston Regional
Intelligence Center (BRIC), one of 77 coordination centers known generically as
fusion centers, was busy monitoring Occupy Boston daily. As the investigative journalist
Demonstrations, in addition to reporting on domestic terrorist acts and significant criminal activity.

Michael Isikoffrecently reported, they were not only tracking Occupy-related Facebook pages and websites but

It was in this
period that the FBI received the second of two Russian police warnings about the
extremist Islamist activities of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the future Boston Marathon
bomber. That citys police commissioner later testified that the federal authorities did not pass any information
writing reports on the movements potential impact on commercial and financial sector assets.

at all about the Tsarnaev brothers on to him, though theres no point in letting the Boston police off the hook either.
The ACLU has uncovered documents showing that, during the same period, they were paying close attention to the
internal workings of Code Pink and Veterans for Peace.

2AC Agenda Politics DA


1. Case outweighs the disad

Cross apply our Wiezman evidence here that says Util is


terrible, and focusing on deterring non-existent threats
destroys any value to life. This gives our !s the most
magnitude.
2. <INSERT NON-UNIQUES>

3. Fiat solves the link we should imagine a world in which the


plan has passed, not how it would pass
5. Vote no - the plan has already been introduced which would

trigger the link regardless


6. The plan is popular, theres no reason it shouldnt be because agents
provocateurs provide no benefit to society.

Plan is popular with Americans especially Muslim Americans


Bertini, 2011 (Joseph, MA in Security Studies from Georgetown University. STINGS, STOOLIES, AND AGENTS
PROVOCATEURS: EVALUATING FBI UNDERCOVER COUNTERRORISM OPERATIONS. MA Thesis, Proquest)
Undercover counterterrorism operations have even greater negative effects on Muslim-American communities. In a
qualitative study of Muslim-American reactions to the USA PATRIOT Act, Tony Gaskew found that many

Muslims

reported feeling harassed and unfairly targeted by law enforcement

since September 11,


2001.28 A Pew Research Center study found that 54% of Muslims feel that they are being singled-out by the
government, and 74% reported that this bothered them either some or a lot.29 In a similar study, Schanzer, et al.

the use of infiltrators in counterterrorism operations was a substantial


source of tension between Muslim-Americans and law enforcement organizations .30
Muslim-American civil society groups have begun to draw attention to the
prevalence of undercover operations.31 The CRS report argues that undercover operations must be
found that

weighed with the knowledge that their unpopularity in Muslim-American communities could conflict with other
counterterrorism methods such as community-based policing.32

7. Not intrinsic rational policymakers can do both


8. Politics are compartmentalized
Dickinson 9 professor of political science at Middlebury College and taught previously at Harvard University
where he worked under the supervision of presidential scholar Richard Neustadt (5/26/09, Matthew, Presidential
Power: A NonPartisan Analysis of Presidential Politics, Sotomayor, Obama and Presidential Power,
http://blogs.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2009/05/26/sotamayor-obama-and-presidential-power/, JMP

What is of more interest to me, however, is what her selection reveals about the basis of presidential power.

Political scientists, like baseball writers evaluating hitters, have devised numerous means of measuring a
presidents influence in Congress. I will devote a separate post to discussing these, but in brief, they often center
on the creation of legislative box scores designed to measure how many times a presidents
preferred piece of legislation, or nominee to the executive branch or the courts, is approved by Congress. That is,
how many pieces of legislation that the president supports actually pass Congress? How often do members of
Congress vote with the presidents preferences? How often is a presidents policy position supported by roll call

These measures, however, are a misleading gauge of presidential power they


are a better indicator of congressional power. This is because how members of Congress vote on a
nominee or legislative item is rarely influenced by anything a president does. Although
outcomes?

journalists (and political scientists) often focus on the legislative endgame to gauge presidential influence will
the President swing enough votes to get his preferred legislation enacted? this mistakes an outcome with actual

Once we control for other factors a member of Congress


ideological and partisan leanings, the political leanings of her constituency, whether
shes up for reelection or not we can usually predict how she will vote without
needing to know much of anything about what the president wants. (I am ignoring the
evidence of presidential influence.

importance of a presidents veto power for the moment.) Despite the much publicized and celebrated instances of

most legislative outcomes dont


depend on presidential lobbying. But this is not to say that presidents lack influence. Instead, the
presidential arm-twisting during the legislative endgame, then,

primary means by which presidents influence what Congress does is through their ability to determine the
alternatives from which Congress must choose. That is, presidential power is largely an exercise in agenda-setting
not arm-twisting. And we see this in the Sotomayer nomination. Barring a major scandal, she will almost certainly
be confirmed to the Supreme Court whether Obama spends the confirmation hearings calling every Senator or
instead spends the next few weeks ignoring the Senate debate in order to play Halo III on his Xbox. That is, how
senators decide to vote on Sotomayor will have almost nothing to do with Obamas lobbying from here on in (or
lack thereof). His real influence has already occurred, in the decision to present Sotomayor as his nominee. If we
want to measure Obamas power, then, we need to know what his real preference was and why he chose
Sotomayor. My guess and it is only a guess is that after conferring with leading Democrats and Republicans, he
recognized the overriding practical political advantages accruing from choosing an Hispanic woman, with leftleaning credentials. We cannot know if this would have been his ideal choice based on judicial philosophy alone, but
presidents are never free to act on their ideal preferences. Politics is the art of the possible. Whether Sotomayer is
his first choice or not, however, her nomination is a reminder that the power of the presidency often resides in the
presidents ability to dictate the alternatives from which Congress (or in this case the Senate) must choose.
Although Republicans will undoubtedly attack Sotomayor for her judicial activism (citing in particular her
decisions regarding promotion and affirmative action), her comments regarding the importance of gender and
ethnicity in influencing her decisions, and her views regarding whether appellate courts make policy, they run the
risk of alienating Hispanic voters an increasingly influential voting bloc (to the extent that one can view Hispanics
as a voting bloc!) I find it very hard to believe she will not be easily confirmed. In structuring the alternative before
the Senate in this manner, then, Obama reveals an important aspect of presidential power that cannot be measured
through legislative boxscores.

9. <INSERT IMPACT DEFENSE>

1AR Intrinsicness
A logical policymaker resolves the link their link evidence
doesnt prove a unique political tradeof between the af and
the disad. Opportunity costs are the only way to determine the
risk of the link.
<Contextualize to their links>

And intrinsicness is not a voter forcing teams to read intrinsic disads is


key to opportunity cost education which is a better form of politics.

They say politics disad good this is not an answer because you can read
politics scenarios with sequencing or horsetrading links that have intrinsic
tradeofs with the plan.

BELOW NEEDS TO BE ORGANIZED INTO AN ARG


Intrinsicness:A logical policymaker would both do the plan and
pass_____________
Instrinsicness is fundamentally a theory of decision-making
Before you can make a decision about action, you have to first consider who the
decision-maker is.
Intrisicness posits the judge in the role of the entirety of the USFG
It isnt a cost to the actor to do something and not do something negative to
themselves.
[(move to neg file) Neg response maybe your decision-making model is good
but its not connected to reality there is no singular USFG.
Intrinsicness is illogical no one policymaker wields control over the entirety of
the USFG.
Takes out all disads intrinsicness tends to become infinitely regressive.
Politics DA is good.
If neg says that condo is logical, then go ahead and use it to endorse the logical
policymaker]
1AR Block

In the 1AR extend the impact as to why intrinsicness is good things you can say
is that its key to logical decision-making and its reciprocal
Logical decision making coherent decision making model wouldnt view the
plan as an opportunity cost
Reciprocity adv. Cps are reciprocal, we should get to test whether the DA is
germane to the plan
A2 takes out all disads we can only deal with things that are in the
disadvantages specifically. The brightline is that intrinsicness arguments
shouldnt require solvency arguments the politics da provides evidence in the
1NC that proves the DA isnt intrinsic.
A2 not logical b/c not whole USFG it is logical because this decision-making
model accommodates fiat. Decision-making education is portable useful
outside of debate, more transferable than just politics based education.
Tether politics debate god arguments to process, the model; not just the normal
learning about politics is c00l!!!!
If the neg drops theory args then say:
WE GET NEW RESPONSES
Otherwise it incentivizes the 2ac to proliferate theory arguments
Discourages substantive debate
Theory is about best practices
Intrinsic: the policy is not the only unique instance of policymaking in the round;
if the judge is like the USFG, and he can pass the plan, then he can pass the
politics DA as well.
It is intrinsic because congress is made up of a lot of people, and the
announcement of the plan would cause backlash from the people who dislike it.
Intrinsic key to politics and negative ground, you learn about current events
education, and its the most real world.
The real inherent barrier to the plan is the unpopularity of it.
Fiat solves the link:
Our interpretation is that the affirmative must defend the political ramifications
from passing their plan.
Politics DA are good (look at intrinsicness).

1AR Political Capital Not Real


Political capital isnt real constituencies and party ideologies
are what influence how members of Congress vote. The
president doesnt hold sway their evidence discounts the fact
that pushes made by Clinton, Reagan, Johnson, Carter, etc.
couldnt overcome institutional dynamics.

1AR Politics
st

1 , UNIQUENESS
2nd LINK
3rd I/L
4th IMPACT

2AC ISIS Strikes Politics DA


Non-unique Obama authorized strikes already
Fox News 9/11

(Fox News, Obama authorizes military strikes against ISIS leadership, 09/11/14, AD:
09/12/14, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/11/obama-authorizes-military-strikes-against-isis-leadership/ |
Kushal)

Obama has authorized the Pentagon to target and kill leaders of the Islamic State
militant group, with the organizations head Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi being at the top of the
administrations list. U.S. military officials confirmed to Fox News Thursday that Obama had approved
the strikes against individual targets for the first time. The authorization was first reported by the
Washington Post. Obama had previously not permitted the military to target individuals from the
terrorist organization, also known as ISIS or ISIL, even if intelligence showed where they were located.
President

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said in a press briefing Thursday that the president is actively engaged
in selecting possible Islamic State targets that are available. The president has gotten guidance about targets
that are available and would be critical to denying ISIL a safe-haven both in Iraq and in Syria, Earnest said. Earnest
said the administration has identified the targets through ramped up "intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance
assets in the region. Pentagon spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby also told reporters Thursday that destroying a
group like the Islamic State requires an aggressive approach, which includes disrupting their ability to command
and control and to lead their own forces. Obama announced on Wednesday he is sharply escalating

the U.S. military campaign against militants, authorizing U.S. airstrikes in Syria along with
expanded airstrikes in Iraq.

2AC Ex-Im Politics DA


1. Case outweighs the disad
Cross apply our Wiezman evidence here that says Util is terrible, and
focusing on deterring non-existent threats destroys any value to life.
This gives our !s have the most magnitude

2. Wont pass rider bills and political brinkmanship


Hanson 8/28

(Christine Hanson, political correspondent for The Hill, Senate Dems threaten to hold
government hostage over Ex-Im Bank, 08/28/14, AD: 08/28/14, https://thehill.com/blogs/congressblog/politics/215765-senate-dems-threaten-to-hold-government-hostage-over-ex-im-bank | Kushal)

Leading up to the annual August Congressional recess, it was still business-as-usual on Capitol Hill. As members
caught their flights home, news reports were suggesting that Senate Democrats may try to tie legislation

the beleaguered Export-Import Bank and a longer term transportation


spending package to a continuing resolution bill that would be needed to fund the government beyond
extending the life of

September 30. In a brazen example of election-year brinksmanship, they may threaten to shut down the
government unless they get their way. Reauthorizing the Export Import Bank and the continuing resolution, which
funds the government, have absolutely nothing to do with one another. Although the government runs out of money
on September 30, the same day as the charter for the Export Import expires, the similarity stops there. This is an
important distinction and shouldnt be hijacked by politicians saying one is dependent on the other. In order to
avoid a government shutdown, Congress should pass a clean, long-term CR that runs until early next year, and
refrains from logrolling unrelated items into the measure. Democrats cried foul last autumn when House
Republicans wanted to attach health care related items to any continuing resolution. They would be wise to heed
their own advice this time around. Threats of shut down are political tactics, meant to distract from

the mounting evidence that the Export Import Bank should expire. As Americans for Prosperity and
our 30+ coalition partners have highlighted over the past several months, the reasons to oppose the Export
Import Bank are myriad: Its corporate welfare, it disadvantages domestic companies, it
send Americans tax dollars abroad, it crowds out private sector loans, it uses taxpayer
funds to boost private profits, etc. Reauthorizing the Export Import Bank should be debated on its merits,
which are dubious at best. To begin with, the bank accounts for a mere two percent of all exports from the United
States, a pittance in terms of the overall exports the United States send abroad. Backstopped by the taxpayers, this
free money is loaned to large multi-national corporations which then go overseas to encourage foreign countries
to buy their products. Taxpayers shouldnt be on the hook, especially when businesses have the same ability as
ordinary folks to go private lenders and not the federal government when they need a loan. Even more disturbing, a
recent article in the Wall Street Journal reported that bank officials received gifts and kickbacks in

order to steer federal contracts to favored companies. While they are back in their home districts
over recess, legislators are hearing from their constituents that they are tired of seeing
corporate welfare come out of Washington. Letting the Export Import Bank expire would
send a clear message that Washington gets it and is starting to get its house in order.
Legislators should be applauded for taking a stand against the special interests who are currently roaming the halls
of Congress, knocking on lawmakers doors and spreading the same politically-charged myths about the Banks
activities (along with their generous contributions, of course).

3. Fiat solves the link we should imagine a world in which the


plan has passed, not how it would pass

5. Vote no - the plan has already been introduced which would

trigger the link regardless


6. The plan is popular

7. Not intrinsic rational policymakers can do both


8. Politics are compartmentalized
Dickinson 9 professor of political science at Middlebury College and taught previously at Harvard University
where he worked under the supervision of presidential scholar Richard Neustadt (5/26/09, Matthew, Presidential
Power: A NonPartisan Analysis of Presidential Politics, Sotomayor, Obama and Presidential Power,
http://blogs.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2009/05/26/sotamayor-obama-and-presidential-power/, JMP
What is of more interest to me, however, is what her selection reveals about the basis of presidential power.

Political scientists, like baseball writers evaluating hitters, have devised numerous means of measuring a
presidents influence in Congress. I will devote a separate post to discussing these, but in brief, they often center
on the creation of legislative box scores designed to measure how many times a presidents
preferred piece of legislation, or nominee to the executive branch or the courts, is approved by Congress. That is,
how many pieces of legislation that the president supports actually pass Congress? How often do members of
Congress vote with the presidents preferences? How often is a presidents policy position supported by roll call

These measures, however, are a misleading gauge of presidential power they


how members of Congress vote on a
nominee or legislative item is rarely influenced by anything a president does. Although
outcomes?

are a better indicator of congressional power. This is because

journalists (and political scientists) often focus on the legislative endgame to gauge presidential influence will
the President swing enough votes to get his preferred legislation enacted? this mistakes an outcome with actual

Once we control for other factors a member of Congress


ideological and partisan leanings, the political leanings of her constituency, whether
shes up for reelection or not we can usually predict how she will vote without
needing to know much of anything about what the president wants. (I am ignoring the
evidence of presidential influence.

importance of a presidents veto power for the moment.) Despite the much publicized and celebrated instances of
presidential arm-twisting during the legislative endgame, then,

most legislative outcomes dont

depend on presidential lobbying. But this is not to say that presidents lack influence. Instead, the
primary means by which presidents influence what Congress does is through their ability to determine the
alternatives from which Congress must choose. That is, presidential power is largely an exercise in agenda-setting
not arm-twisting. And we see this in the Sotomayer nomination. Barring a major scandal, she will almost certainly
be confirmed to the Supreme Court whether Obama spends the confirmation hearings calling every Senator or
instead spends the next few weeks ignoring the Senate debate in order to play Halo III on his Xbox. That is, how
senators decide to vote on Sotomayor will have almost nothing to do with Obamas lobbying from here on in (or
lack thereof). His real influence has already occurred, in the decision to present Sotomayor as his nominee. If we
want to measure Obamas power, then, we need to know what his real preference was and why he chose
Sotomayor. My guess and it is only a guess is that after conferring with leading Democrats and Republicans, he
recognized the overriding practical political advantages accruing from choosing an Hispanic woman, with leftleaning credentials. We cannot know if this would have been his ideal choice based on judicial philosophy alone, but
presidents are never free to act on their ideal preferences. Politics is the art of the possible. Whether Sotomayer is
his first choice or not, however, her nomination is a reminder that the power of the presidency often resides in the
presidents ability to dictate the alternatives from which Congress (or in this case the Senate) must choose.
Although Republicans will undoubtedly attack Sotomayor for her judicial activism (citing in particular her
decisions regarding promotion and affirmative action), her comments regarding the importance of gender and
ethnicity in influencing her decisions, and her views regarding whether appellate courts make policy, they run the
risk of alienating Hispanic voters an increasingly influential voting bloc (to the extent that one can view Hispanics
as a voting bloc!) I find it very hard to believe she will not be easily confirmed. In structuring the alternative before
the Senate in this manner, then, Obama reveals an important aspect of presidential power that cannot be measured
through legislative boxscores.

9. No impact losing the bank has no long term economic


efects
DePillis, 8/1/14 (Lydia, The Washington Post, Do I Need to Care: Export-Import
Bank edition, http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2014/08/01/do-ineed-to-care-export-import-bank-edition/, AW)
The Ex-Im bank, at the very least, likely doesnt do Americans any harm. Its selffunded, returning about $1 billion last year to the Treasury in proceeds from interest
rates. While some companies such as Delta Airlines claim Ex-Im financing helps
their foreign rivals purchase supplies at lower cost, the effect is probably
outweighed by the U.S. government using its prodigious lending capacity on the
behalf of U.S. producers. The bank calculates that its 2013 portfolio currently
supports 205,000 jobs, which is an insignificant number of jobs. But would you
notice if the bank disappears at the end of September? If youre one of the 7,000
businesses the bank says it helped between 2007 and 2014, it could make the
difference between getting a big contract or not. If youre a shareholder of
Caterpillar, General Electric or Boeing three of the biggest recipients of Ex-Im
financing you might notice slightly lower returns. But overall, it only touches two
percent of U.S. exports. And often, Ex-Im financing is something thats just nice to
have, not essential. As the chief financial officer of New Jersey-based Rastelli Foods,
a big Ex-Im client, put it: If their charter is not renewed, we will be scrambling to
find trade insurance that is as flexible and easy to manage as that provided by Exim
Bank. Ultimately, as the Wall Street Journal explained, the fight over the Ex-Im
Bank reauthorization is more important for what it says about the shifting nature of
American politics than it is to the overall economy. The right wing of the Republican
party is flouting the desires of big business, while moderates get behind a mild form
of protectionism. Meanwhile, liberals have largely abandoned their previous
opposition, which arose in response to environmental and human rights issues with
the projects that Ex-Im used to support. Whether it survives is an indicator of whos
on top in Washington with some real consequences, but not far-reaching effects.

10. Private sector checks the impact


James 12 trade policy analyst at the Cato Institutes Herbert A. Stiefel Center
for Trade Policy Studies (October 2012, Sallie, Ending the Export-Import Bank,
http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/export-import-bank#7)//spark
The bank does not create the resources to
provide financing out of thin air: the money comes from taxes or the repayment
fees from previous loans, which would otherwise flow to the U.S. Treasury . In that sense,
the bank only redistributes resources by taking them from other areas of the economy. It reallocates
capital that would otherwise be available for other uses . When the bank diverts resources to
However, that is only one side of the equation.

politically selected activities, economic efficiency is lost unless the reallocation corrects a true market failure. But

there is no reason to think that the Ex-Im Bank knows how to better deploy
resources than consumers, investors, and businesses in private markets . Ex-Im Bank
supporters often say that the bank creates jobs without acknowledging any offsetting losses to the rest of the
economy. Thus the 227,000 jobs that Hochberg claims to have created are not necessarily "net jobs" that would not
exist in a world without the Ex-Im Bank. The relevant question is whether the Ex-Im Bank's activities create more
valuemeasured in terms of jobs, or exports, or economic growththan they destroy. At best,

the activities

of the bank have no discernible net impact on the number of jobs in the
U.S. economy. In many cases, Ex-Imbacked sales would have be completed
anyway with private financing. The bank says that it tries to avoid displacing private-sector finance, but
it can't avoid displacement entirely. Because the Ex-Im Bank is ready to step in with financing, no one can know
what terms might have been offered by private lenders had the bank not existed.

11. <INSERT IMPACT DEFENSE>

2AC TPA DA
Tpa already passed

2AC NSA Reform DA


1. Case outweighs the disad
Cross apply our wiezman evidence here that says Util is terrible, and
focusing on deterring non-existent threats destroys any value to life.
This gives our !s have the most magnitude.
2) Theyre a topical af. Theyre dumb..

2AC NASA Tradeof DA


1. Case outweighs the disad
2. Cross apply our wiezman evidence here that says Util is terrible, and
focusing on deterring non-existent threats destroys any value to life.
Our !s have the most magnitude

2. The disad is terminally non-unique budget has been


declining for decades
Foust 14 (Jeff, National Geographic, 05.30.14, NASA Facing New Space Science Cuts,
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/05/140530-space-politics-planetary-science-funding-exploration/,
Accessed 07.06.14)//LD

Funding for NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope , launched in 2003 and still producing good science,
may be cut. Alien worlds and the search for extraterrestrial life recently took center stage on Capitol Hill, a
break from standard political fare in Washington D.C. (Related: "Future of Spaceflight.") "Finding other sentient life
in the universe would be the most significant discovery in human history," began Lamar Smith, a Republican from
Texas who's chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, at the May 21 astrobiology
hearing. "The unknown and unexplored areas of space spark human curiosity," he went on, applauding recent
discoveries such as the most Earth-like world orbiting a nearby star discovered so far by NASA's Kepler Space

while the stars and planets beckon, a budget battle is


brewing over NASA, the $17.6-billion civilian space agency. Cuts threaten spacecraft and
telescopes, even as NASA struggles to clarify its mission in the post-space shuttle
era. (Related: "Future of Spaceflight.") Since the end of the Apollo missions in 1973, the
space agency's budget has steadily declined from 1.35 percent of federal
spending to less than 0.6 percent . A long-running annual drop in inflation-adjusted funds
took a sharp downward turn in the past two years, as budget cuts, including mandatory
ones ordered by Congress, trimmed almost a billion dollars from 2012 to 2013. The
Telescope. But the reality is that

2014 budget recovered some, but not all, of that cut. In addition, a fundamental debate is under way over the
future exploration aims of NASA. The Obama Administration favors "stepping stone" plans leading to an asteroid

A National Research
Council report released in late 2012 called NASA's strategic plan to explore asteroids
"vague," adding that the agency's explanations did not explain "why it is worthy of
taxpayer investment." The debate over funding the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI)which
visit in the next decade; congressional representatives call for a return to the moon.

was barred from receiving federal dollars in a 1993 congressional vote that scrubbed its ten-million-dollar yearly

Already squeezed
by decades of straitened funding, a variety of NASA missions, ranging from an
infrared space telescope to a 747-mounted observatory, now face cancellation.
operating costmirrors, in microcosm, the larger debate about paying for space science.

3. Sequestration makes Mars mission impossible


Kramer 14 (Miriam, Space Staff, 01.14.14, Manned Mission to Mars By 2030s Is Really Possible, Experts
Say , http://www.space.com/24268-manned-mars-mission-nasa-feasibility.html , Accessed 07.06.14)//LD

While Carberry said that it is possible to launch a manned mission to Mars by the
2030s under pre-sequestration budget levels, a NASA-led human mission to Mars
will probably never launch under current budgetary constraints, Carberry said.

"We're not far off from what we need," Carberry said. "We just need to get back into
a reasonable budget, which we're not in right now." President Barack Obama
requested about $17.7 billion for NASA during his 2013 budget proposal, $59 million
less than what the space agency received in 2012. "[NASA] funds are divided
between various missions, directorates and centers," Carberry said via email.
"Unless there was a MAJOR restructuring, it would be hard to accomplish a NASA-led
Mars mission [under the current budget]. That said, major disruptive technology
gains could always occur that could make it viable we just can't count on that
happening."

4. No link Aps arent based on surveillance agencies the FBI approves


permits AND the plan doesnt mandate USFG investment

5. Empirically funding isnt zero sum


Mangu-Ward 13 (Katherine, Reason magazine, New America Foundation,
09.04.13, Is the Ocean the Real Final Frontier?,
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/09/sea_vs_space_which
_is_the_real_final_frontier.html, Accessed 07.07.14)//LD
Ocean exploration is certainly
the underdog, so to speak, in the sea vs. space face-off . Theres no doubt that the general public
Is Hawkes right? Should we all be crawling back into the seas from which we came?

considers space the sexier realm. The occasional James Cameron joint aside, theres much more cultural celebration of space travel,
exploration, and colonization than there is of equivalent underwater adventures. In a celebrity death match between Captain Kirk

the rivalry can feel a bit lopsided the chess


the jocks arent losing much
sleep over the price of pawns and cheerleaders rarely turn out for chess
tournaments. But somehow the debate rages on in dorm rooms, congressional committee rooms, and Internet chat rooms.
Damp ocean boosters often aim to borrow from the rocket-fueled glamour of space .
and Jacques Cousteau, Kirk is going to kick butt every time. In fact,

club may consider the football program a competitor for funds and attention, but

Submersible entrepreneur Marin Beck talks a big game when he says, We can go to Mars, but the deep ocean really is our final
frontier, but he giggles when a reporter calls him the Elon Musk of the deep sea, an allusion to the founder of the for-profit
company Space X who is rumored to be the real-life model for Iron Mans Tony Stark. Even Hawkes admits that he grew up
dreaming of aircraftthough he means planes, not spaceshipsbut then I got to look at this subsea stuff and I saw this is where

many of the
technologies for space and sky are the similar, right down to the goofy suits with
bubble headsthe main difference is that in space, youre looking to keep pressure inside your vehicle and underwater
youre looking to keep pressure out theres often a sense that that sea and space are
competitors rather than compadres. They neednt be, says Guillermo Shnlein, a man who
straddles both realms. Shnlein is a serial space entrepreneur and the founder of the Space Angels Network.
aviation was all those years ago. The whole field was completely backwards, and thats why I jumped in. While

(Disclosure: My husbands a member.) The network funds startups aimed for the stars, but his most recent venture is Blue Marble
Exploration, which organizes expeditions in manned submersibles to exotic underwater locales. (Further disclosure: I have made a
very small investment in Blue Marble, but am fiscally neutral in the sea vs. space fight, since I have a similar amount riding on a
space company, Planetary Resources.) As usual, the fight probably comes down to money . The typical American
believes that NASA is eating up a significant portion of the federal budget (one 2007 poll found that respondents pinned that figure
at one-quarter of the federal budget), but the space agency is actually nibbling at a Jenny Craigsized portion of the pie. At about
$17 billion, government-funded space exploration accounts for about 0.5 percent of the federal budget. The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric AdministrationNASAs soggy counterpartgets much less, a bit more than $5 billion for a portfolio that, as the name

But the way Shnlein tells the story, this zero sum mind-set is the
result of a relatively recent historical quirk: For most of the history of human exploration,
private funding was the order of the day. Even some of the most famous examples of state-backed
suggests, is more diverse.

explorationChristopher

Columbus

long petitioning of Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, for instance, or Sir Edmund

Hillarys quest to climb to the top of Everest were

actually funded primarily by private investors or

nonprofits.

6. No threshold for the impact cant colonize fast enough to solve for our
!s, the af is critical to solve

7. Mars colonization isnt feasible radiation, space sickness,


sustainability
Lemind 14 (Anna, University of Piraeus, 02.20.14, The Other Side of Mars Colonization: Potential Dangers
of the Red Planet, http://www.learning-mind.com/the-other-side-of-mars-colonization-potential-dangers-of-the-redplanet/#Ay8spY2O4ifCbzcy.99, Accessed 07.04.14)//LD

As the prospect of a permanent colony on Mars is getting closer with every new
press release from the Mars One project, it probably makes sense to remember that
any person who will move permanently to Mars will most likely die untimely and
painful death. Here are some things that are most likely to cause it (all kinds of
technical problems are excluded from consideration): First of all, the Mars colonists
will be subjected to radiation before having set foot on the threshold of their new
home. Technically, the radiation level during the trip from Earth to Mars does not
exceed the capacity of the human body, but one should remember that the Sun is a
huge unpredictable radioactive destructive mass. Just one solar flare during the trip
to Mars will send a stream of high-energy particles that will damage any shielding
that can be created today. In fact, it will roast any creature that is not protected by
the planetary magnetic fields. In 2022, just a couple of years before the planned
start of the expedition, the Sun will be at the peak of its 11-year cycle. Then, on the
surface of Mars, the colonists would have to find a way to deal with a reduced
gravitational field of the planet. Since Mars has only a third of the earths gravity,
this factor can be fatal in the long term perspective. All aspects of our biological
structure from heart rate to the strength of our bones are related to gravity. As
soon as this force is removed, we begin to lose bone marrow and our heart and
vestibular system start to malfunction. It is the reason why the astronauts do not
stay on the ISS for longer than necessary. The effects of the so-called space
sickness on Mars will be reduced compared to the microgravity of outer space, but
in the long run they will likely lead to the terminal health problems. And finally,
there is a problem of self-sustaining life on the Red Planet. Since the supply
missions to Mars will cost billions of dollars, they will be probably delayed if the
colonists suddenly run out of something important, like the air, water or food. Of
course, each colony on Mars is planned as a self-sustaining system. However, just
one serious crop failure will lead to the lack of oxygen, which will be produced by
plants, and will raise the question of survival of the colonists.

2AC Cassini Tradeof DA


1. Case outweighs the disad
Cross apply our wiezman evidence here that says Util is terrible, and
focusing on deterring non-existent threats destroys any value to life.
Our !s have the most magnitude

2. The disad is terminally non-unique budget has been


declining for decades
Foust 14 (Jeff, National Geographic, 05.30.14, NASA Facing New Space Science Cuts,
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/05/140530-space-politics-planetary-science-funding-exploration/,
Accessed 07.06.14)//LD

Funding for NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope , launched in 2003 and still producing good science,
may be cut. Alien worlds and the search for extraterrestrial life recently took center stage on Capitol Hill, a
break from standard political fare in Washington D.C. (Related: "Future of Spaceflight.") "Finding other sentient life
in the universe would be the most significant discovery in human history," began Lamar Smith, a Republican from
Texas who's chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, at the May 21 astrobiology
hearing. "The unknown and unexplored areas of space spark human curiosity," he went on, applauding recent
discoveries such as the most Earth-like world orbiting a nearby star discovered so far by NASA's Kepler Space

while the stars and planets beckon, a budget battle is


brewing over NASA, the $17.6-billion civilian space agency. Cuts threaten spacecraft and
telescopes, even as NASA struggles to clarify its mission in the post-space shuttle
era. (Related: "Future of Spaceflight.") Since the end of the Apollo missions in 1973, the
space agency's budget has steadily declined from 1.35 percent of federal
spending to less than 0.6 percent . A long-running annual drop in inflation-adjusted funds
took a sharp downward turn in the past two years, as budget cuts, including mandatory
ones ordered by Congress, trimmed almost a billion dollars from 2012 to 2013. The
Telescope. But the reality is that

2014 budget recovered some, but not all, of that cut. In addition, a fundamental debate is under way over the
future exploration aims of NASA. The Obama Administration favors "stepping stone" plans leading to an asteroid

A National Research
Council report released in late 2012 called NASA's strategic plan to explore asteroids
"vague," adding that the agency's explanations did not explain "why it is worthy of
taxpayer investment." The debate over funding the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI)which
visit in the next decade; congressional representatives call for a return to the moon.

was barred from receiving federal dollars in a 1993 congressional vote that scrubbed its ten-million-dollar yearly

Already squeezed
by decades of straitened funding, a variety of NASA missions, ranging from an
infrared space telescope to a 747-mounted observatory, now face cancellation.
operating costmirrors, in microcosm, the larger debate about paying for space science.

3. No link Aps arent based on surveillance agencies the FBI


approves permits AND the plan doesnt mandate USFG
investment
4. Other budgets are bookmarked for tradeofs
SVITAK 11 (3/29. Amy; Senior Writer Space.com, NASAs Budget Could Get
Infusion From Other U.S. Departments, http://www.space.com/11247-nasa-budgetfunding-commerce-justice-departments.html, 2011, RZ)

Congressional appropriators could tap the funding accounts of the U.S. departments
of Commerce and Justice to help cover what some see as a $1 billion shortfall in NASAs $18.7
billion spending plan for 2012, which allocates less money for a heavy-lift rocket and crew capsule than
Congress directed last year. Theres over a billion-dollar difference between the budget request and the authorized
levels in [20]12 for the launch system and the crew vehicle, and now that falls squarely back on the shoulders of
[the appropriations committees] to try and figure out where to come up with that money, said a panelist at a
March 23 breakfast on Capitol Hill. Sponsored by Women in Aerospace (WIA), the breakfast was held under the
Chatham House Rule, an 84-year-old protocol fashioned by the London-based nonprofit think-tank to promote frank
discussion through anonymity. [What Obama and Congress Should Do for Spaceflight] The panelist, one of six
whose names and job titles were circulated by WIA prior to the meeting, said funding requested in NASAs 2012
spending plan does not square with levels Congress set in the NASA Authorization Act of 2010 that U.S. President
Barack Obama signed into law in October. Specifically, the request called for spending $1.2 billion less than the $4
billion Congress authorized for the heavy-lift launch vehicle and crew capsule in 2012. At the same time, the
request includes $350 million more than the $500 million Congress authorized to nurture development of
commercial vehicles to deliver cargo and crews to the International Space Station after the space shuttle retires

it is now up to congressional appropriators to find a


to make those tradeoffs and
take that money out of the departments of Commerce or Justice or the other
agencies that are funded in the same bill as NASA. NASAs annual appropriation is
part of a broader spending package totaling nearly $65 billion that funds the U.S.
Commerce and Justice departments, the National Science Foundation, the National
Institute of Standards and Technology and related agencies. But with NASA and other federal
later this year. Consequently, the panelist said,

billion dollars in other places in NASA to pay for those activities or to decide

agencies operating in a fiscally constrained environment, the panelist said Congress could struggle to fund new
multibillion-dollar programs next year. Its not impossible but the ability to do that is severely constrained in the
environment were working in now, and thats exacerbated by budget requests coming up from the administration
that dont track with the authorization, the panelist said. Congress has yet to pass an appropriations bill for 2011,
leaving NASA and most federal agencies to subsist at 2010 spending levels in the current budget year. The panelist
said passing spending legislation for NASA is a complicated and challenging thing this year, and it will be again
next year given a fiscal climate that has changed dramatically authorized funding levels for the space agency were
set last fall. However, the panelist said the appropriations subcommittees that fund NASA are very supportive of
the agency, theyre supportive of the authorization, they want to see NASA get as close as possible to those
authorized levels, so that will be a work in progress.

5. Empirically funding isnt zero sum


Mangu-Ward 13 (Katherine, Reason magazine, New America Foundation,
09.04.13, Is the Ocean the Real Final Frontier?,
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/09/sea_vs_space_which
_is_the_real_final_frontier.html, Accessed 07.07.14)//LD
Ocean exploration is certainly
the underdog, so to speak, in the sea vs. space face-off . Theres no doubt that the general public
Is Hawkes right? Should we all be crawling back into the seas from which we came?

considers space the sexier realm. The occasional James Cameron joint aside, theres much more cultural celebration of space travel,
exploration, and colonization than there is of equivalent underwater adventures. In a celebrity death match between Captain Kirk

the rivalry can feel a bit lopsided the chess


club may consider the football program a competitor for funds and attention, but the jocks arent losing much
sleep over the price of pawns and cheerleaders rarely turn out for chess
tournaments. But somehow the debate rages on in dorm rooms, congressional committee rooms, and Internet chat rooms.
Damp ocean boosters often aim to borrow from the rocket-fueled glamour of space .
and Jacques Cousteau, Kirk is going to kick butt every time. In fact,

Submersible entrepreneur Marin Beck talks a big game when he says, We can go to Mars, but the deep ocean really is our final
frontier, but he giggles when a reporter calls him the Elon Musk of the deep sea, an allusion to the founder of the for-profit
company Space X who is rumored to be the real-life model for Iron Mans Tony Stark. Even Hawkes admits that he grew up
dreaming of aircraftthough he means planes, not spaceshipsbut then I got to look at this subsea stuff and I saw this is where

many of the
technologies for space and sky are the similar, right down to the goofy suits with
aviation was all those years ago. The whole field was completely backwards, and thats why I jumped in. While

bubble headsthe

main difference is that in space, youre looking to keep pressure inside your vehicle and underwater

youre looking to keep pressure out theres

often a sense that that sea and space are


competitors rather than compadres. They neednt be, says Guillermo Shnlein, a man who
straddles both realms. Shnlein is a serial space entrepreneur and the founder of the Space Angels Network.
(Disclosure: My husbands a member.) The network funds startups aimed for the stars, but his most recent venture is Blue Marble
Exploration, which organizes expeditions in manned submersibles to exotic underwater locales. (Further disclosure: I have made a
very small investment in Blue Marble, but am fiscally neutral in the sea vs. space fight, since I have a similar amount riding on a
space company, Planetary Resources.) As usual, the fight probably comes down to money . The typical American
believes that NASA is eating up a significant portion of the federal budget (one 2007 poll found that respondents pinned that figure
at one-quarter of the federal budget), but the space agency is actually nibbling at a Jenny Craigsized portion of the pie. At about
$17 billion, government-funded space exploration accounts for about 0.5 percent of the federal budget. The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric AdministrationNASAs soggy counterpartgets much less, a bit more than $5 billion for a portfolio that, as the name

But the way Shnlein tells the story, this zero sum mind-set is the
result of a relatively recent historical quirk: For most of the history of human exploration,
private funding was the order of the day. Even some of the most famous examples of state-backed
explorationChristopher Columbus long petitioning of Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, for instance, or Sir Edmund
Hillarys quest to climb to the top of Everest were actually funded primarily by private investors or
nonprofits.
suggests, is more diverse.

6. No threshold for the impact other countries have overtaken us in


leadership, satellite construction is long-term and cant solve

7. STEM leadership is structurally flawed


Charette 5/12 (2014, Robert, http://spectrum.ieee.org/riskfactor/at-work/techcareers/exposing-the-roots-of-the-perpetual-stem-crisis-?
utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed
%3A+IeeeSpectrum+(IEEE+Spectrum), IEEE SPECTRUM, accessed 5/19/14,

Okay, here are your choices: 1957, 1982, and 2014. Match each year to when the following statements were
made: a. It is pretty generally realized that our country faces a serious scientific and engineering manpower
shortage. We have at present about half the engineers which we need, and each year we are graduating only about
half our annual needs. b. Science, technology, engineering and math form the foundation of the global economy.
Yet, if educational trends continue, fewer qualified candidates will be available to support growth in these
areas. c. We appear to be raising a generation of Americans, many of whom lack the understanding and the skills
necessary to participate fully in the technological world in which they live and work. Well, for the record, the order
of the year when each statement was made is1957, 2014 and 1982. However, as explained in Michael Teitelbaums
new book, Falling Behind?: Boom, Bust & the Global Race For Scientific Talent (Princeton University Press:2014),

Teitelbaum is a Senior Research Associate in


the Labor and Worklife Program at Harvard Law School (and whom I interviewed for my IEEE
Spectrum feature, The STEM Crisis is a Myth). According to him, since the end of the Second World War
there have been regular proclamations of shortfalls in the graduation rates of engineers and scientists,
as well as prophecies of the imminent loss of U.S. technical leadership caused by the abysmal
education of U.S. students in math and sciences . Teitelbaum writes that these recurring concerns
whatever order you chose is as good as any other.

could well be cut and pasted into one sentence: The United States, long a leader in the number and quality of its
scientists and engineers, has been falling behind its international competitors, and is thereby risking serious
deterioration in its future prosperity and security. However, as Teitelbaum clearly demonstrates in his well-

the past and current cries of an engineering and science crisis are quite
inconsistent with nearly all the available evidence , going back to the early 1950s. Teitelbaum
researched book,

begins Falling Behind? by examining the many hyperbolic claimsof the current so-called science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) crisis. He expertly dissects these assertions and clearly demonstrates the
weak assumptions and sloppy reasoning underlying each. Teitelbaum next turns his attention to previous
declarations of engineer and scientist shortages over the previous seventy years in a chapter aptly titled, No

Shortage of Shortages. Teitelbaum has been debunking these claims since the 1980s. In Falling Behind?, he shows

the fear sown by the false alarms of impending doom did achieve their political goals
spurring governmental actions to alleviate the supposed crisis by pouring more money
into research and education. However, those crying wolf have also produced a series of (at least) five alarm
that

of successfully

boom-busts episodes that have predictablyif unintentionallydestabilized the U.S. science and engineering
workforce. In addition, Teitelbaum argues, when the artificially created demand for engineers and scientist goes
bust, it serves to discourage those very same sought-after students from pursuing engineering and science careers

the basic problems in attracting students to


science, technology, engineering, and mathematics are structural in origin, and cannot be cured simply by
in the first place. Teitelbaum's analysis shows that

providing additional resources. He devotes a full chapter describing how the U.S. engineering and science
academic production process operates, and how that process is insulated, especially at the graduate degree level,
from the needs of the market. As Teitelbaum demonstrates, the current system of higher education has been
geared for some time towards producing PhDs and postdoctoral students irrespective of whether there is sufficient
demand for such highly educated personnel in the market place. Especially useful is the light Teitelbaum shines
on the many financial and political incentives that motivate industry, academia and government to proclaim an
engineering and science crisis. He dedicates most of a chapter to, for example, exposing incessant lobbying efforts
to increase the number H-1B visa workers to meet the supposed STEM shortage. Teitelbaum describes in detail the
various lobbying organizations, interest groups and companies involved and how they are spending tens, if not
hundreds, of millions of dollars to change immigration policy. Teitelbaum also distressingly, but accurately, points
out how advocates of these shortage claims have had a nearly open field in politics and the media, and that while
there have been decades of credible evidence debunking shortage claims, those making them are far less
organized, funded or politically connected than those making those claims. This disparity in resources,
organization and political power make the fight for the truth, really no contest. This was apparent in a recent
STEM Crisis Debate sponsored by the Information Technology and Information Foundation (ITIF), a Washington,
D.C. think tank. The ITIF insists there is a shortage of STEM students and workers, and is an advocate of increasing
the number of H-1B visas. Robert Atkinson, ITIF president, for example, was quoted as saying, If you dont say
there is a shortage, you dont drive improvement. That sort of admission (as do others) goes unnoticed in much of
the press, as exemplified by the newspaper USA Today, which has been strongly beating the U.S. STEM crisis drum
for quite some time.

8. No impact - science diplomacy fails and risks more conflict


Dickson 9 [David, Director SciDev.Net, news editor of Nature from 1993 to August 2001, and was the journals
Washington correspondent from 1977 to 1982, The limits of science diplomacy, June 4,
http://www.scidev.net/en/editorials/the-limits-of-science-diplomacy.html],

Using science for diplomatic purposes has obvious attractions and several benefits. But there
are limits to what it can achieve. The scientific community has a deserved reputation for its international
perspective scientists often ignore national boundaries and interests when it comes to exchanging ideas or
collaborating on global problems. So it is not surprising that science attracts the interest of politicians keen to open
channels of communication with other states. Signing agreements on scientific and technological cooperation is
often the first step for countries wanting to forge closer working relationships. More significantly, scientists have
formed key links behind-the-scenes when more overt dialogue has been impossible. At the height of the Cold War,
for example, scientific organisations provided a conduit for discussing nuclear weapons control. Only so much
science can do Recently, the Obama administration has given this field a new push, in its desire to pursue "soft
diplomacy" in regions such as the Middle East. Scientific agreements have been at the forefront of the
administration's activities in countries such as Iraq and Pakistan. But as emerged from a meeting entitled New

using science for diplomatic


purposes is not as straightforward as it seems. Some scientific collaboration clearly
Frontiers in Science Diplomacy, held in London this week (12 June)

demonstrates what countries can achieve by working together. For example, a new synchrotron under construction

whether
scientific cooperation can become a precursor for political collaboration is
less evident. For example, despite hopes that the Middle East synchrotron would
help bring peace to the region, several countries have been reluctant to
support it until the Palestine problem is resolved . Indeed, one speaker at the
in Jordan is rapidly becoming a symbol of the potential for teamwork in the Middle East. But

London meeting (organised by the UK's Royal Society and the American Association for the Advancement
of Science) even suggested that the changes scientific innovations bring
inevitably lead to turbulence and upheaval . In such a context, viewing science as a driver
for peace may be wishful thinking. Conflicting ethos Perhaps the most contentious area discussed at
the meeting was how science diplomacy can frame developed countries' efforts to help build scientific capacity in
the developing world. There is little to quarrel with in collaborative efforts that are put forward with a genuine desire
for partnership. Indeed, partnership whether between individuals, institutions or countries is the new buzzword
in the "science for development" community. But true partnership requires transparent relations between partners
who are prepared to meet as equals. And that goes against diplomats' implicit role: to promote and defend their
own countries' interests. John Beddington, the British government's chief scientific adviser, may have been a bit
harsh when he told the meeting that a diplomat is someone who is "sent abroad to lie for his country". But he
touched a raw nerve. Worlds apart yet co-dependent

The truth is that science and politics

make an uneasy alliance. Both need the other. Politicians need science to achieve their goals, whether
social, economic or unfortunately military; scientists need political support to fund their research. But they
also occupy diferent universes. Politics is, at root, about exercising power by one means or another.
Science is or should be about pursuing robust knowledge that can be put to useful purposes. A strategy for
promoting science diplomacy that respects these differences deserves support. Particularly so if it focuses on ways
to leverage political and financial backing for science's more humanitarian goals, such as tackling climate change or
reducing world poverty. But

a commitment to science diplomacy that ignores the

diferences acting for example as if science can substitute politics (or perhaps more worryingly, vice versa),
is dangerous. The Obama administration's commitment to "soft power" is already
faltering. It faces challenges ranging from North Korea's nuclear weapons test to
domestic opposition to limits on oil consumption. A taste of reality may be no bad thing .

2AC Environment DA
1. Case outweighs the disad
Cross apply our wiezzman evidence here that says Util is terrible, and
focusing on deterring non-existent threats destroys any value to life.
Our !s have the most magnitude.

2. No link (blow this up) The af doesnt endorse any type of


consumption, or create any polution

3. Life adapts against pollution


UCSB, 13

(University of California Santa Barbara, Ocean's future not so bleak? Resilience found in shelled
plants exposed to ocean acidification, Science Daily, 4/15/13,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130415100903.htm)//SJF

Marine scientists have long understood the detrimental effect of fossil fuel emissions on marine ecosystems. But a

group led by a UC Santa Barbara professor has found a point of resilience in a


microscopic shelled plant with a massive environmental impact, which suggests the
future of ocean life may not be so bleak. As fossil fuel emissions increase, so does the
amount of carbon dioxide oceans absorb and dissolve, lowering their pH levels. " As pH declines, there is
this concern that marine species that have shells may start dissolving or may have
more difficulty making calcium carbonate, the chalky substance that they use to build shells," said
Debora Iglesias-Rodriguez, a professor in UCSB's Department of Ecology, Evolution and Marine Biology. IglesiasRodriguez and postdoctoral researcher Bethan Jones, who is now at Rutgers University, led a large-scale study on
the effects of ocean acidification on these tiny plants that can only be seen under the microscope. Their research,
funded by the European Project on Ocean Acidification, is published in the journal PLoS ONE and breaks with
traditional notions about the vitality of calcifiers, or creatures that make shells, in future ocean conditions. "The

story years ago was that ocean acidification was going to be bad , really bad for calcifiers,"
said Iglesias-Rodriguez, whose team discovered that one species of the tiny single celled marine coccolithophore,
Emiliania huxleyi, actually had bigger shells in high carbon dioxide seawater conditions. While the team
acknowledges that calcification tends to decline with acidification, "we

now know that there are


variable responses in sea corals, in sea urchins, in all shelled organisms that we find
in the sea." These E. huxleyi are a large army of ocean-regulating shell producers that create oxygen as they
process carbon by photosynthesis and fortify the ocean food chain. As one of Earth's main vaults for
environmentally harmful carbon emissions, their survival affects organisms inside and outside the marine system.

as increasing levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide causes seawater to slide


down the pH scale toward acidic levels, this environment could become less
hospitable. The UCSB study incorporated an approach known as shotgun proteomics
to uncover how E. huxleyi's biochemistry could change in future high carbon dioxide
conditions, which were set at four times the current levels for the study. This approach
However,

casts a wider investigative net that looks at all changes and influences in the environment as opposed to looking at
individual processes like photosynthesis. Shotgun proteomics examines the type, abundance, and alterations in
proteins to understand how a cell's machinery is conditioned by ocean acidification. "There is no perfect approach,"
said Iglesias-Rodriguez. "They all have their caveats, but we think that this is a way of extracting a lot of information

from this system." To mirror natural ocean conditions, the team used over half a ton of seawater to grow the E.
huxleyi and bubbled in carbon dioxide to recreate both present day and high future carbon levels. It took more than
six months for the team to grow enough plants to accumulate and analyze sufficient proteins. The team found that
E. huxleyi cells exposed to higher carbon dioxide conditions were larger and contained more shell than those grown

larger cells grow slower than those under


current carbon dioxide conditions. Aside from slower growth, the higher carbon dioxide
levels did not seem to affect the cells even at the biochemical level , as measured by
the shotgun proteomic approach. "The E. huxleyi increased the amount of calcite
they had because they kept calcifying but slowed down division rates ," said IglesiasRodriguez. "You get fewer cells but they look as healthy as those under current ocean
conditions, so the shells are not simply dissolving away."
in current conditions. However, they also found that these

6. Turn growth empirically drives environmental improvements

Mead, 12 --- Professor of Foreign Affairs and Humanities at Bard College (7/28/2012, Walter Russell, The Energy Revolution 4: Hot Planet?
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/07/28/the-energy-revolution-4-hot-planet/, JMP)

Capitalism is not, Monbiot is forced to admit, a fragile system that will easily be replaced .
Bolstered by huge supplies of oil, it is here to stay. Industrial civilization is, as far as he
can now see, unstoppable. Gaia, that treacherous slut, has made so much oil and gas that her faithful acolytes today cannot protect her from
the consequences of her own folly.
Welcome to the New Green Doom: an overabundance of oil and gas is going to release so much greenhouse gas that the world is going to fry. The
exploitation of the oil sands in Alberta, warn leading environmentalists, is a tipping point. William McKibben put it this way in an interview with Wired
magazine in the fall of 2011:
I think if we go whole-hog in the tar sands, were out of luck. Especially since that would doubtless mean were going whole-hog at all the other
unconventional energy sources we can think of: Deepwater drilling, fracking every rock on the face of the Earth, and so forth.
Heres why the tar sands are important: Its a decision point about whether, now that were running out of the easy stuff, were going to go after the
hard stuff. The Saudi Arabian liquor store is running out of bottles. Do we sober up, or do we find another liquor store, full of really crappy booze, to break
into?
A year later, despite the success of environmentalists like McKibben at persuading the Obama administration to block a pipeline intended to ship this oil to
refineries in the US, its clear (as it was crystal clear all along to anyone with eyes to see) that the world has every intention of making use of the crappy
liquor.

greens prove
over and over again that they are surprisingly naive and crude in their ability to
model and to shape the behavior of the political and economic systems they
seek to control. If their understanding of the future of the earths climate is anything like as wish-driven, fact-averse and intellectually crude
Again, for people who base their claim to world leadership on their superior understanding of the dynamics of complex systems,

as their approach to international affairs, democratic politics and the energy market, the greens are in trouble indeed. And as Ive written in the past, the
contrast between green claims to understand climate and to be able to manage the largest and most complex set of policy changes ever undertaken, and
the evident incompetence of greens at managing small (Solyndra) and large (Kyoto, EU cap and trade, global climate treaty) political projects today has
more to do with climate skepticism than greens have yet understood. Many people arent rejecting science; they are rejecting green claims of policy
competence. In doing so, they are entirely justified by the record.

the future of the environment is not nearly as dim as greens think.


Despairing environmentalists like McKibben and Monbiot are as wrong about what the new era of
abundance means as green energy analysts were about how much oil the planet
had.
Nevertheless,

If greens werent so addicted to


Malthusian horror narratives they would be able to see that the new era of
abundance is going to make this a cleaner planet faster than if the new gas
and oil had never been found.
The problem is the original sin of much environmental thought: Malthusianism.

Lets be honest. It has long been clear to students of history, and has more recently begun to dawn on many environmentalists, that all that happy-clappy
carbon treaty stuff was a pipe dream and that nothing like that is going to happen. A humanity that hasnt been able to ban the bomb despite the clear
and present dangers that nuclear weapons pose isnt going to ban or even seriously restrict the internal combustion engine and the generator.
The political efforts of the green movement to limit greenhouse gasses have had very little effect so far, and it is highly unlikely that they will have more

The green movement has been more of a group hug than a curve
bending exercise, and that is unlikely to change. If the climate curve bends, it will bend the way the population curve did: as the result of
success in the future.

lots of small human decisions driven by short term interest calculations rather than as the result of a grand global plan.

The shale boom hasnt turned green success into green failure. Its prevented green
failure from turning into something much worse . Monbiot understands this better than McKibben; there was never
any real doubt that wed keep going to the liquor store. If we hadnt found ways to use all this oil and gas, we wouldnt have embraced the economics of
less. True, as oil and gas prices rose, there would be more room for wind and solar power, but the real winner of an oil and gas shortage is coal. To use
McKibbens metaphor, there is a much dirtier liquor store just down the road from the shale emporium, and its one weve been patronizing for centuries.
The US and China have oodles of coal, and rather than walk to work from our cold and dark houses all winter, wed use it. Furthermore, when and if the oil
runs out, the technology exists to get liquid fuel out of coal. It isnt cheap and it isnt clean, but it works.
The newly bright oil and gas future means that we arent entering a new Age of Coal. For this, every green on the planet should give thanks.
The second reason why greens should give thanks for shale is that

environmentalism is a luxury good. People must survive

A
poor society near the edge of survival will dump the industrial waste in the
river without a second thought. It will burn coal and choke in the resulting smog if it
has nothing else to burn.
and they will survive by any means necessary. But they would much rather thrive than merely survive, and if they can arrange matters better, they will.

Politics in an age of survival is ugly and practical . It has to be. The best leader is the one who can cut out all the
fluff and the folderol and keep you alive through the winter. During the Battle of Leningrad, people burned
priceless antiques to stay alive for just one more night.
An age of energy shortages and high prices translates into an age of radical food
and economic insecurity for billions of people. Those billions of hungry,
frightened, angry people wont fold their hands and meditate on the ineffable wonders of
Gaia and her mystic web of life as they pass peacefully away. Nor will they vote George Monbiot and Bill McKibben into power.
They will butcher every panda in the zoo before they see their children starve, they
will torch every forest on earth before they freeze to death, and the cheaper and the
meaner their lives are, the less energy or thought they will spare to the perishing
world around them.
We are heading into a world in
which energy is abundant and horizons are open even as humanitys grasp of
science and technology grows more secure . A world where more and more basic
human needs are met is a world that has time to think about other goals and
the money to spend on them. As China gets richer, the Chinese want cleaner air,
cleaner water, purer food and they are ready and able to pay for them . A Brazil
whose economic future is secure can afford to treasure and conserve its rain forests .
A Central America where the people are doing all right is more willing and able to preserve its biodiversity. And a world in which
people know where their next meal is coming from is a world that can and will take
thought for things like the sustainability of the fisheries and the protection of
the coral reefs.
But, thanks to shale and other unconventional energy sources, that isnt where we are headed.

A world that is more relaxed about the security of its energy sources is going to be able to do more about improving the quality of those sources and about

A rich, energy secure world is going to


spend more money developing solar power and wind power and other sustainable
sources than a poor, hardscrabble one.
managing the impact of its energy consumption on the global commons.

Once Americans had an


industrial and modern economy, we started wanting to clean up the rivers and
the air. Once people arent worried about getting enough calories every day to
survive, they start wanting healthier food more elegantly prepared.
When human beings think their basic problems are solved, they start looking for more elegant solutions.

A
prosperous world will set money aside for research and development for new
technologies that conserve energy or find it in cleaner surroundings . A prosperous
world facing climate change will be able to ameliorate the consequences and take
thought for the future in ways that a world overwhelmed by energy insecurity and
gripped in a permanent economic crisis of scarcity simply cant and wont
do.
A world of abundant shale oil and gas is a world that will start imposing more environmental regulations on shale and gas producers.

Greens should also be glad that the new energy is where it is. For Monbiot and for many others, Gaias decision to put so much oil into the United States
and Canada seems like her biggest indiscretion of all. Certainly, a United States of America that has, in the Biblical phrase, renewed its youth like an eagle
with a large infusion of fresh petro-wealth is going to be even less eager than formerly to sign onto various pie-in-the-sky green carbon treaties.
But think how much worse things would be if the new reserves lay in dictatorial kleptocracies. How willing and able would various Central Asia states have
been to regulate extraction and limit the damage? How would Nigeria have handled vast new reserves whose extraction required substantially more
invasive methods?

the new sources are concentrated in places where environmentalists have


more say in policy making and where, for all the shortcomings and limits,
governments are less corruptible, more publicly accountable and in fact more
competent to develop and enforce effective energy regulations. This wont satisfy McKibben and
Instead,

Monbiot (nothing that could actually happen would satisfy either of these gentlemen), but it is a lot better than what we could be facing.
Additionally, if there are two countries in the world that should worry carbon-focused greens more than any other, they are the United States and China.
The two largest, hungriest economies in the world are also home to enormous coal reserves. But based on what we now know, the US and China are

In a
world of energy shortages and insecurity, both the US and China would have gone
flat out for coal. Now, that is much less likely.
among the biggest beneficiaries of the new cornucopia. Gaia put the oil and the gas where, from a carbon point of view, it will do the most good.

And theres one more reason why greens should thank Gaia for shale. Wind and solar arent ready for prime time now, but by the time the new sources
start to run low, humanity will have mastered many more technologies that can used to provide energy and to conserve it. Its likely that Age of Shale
hasnt just postponed the return of coal: because of this extra time, there likely will never be another age in which coal is the dominant industrial fuel. Its
virtually certain that the total lifetime carbon footprint of the human race is going to be smaller with the new oil and gas sources than it would have been
without them.

Neither the worlds energy problems nor its climate issues are going away any time
soon. Paradise is not beckoning just a few easy steps away. But the new availability of these energy sources is on balance a positive thing for
environmentalists as much as for anyone else.
Perhaps, and I know this is a heretical thought, but perhaps Gaia is smarter than the greens.

7. <INSERT IMPACT DEFENSE>

(!D) AT: Environment (General)


Bad studiestheir evidence is anecdotal, empirically denied, and tainted
by moral tunnel visionthere is no scenario for complete collapse
Ridder 2008 PhD, School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania (Ben, Biodiversity And Conservation, 17.4,
Questioning the ecosystem services argument for biodiversity conservation) *ES = environmental services

The low resilience assumption

low
resilience assumption gives rise to, and is reinforced by the almost ubiquitous claim
within the conservation literature that ES depend on biodiversity.
Advocates of the conservation of biodiversity tend not to acknowledge the distinction between resilient and sensitive ES. This

An extreme example of this claim is made by the Ehrlichs in Extinction. They state that
all [ecosystem services] will be threatened if the rate of extinctions continues to
increase then observe that attempts to artificially replicate natural processes are no more than partially successful in most cases. Nature
nearly always does it better. When society sacrifices natural services for some other gain it must pay the costs of substitution (Ehrlich and Ehrlich

This assertionthat the only alternative to protecting every species is a world


in which all ES have been substituted by artificial alternativesis an extreme example of
the low resilience assumption. Paul Ehrlich revisits this flawed logic in 1997 i nhis response (with four
1982, pp. 9596).

co-authors) to doubts expressed by Mark Sagoff regarding economic arguments for species conservation (Ehrlich et al. 1997, p. 101).

The claim that ES depend on biodiversity is also notably present in the controversial
Issues in Ecology paper on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (Naeem et al. 1999) that sparked the debate mentioned in the
introduction. This appears to reflect a general tendency among authors in this field (e.g., Hector et al. 2001; Lawler et al. 2002; Lyons et al. 2005).
Although such authors may not actually articulate the low resilience assumption, presenting such claims in the absence of any clarification indicates
its influence.

That the low resilience assumption is largely false is apparent in the number of
examples of species extinctions that have not brought about catastrophic
ecosystem collapse and decline in ES, and in the generally limited ecosystem
influence of species on the cusp of extinction. These issues have been raised by numerous authors, although given the
absence of systematic attempts to verify propositions of this sort, the evidence assembled is usually
anecdotal and we are forced to trust that an unbiased account of the situation has
been presented. Fortunately a number of highly respected people have discussed this
topic, not least being the prominent conservation biologist David Ehrenfeld . In 1978 he
described the conservation dilemma, which arises on the increasingly frequent
occasions when we encounter a threatened part of Nature but can find no rational
reason for keeping it (Ehrenfeld 1981, p. 177). He continued with the following
observation:
Have there been permanent and significant resource effects of the extinction, in the
wild, of John Bartrams great discovery, the beautiful tree Franklinia alatamaha , which had
almost vanished from the earth when Bartram first set eyes upon it? Or a thousand species of tiny beetles that we
never knew existed before or after their probable extermination? Can we even be
certain than the eastern forests of the United States suffer the loss of their passenger
pigeons and chestnuts in some tangible way that affects their vitality or permanence,
their value to us? (p. 192)

most species do not seem to have


any conventional value at all and that the rarest species are the ones least likely
to be missed by no stretch of the imagination can we make them out to be
vital cogs in the ecological machine (p. 215). The appearance of comments within the environmental literature that are
Later, at the first conference on biodiversity, Ehrenfeld (1988) reflected that

consistent with Ehrenfeldsand from authors whose academic standing is also worthy of respectis uncommon but not unheard of (e.g

., Tudge

1989; Ghilarov 1996; Sagoff 1997; Slobodkin 2001; Western 2001).


The low resilience assumption is also undermined by the overwhelming tendency for
the protection of specific endangered species to be justified by moral or aesthetic
arguments, or a basic appeal to the necessity of conserving biodiversity, rather than by
emphasising the actual ES these species provide or might be able to provide humanity.
Often the only services that can be promoted in this regard relate to the scientific or cultural value of conserving a particular species, and the

The preservation of such services is of an


entirely different order compared with the collapse of human civilization predicted by
the more pessimistic environmental authors.
tourism revenue that might be associated with its continued existence.

The popularity of the low resilience assumption is in part explained by the


increased rhetorical force of arguments that highlight connections between the
conservation of biodiversity, human survival and economic profit. However, it
needs to be acknowledged by those who employ this approach that a number of
negative implications are associated with any use of economic arguments to justify
the conservation of biodiversity

Species loss alt causes


EDF 7

(Environmental Defense Fund, The Importance of Wildlife and the Diversity of Life, http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=445, AG)

habitat. As forests, wetlands,


prairies, coastal estuaries and other habitats are converted to residential,
commercial or agricultural use and other types of development, wild plants and
animals vanish. In addition, many areas known as "hotspots" for their unusually rich biodiversity, such as
Florida and Southern California, also have rapidly expanding human populations , which accelerates
the loss of biodiversity. In the U.S. non-native species are the second largest cause of
species loss. Hundreds of Hawaii's unique wildlife and plants are being driven to extinction by non-native plants and animals. Other
factors are pollution, disease, over-fishing and over-hunting.
The major cause of species loss in the U.S. and worldwide is the loss and degradation of

No extinction
Easterbrook 3senior fellow at the New Republic (We're All Gonna Die!, http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.07/doomsday.html?
pg=1&topic=&topic_set=)

If we're talking about doomsday - the end of human civilization - many scenarios simply
don't measure up. A single nuclear bomb ignited by terrorists, for example, would be awful beyond words, but life would go on. People and
machines might converge in ways that you and I would find ghastly, but from the standpoint of the future, they would probably represent an adaptation.

Environmental collapse might make parts of the globe unpleasant, but considering
that the biosphere has survived ice ages, it wouldn't be the final curtain . Depression, which
has become 10 times more prevalent in Western nations in the postwar era, might grow so widespread that vast numbers of people would refuse to get
out of bed, a possibility that Petranek suggested in a doomsday talk at the Technology Entertainment Design conference in 2002. But Marcel Proust, as
miserable as he was, wrote Remembrance of Things Past while lying in bed.

(!D) AT: Keystone Species


No impact or spillover to biodiversity from keystones
Ridder 2008 PhD, School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania (Ben, Biodiversity And Conservation, 17.4,
Questioning the ecosystem services argument for biodiversity conservation) *ES = environmental services

The low resilience assumption

low
resilience assumption gives rise to, and is reinforced by the almost ubiquitous claim
within the conservation literature that ES depend on biodiversity.
Advocates of the conservation of biodiversity tend not to acknowledge the distinction between resilient and sensitive ES. This

An extreme example of this claim is made by the Ehrlichs in Extinction. They state that
all [ecosystem services] will be threatened if the rate of extinctions continues to
increase then observe that attempts to artificially replicate natural processes are no more than partially successful in most cases. Nature
nearly always does it better. When society sacrifices natural services for some other gain it must pay the costs of substitution (Ehrlich and Ehrlich

This assertionthat the only alternative to protecting every species is a world


in which all ES have been substituted by artificial alternativesis an extreme example of
the low resilience assumption. Paul Ehrlich revisits this flawed logic in 1997 i nhis response (with four
1982, pp. 9596).

co-authors) to doubts expressed by Mark Sagoff regarding economic arguments for species conservation (Ehrlich et al. 1997, p. 101).

The claim that ES depend on biodiversity is also notably present in the controversial
Issues in Ecology paper on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (Naeem et al. 1999) that sparked the debate mentioned in the
introduction. This appears to reflect a general tendency among authors in this field (e.g., Hector et al. 2001; Lawler et al. 2002; Lyons et al. 2005).
Although such authors may not actually articulate the low resilience assumption, presenting such claims in the absence of any clarification indicates
its influence.

That the low resilience assumption is largely false is apparent in the number of
examples of species extinctions that have not brought about catastrophic
ecosystem collapse and decline in ES, and in the generally limited ecosystem
influence of species on the cusp of extinction. These issues have been raised by numerous authors, although given the
absence of systematic attempts to verify propositions of this sort, the evidence assembled is usually
anecdotal and we are forced to trust that an unbiased account of the situation has
been presented. Fortunately a number of highly respected people have discussed this
topic, not least being the prominent conservation biologist David Ehrenfeld . In 1978 he
described the conservation dilemma, which arises on the increasingly frequent
occasions when we encounter a threatened part of Nature but can find no rational
reason for keeping it (Ehrenfeld 1981, p. 177). He continued with the following
observation:
Have there been permanent and significant resource effects of the extinction, in the
wild, of John Bartrams great discovery, the beautiful tree Franklinia alatamaha , which had
almost vanished from the earth when Bartram first set eyes upon it? Or a thousand species of tiny beetles that we
never knew existed before or after their probable extermination? Can we even be
certain than the eastern forests of the United States suffer the loss of their passenger
pigeons and chestnuts in some tangible way that affects their vitality or permanence,
their value to us? (p. 192)

most species do not seem to have


any conventional value at all and that the rarest species are the ones least likely
to be missed by no stretch of the imagination can we make them out to be
vital cogs in the ecological machine (p. 215). The appearance of comments within the environmental literature that are
Later, at the first conference on biodiversity, Ehrenfeld (1988) reflected that

consistent with Ehrenfeldsand from authors whose academic standing is also worthy of respectis uncommon but not unheard of (e.g

., Tudge

1989; Ghilarov 1996; Sagoff 1997; Slobodkin 2001; Western 2001).


The low resilience assumption is also undermined by the overwhelming tendency for
the protection of specific endangered species to be justified by moral or aesthetic
arguments, or a basic appeal to the necessity of conserving biodiversity, rather than by
emphasising the actual ES these species provide or might be able to provide humanity.
Often the only services that can be promoted in this regard relate to the scientific or cultural value of conserving a particular species, and the

The preservation of such services is of an


entirely different order compared with the collapse of human civilization predicted by
the more pessimistic environmental authors.
tourism revenue that might be associated with its continued existence.

The popularity of the low resilience assumption is in part explained by the


increased rhetorical force of arguments that highlight connections between the
conservation of biodiversity, human survival and economic profit. However, it
needs to be acknowledged by those who employ this approach that a number of
negative implications are associated with any use of economic arguments to justify
the conservation of biodiversity

Intervening actors safeguard keystones


Kunich, law prof, 94 Professor of Law, Appalachian School of Law (John, 24 Envtl. L. 501, AG)
species that provide obvious, practical benefits to humans are not in danger of extinction. In fact, many
actively safeguarded, raised, cultivated, and otherwise managed to maximize their productivity. There have been some cases of
overharvesting of such species, but for the most part this type of species is safe, due to man's own self-interest.
Most
are

(!D) AT: Oceans


Ocean bio-d is toast for other reasons sea level rise and salinity
EPA 7

Environmental Protection Agency, climate change, November 30th, 2007, http://www.epa.gov/bioiweb1/aquatic/climate.html

Global climate change poses a serious threat to many aquatic ecosystems. Over the last
century, increased global temperatures have caused sea levels to rise approximately
15-20 cm (6-8 inches) worldwide, and is expected to continue to rise at an average rate of
1-2mm/year. This rise in sea level is due primarily to the melting of mountain glaciers, the expansion of ocean water due to warmer ocean
temperatures, the pumping of ground water, and the melting of the polar ice sheets. On average, for every foot of sea level rise,
the ocean moves inland 50-100 feet. At this rate, low lying areas and coastal aquatic
ecosystems such as estuaries, marshes, and mangrove forests are being
threatened. Higher salinities caused by increased evaporation, greater levels of tidal
inundation, increased occurrences of flooding, and increased shoreline erosion are
significantly altering the composition of these ecosystems, affecting both the plants
and animals living in these habitats. If measures are not taken to help prevent
further global warming, aquatic biodiversity could be greatly affected. Not only
could the composition of species within specific ecosystems be greatly altered, but
species extinction could also occur.
Kennedy, environmental science prof, 2. Environmental science prof, Maryland. Former Director, Cooperative
Oxford Laboratory. PhD. (Victor, Coastal and Marine Ecosystems and Global Climate Change, http://www.pewclimate.org/projects/marine.cfm)

There is evidence that marine organisms and ecosystems are resilient to environmental change. Steele
(1991) hypothesized that the biological components of marine systems are tightly coupled to
physical factors, allowing them to respond quickly to rapid environmental change
and thus rendering them ecologically adaptable. Some species also have wide
genetic variability throughout their range, which may allow for adaptation to climate change.
Alt causecoastal expansion and overfishing
Kunich, law prof, 6

Professor of Law, Appalachian School of Law (John, Killing Our Oceans, p 122-3, AG)

threats to marine biodiversity that originate, not in the oceans, but on dry land
coastal zones of the world. Part of the reason these threats are prevalent is that an estimated 67 percent of the entire
global human population lives either on the coast or within 37 miles of the coast, and that percentage is increasing. These
huge and growing populations often cause overutilization of fishing and other resources in coastal
areas, habitat destruction and degradation, pollution (both organic and inorganic), eutrophication and related issues such as
pathogenic bacteria and algal toxins, introduction of invasive species, watershed alteration , marine
littering, and other harms to the nearby marine regions. Given that so many key marine centers of
biodiversity reside in the near-coast coral reefs and continental shelf areas, it is of tremendous importance that our
legal approach embrace appropriate controls over these land-based threats. Any plan that shortsightedly and narrowly focuses
too much on ocean-based activities will , paradoxically, miss the boat.
There are enormous
in the

(!D )AT Ocean Acidification


This impact is dumb multiple disasters like the oil spill prove oceans are
resilient
--No ocean acidification best data
Idso et al. 11 [Craig D. Idso,

B.S. in Geography from Arizona State University, his M.S. in Agronomy from the University of Nebraska Lincoln, and his Ph.D. in Geography from Arizona State University, and Sherwood B. Idso, Bachelor of Physics, Master of Science, and Doctor of Philosophy
degrees are all from the University of Minnesota, Carbon Dioxide and Earths Future, Feb 2,
http://www.co2science.org/education/reports/prudentpath/prudentpath.pdf, CMR]

The chemistry aspect of the ocean acidification hypothesis is rather straightforward, but it is not as
solid as many make it out to be; and a number of respected researchers have
published papers demonstrating that the drop in oceanic pH will not be nearly as
great as the IPCC and others predict it will be, nor that it will be as harmful as they
claim it will be. Consider, for example, the figure below, which shows historical and projected fossil fuel CO2 emissions and atmospheric CO2
concentrations out to the year 2500, as calculated by NOAAs Pieter Tans (2009). As can be seen there, his analysis indicates that the airs CO2
concentration will peak well before 2100, and at only 500 ppm compared to the 800
ppm value predicted in one of the IPCCs scenarios. And it is also worth noting that by the time the
year 2500 rolls around, the atmospheres CO2 concentration actually drops back
down to about what it is today. When these emissions estimates are transformed into reductions of oceanic pH, it can readily be
seen in the following figure that Tans projected pH change at 2100 is far less than that of the IPCC. And Tans analysis indicates a
pH recovery to values near those of today by the year 2500, clearly suggesting that
things are not the way the worlds climate alarmists make them out to be, especially
when it comes to anthropogenic CO2 emissions and their effects on the airs CO2
content and oceanic pH values.
--Over-fishing outweighs warming oceanic collapse is inevitable.
Craig 02 [Robin Kundis, Professor of Law at Indiana University, 29 Ecology L.Q. 649, Lexis]
A recent scientific study by Jeremy B.C. Jackson and several colleagues suggests a far broader range of possible states for marine ecosystems. The study,

This temporallyexpanded perspective reveals that the traditional scientific view of ocean
management, based on short-term studies of changes in marine ecosystems, is
inadequate because humans have been altering and weakening complex marine
relationships for centuries - ever since we , as a species, learned to fish. According to
this study, historical overfishing by humans profoundly disturbed marine
ecosystems and greatly reduced ocean productivity long before the twentieth
century. As a result, more recent disturbances such as pollution, industrialization,
and climate change are, at best, dependent proximate causes of marine
ecosystem collapse, and ocean managers cannot "fix" impaired ocean ecosystems
unless they also account for historical fishing pressures.
which appeared in Science, applies a centuries-long perspective on anthropogenic (human-induced) changes to the oceans.

(!D) AT: Dead Zones


There are a number of diferent dead zones and causes of ocean
destruction
Edmonton Journal, 8 (Elaine OConnor, World's oceans at risk of becoming soupy swill; Rising temperatures, runoff toxins creating
'dead zones' 9/15/2008, www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=3c40fbee-40e4-443a-b736-c70c6072649e) // JMP

VANCOUVER - Sally Cole came home from a sailing trip in August looking forward to a hot shower. But when she turned on her tap, all she got was slime. "I
turned on the tap and it just flooped. Just a bit of viscous gloop came out. It was really horrible," said the resident of B.C's Saltspring Island between the
mainland and Vancouver Island. The culprit was an algae bloom on the nearby lake that had choked the water pipes of hundreds of the area's residents. It

toxic slime -- algae


feasting on pollutants and fertilizers, and starving the ocean of oxygen -- is killing
off sea life at an alarming rate. A new study published in August reveals the world's "dead zones" have doubled in size every
decade since 1960. Coastal waters with once rich marine life -- Chesapeake Bay, the Baltic
Sea, the Black Sea and off Peru, Chile and Namibia -- are rapidly losing species.
According to the report by two U.S. scientists, there are 405 asphyxiating dead zones in our oceans. The
cause, predictably, is pollution. The culprits are fertilizer runoff in estuaries, sewage, global
warming, overfishing and industrial waste . Millions of tonnes of "nutrient pollution" -- chemical fertilizer that adds
took three days to clear. The incident is one example of how seas and lakes are suffocating in slime. That

phosphates and nitrogen to the water -- feed algae blooms. Some zones are vast -- the Baltic Sea's 70,000-square-kilometre aquatic graveyard is the
largest. The Gulf of Mexico harbours North America's giant dead zone: A 22,000-square-km sea morgue, or something roughly the size of New Jersey.

dead zones have been discovered off California, in Lake Erie, around the Florida
Keys, in North and South Carolina creeks and in Washington's Puget Sound. Together, they
Other

have turned 246,048 square kilometres of the seas -- an area the equivalent of all five of the Great Lakes -- into marine wastelands. Robert Diaz, a Virginia
Institute of Marine Science professor and co-author of the study, says the problem is already evident in Canadian waters. In B.C., a dead zone was first
spotted in the Saanich Inlet in 1960. Dead zones have been recorded in P.E.I. fish-farming bays since 2000. If fish swim into a dead zone, they often
become unconscious and cannot escape. Shellfish and bottom-dwellers move too slowly, so a stew of rotting marine life is left behind. Even when fish
survive in low-oxygen water, research shows their reproduction suffers, which could jeopardize wild fish stocks. Diaz says this could be catastrophic for our
local marine life and aquaculture. He says zones are likely to intensify as their contributing factors of algal blooms and intensive fish-farming are
"problems that will continue into the future." Already, the impact of ocean deterioration is being felt all along the Pacific coast. Fishermen are bringing up
cages of dead Dungeness crabs and salmon researchers have found low oxygen from the Columbia River on Oregon border's to northern Washington. As
fish stocks fall, seabird populations are dying of starvation.

Pacific West Coast.

Deadly algae are also becoming common on the

They have been blamed for the erratic behaviour and mass die-offs of sea mammals since some algae act as

neurotoxins and impair brain function. Some 14,000 seals, sea lions and dolphins have washed up sick or dead in California in the last 10 years, and 650
grey whales have beached. Deadly algae have been a problem in the region since the 1980s, but scientists say they're increasingly frequent and intense.
Algae is also storming international seas and claiming human victims. Near Sweden, cyanobacteria blooms at times turn the Baltic Sea into a brown slush
that makes residents' eyes burn. On Florida's Gulf Coast, toxic tides have killed hundreds of manatees and caused breathing problems for area residents.
Algae has smothered 80 per cent of coral reefs in the Caribbean and ruined 75 per cent of California's fish-rich kelp forests. Poison day-glo-green caulerpa
algae is killing fish off the coasts of 11 countries. What will become of our oceans? One U.S. oceanographer has a succinct answer: slime. Jeremy

Jackson, a Scripps Institution of Oceanography professor, released a report in August warning of "mass
extinction" in oceans due to dead zones, global warming, overfishing, pollution,
ocean acidification, ecosystem destruction and invasive species.

2AC Federalism DA (needs work)


1. Case outweighs the disad
Cross apply our Wiezman evidence here that says Util is terrible, and
focusing on deterring non-existent threats destroys any value to life.
Our !s have the most magnitude

2. No link

3. Courts check spillover


Nagel 2001

Robert F., Law Professor, University of Colorado, March, ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF
POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, p. 53

the Supreme
Court has recently issued a series of rulings that limit the power of the national
government. Some of these decisions, which set boundaries to Congress's power to regulate commerce and
to enforce the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment, establish areas that are subject (at least in
theory) only to state regulation. Others protect the autonomy of state governments by
restricting congressional authority to expose state governments to suit in either
state or federal courts and to "commandeer" state institutions for national
regulatory purposes. Taken together, these decisions seem to reflect a judgment held
by a slight majority of the justices that the dramatic expansion of the national government
during the twentieth century has put in jeopardy fundamental principles of
constitutional structure.
In what appears to be an ambitious campaign to enhance the role of the states in the federal system,

4. The CP links to federalism- all of their evidence calls for a


balance between state and federal action but the CP excludes
the federal government which isnt a balance at all. This
supercharges perm solvency and guts the core of the net
benefit
5. No internal link to modeling newest studies
Law and Versteeg 12. [David, Prof. of Law and Prof of PoliSci @ Washington University, St Louis,
PHD @ Stanford, JD @ Harvard Law, Mila, Assoc. Prof, U of Virginia Law, D.Phil @ Oxford, "The Declining Influence of
the United States Constitution" New York University Law Review -- Vol 87:762 -www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv2/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__law_review/documents/documents/ecm_pr
o_072892.pdf]

There are growing suspicions, however, that Americas days as a constitutional


hegemon are coming to an end. 12 It has been said that the United States is losing
constitutional influence because it is increasingly out of sync with an evolving
global consensus on issues of human rights. 13 Indeed, to the extent that other countries
still look to the United States as an example, their goal may be less to imitate American
constitutionalism than to avoid its perceived flaws and mistakes. 14 Scholarly and popular attention has
focused in particular upon the influence of American constitutional jurisprudence. The reluctance of the
U.S. Supreme Court to pay decent respect to the opinions of mankind 15 by

participating in an ongoing global judicial dialogue 16 is supposedly diminishing the


global appeal and influence of American constitutional jurisprudence. 17 Studies
conducted by scholars in other countries have begun to yield empirical evidence that
citation to U.S. Supreme Court decisions by foreign courts is in fact on the decline.
18 By contrast, however, the extent to which the U.S. Constitution itself continues to influence the adoption and
revision of constitutions in other countries remains a matter of speculation and anecdotal impression. With the
help of an extensive data set of our own creation that spans all national constitutions over the last six decades,
this Article explores the extent to which various prominent constitutionsincluding the U.S. Constitution

A
stark contrast can be drawn between the declining attraction of the U.S.
Constitution as a model for other countries and the increasing attraction of the model
provided by Americas neighbor to the north, Canada. We also address the possibility that todays
constitution makers look for inspiration not only to other national constitutions, but
also to regional and international human rights instruments such as the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights . Our
findings do little to assuage American fears of diminished influence in the
constitutional sphere.
epitomize generic rights constitutionalism or are, instead, increasingly out of sync with evolving global practice.

7. <INSERT IMPACT DEFENSE>

2AC NOAA Tradeof DA


1. Case outweighs the disad
Cross apply our wiezzman evidence here that says Util is terrible, and
focusing on deterring non-existent threats destroys any value to life.
Our !s have the most magnitude

2. Non-unique- Obama just massively expanded ocean policy


Eilperin 14 [6- 17-14, Juliet Eilperin is a reporter for the House of
Representatives, Obama proposes Vast Expansion of Pacific Ocean Marine
Sanctuary, http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-will-propose-vastexpansion-of-pacific-ocean-marine-sanctuary/2014/06/16/f8689972-f0c6-11e3-bf76447a5df6411f_story.html]
Obama announced Tuesday his intent to make a broad swath of the central
Pacific Ocean off-limits to fishing, energy exploration and other activities. The proposal, slated to
go into effect later this year after a comment period, could create the worlds largest
marine sanctuary and double the area of ocean globally that is fully protected. Im going to use my authority
President

to protect some of our nations most precious marine landscapes, Obama said in a video to participants at a State
Department conference, adding that while the ocean is being degraded, We cannot afford to let that happen.

The announcement first reported


earlier Tuesday by The Washington Post is part of a broader push on maritime issues by an
Thats why the United States is leading the fight to protect our oceans.

administration that has generally favored other environmental priorities. The oceans effort, led by Secretary of
State John F. Kerry and White House counselor John D. Podesta, is likely to spark a new political battle with
Republicans over the scope of Obamas executive powers. The president will also direct federal agencies to develop
a comprehensive program aimed at combating seafood fraud and the global black-market fish trade. In addition,

the administration finalized a rule last week allowing the public to nominate new
marine sanctuaries off U.S. coasts and in the Great Lakes. Obama has used his executive authority 11 times
to safeguard areas on land, but scientists and activists have been pressing him to do the same for untouched
underwater regions. President George W. Bush holds the record for creating U.S. marine monuments, declaring four
during his second term, including the one that Obama plans to expand. Under the proposal, according to two
independent analyses, the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument would be expanded from almost
87,000 square miles to nearly 782,000 square miles all of it adjacent to seven islands and atolls controlled by the
United States. The designation would include waters up to 200 nautical miles offshore from the territories. Its the
closest thing Ive seen to the pristine ocean, said Enric Sala, a National Geographic explorer-in-residence who has
researched the areas reefs and atolls since 2005. Obama has faced criticism from a variety of groups including
cattle ranchers, law enforcement officers and ATV enthusiasts over his expansion of protections for federal lands.
The ocean area under consideration, by contrast, encompasses uninhabited islands in a remote region with sparse
economic activity. Even so, the designation is expected to face objections from the U.S. tuna fleet that operates in
the region. Fish caught in the area account for up to 3 percent of the annual U.S. tuna catch in the western and
central Pacific, according to the Pew Charitable Trusts. When Bush created the monument in 2009, he exempted
sport fishing to address industry opposition. Mike Leonard, ocean resource policy director for the American
Sportfishing Association, said recreational fishing enthusiasts would push to ensure their existing exemption stays in
place if the protected area is expanded. We believe in almost all instances you can still have marine conservation
and marine protection, and still allow for sustainable recreational fishing activities to take place, Leonard said,
adding theres almost no sportfishing activity in the area because its a heck of a trek out there. Our concern is
obviously with the precedent this might set. Podesta said a public comment period over the summer will allow the
Commerce and Interior departments to fully understand the commercial activity out there and modify the plan if
necessary. Kerry said Monday that the United States and other nations need to take bolder steps to protect marine
habitats and combat other threats. If this group cant create a serious plan to protect the ocean for future
generations, then who can and who will? he asked during an appearance at a State Department oceans
conference. On Capitol Hill, some Republicans have sought to limit the administrations ability to influence offshore

activities, viewing it as another attempt by the president to test the limits of White House power. Its another
example of this imperial presidency, House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) said in
an interview, noting that Obama established a National Ocean Policy during his first term to coordinate competing
interests at sea. If there are marine sanctuaries that should be put in place, that should go through Congress. For

the administration has focused on the nuts and bolts of marine


issues, aiming to end overfishing in federally managed fisheries and establishing a
new planning process for maritime activities. This weeks State Department ocean
summit launches what officials there call a broader global campaign to address
the problems of overfishing, pollution and ocean acidification.
the past 51 / 2 years,

3. No link NOAA has no role in the af the FBI licenses the APs youre
dumb.

5. No threshold for the impacts intervening actors can solve

6. Climate impacts are overyhyped, nothing will happen for 300 years and
even then it wont be that bad, tech solves in the meantime
Lomborg 8 Director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center and adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School, Bjorn, Warming
warnings get overheated, The Guardian, 8/15,http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/15/carbonemissions.climatechange

alarmist predictions are becoming quite bizarre , and could be dismissed as


sociological oddities , if it werent for the fact that they get such big play in the media. Oliver Tickell, for instance, writes that a

These

global warming causing a 4C temperature increase by the end of the century would be a catastrophe and the beginning of the extinction of the human
race. This

is simply silly.

His evidence? That 4C would mean that all the ice on the planet would melt, bringing the long-term sea level rise to

Tickell has maxed out the


campaigners scare potential (because there is no more ice to melt, this is the scariest he could ever conjure). But he
is wrong. Let us just remember that the UN climate panel, the IPCC, expects a temperature rise by the end of the century between 1.8 and 6.0C.
Within this range, the IPCC predicts that, by the end of the century, sea levels will rise 18-59
centimetres Tickell is simply exaggerating by a factor of up to 400 . Tickell will undoubtedly claim
70-80m, flooding everything we hold dear, seeing billions of people die. Clearly,

that he was talking about what could happen many, many millennia from now. But this is disingenuous. First, the 4C temperature rise is predicted on a
century scale this is what we talk about and can plan for. Second, although sea-level rise will continue for many centuries to come, the models
unanimously show that Greenlands ice shelf will be reduced, but Antarctic ice will increase even more (because of increased precipitation in Antarctica)

Given that CO2


stays in the atmosphere about a century, what happens with the
temperature, say, six centuries from now mainly depends on emissions five
centuries from now (where it seems unlikely non-carbon emitting tech nology
such as solar panels will not have become economically competitive). Third, Tickell tells us how the 80m
sea-level rise would wipe out all the worlds coastal infrastructure and much of the worlds farmland undoubtedly causing billions to die. But to
cause billions to die, it would require the surge to occur with in a single
human lifespan. This sort of scare tactic is insidiously wrong and
misleading , mimicking a firebrand preacher who claims the earth is coming to an end and we need to repent. While it is probably true that
the sun will burn up the earth in 4-5bn years time, it does give a slightly different perspective on the need for immediate repenting. Tickells
for the next three centuries. What will happen beyond that clearly depends much more on emissions in future centuries.

claim that 4C will be the beginning of our extinction is again many times
beyond wrong and misleading, and, of course, made with no data to back it up . Let us just take
a look at the realistic impact of such a 4C temperature rise. For the Copenhagen Consensus, one of the lead economists of the IPCC, Professor Gary Yohe,

there
will, of course, also be benefits: as temperatures rise, more people will die from
heat, but fewer from cold; agricultural yields will decline in the tropics, but increase in the
temperate zones, etc. The model evaluates the impacts on agriculture, forestry, energy, water, unmanaged ecosystems, coastal zones,
heat and cold deaths and disease. The bottom line is that benefits from global warming right now
outweigh the costs (the benefit is about 0.25% of global GDP). Global warming will continue to be
a net benefit until about 2070, when the damages will begin to outweigh the benefits, reaching a total damage cost equivalent to about
3.5% of GDP by 2300. This is simply not the end of humanity. If anything, global
warming is a net benefit now; and even in three centuries, it will not be a
challenge to our civilisation. Further, the IPCC expects the average person on earth to be 1,700% richer by the end of this century.
did a survey of all the problems and all the benefits accruing from a temperature rise over this century of about approximately 4C. And yes,

AT: DeDev
1. Their ev assumes a planned transition not forced collapse
their impacts are inevitable because countries will try to
maintain growth in the face of crises try-or-die for the af
Rubin 8Associate Degree of Science (Chem.), Bachelor of Arts (Sociology, w/honours) (Dani, 9 January 2008, Beyond Post-Apocalyptic EcoAnarchism, http://www.pej.org/html/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=7133&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0, RBatra)

increasingly, people are adopting the anarcho-apocalyptic, civilizationmust-fall-to-save-the-world attitude. It is a fairly clean and tight worldview, zealously bulletproof, and it scares me. I want the natural world,
Unlike twenty-five years ago,

the greater community of life beyond our species, with all its beautiful and terrifying manifestations, and its vibrant landscapes to survive intact I think
about this a lot.

quick collapse of global civilization, will almost certainly lead to greater explosive damage
to the biosphere, than a mediated slower meltdown.
A

When one envisions the collapse of global society, one is not discussing the demise of an ancient Greek city-state, or even the abandonment of an empire

The end of our global civilization would not only result in the death of six billion
humans, just wiping natures slate clean. We also have something like 5,000 nuclear facilities spread across
the planets surface. And this is just one obvious and straightforward fact cutting across new radical arguments in favor of a quick fall.
like the Mayans.

We have inserted ourselves into the web of life on planet Earth, into its interstitial fibers, over the last 500 years. We are now a big part of the worlds

If we get a fever and fall into social chaos, even just


considering our non-nuclear toys laying about, the damage will be profound. It will be much more
devastating than our new visionaries of post-apocalyptic paradise have prophesized.
dynamic biological equation set its checks and balances.

If one expands upon current examples of social chaos that we already see, like Afghanistan or
Darfur, extrapolating them across the globe, encompassing Europe, Asia, North and South America, and elsewhere,
then one can easily imagine desperate outcomes where nature is sacrificed wholesale in
vain attempts to rescue human life. The outcomes would be beyond ugly; they would be
horrific and enduring.
The end-point of a quick collapse is
quite likely to resemble the landscape of Mars, or even perhaps the Moon. I love life. I do not want the
That is why I cannot accept this new wave of puritanical anarcho-apocalyptic theology.

Earth turned barren.

Imagine 100
Chernobyls spewing indelible death. Imagine a landscape over-run with desperate and
starving humans, wiping out one ecosystem after another. Imagine endless tribal wars
where there are no restraints on the use of chemical and biological weapons. Imagine a
failing industrial infrastructure seeping massive quantities of deadly toxins into the
air, water and soil.
I think that those who are dreaming of a world returned to its wilderness state are lovely, naive romantics dangerous ones.

2. Even if people COULD be convinced that dedev is good, they dont


access a mindset shift absent education programs
Fotopoulos, 2k (Takis,

Senior Lecturer in Economics at the Polytechnic of North London, Editor of The International Journal of Inclusive
Democracy, The limitations of Life-style strategies: The Ecovillage Movement is NOT the way towards a new democratic society, The International
Journal of Inclusive Democracy, July 2000, Volume 6, Number 2, Tashma)

social transformation towards an inclusive democracy would never come about by example
and education alone , since the required change in values and culture can only be the
So,

outcome of a process of continuous interaction between changes in institutions and changes in values. In other words, the change in values
would have to come about as part of a programmatic political movement with an overall goal for systemic change, rather
than as part of the activities of some fractionalised movement s to create a new relation
between the sexes, identities, or society and nature.

3. No logical reason collapse is inevitablespace colonization etc. means


that resources are functionally infinite and the unsustainability of growth
is self-correcting.

4. Collapse only reinforces the system


Mead 9Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, teaches foreign policy at Yale (Walter, 4
February 2009, Only Makes You Stronger: Why the recession bolstered America, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2169866/posts, RBatra)

Perhaps--but the long history of capitalism suggests another possibility. After all,

capitalism has seen a steady procession

of economic crises and panics, from the seventeenth-century Tulip Bubble in the Netherlands and the Stop of the Exchequer under Charles
II in England through the Mississippi and South Sea bubbles of the early eighteenth century, on through the crises associated with the Napoleonic wars
and the spectacular economic crashes that repeatedly wrought havoc and devastation to millions throughout the nineteenth century. The panics of 1837,

the Great Crash of 1929, which set off a


depression that would not end until World War II. The series of crises continued after the war, and the last generation has seen the Penn Central
1857, 1873, 1893, and 1907 were especially severe, culminating in

bankruptcy in 1970, the first Arab oil crisis of 1973, the Third World debt crisis of 1982, the S&L crisis, the Asian crisis of 1997, the bursting of the dot-com
bubble in 2001, and today's global financial meltdown.

relentless

crises has not disrupted the rise of a global capitalist system

And yet, this


series of
,
centered first on the power of the United Kingdom and then, since World War II, on the power of the United States. After more than 300 years, it seems

financial and economic crises do not , by themselves, threaten either the international
capitalist system or the special role within it of leading capitalist powers like the United Kingdom and the United States. If anything, the
opposite seems true--that financial crises in some way sustain Anglophone power and capitalist development .
reasonable to conclude that

Indeed, many critics of both capitalism and the "Anglo-Saxons" who practice it so aggressively have pointed to what seems to be a perverse relationship

financial
crises remorselessly crushed weaker companies, allowing the most successful and
ruthless capitalists to cement their domination of the system. For dependency theorists like Raul Prebisch,
crises served a similar function in the international system, helping stronger countries marginalize and
impoverish developing ones.
between such crises and the consolidation of the "core" capitalist economies against the impoverished periphery. Marx noted that

5. Timeframe outweighs collapse is several years away intervening


actors can save the planet

6. Growth sustainable tech & alternatives


Goklany 7 PhD, science and tech policy analyst for the US Dept of the
Interior
Indur M, M.S. and Ph.D are from Michigan State University, the improving state of the world, page number below in [brackets], CMR

It may be argued that the improvements in human well-being have been obtained through massive and unsustainable depredation of the earth's
nonrenewable resources and degradation of its environment. While deferring the latter issue to subsequent sections, in the following I will address the
issue of nonrenewable resources. This discussion is brief because it has been addressed comprehensively in Julian L. Simon's The State of Humanity, as

we are not likely to run out of critical energy and


mineral resources any time soon, if at all.52 The contention that we are
depleting "nonrenewable" resources stems from a static view of what a
"resource" is. For example, while every atom of copper is a potential resource for humanity, it is not a usable resource unless it is accessible
at an affordable price. But what is accessible and afordable depends on technology,
which, as we have already seen, is constantly advancing. Economic geologists classify the amount of resources that can
well as elsewhere, and the general finding is that

be extracted profitably at current prices as current, proven, or economic reserves. However, at any time, there will be resources that can be extracted
using tin-rent technology, but which could not then be sold profitably. Such resources are classified as potential reserves, and they are a (unction of
current prices and technology. Consider, for instance, that technology limited us to bore a hole no deeper than a thousand feet. All the copper beyond
that, even 11 it comprised 99 percent of the earth's total resource endowment of copper, would be inaccessible. Therefore, the price of copper (assuming

if technology advances
we can access copper beyond that thousand feet and be able to sell
that additional amount at a profit, its price would drop in recognition of the expansion of the resource base. In fact,
it is not necessary for a technology to actually be functioning for markets
to factor it into prices. The likelihood that a technology may increase economic reserves itself would be considered in the pricing.
The greater the likelihood, the lower prices would drop in anticipation . Thus,
prices are always changing in response to short- and long-term prospects for accessing and using a commodity. In a free market system, the fact
that prices are attached to commodities means that suppliers are in a
constant quest to increase supplies so that they can sell more while at the
same time reducing prices so that they are not undersold. Meanwhile, direct and indirect
users of the commodities are on their own quest to reduce consumption so that they can reduce their costs. The higher the price
of a resource, the greater the response from both suppliers and
consumers. This response can take the form of greater penetration of improved-but-less-used
technologies, as well as research, development, and adoption of brand new
technologies. For suppliers, this leads to technological change in the search for more efficient methods to locate, extract, and refine the
free markets and good information) would not consider 11 it; 99 percent that would be inaccessible. But
w that

resource. For consumers, higher prices stimulate technological change in the reuse, recycling, and conservation of that resource. Thus, today with global
steel demand at record heights (around a billion tonnes annually), more than a third of the steel produced each year comes from recycled scrap, which is a

High prices also intensify the search for substitutes for that
resource. And sometimes those substitutes can drive out the "original"
resource. To paraphrase Bj0rn Lomborg, the stone age didn't end because we ran out of stones, the iron age because we ran out of iron, or the
bronze age because we ran out of bronze.54 As a result of this dynamic, technology increases the amount of
resources that can be used or there is increased substitution, which would stabilize if
not reduce prices. Alternatively, if these eforts fail to reduce prices, its usage would drop
and eforts to find substitutes would increase until they are, in fact, found. Consider
$100 billion per year business.53

whale blubber. Once it was the preferred fuel used to light households. It became scarce, prices went up, and substitutes were found. Today, although
there might be a niche for whale blubber somewhere, it no longer has an international market as a lighting fuel. So although reportedly you can get a

it is hardly
surprising that despite short-term fluctuations, the long-term price trend of virtually every
commodity that is used today has been downward over the past two
centuries not only in terms of "real," inflation-adjusted dollars but also more importantly in terms of the amount of effort an average individual
pound of whale blubber for half-a-penny in Norway (down from 15 cents per pound in 1999), its current price is irrelevant.55 Thus,

has to expend to obtain or to purchase a given mass of that commodity.56 As one illustration of this general phenomenon, figure 4.4 shows that, despite a
recent upturn in prices probably because of increased demand in Asia, there has been a long-term decline in the price of 13 metals relative to wages.57
On that basis, in 2005, the price of copper was an l/80th of its 1800 level, aluminum dropped to a 1/ 40th of its 1900 price, silver declined to a l/40th of its
1860 level, and tin to a l/7th of its price in 1880. These long-term declines in prices indicate that those commodities are not getting any scarcer. In fact,
the only metal that had a price-relative-to-wages higher in 2005 than in 1900 was platinum: in 2005, it was 35 percent more expensive that it was in
1900, but its price had peaked around 1920, at a level three and one-half times higher than today's. Given that commodity prices have, by and large,
dropped, it is interesting to ponder on the etymology of the phrase "searching for a needle in a haystack." Before the industrial revolution when metals
were scarcer than they are today and needles, therefore, more costly, it might have made sense to search a haystack for a lost needle. But today that
would be a sheer waste of time and energy. Finally, in recent years there have been a spate of books and articles trumpeting the imminent end of oil.38 As
Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute notes, "Fortunately, the debate over the likelihood of declining production is in a sense irrelevant.'"19 Perhaps the end of
oil will come about sometime in the future but whenever it comes, it will only be a footnote to history, just as the end of blubber is today. The end of oil

we have a number of technologies waiting in


the wings ranging from "clean coal" to nuclear as a substitute for fossil fuels to different forms of renewables that could
generate electricity for ultimate use in the home, workplace, and even in transportation. And when the
price is right, they will step in, either because oil becomes more expensive as it becomes scarcer or technological
does not mean an end to energy production. Even today

innovation reduces the price of substitutes. [Page 97-100]

7. Massive transition wars


Nyquist 5
J.R. renowned expert in geopolitics and international relations, WorldNetDaily contributing editor, The Political Consequences of a Financial Crash,
February 4, www.financialsense.com/stormw...2005/0204.html

Should the United States experience a severe economic contraction during the second term of President Bush, the American people will likely support
politicians who advocate further restrictions and controls on our market economy guaranteeing its strangulation and the steady pauperization of the
country. In Congress today, Sen. Edward Kennedy supports nearly all the economic dogmas listed above. It is easy to see, therefore, that the coming
economic contraction, due in part to a policy of massive credit expansion, will have serious political consequences for the Republican Party (to the benefit

the formation of anti-capitalist majorities


and a turning away from the free market system. The danger here is not merely
economic. The political left openly favors the collapse of Americas strategic
position abroad. The withdrawal of the United States from the Middle East, the Far
East and Europe would catastrophically impact an international system That
presently allows 6 billion people to live on the earths surface in relative peace.
of the Democrats). Furthermore, an economic contraction will encourage

Should anti-capitalist dogmas overwhelm the global marke t and trading system that
evolved under American leadership, the planets economy would contract and
untold millions would die of starvation. Nationalistic totalitarianism, fueled by a
politics of blame, would once again bring war to Asia and Europe. But this time the
war would be waged with mass destruction weapons and the United States would be blamed because it is the
cente r of global capitalism. Furthermore, if the anti-capitalist party gains power in Washington, we can
expect to see policies of appeasement and unilateral disarmament enacted.
American appeasement and disarmament, in this context, would be an admission of
guilt before the court of world opinion. Russia and China, above all, would exploit this
admission to justify aggressive wars , invasions and mass destruction attacks . A future financial
crash, therefore, must be prevented at all costs. But we cannot do this. As one observer recently lamented, We drank the poison and now we must die.

8. Extinction we have to go to space

Garan, 10 Astronaut (Ron, 3/30/10, Speech published in an article by Nancy


Atkinson, The Importance of Returning to the Moon,
http://www.universetoday.com/61256/astronaut-explains-why-we-should-return-tothe-moon)
Resources and Other Benefits: Since we live in a world of finite resources and the
global population continues to grow, at some point the human race must utilize
resources from space in order to survive. We are already constrained by our limited
resources, and the decisions we make today will have a profound affect on the
future of humanity. Using resources and energy from space will enable continued
growth and the spread of prosperity to the developing world without destroying our
planet. Our minimal investment in space exploration (less than 1 percent of the U.S.
budget) reaps tremendous intangible benefits in almost every aspect of society,
from technology development to high-tech jobs. When we reach the point of
sustainable space operations we will be able to transform the world from a place
where nations quarrel over scarce resources to one where the basic needs of all

people are met and we unite in the common adventure of exploration. The first step
is a sustainable permanent human lunar settlement.

1AR DeDev
Growth is good and inevitable:
A) No transition their claims are utopian fiction; individuals wont accept
a mindset shift of attrition. Theres no planned transition from growth
without educational programs because countries become reactionary in
the face of decline risk of collapse only INCENTIVIZES conflict which
makes it try or die for the af

B) Reification Disad empirics prove declines only reinforce growth,


increased regulation after the Great Depression, market bubbles, etc.
prove attempts at system-wide shifts only result in conflict because
theres an economic incentive for states to achieve dominance in a
growth-driven system

C) Tech good no logical reason why resource collapse is inevitable


innovations like renewables prove that humans will always find
alternatives transitioning doesnt eradicate the CONSUMPTION mindset.
Growth solves the impact creates a sustainable path forward

Counterplans

2AC Generic Advantage Counterplan


Huge solvency deficit the 1AC evidence is specific to the impact of
currency stability and natural gas leverage the uniqueness diferential
between the two methods ensures the advantage counterplan cant solve
our impacts.

The impacts arent rectified by the band aid solutions of the counterplan
the af is critical to resolve the energy dominance of producer states as
well as create a long-term transition from petrodollars

Permutation do both shields the link to the net benefit because the link
gets diluted (explain)

<Insert an internal link or add-on>

2AC Generic Conditions CP


Permutation do both pass the plan and (insert mandate of conditioning)
solves the link to the net benefit because (explanation)

Perm do the counterplan

First Not Severance


Resolved is to express; to decide by a formal vote thats a quote from
Websters 98

Revised Unabridged Dictionary, (dictionary.com)

Resolved:
To express, as an opinion or determination, by resolution and vote; to declare or decide by a formal
vote; -- followed by a clause; as, the house resolved (or, it was resolved by the house) that no money should be
5.

apropriated (or, to appropriate no money).

And Should used in regular sense is not mandatory but permissive


thats a quote from
Words and Phrases, 2002

(Words and Phrases: Permanent Edition Vol. 39 Set to Signed. Pub. By

Thomson West. P. 370)


Cal.App. 5 Dist. 1976. Term should, as used in statutory provision that motion to suppress search warrant
should first be heard by magistrate who issued warrant, is

used in regular,

persuasive

sense,

as

recommendation, and is thus not mandatory but permissive. Wests Ann.Pen Code, 1538.5(b).--Cuevas v. Superior Court, 130 Cal. Rptr. 238, 58 Cal.App.3d 406 ----Searches 191.

This is best we determine what our plan does

A) Normal means is arbitrary the plan is our creation, and were the ones
who decide what it mandates this avoids millions of normal means CPs

B) Cross-examination checks had they asked us about the counterplan in


cross-x, they would have known not to read it dont reward them for
being lazy

Our interpretation is that a cp must be textually and functionally


competitive

Process bad

A) Predictability - hundreds of diferent generic process that could be used


to result in the af make it impossible to be af because the practice
encourages contrived counterplans

B) Education leads to a lack of research because teams recycle the same


generics for 4 years also encourages throwing everything at the wall

A) Advocacy skills process focus destroys advocating the substance of a


policy

D) Timeframe fiat CP fiats the outcome of ruling after ruling takes place
justifies timeframe fiat and terrible CPs like delay

E) They need a comparative solvency advocate defending the action of


the conditions counterplan in the context of the affirmative- key
competitive equity and an independent reason to reject the plan

Multi actor fiat is a voting issue-

A) Reciprocity- we only have one actor they can gain an infinite number of
advantages and solvency mechanisms with each actor

B) Predictability- infinite amount of combinations means its impossible to


research ofense to each possible counterplan

*2AC Generic Consult CP


1. Consult counterplans are a voting issue for fairness and
education
A) It is conditional fiat they get to choose between the world
of yes and the world of no which allows them to suck up all our
ofense and just defend the squo with a disad that doesnt link
to the plan
B) Infinite worlds they have the world of yes, no, and all
infinite modifications any world we dont have ofense on
they can extend and we automatically lose, we cant cover
C) Its the uniquely worst form of a pic since they literally do
the exact same action as the plan and something else coopts
8 minutes of 1ac ofense against the counterplan in the form of
solvency deficits which are key to internal clash and
competitive equity
2. Permutation do the counterplan - their interpretation of
resolved is arbitrary.
3. Double Bind: Either they have uniqueness to their net
benefit and we already consult which means it is part of
normal implementation of the plan or we never consult and
they have ZERO uniqueness for the internal link and impact.
4. Perm: Enter into consultation with ________________, but do the
plan regardless of their response. Either they say yes which
means the permutation solves the net-benefit or the case is a
disad to the counterplan and well outweigh.
5. Perm: Do the plan and enter into consultation over its
implementation solves then net-benefits and avoids the case
impacts
6. Turn - rising expectations
Well go back to non-consultation post the counterplan which
makes relations even worse
National Journal 2 9-14-2
But failing to say what you mean is usually a bad tactic. In the end, you get found
out. President Clinton's support for the Kyoto accord on global warming was a
much-praised instance of international cooperation. He took foreigners'
concerns seriously. He backed the agreement, knowing it was unworkable and would
never be implemented, to appease critics at home and abroad and to affirm his

multilateralist outlook. Did the pretense serve America's longer-term interests? Just
the opposite. In due course, when America stepped back from its commitments
under the plan-as it was bound to do-it was reviled all the more furiously for
reneging on its promises.

Well inevitably veto decisions made through consultation


which kills our soft power
National Journal 9-14-2

Moreover, if America engages in processes such as Kyoto and the ICC-while


recognizing (as Nye admits) that they pose threats to American interests- it is entirely
possible that the effect on soft power will be zero, or even negative.

America's would-be partners in multilateral projects may find a veto


exercised from inside even less attractive than a politely declined invitation
at the outset. Remember too that those partners are not interested in adding to
any kind of American power, soft or hard. They are chiefly interested in doing the
opposite. For them, the whole point of multilateralism is to deal with the "problem" of
American hegemony-to contain and to check. This is a matter not of interpretation, but
merely of listening to what they say. Nye wants the United States to embrace
multilateralism and then insist, somehow, on having its way. Its partners will hate

that. This course yields no great soft-power premium.

*2AC XO CP
1. Perm do the counterplan The counterplan is a specification
of how the af is done. The plan text just says the Courts
should", not "executive shouldnt". The perm adopts the
specification, it does not sever out of the plan.
2. The af should not have to defend normal means:

A) Af Critical thinkingreward strategic plan text writing


B) Af Burdendoing the resolution through something other than normal
means still proves the resolution true
C) Opportunity Cost Educationa shift in agent is not a cost to the af,
that education is key to real world decision-making our reasons for why
agent cps are bad justify this

3. Solvency deficits
Future presidents dispose of
Cooper 97 [Phillip, Professor of Poli Sci @ University of Vermont, Administration and Society, Lexis]
Even if they serve temporary goals,

executive orders can produce a significant amount of


not yield a long-term benefit because the next
president may dispose of predecessors orders at a whim. It may be easier than
complexity and conflict and

moving a statute through Congress and faster than waiting for agencies to use their rule-making
processes to accomplish policy ends, but executive orders may ultimately be a much

weaker foundation on which to build a policy than the alternatives.

4. Counterplan links to politics

A) XOs are perceived and unpopular with Republicans


Cohen 11/1 (Tom, CNN, Obama uses executive orders as a political tool,
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-11-01/politics/politics_obama-executiveorders_1_executive-orders-press-secretary-jay-carney-inaction?_s=PM:POLITICS ,
accessed 11/4)

Republicans reject the premise of the White House position, arguing that Obama
chooses to blame Congress for inaction instead of working with legislators from both
parties on bills that can pass. House Speaker John Boehner, speaking on the Laura

Ingraham show last week, described as laughable the prospect that Obama would
use executive orders to bypass Congress on substantive issues . At the same time,
though, the Ohio Republican said he would keep close watch to make sure nothing
unconstitutional happens. To Adam Warber, a Clemson University political science
professor who wrote a book on executive orders, Obama is carrying on a consistent
tradition of his predecessors in trying to expand the power of the presidency as
much as possible. "It's incremental," Warber said. "Each president kind of adds to
the power that the presidency has." In Obama's case, "we pretty much are seeing
that behind the scenes he's centralizing power," Warber continued. "He's not really
different than anyone else." For Obama, the strategy of executive orders serves a
dual purpose by moving forward on parts of his agenda despite Republican
opposition while projecting an image of decisive action in the face of political
inaction.

B) XOs turn the President into a lightning rod


Cooper 97 [Phillip, Professor of Poli Sci @ University of Vermont, Administration and Society, Lexis]
the effort to avoid opposition from Congress or agencies can have the
effect of turning the White House itself into a lightning rod. When an
administrative agency takes action under its statutory authority and responsibility, its opponents
generally focus their conflicts as limited disputes aimed at the agency involved. Where
the White House employs an executive order, for example, to shift critical elements of decision
making from the agencies to the executive office of the president, the nature of conflict changes and
the focus shifts to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue or at least to the executive office buildings
Interestingly enough,

The saga of the OTRA battle with Congress under regulatory review orders and the murky status of the Quayle
Commission working in concert with OIRA provides a dramatic case in point. The nature and focus of conflict is in
some measure affected by the fact that executive orders take administrative action outside the normal rules of
administrative law. And although there are tensions in that field of law, the fact is that it has been carefully
developed over time with the intention of accommodating the needs of administration and the demands for
accountability by agencies filled with unelected administrators who make important decisions having the force of
law in the form of rules and administrative adjudications. On one hand, administrative law requires open, orderly,
and participative decision processes, but it also creates significant presumptions in favor of administrative
agencies. The courts provide legal support in the form of favorable decisions as well as assisting agencies in
enforcement through orders enforcing subpoena and other investigative authority while also ordering compliance
with agency decisions once the investigations and decision processes are complete. Administrative law also
provides a vehicle for integrating administrative decisions having the force of law with the larger body of law and

The use of executive orders to confound or circumvent normal administrative


law is counterproductive and ultimately dysfunctional.
policy.

C) XOs fail and are unpopular gun control from this year proves
Hunter 13

(Hunter, Daily Kos, Roundup: GOP outraged by Obama's executive orders on guns, but still not
certain why, 01/17/13, AD: 02/13/13, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/17/1179617/-Roundup-GOP-outragedby-Obama-s-executive-orders-on-guns-but-still-not-certain-why | Kushal)

Republicans spent Tuesday announcing that whatever Obama was about to announce in order to help curb gun
violence in America was "tyranny." So, did the announcement of Obama's actual executive orders quell

the fears of the paranoid? Of course not, and so we spent the entirety of the day listening to
generic statements about how Obama's list of seemingly not all-that-controversial small actions

is,

in fact, definitely still tyranny. Notably absent in any of the statements was a specific note of which
specific Obama executive orders were the outrageous ones. Are we still going to impeach Obama? For which thing,
for promising to nominate an ATF director? For informing the CDC that their scientists are, in fact, allowed to at least
examine the issue of gun violence? The bit about more armed security officers in schools, which was the National
Rifle Association's greatest plan ever but which presumably is what Hitler would have done, now that Obama
actually agreed to it? Let's run down the list of oh-so-wounded responses. Sen. Marco Rubio: Nothing the
President is proposing would have stopped the massacre at Sandy Hook. President Obama is targeting the 2nd
Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens instead of seriously addressing the real underlying causes of such
violence. Rolling back responsible citizens rights is not the proper response to tragedies committed by criminals
and the mentally ill. Making matters worse is that President Obama is again abusing his power by imposing his
policies via executive fiat instead of allowing them to be debated in Congress. President Obamas frustration with
our republic and the way it works doesnt give him license to ignore the Constitution. Which orders? Where's the
problem? No clue, possibly because Marco Rubio is too dumb to read through the list and decide. Rick Perry, who is
just phoning it in from Xanax-and-booze-land, at this point: "There is evil prowling in the world - it shows up in our
movies, video games and online fascinations, and finds its way into vulnerable hearts and minds. As a free people,
let us choose what kind of people we will be. Laws, the only redoubt of secularism, will not suffice. Let us all return
to our places of worship and pray for help. Above all, let us pray for our children. "In fact, the piling on by the
political left, and their cohorts in the media, to use the massacre of little children to advance a pre-existing political
agenda that would not have saved those children, disgusts me, personally. The second amendment to the
Constitution is a basic right of free people and cannot be nor will it be abridged by the executive power of this or
any other president." Yes, how outrageous that someone try to do something, as a result of a tragedy. Something
other than shrugging our shoulders and going off to pray for more competent leaders, anyway. The Republican
National Committee, still run by eternal twelve year old Reince Preibus: President Obamas series of gun control
measures amount to an executive power grab that may please his political base but will not solve the problems at
hand. He paid lip service to our fundamental constitutional rights, but took actions that disregard the 2nd
Amendment and the legislative process. Representative government is meant to give voice to the

people; President Obamas unilateral executive action ignores this principle , said RNC Chairman
Reince Priebus. Again, which goddamn actions are the outrageous ones? Do we have to offer a cash reward for the
first yokel to tell us exactly what part of Obama's executive orders they find so damn offensive? Murderer's Row,
formerly known as the National Rifle Association: Attacking firearms and ignoring children is not a solution to the
crisis we face as a nation. Only honest, law-abiding gun owners will be affected and our children will remain
vulnerable to the inevitability of more tragedy. If you were looking for more substantive criticisms than a sniffling
pout over Obama "attacking firearms" (silly Obama, everyone knows children are the real cause of gun violence, not
guns), you'll have to look elsewhere. The entire government of Mississippi, which on the bright side apparently still
has a government of sorts and has not gone all Mad Max on us just yet: Leading the charge to ignore new federal
regulations is Mississippi, where the states Republican governor and state House speaker took to the mics right
after Obama finished announcing his plans and pledged to ensure the ones they dont like dont take effect in the
state. The Constitution is clear that such an effort would be illegal. Nevertheless, the Mississippi leaders say they
have a plan. Bonus points to Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant for the nearly zenlike defense of one metric buttload of
unregulated weaponry for any Mississippian that wants it: "When its for self protection, you need as much
firepower as needed to protect your family." Genius, that guy. And then there's Rand Paul. Rand Paul may or may
not be angling for a spot as America's dumbest senatorI don't know, I'm not privy to the Republican mindbut he
wants you to know that the President's outrageous executive orders, things like nominating someone to head the
ATF and maybe looking at how to let the appropriate agencies more easily share information about crazy people
who really shouldn't be allowed to buy guns, this tyranny will not stand. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has a plan to undo
President Obamas executive actions on guns. [] We only have descriptions of the executive actions, yet many
could be construed to describe an attempt by the executive to make laws in violation of the Article 1, Sec. 8 of the
Constitution and the 2nd Amendment, reads the one-page summary of the Paul plan shared with TPM by his staff.

Pauls bill will set out to nullify Obamas executive actions, deny any federal funding for their
implementation, and allow members of Congress and state officials to challenge the actions
in court. Which ones, among the executive orders, are the ones that "make laws in violation" of the Constitution
as understood by Rand Paul? Hell if he knowshis one-page document doesn't mention a single one of thembut
he's aginnit anyway. Sweet Jesus, these people have sailed so far past the shores of reality that they can't even
remember what reality looks like.

D) Empirics

Weisman 9 (Jonathan, WSJ, Obamas Fiat Angers Lawmakers, 7/15/9,


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124761651200542351.html)//LA

White
House economic officials begged, cajoled and cut deals with Democrats to secure passage of
legislation boosting the fund's power. Days later, President Barack Obama announced he wasn't
bound by any of the agreements. The ensuing flap over the president's June 24 signing
statement is the latest in a series of clashes between the White House and
Congress over an issue Mr. Obama once fought against himself: presidential fiat. As a
candidate, Mr. Obama pledged that he wouldn't abuse the presidential signing
statement, a declaration issued by the president when he signs a bill to give his interpretation of that law.
President George W. Bush used so many signing statements -- more than 750 -- that the American Bar
Association criticized it as an abuse of power . After Mr. Obama's issuance of his second signing
statement last month, even some Democrats say he isn't keeping his word on reining in
unilateral presidential actions. "Of course there's a broader issue here," said House Financial Services
WASHINGTON -- With $108 billion in International Monetary Fund loan guarantees in jeopardy last month,

Chairman Barney Frank (D., Mass.), referring to the brewing battles with Mr. Obama over presidential prerogative.

A White House official said the signing


statement was issued "out of an abundance of caution" to preserve "core
presidential prerogatives" in the area of foreign policy. "The administration negotiated in good
"It's outrageous. It's exactly what the Bush people did."

faith on this bill and has every intention of living up to our commitments undertaken in the legislation," said White
House deputy press secretary Jen Psaki. The House last week reinstated the restrictions on the IMF that were
undone by the president's June signing statement, by a vote of 429-2, in a foreign-operations appropriations bill. In

House Appropriations Committee Chairman


and New York Democratic Reps. Nita Lowey and Gregory Meeks will inform the
president that if he issues another signing statement on IMF and World Bank funding,
Congress will cut off the funds he wants. Mr. Obama needs good relations with
congressional Democrats to help pass his agenda on health care, energy and
financial-markets regulation. At the London summit of the Group of 20 largest economic powers in April,
Mr. Obama had promised to secure large increases in loan guarantees for the IMF. With the Group of Eight
summit kicking off soon, failure to make good on that promise would have been an
embarrassment. Many Republicans opposed the IMF loan-guarantee language, which had been inserted in a
war-spending bill making its way through Congress last month, calling it a bailout for international bankers. The
White House needed to win over balking Democrats . Rep. Brad Sherman (D., Calif.), negotiating
a letter slated for delivery on Wednesday, Mr. Frank,
David Obey (D., Wis.),

for some Jewish lawmakers, said he told White House National Economic Council Director Lawrence Summers they
needed stronger guarantees that IMF loans wouldn't go to Iran.

5. Counterplans that result in the plan are bad and a voter


Strategy skew jacks our 1ac by focusing the debate on our actor
Unpredictable there are too many sub-agencies or ways to implement a policy
They can still say our agent is bad solves all their offense
No specific solvency evidence proves abuse we do not have evidence that x
agency should not do the plan, because it is not part of their normal role in the
government.

Not having a specific solvency advocate is an independent voter it forces us to


defend process questions not grounded in the literature

6. Overexpansion of executive powers gets modeled causes


international destruction of human rights.
Sloane 8

(Robert D, Associate Professor of Law, Boston University School of Law, 88 B.U.U. Rev. 341, Lexis)

There is a great deal more constitutional history that arguably bears on the scope of the executive power in the

it is vital to appreciate that the scope of the executive


power, particularly in the twenty-first century, is not only a constitutional or historical
issue. As an international lawyer rather than a constitutionalist, I want to stress
briefly that these debates and their concrete manifestations in U.S. law and
policy potentially exert a profound effect on the shape of international law. Justice
twenty-first century. But

Sutherland's sweeping dicta in United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., that the President enjoys a "very delicate, plenary and exclusive power ...
as the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations - a power which does not require as a basis for its exercise an act of
Congress," n52 has been (correctly, in my view) criticized on a host of grounds. n53 But in practice, in part for institutional and structural reasons,

Because of the nature


of the international legal and political system, what U.S. Presidents do
and say often establish precedents that strongly influence what other
states do and say - with potentially dramatic consequences for the shape
of customary international law. The paradigmatic example is the
establishment of customary international law on the continental shelf
following the Truman Proclamation of September 28, 1945, n55 which
produced an echo of similar claims and counterclaims, culminating in a
whole new corpus of the international law of the sea for what had
previously been understood only as a geological term of art. n56 Many states
took note, for example, when in the 2002 National Security Strategy of the
United States ("NSS"), President Bush asserted that the United States had
the right under international law to engage in preventive wars of [*350]
self-defense. n57 While, contrary to popular belief, the United States never
in fact formally relied on that doctrine in practice, many would argue that
President Bush de facto exercised this purported right when he initiated
an armed conflict with Iraq based on claims, which have since proved unfounded, about
n54 it accurately reflects the general preeminence of the President in the realm of U.S. foreign affairs.

its incipient programs to develop catastrophic weapons. The 2006 NSS notably retreats from the 2002 NSS's

even within this brief,


four-year period, an astonishing number of other states have asserted a
comparable right to engage in preventive self-defense. These include not only states that
robust claims of a right to engage in preventive wars of self-defense. n58 Yet

the United States has described as "rogue states," such as North Korea and Iran, but Australia, Japan, the United Kingdom, China, India, Iran, Israel,
Russia, and (though technically not a state) Taiwan. n59 I doubt we will welcome the consequences of this pattern for the evolving jus ad bellum of
the twenty-first century. Equally, after President Bush's decision to declare a global war on terror or terrorism - rather than, for example, the Taliban,
al-Qaeda, and their immediate allies - virtually every insurgency or disaffected minority around the world, including peoples suffering under
repressive regimes and seeking to assert legitimate rights to liberty and self-determination, has been recharacterized by opportunistic state elites as
part of the enemy in this global war. n60 The techniques employed and justified by the United States, including the resurrection of rationalized torture
as an "enhanced interrogation technique," n61 likewise have emerged - and will continue to emerge - in the [*351] practice of other states.

Because of customary international law's acute sensitivity to


authoritative assertions of power, the widespread repetition of claims
and practices initiated by the U.S. executive may well shape
international law in ways the United States ultimately finds disagreeable
in the future. So as we debate the scope of the executive power in the
twenty-first century, the stakes, as several panelists point out, could not be
higher. They include more than national issues such as the potential for executive branch officials to be
prosecuted or impeached for exceeding the legal scope of their authority or violating valid statutes. n62 They
also include international issues like the potential use of catastrophic

weapons by a rogue regime asserting a right to engage in preventive


war; the deterioration of international human rights norms against
practices like torture, norms which took years to establish; and the atrophy
of genuine U.S. power in the international arena, which, as diplomats, statesmen,
and international relations theorists of all political persuasions appreciate, demands far more than the largest

what Presidents do,


internationally as well as domestically - the precedents they establish may afect not only the technical scope of the executive power, as a
matter of constitutional law, but the practical ability of future Presidents to
exercise that power both at home and abroad. We should candidly debate whether
and most technologically advanced military arsenal. In short,

terrorism or other perceived crises require an expanded scope of executive power in the twenty-first century.

it is dangerous to cloak the true stakes of that debate with the expedient of a new in the view of most, indefensible - "monarchical executive" theory, which claims to be coextensive with
the defensible, if controversial, original Unitary Executive theory. n63 We should also weigh the
But

and,

costs and benefits of an expanded scope of executive power. But it is vital to appreciate that there are costs.

They include not only short-term, acute consequences but long-term, systemic consequences
that may not become fully apparent for years. In fact, the exorbitant exercise of broad,
supposedly inherent, executive powers may well - as in the aftermath of the Nixon administration - culminate in

the sort of reactive statutory constraints and de facto diplomatic


obstacles that proponents of a robust executive regard as misguided
and a threat to U.S. national security in the twenty-first century.
precisely

7. Their executive order ignores Congressional legislation


that destroys separation of powers
[Ronald Turner, University of Alabama School of Law professor, JOURNAL OF LAW & POLITICS, Winter
1. (DRGCL/E264)]

1996, p.

The increased and aggressive presidential use of executive orders can present
serious constitutional questions when there are no congressional or constitutional
bases for a particular order. Orders not tethered to or derived from statutes or the
Constitution raise issues about the legitimacy of presidential legislation because, as
noted previously, lawmaking is a legislative function . Thus, the issuance of an executive
order by a President without a clear statutory or constitutional basis can be
inconsistent with the principle of separation of powers and the sequential trumping
inherent in the constitutional system. A baseless and unauthorized order provides a
means for the President to subvert the system of checks and balances , for she can
make laws free from congressional involvement or agreement and is "able to make
sweeping policy value choices without any check by either the federal courts or by a
majority of Congress." Such unchecked executive power allows a President to "alter
the distribution of the background set of private rights entitlements" and to evade the
filtering mechanisms of the bicameral legislature and judicial review. Evasion is particularly
problematic when different political parties dominate different branches of
government. An executive order issued by the President of one party that declares
national policy that is opposed by the opposition party with a legislative majority
can result in a clash of ideologies and views as to the law that should govern the
nation. As a result "strengthening a particular institution may not only improve its effectiveness but also the
relative influence of a particular political party or ideology."

*AT: Presidential Powers NB


Perm Do the plan and an XO on another issue. Solves their prez powers
nb. Their Mayor evidence isnt specific to our plan and isnt even specific
to Obama it is from 2001. This perm is legit

Their prez powers nb is artificially competitive. They should at least have


to prove that the plan is the key issue. The perm is necessary to test
competition.

Obamas an executive order extremist no threshold to the net


benefit
FRIEDERSDORF 9/12

(Conor Friedersdorf is a staff writer at The Atlantic, where he focuses on politics and
national affairs, Obama Acts Like He Doesn't Know He's an Executive-Power Extremist, 09/12/13, AD: 09/12/13,
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/09/obama-acts-like-he-doesnt-know-hes-an-executive-powerextremist/279583/ | Kushal)

It's often hard to tell if President Obama is lying to the American people or to himself. Is he willfully
misrepresenting who he is? Or is he blind to his true self? Over the last five years he has repudiated many of the
positions he took in 2008, but still talks like and perhaps likes to think of himself as the man who ran on change. A
passage from his Tuesday speech on Syria provides a striking example. The relevant passage -- an aside on
executive power -- comes just after the president explains that he favors a strike on Syria to deter the

use of chemical weapons (emphasis added): That's my judgment as commander-in-chief. But Im also the
president of the worlds oldest constitutional democracy. So even though I possess the authority to order military
strikes, I believed it was right, in the absence of a direct or imminent threat to our security, to take this debate to
Congress. I believe our democracy is stronger when the president acts with the support of Congress. And I believe
that America acts more effectively abroad when we stand together. This is especially true after a decade that put
more and more war-making power in the hands of the president, and more and more burdens on the shoulders of
our troops, while sidelining the peoples representatives from the critical decisions about when we use force. What a
fascinating paragraph! Even as Obama implies that he is a circumspect steward of constitutional

democracy, he asserts that even absent "a direct or imminent threat," he has absolute
power to wage war without congressional support, the Constitution and the opinions of the
demos be damned. If the passage ended there it would be staggering in its internal tension. As Jack Goldsmith
explained in detail, intervening in Syria without congressional sign-off would "push presidential war unilateralism
beyond where it has gone before." Asserting that power without using it is still an extreme position to take.

Obama goes a delusion farther. Ostensibly because he hasn't yet intervened, even though
he repeatedly and needlessly asserts his right to do so unilaterally, he casts himself as
moving away from unilateralism and toward consulting Congress. The benefits are "especially true
after a decade that put more and more war-making power in the hands of the president," he notes, "while sidelining
the peoples representatives from the critical decisions about when we use force." The grammer is priceless. Who
"put more and more war-making power in the hands of the president"? In Obama's telling, "a decade" put the
executive power there. The absence of a human subject in the sentence isn't hard to figure out. For all President
George W. Bush's faults, he sought and received majority support for the Patriot Act, the September 2001 AUMF, the
War in Afghanistan, and the War in Iraq. Obama's expansion of the drone war and his illegal war-making in Libya
didn't turn out as bad as Iraq, so it's hard to see him as a worse president, but Obama has done more than Bush to
expand the war-making power of the White House. As for "sidelining the peoples representatives from the critical
decisions about when we use force," it's Obama who went into Libya despite the fact that a House vote to approve
U.S. involvement was brought to the floor and voted down. Yet Obama complains about these trends as if someone
other than Obama is responsible for them, and as if he has been and remains powerless to do more to reverse
them. When Obama asked Congress to vote in Syria, no one forced him to insist that he had

the power to intervene militarily even if a legislative vote declared otherwise. No one forced
him to defend the extreme position that the presidential war power is so sweeping that it

includes waging wars of choice rejected by Congress that don't involve any direct or
imminent threat to the United States. He went out of his way to defend that maximal
precedent, even as gave us the impression that he was trying to rein in executive power that
he claims to find regrettable and worrisome. It's all consistent with Obama's favorite rhetorical tactic:
granting the validity of an objection in his rhetoric, then totally ignoring the objection in his actions. In so doing, he
confuses public discourse and subverts debate. We know that Obama is an executive-power extremist

in his actions. He believes the president has the power to intervene militarily without
Congress in places that do not threaten America; that he can order American citizens killed
in secret without due process; that he can secretly collect data on the phone calls of all
Americans; that he can invoke the state-secrets privilege to avoid adjudicating constitutional
challenges to his policies on their merits; that he can indefinitely detain prisoners without
evidence, charges or due process, that he can sit in judgment of anyone on earth, then send
a drone anywhere to strike them. Yes, we know that Obama is an executive-power extremist in his actions,
that there are many steps to rein in executive power that he could take but hasn't taken ... and that he worries
repeatedly about an excess of executive power in his rhetoric. What we don't know is the reason for this disconnect.
After all, this ain't like Gitmo. If he really wanted to do more to shrink executive power, he could do a lot unilaterally,
and no one could stop him. Is he trying to fool us? Or is he fooling himself, because he likes to think of himself as
more prudent and moderate man than he is? Can he not bear the truth that he's a Cheneyite extremist*? My best
guess is that he's trying to fool us. But it's hard to know for sure.

And prez powers should be at an all-time high Obama XOd


cyber security this year
Larose 13

(Cynthia J. Larose, United States: President Signs Cybersecurity Executive Order, 02/15/13, AD:
02/15/13,
http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/221874/Data+Protection+Privacy/President+Signs+Cybersecurity+Executiv
e+Order | Kushal)

Just before delivering his State of the Union address, President Obama signed an Executive
Order aimed at increasing information sharing between the government and private-sector
businesses in order to move the issue of cybersecurity protection. The goal of the order is to
achieve a "partnership with owners and operators of critical infrastructure to improve
cybersecurity information sharing..." by developing and promoting a new cybersecurity
framework. The framework will partner critical infrastructure with sector-specific agencies to increase the flow of
cybersecurity information between the government and private industry.

No nb - single executive orders dont spillover*


Kreider 6 [Dr. Kyle L. Kreider, Assistant Professor of Political Sciences at the Political Science
Department, Wilkes University June 2006
[http://www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/lpbr/subpages/reviews/warber0606.htm]//DoeS
A part of the strategic environment surrounding executive orders is what Congress is likely to do in response. As Warber sees it,
Congress has two options: apply verbal pressure or pass legislation to nullify or reform existing executive orders (p.108). While

Congress devotes a small portion of its time


debating executive orders (p.114) and has been relatively inactive in reforming and eliminating specific executive
Congress has these two options, the data show that

orders issued by presidents who served between the Kennedy and George H. W. Bush administrations (p.120). Warber concludes
with a cursory examination of President George W. Bushs use of executive orders and some thoughts on where future research
should go. While his political opponents and some members of the media criticize President Bush for his penchant for acting
unilaterally (in both domestic and foreign affairs), expanding the powers of the presidency, and sometimes bypassing the expertise
found in Congress, the results demonstrate that Bush has not significantly departed from previous presidents regarding the types
and quantity of executive orders that he issued during his first term (p.124). However, what has been different under President
Bush is his willingness to change existing public policy by revoking, superseding, or amending executive orders made by previous
presidents. Yearly averages show President Bush to be second only to President Carter in revising inherited executive orders. A key
finding of this book is that

presidents have not dramatically expanded their power with

[executive orders] across the modern presidency (p.128). Though Warber does not
have the specific answers as to why presidents have not increased their use of
executive orders over time, he speculates the stasis in presidential directives to a
number of [*437] factors, one being the continued existence of separation of
powersspecifically Congresss ability to pass legislation to revoke or revise executive orders and the federal courts authority
to decide upon their constitutionality.

Congressional backlash to executive orders kills prez powers this also


proves the link to politics*
Posner 2K [Michael, Professor Emeritus at the University of Oregon and Adjunct Professor at the
Weill Medical College in New York Blocking the Presidential Power Play National Journal, Jan 1,
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/nj_20000101_15.php]

Some legal experts counsel Congress to be careful not to usurp legitimate presidential power. One
expert urging caution is Douglas Cox, a lawyer who was deputy assistant attorney general in the Office
of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department during the Bush Administration. "When a President

overreaches and uses executive orders to invade or supersede the legislative powers
of Congress, Congress may be sufficiently provoked to consider an across-the-board
approach to rein in those abuses," he told the House Rules subcommittee. "Although that
reaction is understandable, Congress must be careful to understand the extent to which executive
orders are a necessary adjunct of the President's constitutional duties," Cox added. "At all times,
Congress has ample legislative and political means to respond to abusive or lawless

executive orders, and thus Congress should resist the temptation to pursue more sweeping, more
draconian, and more questionable responses."

*2AC Commissions CP
1. The limits us to the federal government but doesnt require the whole
thing
Random House 2012
[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/the]
The 1 [stressed thee; unstressed before a consonant thuh; unstressed before a vowel
thee] Show IPA
definite article
1. (used, especially before a noun, with a specifying or particularizing effect, as opposed to
the indefinite or generalizing force of the indefinite article a or an ): the book you gave me;
Come into the house.

2. Perm do both
3. Should is not mandatory
Words and Phrases 02 (Words and Phrases: Permanent Edition Vol. 39 Set to
Signed. Pub. By Thomson West. P. 370)
Cal.App. 5 Dist. 1976. Term should, as used in statutory provision that motion to
suppress search warrant should first be heard by magistrate who issued warrant, is
used in regular, persuasive sense, as recommendation, and is thus not mandatory
but permissive. Wests Ann.Pen Code, 1538.5(b).---Cuevas v. Superior Court, 130
Cal. Rptr. 238, 58 Cal.App.3d 406 ----Searches 191.

4. Links to politics-A) Empirics


Klein 10 Ezra Klein, awesome political blogger, Sins of Commission, February
19, 2010, online: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezraklein/2010/02/sins_of_commission.html
There's nothing magic about a commission. Like a congressional committee, it puts
together legislation that Congress later votes to accept, reject or delay. And as of
now, there's simply no reason to believe that the votes exist for any serious
compromise. Republican leaders, for instance, are arguing that the commission
simply shouldn't consider tax increases, which makes a deal impossible. That was
their rationale for filibustering the very formation of a commission, which is why
Obama had to do this through an executive order. But elites still like the idea, in part
because elites can see the outlines of a deal that elites would make. Greg Mankiw
for instance, thinks Republicans should demand that the commission include a
value-added tax and a carbon tax. I would support that. The problem is that the
Republican Party opposes both policies, and there's no reason to believe they're
going to change their minds.

B) Even unanimous commissions link.


Hennessey 10 Keith Hennessey, economic policy analyst, January 20, 2010,
Error of Commission, online: http://keithhennessey.com/2010/01/20/error-ofcommission/
The Presidents commission does not create any binding fast-track process. Leader
Reid cannot unilaterally bind 100 Senators to an up-or-down vote and no
amendments. Even if a commission were to produce unanimous recommendations,
Republicans should fear that a Democratic Senate majority would use those
recommendations as a starting point, substitute even more tax increases for
whatever spending cuts are in the recommendations, and then pass the bill. Scott
Browns election as the 41st vote has little effect on this dynamic, since the
changes would probably happen in committee. Any commission created by
Executive Order has this weakness: it cannot bind Congress. Only Congress can tie
itself to the mast.
5. Process counter plans kill substantive debate: They dont test if the
plan is a good idea, theyre unpredictable without a specific solvency
advocate which is an independent voter, counter-interp: non-plan inclusive
counterplans and disads, educational and a better test of the af.
6. Risk of a politics link to the af means Congress says no.
Mayer 7 Kenneth R. Mayer, Professor of Political Science at the University of
Wisconsin-Madison, December 2007, The Base Realignment and Closure Process: Is
it Possible to Make Rational Policy?, online:
http://users.polisci.wisc.edu/kmayer/Professional/Base%20Realignment%20and
%20Closure%20Process.pdf
The second question is whether the BRAC model can succeed in other policy areas,
where Congress has been similarly unable to act. The success of the BRAC process
has spurred many efforts to replicate it on other controversial issues. In 1999, I
argued that independent commissions have a poor record; there have been very
few instances where they have actually resolved legislative impasses (Mayer
1999).5 The problem is that legislators are usually reluctant to delegate substantial
policy authority, at least without strong procedural safeguards and ongoing
monitoring. The conditions that made BRAC successful were the consensus on the
goals, agreement about what precise policy steps were necessary, and the narrow
range (at least initially) of the policy making authority. These conditions are rarely
present, and clearly do not apply to, say, efforts to create BRAC-like commissions on
entitlement reform, where there is intense controversy over both goals and specific
policies.
7. No solvency they arent binding and inconsistency dooms success
DalBello, 11 [2-25, Mr. Richard Vice President Legal and Government Affairs
Intelsat General Corp., National Space Policy: The Challenge of Implementation,
http://www.intelsatgeneral.com/sites/default/files/2011-02-25_HighFrontier.pdf]

Space policies are not laws. Although they provide some guidance to agencies, they
do not assign budgets, establish programs, or obligate Congress. They are, instead,
written to bedirectional and aspirational, and, in a tradition that goes all the way
back to President Dwight D. Eisenhower, serve to focus the nations thinking about
this one area of American expertise. Because of the holistic and ecumenical nature
of space policy documents, they also tend to have a something for everyone
character that can be confusing and, occasionally, internally inconsistent.

8. Permutation do the CP its plan plus because it acts as a


recommendation
.

5. The counterplan links to the net benefit recommendation would still


cause the plan to be perceived by courts.

6. Double bind either Courts say no and the counterplan


doesnt do anything OR the creation of the commission
convinces Courts that the plan is good and the permutation
resolves the link.
7. No solvency advocate is a voter we cant generate ofense
to a CP if theres no one who thinks it should happens

2AC Judicial Sunsets CP


1. Permute: Do the counterplan Its plan plus. The
counterplan only impacts the way the decision is worded which
doesnt change the plan text that they rule for the petitioners.
Katyal 4

John Carroll Research Professor at Georgetown University Law Center, 4 (Neal, THE CHANGING LAWS
OF WAR: DO WE NEED A NEW LEGAL REGIME AFTER SEPTEMBER 11?: SUNSETTING JUDICIAL OPINIONS, Notre
Dame Law Review, July, 79 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1237)

It was perhaps because the language of judicial sunsets had not been invented, that the one possible recent example of it, Grutter, was itself hazy. Some of the haze is due, no
doubt, to the way in which the Court shoehorned the sunset into the opinion. The Supreme Court for years has insisted on affirmative action having a "logical stopping point." n27
But this stopping point was one internal to the program - the term was meant to refer to the time period in the affirmative action policy where the preference should end. In

The
Court said, in essence, that it did not want to give the University carte blanche for all time.
Grutter, however, the Court appears to have imposed an external, judicial stopping point - one that had nothing to do with the University of Michigan policy .

n28 This does not really appear to be a claim about a "logical stopping point" as such; rather, it appears to be one about the vitality of a Supreme

the
characterization of it enumerates a possible template for such sunsets. That is,
the Court can hand down an opinion and announce that its holding is
entitled to the full effect of the stare decisis doctrine for a set number of years (e.g., "In
five [*1245] years, we will be completely open to reconsideration of these claims."),
or that it will be binding law until a designated event (e.g., "Following the cessation of hostilities with
Court opinion in the face of evolving circumstances. Regardless of whether this "judicial sunset" reading of Grutter is descriptively correct,
above

Japan and Germany, we will be completely open to reconsideration."). After the elapse of that time period, both lower courts and the Supreme Court would not be bound by the
decision, though they could of course follow its reasoning and logic. In effect, the decision would become something akin to an out-of-circuit precedent for a federal court of
appeals, in that it would have no formal binding weight as law, but its reasoning could be cited as persuasive authority via an affirmative codification of the old decision.

2. The counterplan makes ZERO sense. Judicial sunsets would


only be used to prevent incorrect court rulings. The entire
case proves its not a bad decision that would need to be
reviewed. They have to prove some portion of the case would
need to be reviewed down the line
Katyal 4, John Carroll Research Professor at Georgetown University Law Center, 4 (Neal, THE CHANGING LAWS OF WAR:

DO WE NEED A
NEW LEGAL REGIME AFTER SEPTEMBER 11?: SUNSETTING JUDICIAL OPINIONS, Notre Dame Law Review, July, 79 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1237)

There are two principal reasons to adopt this approach. First, error correction. As human beings,

judges necessarily will

make mistakes. The liklihood of such mistakes is a function not only of cognitive biases and simple human error, but also of the time
pressures the Justices face. Because the Justices are deciding so many momentous issues at any one time, n29 it is difficult for
them to reach agreements, particularly long-term binding ones, without error. Mistakes are particularly likely
to occur in areas that are beyond the Court's expertise, matters in which judges have a tendency to overreact, and circumstances where background

a decision might be appropriate when announced, but


later events might collude to make the ruling ineffective or even wrong. Unlike
facts are subject to constant flux. Indeed,

Supreme Court doctrine, constitutional principles are self-consciously flexible and adaptable; as Chief Justice Marshall put it, the text is "intended to
endure for ages to come, and, consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs." n30

3. No Solvency: They dont send the same signal we do


Sunsets show the court isnt sure about the long-term
applicability of the decision. The entire case is a disad
because nobody will comply
Katyal 4, John Carroll Research Professor at Georgetown University Law Center, 4 (Neal, THE CHANGING
LAWS OF WAR: DO WE NEED A NEW LEGAL REGIME AFTER SEPTEMBER 11?: SUNSETTING JUDICIAL OPINIONS,
Notre Dame Law Review, July, 79 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1237)

Instead of using devices that minimize the impact of systematic mistakes as part of a broader architecture of justice, our judicial system has adopted a system to magnify it. Both
the doctrine of stare decisis and the superiority of the Supreme Court over the lower courts exacerbate Supreme Court errors, the former over time, the latter over distance. The
stare decisis principle is so entrenched into jurisprudence that even when the Supreme Court realizes it made a mistake - such as Plessy v. Ferguson - it does not often admit the

The sunset
gives the Court a way to convey its uncertainty about the long-term effect
of its holding. The Justices may come to a decision in a particular case, but fear that the underpinnings of its decision may evaporate over time. Or they may
error. n31 [*1246] In these settings, and some others, the judicial sunset provides a method to prevent the automatic magnification of the mistake.

know themselves well enough to know that they may be overreacting to a potential crisis, but at the same time believe that a generalist court, in the midst of a national security
emergency, should not hamstring the executive branch. Some might say that a judicial sunset is not necessary because the Court always retains the power to overrule itself. The
same thing could be said of the legislature, which has the power to overrule itself and therefore arguably does not need a sunset provision either. The gambit here replaces reality
with formalism: the Court rarely overrules itself, particularly given the strong adherence to stare decisis. And even if the Court became predisposed to reconsidering precedent
more often, it would be difficult to signal to lower courts that the Court was ready to question one of its decisions. Instead, the matter would be likely taken as settled law,

Without the aforementioned signal


that the holding of a case is up for reconsideration, political actors and private
parties are unlikely to take decisions that flout precedent. Supreme Court
decisions are generally understood to be binding law, and the incentives
are to stay within that precedent, or at most to nibble around its edges. The upshot is that generating a test case to
enshrined into the jurisprudence and accepted by lawyers and lower court judges alike. Second, agenda-setting .

question a precedent is not easy and requires potential parties to read the tea leaves of the Supreme Court and buck an established case. And if that
task is hard for potential parties, it is even harder for the lower courts, who are under orders not to call Supreme Court cases into question or to
anticipate an overruling by the Court. n32 The only other real alternative is for litigants to resort to counting votes and retirements, practices that

A judicial sunset, by contrast, puts the


political branches, the media, other judges, and litigants on all sides on notice that the holding is bound
to be questioned at a date later in time. As such, the announcement of a sunset can invite these entities to develop a factual record
assume that Justices cannot change their minds [*1247] as circumstances evolve.

and data about the wisdom of retaining a judicial rule. (Consider Judge Posner's Wittmer opinion, which in effect called upon the government to
develop a factual basis for its boot-camp affirmative action policy or face something akin to a sunset. n33) A judicial sunset may even prompt the
Court, should it decide to reaffirm a lapsed precedent, to do so in a way that articulates the true basis for its decision, instead of crutching its holding
to what the Court has said before. n34

4. And, their author says the only time its okay to violate stare
decision is when core freedoms are at stake, which isnt true in
the case we rule on
Katyal 4, John Carroll Research Professor at Georgetown University Law Center, 4 (Neal, THE CHANGING LAWS OF WAR:

DO WE NEED A
NEW LEGAL REGIME AFTER SEPTEMBER 11?: SUNSETTING JUDICIAL OPINIONS, Notre Dame Law Review, July, 79 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1237)

Judicial sunsets could be in tension with stare decisis and may jeopardize one of its principal aims: to limit the ability of any one particular Court to
impose its will on the nation. For example, in James B. Beam Distilling Co. v. Georgia, the Court stated that if it were to overrule a previous decision,
and apply that overruling only to future (and not present) litigants, it would "minimize the costs of overruling, and thereby allow the courts to act with
a freedom comparable to that of legislatures." n35 From this perspective, the theory goes, stare decisis ensures that a contemporary Court, such as
the Rehnquist Court, cannot depart too much from the Burger Court, the Warren Court, and so on. There is no doubt that, viewed in the backward
looking direction of what the Rehnquist Court could do, respect for precedent can constrain decisionmaking. The rub, however, occurs when the
temporal direction is flipped - and the point is made about how stare decisis empowers a contemporary Court to exert control over subsequent
Supreme Court majorities far into the future. As discussed in Part I.B, once a specific legal matter has been resolved by the Court, the formal rule of
stare decisis, the informal constraint of a passive judiciary, and the existence of other agenda-setting limits all [*1248] may preclude that matter

. This precedent-laden alternative to judicial sunsets permits nine,


or as few as five, Justices of the Supreme Court to make a ruling that can last
indefinitely - binding people who have not yet been born. While in many cases
such a result may be acceptable, surely when our nation's most cherished
freedoms are at stake, and when there is a strong tendency for our judiciary to
overreact to a crisis, this grave expansion of judicial power must be resisted.
from arising again

The counterplan destroys judicial independence


Monaghan 98, Law Professor at Columbia, 98 (Stare Decisis and Constitutional Adjudication, Columbia
Law Review, 88 COLUM. L. REV. 723)

Focus on system legitimation convincingly underpins only some aspects of stare decisis. For example, the wisdom of judicial reconsideration of a
whole series of "small" constitutional questions -- such as whether jeopardy attaches when a jury is sworn rather than when it actually hears
evidence, or whether remittitur is consistent with the common-law trial by jury -- is not determined by system-maintenance concerns. Of greater note,

There is,
however, a second, and perhaps more universal justification for the application of stare decisis to contested
matters, one that also arises from a rationale concerned with stability and
continuity. Namely, the Court must strive to demonstrate -- at least to elites -- the
continuing legitimacy of judicial review. A general judicial adherence to
constitutional precedent supports a consensus about the rule of law, specifically the belief that
all organs of government, including the Court, are bound by the law. At first blush it may seem perverse
it seems that most issues one would consider "currently contested" 166 are not easily disposed of by appeals to system legitimacy.

to defend the idea that the Court maintains its subservience to the fundamental law by upholding decisions that depart from that law. But this
difficulty is not insurmountable. What the Constitution requires is often a matter for debate, and once having been adequately canvassed and
resolved by the Court, an issue might presumptively remain at rest. Even when the prior judicial resolution seems plainly wrong to a majority of the

adherence to precedent can contribute to the important notion that


the law is impersonal in character, that the Court believes itself to be following a "law which binds [it] as well as the litigants."
present Court,

167 In listing "the weighty considerations" supporting [*753] adherence to precedent, Justice Harlan included "the necessity of maintaining public
faith in the judiciary as a source of impersonal and reasoned judgments." 168 While it is quite clear to any observer that the Court has no coherent or
stable conception of the appropriate role of precedent in constitutional adjudication, Justice Harlan's theme is something of a decorative favorite,
especially among dissenters who object to an overruling decision 169 -- and it is certain the theme is sensible beyond mere decoration. To my mind,
this rule of law argument does not suffer from criticism that the man in the street is unaware of the overruling of "small" precedents and that, in any
event, he would expect the Constitution and not the Court's precedents to control adjudication. 170 For me, the real focus of rule of law theories

The concern is to contain, if not minimize,


the existing cynicism that constitutional law is nothing more than politics
carried on in a different forum. 171 In a recent work, Professor Cox states that the future of judicial
review turns largely on whether law is seen by the profession as only judicial
policymaking, or "whether room is left for the older belief that judges are truly bound by law both as a confining force and as an ideal
about the Supreme Court in the main is elites, at least "the reasoning classes."

search for justice." 172 Perhaps it goes too far to tie the whole future of judicial review to this distinction, but Professor Cox's point does have merit.

the Court's institutional position would be weakened were it


generally perceived that the Court itself views its own decisions as little
more than "a restricted railroad ticket, good for this day and train only." 173 If courts are
viewed as unbound by precedent, and the law as no more than what the last Court said, considerable
efforts would be expended to get control of such an institution -- with
judicial independence and public confidence greatly weakened. 174
My submission is that

5. Turn: The counterplan undermines the rule of law


Justice OConnor, Supreme Court Justice,
Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 112 S.CT. 2791)

92 (With Kennedy & Souter, Majority Opinion, Planned Parenthood v.

The obligation to follow precedent begins with necessity, and a contrary necessity marks its
outer limit. With Cardozo, we recognize that no judicial system could do society's work if it eyed
each issue afresh in every case that raised it. See B. Cardozo, The Nature of the Judicial Process 149
(1921). Indeed, the very concept of the rule of law underlying our own Constitution
requires such continuity over time that a respect for precedent is, by definition,
indispensable. See Powell, Stare Decisis and Judicial Restraint, 1991 Journal of Supreme Court History 13, 16. At the other extreme, a
different necessity would make itself felt if a prior judicial ruling should come to be seen so clearly as error that its enforcement was for that very
reason doomed.

*2AC Sunsets CP
1. Perm- do both
2. Perm- do the counterplan, its not textually competitive,
they only add a plank that includes a sunset in 5 years
3. Perm- do the plan and insert a sunset provision but continue
doing the plan regardless of its recommendations
4. No Solvency- Congress will forget about the sunset provision and the counterplan
will accidentally expire
Inside Bay Area 7, 3/1/7 [State needs to Reinstate sideshow law, Nexis]

It's not clear who lost track of the sunset clause or why. It's not the first time
government officials and lobbyists forgot to track time limits in legislation.
The documentation shows the sideshow and drag racing law successfully reduced
reckless driving. Unfortunately, it was submitted months after the Legislature
finished last year's business. The lapse could prove deadly. Getting the law back
on the books and in operation is crucial before the spring months; sideshows are
particularly popular during warm weather. Even though it has expired, lawmakers can
renew it on an urgent basis and it would take effect as soon as it was signed by the
governor. It's not a matter of opposition or ineffectiveness. It was simply a goof.
Lawmakers should fix it as quickly as possible -- we hope to see it reinstated this month.
And next time city officials should make sure to set the reminder on their computer
calendars well in advance.

5. Timeframe counterplans are bad- they only generate any


ofense based of a change in the plan 5 years from now, there
is no literature as to how this would occur in relation to our
plan, kills education and fairness because we cant generate
predictive literature
6. No Solvency- If they win the plan is unpopular- it proves
Congress will want to roll back during review
7. Double Bind- Either
A. The plan will be rolled back later and the case outweighs
politics
OR
B. Theres no Net Benefit- Congresspeople will still fight the
counterplan if they know it wont be rolled back
Deseret Morning News 7, 2/16/7 [Seat-belt measure stumbles by 6 votes in
House, Nexis]

Sen. Pat Jones, D-Salt Lake, sponsored the bill and helped shepherd it out of the Senate.
Last year, similar legislation made it out of the Senate but failed in the House. She
hoped a sunset provision in the legislation would have helped the bill pass.
With the provision, the law would have expired after three years. The bill's House
sponsor, Rep. Sheryl Allen, R-Bountiful, was disappointed with the outcome. "I think
it's very unfortunate because this was a way to save lives." During floor debate, Allen
pointed out that not wearing a seat belt is already illegal. She also used the impact
accidents have on taxpayers and the sunset clause as selling points. "We have
heard a number of studies that say ... seat belts do save lives. . ." But, the bill met
resistance from Rep. Carl Wimmer, R-Herriman. Wimmer, who is a police officer by
profession, told his fellow House members that he had been on the scene of many fatal
car accidents and knew the consequences of not buckling up. But Wimmer said the bill
represented "heavy-handed government." Something he called "uglier than any death
I've ever seen." Rep. Curt Oda, R-Clearfield, dismissed the sunset clause when
he offered a very different substitute version of the bill. "Once it's enacted it's not
really ever going to go away."

8. Sunset provisions are unpopular and links to politics - tax


cuts proves
Guinto 7, Investors Business Daily, 03 (Joseph, May 5, House Nearing Final Tax-Cut Package That Trims Cap
Gains, Dividend Levies; Senate Limits Still A Hurdle lexis)

The idea would be to hold down long-term estimates of costs to the

Treasury arising from the tax cut. And while that's nothing new on Capitol Hill, talk
of a sunset provision has already proven unpopular in the Senate. That's just
one of several things that continue to cleave apart even the Republican
leaders in the House and Senate. A Senate blueprint on the tax cut might come
today. But Senate tax writers are so far apart on the issue that sources told IBD that it
could be as late as next Friday before an outline emerges. Still, Senate Majority Leader
Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said Thursday he now favors phasing in an elimination of dividend taxes
over 10 years. That would meet Bush's goal of eliminating the tax while letting the
Senate hold down the 10-year cost of the overall tax cut to $350 billion. Senate leaders
last month committed to capping the tax cut at that $350 billion level. But even that
commitment remains in flux. "We want to fight for as high a number as possible," Frist
said. His goal now is $550 billion. Even so, Thomas does not back Frist's phase-in and Frist
does not back Thomas' plan to tax dividends as capital gains.

9. The Counterplan wont be shielded from politics


Liberman 99, Plain Dealer Publishing, 99 (Brett, Feb. 21, Prosecutors Run Amok; Independent Counsel Law
Next Target For Impeachment-Weary Congress, lexis)

Regardless of their views, both political parties are faced with crafting some instrument
for impartial investigations of a president or senior administration officials. "I hope to start
off by seeking a consensus to the effect that we must have a mechanism to deal with
conflicts of interest," said Rep. George Gekas, Republican of Pennsylvania, who plans to
hold hearings on the subject in the House Judiciary subcommittee he chairs, perhaps in

March. "We never will have a situation where conflicts of interest will not exist," said
Gekas, one of 13 House impeachment managers who prosecuted Clinton in the Senate.
He wants to reauthorize the law but include a sunset provision and other
restraints to prevent runaway investigations. Gekas has suggested extending the
act beyond the executive branch to cover members of Congress, an unpopular idea
on Capitol Hill. When the law last was reauthorized in 1993, Gekas tried to limit
investigations to two years and to require independent counsels to receive annual
appropriations, both as ways to rein in investigators.

*2AC NGO CP
1. Perm: do both- combined government and NGO action is
critical to efective policy
Sanyal 97, Chair department of Urban studies at MIT, 97 (554 Annals 21, Bishwarpriya)
Yet another surprise for NGO proponents was the finding that the NGOs that were
somewhat successful in implementing bottom-up projects were led, in most cases,
not by the poor but by individuals from higher up in the social echelon, with strong
but informal linkages to government political parties and other institutions at
the top. Although these individuals belonged to the upper social echelon, they cared

deeply for the poor and utilized their knowledge of and contacts with the
market and state institutions to channel resources and and institutional
support from these dominant institutions to the poor. <Continued a few
paragraphs later> If there is one lesson to be learned from the numerous bottomup projects let by NGOs, it is the following: to be effective, NGOs must
abandon their autonomy fetish and begin to work closely with dominant
institutions, such as the state, market institutions, political parties, and so on. To
say it another way, just as development does not trickle down from the top, pushed
by the state alone, it cannot effervesce from the bottom, initiated by NGOs

alone. The state and NGOs must work together and include market
institutions in their joint effort to aleviate poverty. This is borne out by the
experience of a few relatively successful NGOs, such as the Grameen Bank in
Bangladesh and the Self-Employed Womens Association in India. For the sake of
brevity, I will not describe these relatively successful NGOs in this article. However, I
would highlight the key lesson exemplified by them, namely, to be effective, cooperation
between NGOs, the state, and market institutions must draw on the distinctly different
institutional strengths of each. The state alone can create the policy

environment necessary for the NGOs success, and only it has the
administrative machinery for the large-scale implementation of projects.
Although NGOs lack this ability, their comparative advantage is in their ability to reach
citizens who are beyond th ereach of the governments bureaucratic administrative
apparatus. NGOs are also good at ensuring the citizens participation in the development
process by engaging them in learning environments, as opposed to the rule-driven
hiearchically structured institutional setting common to government projects. Market
institutions provide a third kind of strength to development efforts: unlike the government
and NGOs they heighten the sensitivity of development effortsto the preferences of
consumers and producers and inject a sense of market discpline in the organization of
development efforts

2. The af is a disad to the counterplan NGOs cant solve for federal


reserve currencies

3. No solvency NGOs dont have access to natural gas or jurisdiction over


exports

*2AC Consult Congress CP


Permdo the plan and consult using a nonbinding committee
framework
Kampelman 2 (Max M., The Washington Post, A New Structure for
Foreign Policy, 1/5/2, Lexis)//LA
A foreign policy declared by a president , except in an emergency, is subject to criticism by
the opposing political party, by 535 members of Congress, by the press, by nongovernmental
organizations and by other governments. Yet democracies, such as ours, require a broad consensus
behind a foreign policy; a bare majority is not sufficient. Members of Congress tend
to believe, particularly in foreign policy, that if, for the sake of unity, they are
expected to be in on a potential crash landing, they want to be in on the takeoff.
This comes face to face with the constitutional duty of the president to be in charge
of foreign policy. What to do, particularly given the congressional role to appropriate
funds and the congressional right to criticize? It is impractical and unwise to
"consult" 535 members of Congress, whereas not to consult is to deprive the administration of the
cooperation it requires as well as the judgment and experience possessed by Congress. What is required is
for congressional leadership to create a joint committee on international strategic
policy, which would not deal with legislation and would not have any
appropriation authority. In addition to the speaker of the House and the majority and minority leaders
of both houses, its membership should consist of the chairmen and ranking minority members of the
Appropriations, armed services, foreign policy and intelligence committees from each house. Given his
constitutional role in the Senate, the vice president should chair this committee, but should the leadership resist

Such a
structure would make cooperation with Congress more than a superficial exercise,
strengthen the president's leadership by enlarging it with input from an experienced
and powerful legislative group and overcome a major potential obstacle to an
effective foreign policy.
this arrangement, the vice president could also be an ex officio member as the president's representative.

Oversight makes for better policy


Eizenstat 98 (Stuart E., JD Harvard Law School, Jimmy Carters Chief
Domestic Policy Advisor, Bill Clintons Deputy Secretary of the Treasury,
Undersecretary of State for Economic, Business, and Agricultural
Affairs, and Undersecretary of Commerce, also was United States
Ambassador to the EU from 1993-6, Very qualified individual,
TESTIMONY FOR UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE STUART E. EIZENSTAT
HOUSE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE JUNE 3, 1998,
http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/congress/1998_h/h980603se.htm)//LA
The President needs Flexibility The President should have the authority to tailor
specific U.S. actions to meet our foreign policy objectives. We recognize important
Congressional prerogatives in foreign policy , in particular where economic sanctions
are involved. This Administration, or any Administration, must take into account
Congressional concerns over foreign affairs questions. At the same time, the President is, of

course, responsible under the Constitution for the conduct of the nation's foreign
policy. Ideally, our foreign policy should be the product of a bipartisan consensus focusing on U.S. national
interests. One expression of that constitutional responsibility and comity between
branches of government is expressed in sanctions legislation through the inclusion
of appropriate Presidential waiver authority. Ultimately only the President can weigh
all the issues at stake at any given moment and tailor our response to a specific
situation. Legislation should set forth the broad objective but should allow the
flexibility to respond to a constantly changing and evolving situation . In this regard, there
are two particular pieces of legislation, Mr. Chairman, which are of particular concern: the Iran Missile Proliferation

The
President's senior advisors are recommending that the Iran Missile Proliferation Act of 1997
be vetoed because of its low standard of evidence, its unworkable waiver standard, and
because its inflexible and indiscriminate requirement to impose sanctions would be
Act of 1997; and the Wolf-Specter Anti-Religious Persecution Bill, which passed the House by a large margin.

counterproductive to our nonproliferation objectives. Similarly while we strongly support the goals of the WolfSpecter Freedom from Religious Persecution Act of 1998, the President's senior advisors have also said that they
would recommend a veto of the Wolf-Specter Bill if passed in its current form, because of its automatic sanctions,
the confusing bureaucratic structure it would create, and the inappropriate hierarchy of human rights violations in
U.S. law the bill would establish. We believe that

enactment of the bill would undermine many of


our important foreign policy interests, including ultimately the bill's own goal of helping those who
face religious persecution. Mr. Chairman, this rapid pace of change, sometimes unanticipated
change, highlights the absolutely critical need for flexibility in the application of
economic sanctions. Simply put, without flexibility we will not be able to tailor our
actions to meet our foreign policy objectives. There can be no "one-size fits all"
approach. Only the President can balance all the factors. It is important the
President have the flexibility to respond in an appropriate fashion to changing
circumstances. That flexibility also provides the President appropriate leverage to achieve the statute's goals
while minimizing collateral damage to other important national interests. If the Congress feels that he
has not struck the right balance, then oversight and criticism in a spirit of comity
are appropriate, but not removal of the President's discretion -- that would make for
bad policy. Using these general principles as a standard against which to grade our - and your - efforts, Mr.
Chairman, I would like to focus on three specific cases where the actual use or prospect
of unilateral economic sanctions was an integral part of our policy : our use of ILSA on Iran
and Helms-Burton on Cuba to advance our cooperation with the European Union. Mr. Chairman, to illustrate
and underscore these guiding principles, I would like to focus on two specific cases, the Libertad Act and the Iran-

the prospect of sanctions rather than their use effectively


achieved greater cooperation in support of the Acts' objectives without upsetting our political and
Libya Sanctions Act. In both cases

economic relations with our allies and friends. In the Helms-Burton case, we decided our success with the property
disciplines we agreed upon with the EU merits seeking authority to waive Title IV.

Executive flexibility is best


Eizenstat 98 (Stuart E., JD Harvard Law School, Jimmy Carters Chief
Domestic Policy Advisor, Bill Clintons Deputy Secretary of the Treasury,
Undersecretary of State for Economic, Business, and Agricultural
Affairs, and Undersecretary of Commerce, also was United States
Ambassador to the EU from 1993-6, Very qualified individual, Sanctions
By Stuart E. Eizenstat, Under Secretary of State for Economic, Business and
Agricultural Affairs, 9/8/98, http://wpobw-res8.wpafb.af.mil/Pubs/Indexes/Vol
%2021_2/Eizenstat.pdf)//LA

The LCH bill would also impose a number of specific


procedural and substantive restrictions on Executive Branch imposition of new
sanctions imposed under IEEPA and all future unilateral economic sanctions laws. We would propose
instead that the President would be willing to issue an Executive Order that would
set guidelines--many of which are taken from the LCH proposal--which would apply in two
situations. First. they would apply to all future sanctions regimes under IEEPA.
Second. they would apply to imposition of sanctions under future sanctions laws
passed by Congress. where appropriate. LCH would impose many inflexible restrictions on
the President's imposition of sanctions. e.g .. requiring him to announce and publish
his intent to do so forty five days in advance. and specifying that all future sanctions
shall include. among other things, a cost benefit analysis. a contract sanctity
provision, and a two year sunset clause. We support the general idea behind some
constraints. but the simple fact of life is that there are instances when such
requirements would prove unworkable and destroy the value of the sanctions
as a foreign policy tool. For example, telegraphing in advance our intention to seize the assets of
Restrictions on Executive Branch

suspected terrorists, narcotics traffickers, major international criminals. or indeed for any foreign policy purpose

Contract sanctity provisions maybe


similarly unworkable and counterproductive--for example. in dealing with front companies in the
narcotics area-----particularly when combined with the requirement for advance notice of
intent to impose sanctions. They would encourage businesses to negotiate quick
deals to get in under the wire and avoid the effect of sanctions . Sunset clauses tied to time
rather than performance may also often not be appropriate. Many of the purposes tor which we may
impose sanctions-non-proliferation, to combat drug trafficking. to combat terrorism.
to encourage greater respect for human rights-are long term: they are simply not
time bound. We should not give the targets of such sanctions the ability to wait us
out. What is the lesson? Flexibility is an absolute necessity. In these as in all cases.
the President needs the flexibility to tailor our response most appropriately to the
specific situation. LCH contains differing waiver standards for these restrictions, ranging from a national
would effectively rule out asset freezes as sanctions tool.

interest standard to a national emergency standard to an armed conflict standard. and specifies that some

We need to modify such requirements to protect the


President's flexibility. With such enhanced flexibility. the President would be willing
to sign an Executive Order that would include the following particular guidelines
according to which the President should impose sanctions: a requirement to analyze
costs and gains to all relevant U.S. interests: contract sanctity unless the President
determines that it would detract from the effectiveness of the sanctions; a provision
calling for an annual review of future Executive Branch sanctions under which the
President must determine that the sanctions are meeting certain criteria in order tor
the sanctions to continue in effect: narrow targeting: appropriate exemptions to
minimize adverse humanitarian impact; and prior consultations with Congress,
wherever possible.
provisions would never be waivable.

*2AC The PIC


1. Perm do both

2. CP gets rolled back legal context proves


Southwestern Reporter 1908 [State v. Campbell, Southwestern Reporter, Google
Book]

This being true, it is plainly manifest that, by the omission of the definite article
the, which should immediately precede the word state, the conclusion to the
indictment in the case at bar falls far short of indicating the power or authority
against which the facts charged in the body of the indictment constitute an
offense. While it may be conceded that the word the is a small one and in many

instances of little importance, however, if we are to longer recognize rules in the


proper interpretation of language, then we see no escape from the conclusion
that the definite article the, preceding the word state, is absolutely essential ,
in order to designate the particular state against which the offense is charged to
have been committed. It is clear that the omission of this word not only changes
the sense, but the very substance of the clause , and, as was said by Mr. Bishop, in
the discussion of the proposition of the conclusion prescribed by the Constitution, that,
Whatever alters the substance, even in what seems unimportant, will render it void.
While it may be said that the definite article the in many instances is an unimportant
phrase, yet, as applicable to the conclusion prescribed by the Constitution of this State, it
is full of force and vitality. As was said by the learned counsel in their brief in State v.
Skillman (decided at the present term of this court) 107 S. W. 1071: The article the

directs what particular thing or things we are to take or assume as spoken of. It
determines what particular thing is meant; that is, what particular thing we are to
assume to be meant. It is used before nouns with a specifying or particularizing
effect. In the use of the definite article the immediately preceding state in the
conclusion prescribed by the Constitution, we have pointed out the state whose peace
and dignity has been offended, and by the omission of such definite article we have

a conclusion that does not designate the power or authority against which the
offense is committed. The state, in the conclusion prescribed by the Constitution of
this state, means the state of Missouri, and this, in substance, was what was decided in
the Hays Case, 78 Mo. 600, heretofore cited. If this conclusion embraced language similar
to that pointed out in the cases to which we have heretofore referred, such as against
the peace and dignity of our said state, or against the peace and dignity of state of
Missouri, it might be very properly ruled that such language was at least equivalent to
the language prescribed by the Constitution, for the reason that it indicated the power
and authority against which the offense, as charged in the body of the indictment,
constitutes an offense. This case falls far short of conforming to or meeting the
requirements of the rule announced by Judge Lewis in State v. Waters, supra. It was there
said: If the intent of the Constitution be responded to in this part of the indictment, a
literal transcript of the formula is not essential. But in that same case it will be

observed that the learned judge said that the purpose and meaning of the
conclusion was to indicate the power or authority against which the facts charged
constitute an offense. Therefore it is obvious that the intent of the Constitution has not
been substantially responded to, for the reasons heretofore suggested, that, in the

omission of the definite article the preceding state, there is an absolute failure to
indicate the power or authority against which the offense is charged to have been
committed. It is not a satisfactory solution of this proposition to say we know what

was intended or meant by the conclusion in the case at bar, or that it was a mere
matter of form. The proposition confronting us is not what the pleader meant to
say, but what he did say, and do the terms used in concluding the indictment in this
case substantially conform to the requirements prescribed by the Constitution?
Constitutional requirements are not ordinarily to be regarded as mere matters of form. As
was said in Cox et al. v. State, 8 Tex. App. 254, 34 Am. Rep. 746: However much we may
feel disposed to consider a matter prescribed by the Constitution ill-advised or uselesshowever much we may be inclined to doubt the propriety of inserting into the organic,
fundamental law of the state requisites of forms with regard to procedure and practice in
the courts-the answer is, the people themselves, the source of all power and authority in
a Republican government, have spoken it; and with regard to their ipse dixit, when
contained in the Constitution, which is but the expression of their sovereign will, the
courts can only bow in humble obedience, and say, Ita est scripta. If plain and
unambiguous, no ordinary rules of construction are applicable to these expressions; their
inherent, binding authority is superior to all ordinary rules.

3. The lack of a the before the state empirically caused


rollback
Wicht 97 James Edward, ARTICLE: There is No Such Thing as a Harmless
Constitutional Error: Returning to a Rule of Automatic Reversal, 12 BYU J. Pub. L. 73

Despite this seemingly accurate verdict, the appellate court reversed Mr.
Campbell's conviction.22 The reversal occurred not because Mr. Campbell's federal
Constitutional rights had been violated, not because the state failed to proffer
evidence on one of the elements of rape 23 and not because the evidence was
insufficient to support the conviction.24 Instead, the appellate court reversed Mr.
Campbell's conviction merely because the language at the end of the charging
indictment alleged that the rape occurred against the peace and dignity of
state rather than the required against the peace and dignity of the state .25

4. Critiques of speech produces a reactionary politics in which


change is focused on language directly trading of with eforts
to reform the socioeconomic root causes of injustice
Brown, Professor Political Science UC Berkeley, 2K1 (Wendy, Politics Out of History,
pg. 35-37)

Speech codes kill critique, Henry Louis Gates remarked in a 1993 essay on hate
speech.14 Although Gates was referring to what happens when hate speech
regulations, and the debates about them, usur p the discursive space in which one
might have offered a substantive political response to bigoted epithets, his point
also applies to prohibitions against questioning from within selected political

practices or institutions. But turning political questions into moralistic onesas


speech codes of any sort donot only prohibits certain questions and mandates
certain genuflections, it also expresses a profound hostility toward political life
insofar as it seeks to preempt argument with a legis lated and enforced truth. And
the realization of that patently undemocratic desire can only and always convert
emancipatory aspirations into reactionary ones. Indeed, it insulates those
aspirations from questioning at the very moment that Weberian forces of rationalization and bureaucratization are quite likely to be domesticating them from another
direction. Here we greet a persistent political paradox: the moralistic defense of
critical practices, or of any besieged identity, weakens what it strives to fortify
precisely by sequestering those practices from the kind of critical inquiry out of
which they were born. Thus Gates might have said, Speech codes, born of social
critique, kill critique. And, we might add, contemporary identity-based institutions,
born of social critique, invariably become conserva tive as they are forced to
essentialize the identity and naturalize the boundaries of what they once grasped as
a contingent effect of historically specific social powers.
But moralistic reproaches to certain kinds of speech or argument kill critique not
only by displacing it with arguments about abstract rights versus identity-bound
injuries, but also by configuring political injustice and political righteousness as a
problem of remarks, attitude, and speech rather than as a matter of historical,
political-economic, and cultural formations of power . Rather than offering
analytically substantive accounts of the forces of injustice or injury, they condemn
the manifestation of these forces in particular remarks or events. There is, in the
inclination to ban (formally or informally) certain utterances and to mandate others,
a politics of rhetoric and gesture that itself symptomizes despair over effecting
change at more significant levels. As vast quantities of left and liberal attention go
to determining what socially marked individuals say, how they are represented, and
how many of each kind appear in certain institutions or are appointed to various
commissions, the sources that generate racism, poverty, vio lence against women,
and other elements of social injustice remain relatively unarticulated and
unaddressed. We are lost as how to address those sources; but rather than examine
this loss or disorientation, rather than bear the humiliation of our impotence, we
posture as if we were still fighting the big and good fight in our clamor over words
and names. Dont mourn, moralize.

*2AC Should PIC


1. Perm do both
2. Consequentialism solves their impact moral language is
only bad within a deontological framework and Greene admits
that the word should is usually okay this also proves the
permutation solves because we can recognize that moral
realism is flawed while still using potentially realist language
Greene, 02 (Joshua David Greene, currently an Assistant Professor of Psychology at Harvard
University. THE TERRIBLE, HORRIBLE, NO GOOD, VERY BAD TRUTH ABOUT MORALITY AND WHAT TO
DO ABOUT IT. Dissertation presented to Princeton University in candidacy for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy. November 2002. http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~jgreene/GreeneWJH/GreeneDissertation.pdf)

Realist words like good, bad, better, and worse, while not ideal from a
revisionist perspective, are not so terrible either. First, this is because their
ordinary uses are more often subjective or hypothetical as compared to words like
right and wrong. When I say that the sea bass was good last night, Im very
likely expressing nothing more than that I enjoyed eating it , and when I say that the
movie last night was better than the one I saw last week, I may not be expressing
anything more than a preference. I might intend to express more than that,
but I might not. In contrast, if I say, as Bertrand Russell (1946) once did, that bullfighting is wrong, I, like Russell, almost certainly intend
to express more than my distaste for it.13 Second, our use of terms like good and bad, as compared to right and wrong, is more easily interpreted

When I say that ice cream is good, I surely mean that


it is good for eating (or, perhaps, for tasting) and not good for, say, cleaning my rug.
as making implicit reference to optional standards.

In other words, our use of good in such contexts is implicitly hypothetical: If you want something tasty to eat, then ice cream is good. While terms like
right and wrong and rights have some hypothetical uses of their own, as in the right way to hit a forehand volley, their uses are very often
implicitly categorical. For example, when one says that its wrong to kill people, its not at all clear what, if anything, this is supposed to be wrong for.
Wrong for morality? Yes, but standards imposed by morality arent supposed to be optional. Indeed, we say that killing people is just plain wrong,

In contrast to our most moralistic uses of right and


wrong, its harder to find uses of good, bad, better, or worse, that are so
naturally interpreted as implying categorical demands. And without categorical
demands, with only optional moral standards, there is no realism.14 Thus, it seems
that some bits of realist language are less subjective and more categorical than
others, making them more realist and therefore more important to avoid. The main
enemy here, the language that is the most unambiguously categorical and objective
in its implications, is the language characteristic of deontology . Deontology is usually contrasted
regardless of ones goals or preferences.

with consequentialism. According to consequentialism, The Good precedes The Right. In other words, the moral quality of an action is
assessed in terms of its efectsor its intended efects, or its likely efects, or its perceived likely efects, or some other more
sophisticated variant of this idea. Deontologists, in contrast, believe that The Right precedes The Good, or is at least somewhat
independent of it. The moral quality of an action is not simply a function of its associated outcomes, but depends, rather, on whether
that action exhibits proper respect for the dignity, freedom, autonomy, etc. of others in a way that goes beyond merely factoring in other
peoples wellbeing as part of the cost-benefit analysis. For consequentialists, every practical moral issue is largely an empirical issue, a
matter of figuring out what states of afairs are likely to result from the action in question. For deontologists, many practical moral
issues are to be settled a priori simply by considering the intrinsic nature of the action in question. In deciding whether it would be
wrong to tell a certain lie, for example, a consequentialists deliberation will consist of a tabulation of that lies expected efects, both
direct and indirect. In contrast, a deontologist may pass judgment on that action without much thought for its consequences. One might
conclude, for example, that telling this lie would be wrong regardless of the good consequences it may achieve because all deception

Consequentialists and
deontologists each help themselves to the full array of the common sense moral
terms; right, wrong, good, bad, ought; but they emphasize them
differently. Another way to characterize the difference in emphasis is to say that
consequentialism emphasizes the language of balance while deontology
exhibits insufficient respect for the autonomy of others and is therefore wrong.

emphasizes the language of line drawing. Line-drawing is a bad habit,15 the normative expression of what is most destructive in moral
realism. Recall from Chapter 3 the psychological basis of moral realism. People project their values onto the world, mistakenly thinking that the forceful intuitions they experience are
perceptions of a mind-independent moral reality. How will people in the grip of such projections be inclined to express their views? Answer: with a language as forceful and absolute as
their moral intuitions. Thus, an ardent liberal, one whose liberal judgments stem from deeply felt moral intuitions, will say that capital punishment is a clear violation of human rights and
that abortion is a clear violation of a womans right to choose. Likewise, an ardent conservative will say that family members of murder victims have a right to see justice served in the
form of an execution and that abortion is a clear violation of a fetus right to life. Of course, both sides will appeal to consequences when it serves them. Liberals will argue that capital
punishment is not an effective deterrent and that making abortion illegal will only result in more backroom butchery and unwanted children. Likewise, conservatives will defend capital
punishments effectiveness as a deterrent and argue that illegal abortions and unwanted children can be replaced by adoptions. But the more honest members of either camp will admit
that their commitments are not beholden to these sorts of contingent claims about the consequences of capital punishment and abortion. Once again, liberalsthe more ardent ones,
anywayoppose capital punishment because they feel that it is just plain wrong, likewise for conservatives and their opposition to abortion. This is why talk of rights is such a natural
expression for these powerful commitments. It captures the clarity and absoluteness of the conviction, its insensitivity to the empirical calculus of costs and benefits. In other words, the
notion of rights epitomizes the practical failure of moral realism, the stubbornness, rigidity, and irreconcilable differences that emerge when people believe that they, unlike their
perverse opponents, clearly have the moral truth on their side. There are two kinds of rights to which one can appeal, legal rights and moral rights, and in either case the appeal is
inevitably question-begging. Gunlovers appeal to their (legal) right to bear arms: Read the Second Amendment! But, of course, this gets them nowhere with their opponents, to whom
the whole issue is whether we should change the Second Amendment or (re)interpret it so as to achieve the same thing. When two legal rights conflict, its equally pointless to appeal to
one of them as if this might settle the issue. This is especially true when there is no clear legal standard for determining which right takes precedence, but even when there is such a
standard, one can question that standard on moral grounds just as one can question any law on moral grounds. The only time its not question-begging to appeal to a legal right is when
there is genuine ignorance of the letter of the law, as when board game players are forced, after much heated dispute, to consult the fine print on the inside of the box. Given that moral
realism is false, it is equally pointless to appeal to moral rights in the context of a purely moral disagreement. Suppose some people are discussing whether their mutual friend should
confess to her husband that shes had an extramarital affair. She must tell him. Gustave has a right to know! one of them asserts. If realism were true, such a claim might convey
useful information about the Moral Truth, but to people who know the terrible, horrible truth about morality, such assertions are no more effective than an expressivist Boo! or
Hurrah!, and probably less so given that revisionists will inevitably find people who speak as if they have the Moral Truth on their side somewhat annoying. Assertions about rights,
wrongs, duties, and obligations (over)state a position, but they do nothing to defend it. They tell you what to do, but they dont tell you why, and they certainly dont give someone who
is inclined to disagree a reason to change her mind. Contrast assertions about rights and other deontological entities with these contributions: I think its selfish to tell him. Let her live
with it! Why make things worse for him? This statement suggests a shift in perspective. Rather than conceiving of her confession as an act of bravery performed out of respect for her
husband, it is portrayed as a selfish act, one of sacrificing her husbands happiness in order to ease her own sense of guilt. To this one might reply, She should tell him because he
probably already suspects, and knowing is better than always wondering. This comment performs a useful service by drawing ones attention to a relevant empirical issue, namely the
possibility that her husband already suspects her infidelity and that he may have less to lose in being told about it than one might suspect. Another friend adds, 297 Would you want to
live a lie? Id want to know the truth no matter what. This comment suggests yet another shift in perspective, one achieved through the empathetic exercise of role-reversal. Unlike
empty assertions about rights and duties, comments such as these do offer something of value. Some draw attention to relevant facts (Good point! I hadnt thought of that!), while

Moral
realists, and those anti-realists who would emulate them, have the option of
dogmatism, of blindly acting by moral norms that one takes to be authoritative.
Revisionists, in contrast, have no choice but to acknowledge that all moral judgment
is an imprecise process of weighing values. The nature of moral action requires the drawing of lines: One either jumps
others offer new perspectives on the same facts, inducements to view the same situation in a different evaluative light (Good point! I hadnt thought of it that way!).

in and saves the drowning child, or one does not. One either votes to allow abortion or one does not. Of course, one will sometimes make compromises by
adopting middle-ofthe- road courses of action, but, at some level, all action is discrete. To any particular course of action one must say either yes or
no. Thus, while the inputs to moral judgment are fuzzy, fluid, and continuous considerations, the practical outputs of moral judgment are discrete
actions. Deontology is intuitively appealing because it offers answers as clear and forceful as our intuitions, drawing theoretical lines that translate into
practical lines, the kinds of lines that we, like it or not, are forced to draw by the nature of action. But, contrary to appearances, nature contains no true
moral lines. We begin with only a mush of 298 morally relevant considerations, things we care about, and any lines that get drawn must be drawn by us.
Therefore, any attempt to settle a moral question with deontological appeals to rights, obligations, etc. always begs the question. Such appeals are merely

In
contrast to deontological language, characteristically consequentialist words like
good, bad, better, and worse may be used by revisionists without too much
cringing because such words lend themselves to talk of balancing , to making sense
of the moral mush rather than denying its mushiness. Justifying ones opposition to
the action under consideration by labeling it bad is as bad as doing so by labeling
it wrong, but less dogmatic uses of bad, good, etc. can be useful. One can use such
attempts to settle moral issues by insisting that they have, in effect, already been settled by Mother Moral Nature and the lines she has drawn.

terms in ones subjective accounting of costs and benefits. When one says, for example, Its bad enough that she did it Why make things worse for
him? the bad and worse are not controversial labels that beg the ultimate moral question, but rather indications of uncontroversial16 moral2 subjudgments that will feed into the all-thingsconsidered judgment that practice requires. Often one can think of words like good and bad as non-specific
placeholders for evaluatively relevant factual terms. Continuing with the example 16 When such judgments turn out to be controversial, then one must
drop the evaluative label and go a level deeper, treating the use of the label as a moral issue in itself. 299 above, a revisionist might just as easily say,
Her actions have caused a lot of unhappiness already Why create additional unhappiness for him? Zealous revisionists may prefer a formulation of the
latter sort, one completely purged of realist moral language, but the advantages here are minimal. Likewise, when one says that its better to know than
to wonder, one can easily interpret this as an empirical assertion, probably one to the effect that knowing the unpleasant truth makes one happier in the

What about the should in She should tell him, because? Here we might
say instead, I recommend telling him, because but, again, the gain is minimal.
In this context the emphasis is on the factual claim following the because,
and not on abstract moral considerations.
long run.

3. Turn awkwardness
A. The link the counterplan text is substantially more
awkward-sounding than the plan text
B. The impact using the word should is okay if it sounds
better
Greene, 02 (Joshua David Greene, currently an Assistant Professor of Psychology at Harvard
University. THE TERRIBLE, HORRIBLE, NO GOOD, VERY BAD TRUTH ABOUT MORALITY AND WHAT TO
DO ABOUT IT. Dissertation presented to Princeton University in candidacy for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy. November 2002. http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~jgreene/GreeneWJH/GreeneDissertation.pdf)

What about ought and should? These words are more or less equally
comfortable in the mouths of deontologists and consequentialists, and, as we would
expect, not so bad as rights and duties, but a bit more dangerous than good
and bad. In asserted contexts one can avoid them by saying I favor , Im for,
I recommend, I support, Im opposed to, or Im against instead of
We ought to, or He should., or They must. Its a bit hard to let go of
these words in non-asserted contexts. For example how would a revisionist ask,
Should abortion be legal? One could ask, Are we for or against abortion? but
this sounds like a question about our current position, as if our votes have been
cast and its simply a matter of tallying them. Shall we allow abortion? and Are
we to allow abortion? both sound a bit too realist, not to mention stilted.

Will we allow abortion? makes it sound like the


issue is one of predicting the future. As far as I can see,
there is no standard English way of asking the anti-realist question, Should2
abortion be legal? or of translating the phrase, the dispute over whether
abortion should2 be legal. For this reason, revisionists may have to settle for
ought and should for use in non-asserted contexts.

4. Critiques of speech produces a reactionary politics in which


change is focused on language directly trading of with eforts
to reform the socioeconomic root causes of injustice
Brown, Professor Political Science UC Berkeley, 2K1 (Wendy, Politics Out of History,
pg. 35-37)

Speech codes kill critique, Henry Louis Gates remarked in a 1993 essay on hate
speech.14 Although Gates was referring to what happens when hate speech
regulations, and the debates about them, usur p the discursive space in which one
might have offered a substantive political response to bigoted epithets, his point
also applies to prohibitions against questioning from within selected political
practices or institutions. But turning political questions into moralistic onesas
speech codes of any sort donot only prohibits certain questions and mandates
certain genuflections, it also expresses a profound hostility toward political life
insofar as it seeks to preempt argument with a legis lated and enforced truth. And
the realization of that patently undemocratic desire can only and always convert

emancipatory aspirations into reactionary ones. Indeed, it insulates those


aspirations from questioning at the very moment that Weberian forces of rationalization and bureaucratization are quite likely to be domesticating them from another
direction. Here we greet a persistent political paradox: the moralistic defense of
critical practices, or of any besieged identity, weakens what it strives to fortify
precisely by sequestering those practices from the kind of critical inquiry out of
which they were born. Thus Gates might have said, Speech codes, born of social
critique, kill critique. And, we might add, contemporary identity-based institutions,
born of social critique, invariably become conserva tive as they are forced to
essentialize the identity and naturalize the boundaries of what they once grasped as
a contingent effect of historically specific social powers.
But moralistic reproaches to certain kinds of speech or argument kill critique not
only by displacing it with arguments about abstract rights versus identity-bound
injuries, but also by configuring political injustice and political righteousness as a
problem of remarks, attitude, and speech rather than as a matter of historical,
political-economic, and cultural formations of power . Rather than offering
analytically substantive accounts of the forces of injustice or injury, they condemn
the manifestation of these forces in particular remarks or events. There is, in the
inclination to ban (formally or informally) certain utterances and to mandate others,
a politics of rhetoric and gesture that itself symptomizes despair over effecting
change at more significant levels. As vast quantities of left and liberal attention go
to determining what socially marked individuals say, how they are represented, and
how many of each kind appear in certain institutions or are appointed to various
commissions, the sources that generate racism, poverty, vio lence against women,
and other elements of social injustice remain relatively unarticulated and
unaddressed. We are lost as how to address those sources; but rather than examine
this loss or disorientation, rather than bear the humiliation of our impotence, we
posture as if we were still fighting the big and good fight in our clamor over words
and names. Dont mourn, moralize.

2AC Government PIC


1. Permutation do both - the state is inevitablemeans theres
an ethical responsibility to STRIVE toward making it ethical
solvency isnt a question
Simmons 99 (William Paul, Prof @ U of Arizona, Formerly ASU
and Bethany College, The Third: Levinas Theoretical Move
from An-Archical Ethics to the Realm of Justice and Politics,
Philosophy & Social Criticism, 25(6), p. 83-104,
http://theology.co.kr/wwwb/data/levinas/1-levinas.pdf)//LA
We should also say that all those who attack us with such venom have no right to do so, along with this feeling of
unbounded responsibility, there is certainly a place for defence, for it is not always a question of me but of those

Id call such a defence a politics, but a politics thats


ethically necessary. Alongside ethics, there is a place for politics .55 Levinas argues
for a place for both ethics and politics, or, to employ his metaphor, a place for both the Jewish
close to me, who are also my neighbors.

tradition of ethics and responsibility and, along with it, the Greek tradition of language, justice and politics. This
section will analyze the mutual necessity of both ethics and politics. According to Levinas, ethics and politics can

Neither ethics nor


politics should be taken to their extremes; each must be moderated by the other. I
both be needed only if there is separation, that is, if each has its own justification.

think theres a direct contradiction between ethics and politics, if both these demands are taken to the extreme.

Ethics must temper the political because politics unbounded leads to tyranny ,
absolute power of the strongest. Politics ignores the individuality of each citizen,
treating each as a cipher, a member of a species. Further, without a norm outside of the scope of
the said, there is no standard to judge political regimes. The call for a standard by which to judge regimes is what
Levinas means by a return to Platonism. Plato, in the Republic, had used the good beyond being as his standard. A
return to Platonism would be necessary to restore the independence of ethics in relation to history and trace a
limit to the comprehension of the real by history. Levinas finds a standard in the ethical relationship with the Other.

If the
moral-political order totally relinquishes its ethical foundation, it must accept all
forms of society, including the fascist or totalitarian, for it can no longer evaluate or
discriminate between them. The state is usually better than anarchy but not always. In
some instances, fascism or totalitarianism, for example the political order of the
state may have to be challenged in the name of our ethical responsibility to the
other. This is why ethical philosophy must remain the first philosophy At the same time, ethics needs
politics. To reach those others who are far away, ethics must be transfixed into language, justice and politics. As
prima philosophia, ethics cannot itself legislate for society or produce rules of conduct
whereby society might be revolutionized or transformed. Although this
universalization distances the ego from the Other, it must be done to reach the
others. We must, out of respect for the categorical imperative or the others right as expressed by his face, unThe norm that must continue to inspire and direct the moral order is the ethical norm of the interhuman.

face human beings, sternly reducing each ones uniqueness to his individuality in the unity of the genre, and let

Thus we need laws, and yes courts of law, institutions and the state
to render justice Further, politics is necessary because there are those who will
refuse to heed the new law, Thou shall not kill. Levinas is well aware that this commandment is not an
universality rule.

ontological impossibility. Many will take Cains position and shun the responsibility for the Other. Thus, politics is
necessary to prohibit murder, in all its forms. A place had to be foreseen and kept warm for all eternity for Hitler

Both ethics and politics have their own justification. The justification
for ethics is found in the face-to-face relationship with the Other. The justification for
and his followers.61

politics is to restrain those who follow Cains position and ignore the responsibility
for the Other. Politics does not subsume ethics, but rather it serves ethics. Politics is
necessary but it must be continually checked by ethics. Levinas calls for a state that
is as ethical as possible, one which is perpetually becoming more just. Levinas calls for
the liberal state. The Levinasian state According to Levinas, the move from the Other to the Third is the begin- ning
of all violence. In the realm of the said, the ego must necessarily weigh others in the name of justice, but this
process reduces the Other to a cipher. Strangely enough, justice is un-ethical. When justice is uni- versalized into
laws and institutions it moves yet another step away from the an-archical responsibility for the Other. The
necessary universaliza- tion of ethical responsibility into the state is inherently un-ethical and violent. In the state,
the ego is unable to respond directly to the face of the Other. Further, the institutions of the state treat the Other as
an inter- changeable cog in its machinery, thereby denying the transcendent element in man. Even when the state
functions perfectly it is, by its very nature, opposed to ethics. For me, the negative element, the element of violence
in the state, in the hierarchy, appears even when the hierarchy functions perfectly, when every- one submits to
universal ideas. There are cruelties which are terrible because they proceed from the necessity of the reasonable

Vigilance
against violence in the state is essential. Institutions need to be constantly checked
by the ethical relationship with the Other. In order for everything to run along smoothly and freely,
it is absolutely necessary to affirm the infinite responsibility of each, for each , before
order. There are, if you like, the tears that a civil servant cannot see: the tears of the Other.62

each... As I see it, subjective protest is not received favourably on the pretext that its egoism is sacred, but because
the I alone can perceive the secret tears of the Other which are caused by the functioning albeit reasonable of

The state must be constantly reminded of its inherent violence. Levinas finds
just such a self-critical state in the modern liberal state. The liberal state always asks itself whether
its own justice really is justice. What qualities does the liberal state possess that make it self-critical?
the hierarchy.

First, there is the freedom of the press, the freedom to criticize the government, to speak out against injustice. You
know the prophets of the bible; they come and say to the king that his method of dispensing justice is wrong. The
prophet doesnt do this in a clandestine way: he comes before the king and he tells him. In the liberal state, its the

the leader is not above the


people, but is chosen from among the people. A ruler who is in an ethical
relationship, sees humanity through the Others eyes. Against the Platonic formulation that the
press, the poets, the writers who fulfill this role. Second, in the liberal state,

best ruler is the one who is best in control of himself, Levinas argues that the best ruler is the one who is in an
ethical relationship with the Other. The State, in accordance with its pure essence, is possible only if the divine

the most important


component of the liberal state is its call for a permanent revolution. The Levinasian
liberal state is always trying to improve itself , trying to be more just. It is a rebellion that
word enters into it; the prince is educated in this knowledge. However, for Levinas,

begins where the other society is satisfied to leave off, a rebellion against injustice that begins once order begins.

Although no state can be purely ethical, the liberal state at least strives for ethics.
Such a state is the desideratum if politics cannot be ethical. There is no politics for
accomplishing the moral, but there are certainly some politics which are further
from it or closer to it. For example, Ive mentioned Stalinism to you. Ive told you that justice is always a
justice which desires a better justice. This is the way that I will characterize the liberal state. The liberal state is a

Concretely, the liberal


state has always admitted alongside the written law human rights as a parallel
institution. It continues to preach that within its justice there are always improvements to be made in human
rights. Human rights are the reminder that there is no justice yet. And consequently, I
believe that it is absolutely obvious that the liberal state is more moral than the
fascist state, and closer to the morally ideal state.69 Since it is impossible to
escape the State, 70 Levinas insists that the state be made as ethical as possible.
The world of institutions and justice must be held in check by the an-archical
responsibility for the Other. Levinas calls for both an-archy and justice. Alongside the an-archical
responsibility for the Other there is a place for the realm of the said, which includes ontology,
justice and politics. Levinas thought is not apolitical as many have charged. His harsh critiques of the
political realm refer to a politics unchecked by ethics. For example, in Totality and Infinity,
state which holds justice as the absolutely desirable end and hence as a perfection.

Levinas sees politics as antithetical to an ethics based on the Other. The art of
foreseeing war and winning it by every means politics is henceforth enjoined as
the very exercise of reason. Politics is opposed to morality, as philosophy to navet. 71 Politics
unrestrained, by necessity, totalizes the Other by reducing him or her to abstract
categories. Levinas will call for a politics that is founded on ethics and not on
ontology. The state must be answerable to the an-archical relationship with the
Other, it must strive to maintain the exteriority of the Other . Levinasian heteronomic political
thought oscillates between the saying and the said, an-archy and justice, ethics and politics. The liberal state is the
concrete manifestation of this oscillation. Levinas calls for a balance between the Greek and the Judaic traditions.

Neither tradition should dominate. The fundamental contradiction of our situation (and perhaps of our
condition) . . . that both the hierarchy taught by Athens and the abstract and slightly anarchical ethical

Each of
these principles, left to itself, only hastens the contrary of what it wants to secure.
individualism taught by Jerusalem are simultaneously necessary in order to suppress the violence.0020

2. The government is goodits essential to our freedom and


liberty. The negatives anti governance stance is what makes it
fail in the first place, we must work through the government to
solve for oppression and violence.
Douglas Amy 2007(Professor of Politics at Mount Holyoke College, Government
as the Champion of Justice, Equality, Freedom, and Security,
http://www.governmentisgood.com/articles.php?aid=12, nikhil)
Do you believe in justice? That our civil liberties should be protected? That all
citizens should all be treated as equals? You would probably answer, Of course!
But do you also realize that if you are an avid supporter of public values like
justice, liberty and equality, then you should also be an avid supporter of
government? Government is often the only institution that can make these kinds of
core political values a reality. In fact, without an active and healthy public sector,
these kinds of public values would be in very short supply. Take justice, for instance.
It is not usually something provided by the marketplace or created by the actions of
individuals. More often it is something that can only be provided and sustained in
the public sphere by the actions of government organizations like the courts and the
legislatures. If we want a just society, we must work through government to get
it. This argument that government is an essential mechanism for realizing
vital public values is an important one in making the case for government.
Government is good not simply because it provides us as individuals with certain
services and benefits (such as the ones described in another article on this site, A
Day in Your Life) but also because it is the main way to promote important values
that are good for us as a whole values that are in the public interest. This view of
government as the insurer of core democratic values is one that goes back to the
very beginning of our national political institutions. Consider, for example, the
political sentiments expressed by the founding fathers in the preamble to the U.S.
Constitution: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect
Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United
States of America. From the outset, the American government was primarily seen as
an indispensable means of establishing and promoting certain universally

recognized public values, such as justice, tranquility, and liberty. And today, as
citizens, we need to recognize in government what the founding fathers saw in it:
that it is the only institution we can rely on to nourish and protect these kinds of
values in our society. Many people actually share this value-oriented vision of
government. They get involved in politics and the governing process not because
they want something for themselves but because they want to promote certain
democratic values such as equality or freedom that they feel are important. They
have a vision of what the good society is and they try to use government to make
that vision a reality. They vote for candidates and lobby the government not simply
to line their own pockets but in order to encourage government to do what is right
for society as a whole. Many people participate in the democratic process because
they want to promote principles and values that they believe are in the public
interest. For many people in the National Rifle Association, for example, it is not just
about owning their own shotgun, it is about liberty. And for many in the Civil Rights
movement it was not about using the same restaurants as whites, it was about
equality. To really appreciate the unique role that government plays in promoting
these basic political principles, we need to take a more careful look at some of these
key values and see how they can be ensured only by government and how they are
embodied in particular policies and programs. Lets start with justice and fairness.

3. Language isnt deterministic, changing it does nothing but makes the


problem less visible
Mark S Meisner, Professor of environmental studies at York University, 19 95
[Resourcist Language: The Symbolic Enslavement of Nature,
http://markmeisner.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/meisnerresourcist_language.pdf]/sbhag
Changing the language we use to talk about non-human nature is not a solution.
As I suggested, language is not the problem. Rather, it seems more like a
contagious symptom of a deeper and multi-faceted problem that has yet to be fully
defined. Resourcist language is both an indicator and a carrier of the pathology of
rampant ecological degradation. Furthermore, language change alone can end up
simply being a band-aid solution that gives the appearance of change and makes
the problem all the less visible. In a recent article on feminist language reform,
Susan Ehrlich and Ruth King (1994) argue that because meanings are socially
constructed, attempts at introducing nonsexist language are being undermined by
a culture that is still largely sexist. The words may have shifted, but the meanings
and ideologies have not. The real world cure for the sick patient matters more than
the treatment of a single symptom. Consequently, language change and cultural
change must go together with socialstructural change. It is naive to believe either
that language is trivial, or that it is deterministic.

4. Doesnt do change structures cedes the discussion to


elites
Darryl Jarvis (Director of the Research Institute for International Risk and Lecturer
in International Relations, The University of Sydney) 2k International relations and
the challenge of postmodernism)
Just because we acknowledge that the state is a socially fabricated entity, or that
the division between domestic and international society is arbitrary inscribed does
not make the reality of the state disappear or render invisible international politics.
Whether socially constructed or objectively given, the argument over the
ontological status of the state is no particular moment. Does this change our
experience of the state or somehow diminish the political-economic-juridical-military
functions of the state? To recognize that states are not naturally inscribed but
dynamic entities continually in the process of being made and reimposed and are
therefore culturally dissimilar, economically different, and politically atypical, while
perspicacious to our historical and theoretical understanding of the state, in no way
detracts form its reality, practices, and consequences. Similarly, few would object
to Ashleys hermeneutic interpretivist understanding of the international sphere as
an artificially inscribed demarcation. But, to paraphrase Holsti again, so what? This
does not make its effects any less real, diminish its importance in our lives, or
excuse us form paying serious attention to it. That international politics and states
would not exist without subjectivities is a banal tautology. The point, surely, is to
move beyond this and study these processes. Thus while intellectually interesting,
constructivist theory is not an end point as Ashley seems to think, where we all
throw up our hands and announce that there are no foundations and all reality is an
arbitrary social construction. Rather, it should be a means of recognizing the
structurated nature of our being and the reciprocity between subjects and
structures through history. Ashley, however, seems not to want to do this, but only
to deconstruct the state, international politics, and international theory on the basis
that none of the is objectively given fictitious entities that arise out of modernist
practices of representation. While an interesting theoretical enterprise, it is of no
great consequence to the study of international politics. Indeed, structuration
theory has long taken care of these ontological dilemmas that otherwise seem to
preoccupy Ashley wn government. And deterrence either prevents achievement of
the objective altogether or imposes punishing costs making the gamble not worth
the risk.

*2AC Military CP
Military is going to kill agent provocateurs lol
Permutation do both double action is double solvency

Perm do the counterplan - noncombat functions of the military


are non-military proves normal means
Huntington, 93 former professor of government at Harvard (Samuel, Noncombat Roles for the U.S. Military in the Post-Cold War Era, ed: James Graham, p. 5)

These would clearly seem to be non-traditional roles. But are they really? The more I
have thought about this issue, the more I have become convinced that with one
possible exception the subject of this conference does not exist There are almost no
conceivable roles for the American military in this new phase of national security
that the American military have not performed in some earlier phase. The true
distinction, I believe, is not between traditional and non-traditional roles but
between military and non-military roles, or more precisely, between the combat
missions of the military and the non-combat uses of military forc e. The purpose of
military forces is combat, that is to deter and to defeat the enemies of the United
States; that is their central mission, their raison d'etre, the only justification for
expending resources on their creation and maintenance. The forces created for that
mission, however, can and throughout our history have been employed in noncombat non-military uses.

DOD fails inefficiency


-inefficient
-little experience

Khan, 2012 - Director of Financial Management and Assurance for GAO (Asif,
DOD FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT Challenges in Attaining Audit Readiness and
Improving Business Processes and Systems, 4/18/2012,
http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590203.pdf ) DS
GAOs recent work highlights the types of challenges facing the Department of
Defense (DOD) as it strives to attain audit readiness and reengineer its business
processes and systems. The urgency in addressing these challenges has been
increased by the goals of an auditable DOD Statement of Budgetary Resources (SBR)
by the end of fiscal year 2014 and a complete set of auditable financial statements by the end of fiscal year 2017.

GAOs 2011 reporting highlights difficulties the DOD components


experienced in attempting to achieve an auditable SBR. These include: the Navys
and the Air Forces premature assertions of audit readiness and missed interim
milestones; the Armys inability to locate and provide supporting documentation
for its military pay; the Navys and Marine Corps inability to reconcile their Fund
Balance with Treasury (FBWT) accounts; and the Marine Corps inability to receive
an opinion on both its fiscal years 2010 and 2011 SBRs because it could not provide
supporting documentation in a timely manner, and support for transactions was
For example,

missing or incomplete. In a February 2012 briefing on its updated plans, DOD accelerated milestones for its
components in some cases, significantlyto accomplish the 2014 SBR goal. For example, the Air Force had
planned to validate its audit readiness for many SBR- related items in fiscal year 2016; however, the departments
February 2012 accelerated plans show that most of the Air Forces SBR line items will be audit-ready in fiscal years
2013 or 2014. Also, in its February 2012 update DOD shows that 7 of 24 material general fund Defense Agencies
and Other Defense Organizations have either already had SBR audits or are ready to have their SBRs audited, which
represent important positive steps. DOD has stated it considers the successful implementation of its enterprise
resource planning (ERP) systems critical to transforming its business operations, addressing long-standing
weaknesses, and ensuring the department meets its mandated September 30, 2017 auditability goals. However, in
2011, GAO reported that independent assessments of two of these systems the

Armys and Air Forces


new general ledger systemsidentified operational problems, gaps in capabilities
that required manual workarounds, and training that was not focused on system
operation. Moreover, users of these systems had difficulties using these systems to
perform daily operations. GAO also reported in 2011 on numerous weaknesses in DODs
enterprise architecture and business processes that afect DODs
auditability. For example, while DOD continued to update its corporate enterprise
architecture, it had not yet augmented its corporate architecture with complete,
coherent subsidiary architectures for DOD components such as the military
departments. Also, while DOD and the military departments largely followed DODs Business Process
Reengineering Guidance to assess business system investments, they had not yet performed the key step of
validating assessment results. GAO has made prior recommendations to address these issues. DOD has generally
agreed with these recommendations and is taking corrective actions in response. GAO has work underway to
evaluate DODs continuing efforts in these areas.

Alt causes thump the net benefit


A) State authority
Wolfrum, 2008 - president of the international tribunal for the law of the sea
(Rdiger, Freedom of Navigation: New Challenges, 2008,
https://www.itlos.org/fileadmin/itlos/documents/statements_of_president/wolfrum/fre
edom_navigation_080108_eng.pdf ) DS
The ambiguity prevailing at the time concerning coastal States legislative
competences as regards innocent passage was meant to be clarified by article 21 of
the Convention. This provision tries to establish a delicate balance between the interests of international
navigation and the right of coastal States to regulate the passage of foreign ships in the territorial sea. Only a
handful of actions are qualified as not being protected under the notion of innocent passage in article 19, paragraph
2, of the Convention, e.g., any act of wilful and serious pollution contrary to the Convention (article 19, paragraph
2(h)). The

coastal State may regulate innocent passage in respect of a wide range of


matters under article 21, paragraph 1, of the Convention, in conformity with the
Convention and other rules of international law ,. Paragraphs 1(a) and 1(b) of article
21 in particular refer to the safety of navigation, the regulation of maritime traffic,
and the protection of navigational aids, while paragraph 1(f) relates to the
preservation of the marine environment and the prevention, reduction and control
of pollution thereof. Paragraph 1(g) refers to article 245 of the Convention, which accords to
coastal States an exclusive right to regulate, authorize and conduct marine
scientific research in their territorial sea, and paragraph 1(h) refers to custom, fiscal,
immigration and sanitary matters. In short, article 19 of the Convention excludes certain actions from
the protection accorded by the notion of innocent passage, whereas article 21 of the Convention opens
the possibility for coastal States to limit further the freedom of navigation.

B) International agreements
Wolfrum, 2008 - president of the international tribunal for the law of the sea
(Rdiger, Freedom of Navigation: New Challenges, 2008,
https://www.itlos.org/fileadmin/itlos/documents/statements_of_president/wolfrum/fre
edom_navigation_080108_eng.pdf ) DS
International agreements, in many cases established under the auspices of the IMO,
mandate coastal States, including States bordering international straits, to adopt
further measures for the management and control of international navigation. Such
measures may be taken unilaterally or in conjunction with the IMO . This system is still in
the stage of development and some uncertainty exists in this respect. Among many international conventions
having a bearing on coastal State jurisdiction over foreign shipping in the territorial sea, four contain provisions that
allow for the adoption of rules and standards applicable to foreign merchant ships. These are the Convention on the
International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea. 1972 (COLREG)4 which provides for the possibility of

The other international instruments are: the International


Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of
1978 relating thereto (MARPOL 73/78),5 the International Convention for the Safety of Life at
Sea, 1974 (SOLAS),6 and the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary
Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal 1989 .7
traffic separation schemes.

<INSERT IMPACT DEFENSE>

*2AC NEPA CP
1. Conditions counterplans are a voting issue
a) Creates an artificial net-benefit by taking away uniqueness and link
arguments. Discourages in depth debate by allowing the neg to win with a
small risk of a contrived impact
b) Creates an unfair side bias by stealing the entirety of the af which is
the only predictable basis for ofense
c) Kills topic education - we focus on minute, infinitely regressive
implementation questions instead of transportation

2. Permutation do both - solves the net benefit because the


plan would be implemented but have funds withheld if the
impact statement wasn't followed
3. Perm solves public participation and politics
Lindstrom and Nie 97 Research Consultants for the Arizona Department of
Transportation
Matthew and Martin, HOW DO YOU COLLECT AND USE PUBLIC INFORMATION IN THE
DEVELOPMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PLANS AND PROGRAMS?, ADOT, REPORT
NUMBER: FHWA-AZ97-452,
http://www.azdot.gov/TPD/ATRC/publications/project_reports/PDF/AZ452.pdf
There are two key facets to any process whereby the public participates in the
decision making process. First, the procedural element simply allows the public a
formal opportunity to voice their concerns and opinions, usually at various stages of
decision making. The procedural requirements for public participation are a prerequisite
for substantive participation, or participation that entails a real impact and effect on
public policy. Secondly, substantive participation implies two-way channels of
communication the extent that government officials and the public become mutual
partners in the decision making process. Most participation takes place on

procedural grounds while creating an illusion that the public can have a
substantive impact. As a result, even though a citizens advice is rejected, they
may feel at least they had their day in court and will probably be more willing to
go along with the final decision. Towards the end of this report, we will come back to
this issue when we recommend techniques and strategies for Arizonas Department of
Transportation.

1. Permutation do the counterplan. It's legitimate - the af


shouldn't have to defend certainty and immediacy against
counterplans. Counterplans must be textually and
functionally competitive.
2. EIS is normal means
Argus 14

(Argus Media, DOE to start new policy for non-FTA LNG exports, 08/14/14, AD: 09/11/14,
http://www.argusmedia.com/News/Article?id=922000 | Kushal)

Projects that are required by FERC to complete a comprehensive environmental impact


statement (EIS) will be placed by the DOE into a queue for non-FTA consideration 30 days
after the final EIS is published. Projects that are required to undergo a less comprehensive
environmental assessment will be placed in the DOE's non-FTA queue after the DOE
publishes a finding of no significant impact. Non-FTA authorizations are seen as crucial for
most US projects as most of the world's largest LNG consuming nations by volume, including
Japan, by far the largest, do not have FTAs with the US.

6. Permutation do the counterplan in the world in which they


say yes
7. The CP results in a multi-year delay studies prove
Dill 5 PhD in Urban Studies
Jennifer, What Influences the Length of Time to Complete NEPA Reviews? An
Examination of Highway Projects in Oregon and the Potential for Streamlining,
http://dot.alaska.gov/stwddes/desenviron/assets/pdf/resources/nepareviewtime.pdf
How long does the environmental review process take? The Louis Berger Group
sampled 100 EISs from the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, to help FHWA obtain a baseline for
measuring performance (2). They estimated the length of time taken to complete the
NEPA process based on the information in the EIS. The end date was the date on the final
EIS. The start date varied. In Phase II of the project, the Louis Berger Group collected data
on 244 projects from 1995 to 2001 and calculated the length of the NEPA process using
the Notice of Intent (NOI) as the start date and the Record of Decision (ROD) as the end
date. In addition, for the past five years, FHWA has tracked the length of time to complete
the NEPA process, also using the NOI and ROD dates (7). The data from these three
sources is shown in FIGURE 1. The two studies by the Louis Berger Group noted that the
time to complete NEPA was not normally distributed, and that a handful of very lengthy
projects often skewed the data. In such cases, the median may be a better indication of
central tendency. For example, the median time to complete NEPA for the projects from
the 1970s through 1990s was 3.0 years, compared to a mean of 3.6 years for all three
decades. FIGURE 2 shows the medians from the same three data sources. In addition, in
1994 the General Accounting Office (GAO) reviewed 76 projects with EISs completed
between 1988 and 1993 (5). The average time from NOI to ROD was about 4.5 years. This
figure is consistent with the Berger Group data. At the request of the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), in 2003 TransTech
Management, Inc. surveyed 31 state departments of transportation about their most
recent final EIS document (8). They found a median time taken from NOI to ROD of 3.7
years, ranging from just over two years to almost 12 years. The difference from the
FHWA/Berger Group data was not explained

8. NEPA reviews cause ineffective overlap and delays all their environmental
impacts are solved by local and state actors
Stanford Law 7/15 Comments and Recommendations on NEPA Reform for the
White House Council on Environmental Quality,
https://www.law.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/organization/601795/doc/slspublic/N
EPA%20Pushing%20The%20Reset%20Button%20Submittal%20to%20CEQ
%20FINAL.pdf, 7/21/14 BRoche
NEPA lead agencies also create inefficiencies and/or litigation risk when they fail to
recognize or simply do not knowthat another agency is undertaking an
environmental analysis of similar issues in the same region , or another agency is
analyzing environmental impacts associated with the same type of project in a
different region. The Department of the Interiors Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and the Commerce Departments
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration provided a recent example of this phenomenon as they simultaneously undertook
separate, largely-uncoordinated programmatic EISs evaluating environmental aspects of 9 potential oil and gas developments in the

If agencies like these fail to communicate with one


another, they miss a valuable opportunity to streamline their work and develop
more robust analyses. They also may be opening themselves up to litigation risk by
undertaking individual reviews that do not address the full scope of related project
impacts, particularly cumulative impacts.
same sensitive offshore environment in the Arctic.

9. Links to politics
Dreher 5 - Deputy Executive Director of the Georgetown Environmental Law &
Policy Institute. He served as Deputy General Counsel of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Robert, The Political Assault on the National Environmental Policy Act,
http://www.law.georgetown.edu/gelpi/research_archive/nepa/NEPAUnderSiegeFinal.p
df
NEPA is justly regarded as the foundation for U.S. environmental protections. In addition
to establishing our nations basic commitment to a policy of environmental protection,
NEPA creates a framework for informed and responsive government decision-making
based on extensive public input. The assault on the Act that is taking place on
Capitol Hill and within some federal agencies threatens to destroy this basic
environmental framework. After 35 years, it is worthwhile to consider how NEPA should
be improved. Thoughtful improvements in agency practices and renewed commitments of
federal resources can make the Act more effective. The goal should be to improve and
strengthen this bedrock environmental law, not to undermine and weaken it

*2AC EU CP
Permutation do both double action is double solvency

The perm solves EU cant act independently foreign policy


execution requires US involvement
Georgescu 13 Radu Georgescu, Translated by Nelly Tsekova, The EU needs the
USA, Le Taurillon, 4/28/2013, http://mobile.taurillon.org/?
page=mobile_article&id_article=5720
Americans have developed a global strategy . Therefore, other countries built their own
strategies based on the American political orientation . Thanks to a strategically advantageous
position, the United States have both built active external policy and security strategy
which was considered invulnerable. In this context and as international relations are
becoming increasingly uncertain, the European Union has no choice but to follow
the American model. In 2011, the showdown that was to target the Gaddafi regime shows that the
transatlantic partners have special relations. Despite this showdown, these relationships deteriorate, for
purely geopolitical reasons. In this perspective, Europe is not attractive anymore, especially
because of the significant changes that have occurred in Asia - both economic (eg,
China) that the political and military (eg the Middle East). Asia has many faults, as shown by the records
of Iran and Syria, the lack of predictability of China (as well as China-Japan and China-Taiwan relations), the
Pakistan-India relations and finally the situation in Afghanistan.

Europe wants the plan already started building terminals


Baugh 14

(Les Lo Baugh, a partner at Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, has practiced LNG, environmental and
corporate law for over thirty years. At the LNG export proceedings before the U. S. Department of Energy, he has
strongly advocated that national security and geopolitical considerations should be part of the public interest
determination. Winter and Gazprom Won't Wait: What The Geopolitics of LNG Will Mean for the People of the
Ukraine and Europe, 08/15/14, AD: 08/27/14, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/agnia-grigas/winter-and-gazpromwont-w_b_5681791.html | Kushal)

Countries needing U.S. LNG are taking action now. U.S. companies are welcomed in Eastern
Europe, Japan, South Korea and elsewhere, and so is American leadership. At the very least,
domestic partisan politics and red-tape should not send mixed signals and impede free commerce. Even taking
steps towards small-scale LNG projects, the likes of Lithuania's Klaipeda terminal, coming online by 2015,

can reap impressive rewards through the promise of gas alternatives .

A striking demonstration of
this effect is that Vilnius has already managed, for the first time ever, to negotiate a discount from Gazprom in its
long-term gas contract. Other EU member states are also lining up: Poland is six months away from building the
largest LNG terminal on the Baltic Sea, while Croatia, Portugal, Finland, and Estonia are also making plans for
enhanced LNG infrastructure. A basic first step for the U.S. administration would be to expedite

issuance of LNG export permits. Most have languished for years and clearing up the backlog would
be a boon to energy dependent allies. Some progress has been made - but the U.S. must speed up
the progress and send a clear message before Europe falls into the icy clutch of winter. If the
U.S. does not move with the pace of the global economy, the market will default to others
whose interests are not aligned with the U.S. and its allies.

International fiat is a voting issue, illogical, no policymaker has


a choice between the plan and the cp, it doesnt test the
opportunity cost of the plan, affirmative ground, there are an
infinite rage of actors, this cp is especially bad since it fiats
multiple states acting in unison.
No solvency - EU diplomacy systems fail
Rettman 12 Andrew Rettman, Ministers identify glitches in EU diplomatic
service, EU Observer, 6/1/2012, http://euobserver.com/foreign/114783
Twelve member states have said bureaucracy and bad management are hampering
the effectiveness of the EU's new diplomatic service one year after its launch. The foreign
ministers of Belgium, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands,
Poland and Sweden put forward their ideas in an informal three-page paper dated 8 December and seen by

the text strikes raw nerves in Brussels on issues


including turf battles between the European Commission and the European External
Action Service (EEAS), EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton's handling of
ministerial meetings and her purported neglect of security affairs . Under current
EUobserver. While couched in polite language,

arrangements, Ashton's service is responsible for framing EU foreign policy and managing joint relations with nonEU countries via 140 foreign delegations. But the European Commission is responsible for funding foreign
programmes and for handling many day-to-day EEAS matters, such as making sure Ashton's people have working

The hybrid set-up has created problems


such as forcing Ashton's foreign ambassadors to do book-keeping on commission
spending over which they have no decision-making powers . It has also seen around 60 EEAS
computers on their desks and get their expenses on time.

staff leave their posts amid frustration that they do not have the basic tools for their job. "Does the EEAS have the
right organisational structure to ensure effective co-operation with the commission on all external action
aspects? ... An EU delegation can function effectively only if the head of delegation receives all necessary
information in good time and can fully focus on political priorities, and if a delegation can manage its administrative

Ashton has done a


poor job of chairing their regular monthly meetings. Brussels is awash with
anecdotes about the EEAS sending out agendas at too short notice for ministers to
prepare properly and about Ashton chafing with colleagues. In one episode in March last year
expenditures efficiently," the ministers said. On a more personal note, they indicated

she called ministers to the EU capital ahead of a snap summit on Libya then said mid-meeting she had to leave.
Sweden's Carl Bildt at the time reportedly told her to stay until the talks ended, with Ashton falling into line. "Ways
to further optimise the identification of political priorities should be explored," the 12 ministers said, urging her to
circulate a yearly agenda for the events and "more regularly to produce preparatory policy and/or decision-making
papers to be circulated sufficiently in advance."

The 1AC is a solvency deficit to the counterplan the EU has severe


energy insecurity right now, Russia scenario proves EU wants the plan in
order to have a stable source of imports

No impact to the counterplan - the EUs resilient 50 years of


governance wont be reversed in the short term
Pelinka 11 (Anton, The European Union as an Alternative to the Nation-State,
International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, June 2011, Volume 24, Issue 12, pp 21-30, AK)
This observation must not be misunderstood that the end of the integration is
visible. And whatever can be called the EUs final status is foreclosed. There is no

determinism in the process. But here is empirical evidence: The Union is moving in the direction of an
ever less unfinished federal system. Whatever that meanswhether the EU could, should and would become the
United States of Europe or whether the process can be stabilized in form of a Europe of concentric circles with a
more federalized core group does not mean that the integration has become irreversible. The integration has not

The
member states are still able to reverse the trend and become more sovereign again.
There is no guarantee whatsoever for the EUs bright future. But taking all
observations into account: More than half a century of integration has strengthened
the Unionand not weakened it.
reached the point of no return. The EU still could develop in a more loser form of an international organisation.

*2AC Consult China CP


<INSERT ARGUMENTS FROM THE GENERIC CONSULT BLOCK>

Permutation do both double action is double solvency

Perm- do the CP- if they say yes, the perm doesnt sever the
plan
<INSERT ANSWERS FROM CHINA CP BLOCK>
Solvency deficit- theres a chance China says no, which means
the case is a disad to the counterplan
Consult CPs are badSteals the entire af- we cant weigh the af against the CP
Infinitely regressive- we cant predict every random countries
that they could consult- its an unfair research burden for the
af
Doesnt disprove the desirability of the af- they agree that the
plan should be done, which means you should vote affirmative
Creates multiple worlds- China could say yes, no, or make
modifications- makes solvency too indeterminate and makes
the debate too unpredictable

*2AC Consult the Indigenous CP


<INSERT ARGUMENTS FROM THE GENERIC CONSULT BLOCK>

Permutation do both double action is double solvency

Perm- do the CP- if they say yes, the perm doesnt sever the
plan
Consultation trades of with indigenous activism to address
immediate threats to survival by locking native groups into
complex debates over legal procedure.
Rodriguez-Garavito 2010
Cesar, Associate Professor of Law and Director of the Program on Global Justice and Human Rights, University of the
Andes (Colombia); Hauser Global Fellow, New York University Law School; Founding member, Center for Law,
Justice, and Society, Ethnicity.gov: Global Governance, Indigenous Peoples, and the Right to Prior Consultation in
Social Minefields, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies Vol. 18 #1 (Winter), http://burawoy.berkeley.edu/Public
%20Sociology,%20Live/Rodriguez.Global%20Governance.pdf

Thereafter, the phrase repeated in the presentation is prior consultation. Its effect
is magnified because it is one of the few Spanish termsalong with others, such as
Corte Constitucional (Constitutional Court), sentencia (ruling), and gobierno
(government)that sprinkle the remarks of participants who only speak Embera. At
this point, it is clear that the talk has turned into a legal memorandum. The speaker,
a leader who has braved death sentences from the paramilitaries and the guerillas
for nearly a decade to defend his people, stumbles uncertainly into the terrain of
legal procedure: how to prove the dam has caused harm to Embera communities;
which court to bring a new case before in order to suspend the government and the
companys plans to enlarge the dam; what is the status of the last legal action
presented by the nongovernmental organization (NGO) that represents them; who is
the indigenous peoples legal representative in the approaching prior consultation
procedure; how to make use during these ensuing procedures of the Constitutional
Courts judgment6 and the report by the ILO committee, 7which both condemned
the Colombian government for authorizing the construction of the Urr dam without
consulting the Embera. These legal artifactsthe succession of procedural
deadlines, the architecture of laws and decisions, the affirmation of equality
between parties to a caseare precisely what generate the illusion of order, and in
turn, make us forget for a moment that we are in the heart of the chaos. Thereafter,
we get stuck in a long discussion about prior consultations technicalities, as if
death squads were not patrolling just a few kilometers away, as if the territory were
not littered with landmines, as if all of the few families in attendance did not have
some member who had been assassinated or forcibly displaced, as if we had not
crossed paths along the river with speedboats that were driven by fully armed
soldiers, who play cat and mouse with the settlers that transport coca downriver.

Consultation fails to resolve the net benefit --- Limited


negotiation leverage and decision-making power prevent
consultation from preserving indigenous culture.
Rodriguez-Garavito 2010
Cesar, Associate Professor of Law and Director of the Program on Global Justice and Human Rights, University of the
Andes (Colombia); Hauser Global Fellow, New York University Law School; Founding member, Center for Law,
Justice, and Society, Ethnicity.gov: Global Governance, Indigenous Peoples, and the Right to Prior Consultation in
Social Minefields, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies Vol. 18 #1 (Winter), http://burawoy.berkeley.edu/Public
%20Sociology,%20Live/Rodriguez.Global%20Governance.pdf

In the absence of strict procedural standards and effective monitoring mechanisms


and sanctions, the version of FPIC endorsed in multilateral bank directives and TNC
codes of conduct embodies the two principal limitations of the governance
paradigm mentioned earlier. On the one hand, the lack of procedural guarantees to
mitigate the profound power asymmetries among indigenous communities,
corporations, and states render consultation a form of participation in which
indigenous peoples have limited negotiating leverage and even more limited
decision-making power. On the other hand, the absence of effective and functional
monitoring and sanctioning mechanisms is reminiscent of the preference for selfregulation inherent in governances approach, which accounts for the
ineffectiveness of operational policies and voluntary standards recognizing the duty
to consult indigenous peoples. Similar limitations are apparent in the version of
consultation incorporated into legislation in the majority of states that have ratified
Convention 169.87 As a result, this dominant version of FPIC and this interpretation
of Convention 169 are central pieces of what Hale calls neoliberal
multiculturalism, which is the legal regime that recognizes cultural rights, but
denies, de facto or de jure, the assertion of control over resources necessary for
those rights to be realized.88 It is the type of multiculturalism and consultation
that is today prevalent even in those Latin American countries that have joined the
wave of multicultural constitutionalism and ethno-development, without addressing
the structural causes of indigenous peoples exclusion or establishing forms of
participation with decision-making power.89

Counterplan doesnt solve case --- Massive delays for as much


as 20 years.
Rodriguez-Garavito 2010
Cesar, Associate Professor of Law and Director of the Program on Global Justice and Human Rights, University of the
Andes (Colombia); Hauser Global Fellow, New York University Law School; Founding member, Center for Law,
Justice, and Society, Ethnicity.gov: Global Governance, Indigenous Peoples, and the Right to Prior Consultation in
Social Minefields, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies Vol. 18 #1 (Winter), http://burawoy.berkeley.edu/Public
%20Sociology,%20Live/Rodriguez.Global%20Governance.pdf

Those who attend negotiations and discussions during a consultation process will
notice something strange. When it seems that a point on the agenda has been
exhausted or an agreement has been reached, it is common that the conversation
returns to the same matters or, in fact, discussion of them in a subsequent meeting
begins again from scratch. For this reason, unless the proceedings are perfunctory
or imposed under deception or coercion (which is not infrequent), consultations tend

to follow a non-linear path in which delays, repetition, and misunderstandings are


endemic. Once again, the case of the Urr dam is indicative of this tendency. In
effect, one of the principal points of controversy among the parties to the case is
whether an agreement had ever been reached. In other words, the State, the
company, and the Embera-Kato have not agreed on the existence of an agreement.
While the first two maintain that they reached an agreement with the Embera in
1999, allowing the dam to be filled following the Courts decision, the Embera argue
that such an agreement never existed. To complicate the misunderstanding further,
the consultation process, as it often does, produced an internal division within the
Embera people. Thus, some communities currently argue that there was an
agreement, while others disagree. 109 Considerable uncertainty results, thus
aggravating the lack of confidence among the parties and heightening rather than
mitigating the volatility of the situation on the ground. How are such
misunderstandings produced? What causes miscommunication, which is so
prevalent that it leads to constant communication breakdown among the parties
and to long stalls in consultation processes? One of the primary causes is that
consultations embody a discursive clash, in which claims and different kinds of
knowledge, based on radically distinct epistemological roots, get crossed. In a stark
historical short circuit, consultations combine pre-modern indigenous claims,
post-modern designs of global governance, and classical modern forms of
primitive accumulation of capitalall of which are smelted in the crucible of modern
legal forms par excellence: due process and freedom of contract. The
misunderstandings that can arise from this epistemic Tower of Babel are apparent in
various consultation processes that I have observed. One particularly telling and
internationally known case is the consultation of the Uwa people, which derived
from Occidental Petroleums plans for oil exploration in the Uwas territory in
eastern Colombia.110 The Uwas consultation process has lasted for nearly twenty
years, and a stalemate among the parties persists, due in part to the countervailing
power of a coalition of indigenous and environmental NGOs worldwide that have
assembled in solidarity with the Uwa. Beyond the cases intricacies, what is
interesting to highlight is the abyss between the State and the oil companies proextraction vision and the Uwas conception of territory and oilboth sacred and
untouchable, to the point where the Uwa have announced that they will commit
collective suicide in the event of oil exploration in their territory.111 The result is a
breakdown in communication, unresolved by the procedural mechanism of
consultation, as various paradoxical incidents in the case reveal. For example, in
1997, when the Colombian Constitutional Court ruled in favor of the Uwa regarding
a complaint that they brought and, thereby, ordered the State to undertake prior
consultation before authorizing seismic exploration in indigenous territory,112 the
Uwa surprised their allies who were celebrating this legal victory by issuing a
communiqu expressing their rejection of the Courts ruling and reiterating that
their goal was not that the oil project be consulted or negotiated, but rather that it
simply be cancelled for attacking their most profound cultural convictions. As the
circulated communiqu stated, we do not understand why they summon us to
participate in a hearing when they know what we will say, which is the same as
what we have been saying from the beginning.113

Indigenous groups say no --- They reject new energy and


resource exploitation.
Rodriguez-Garavito 2010
Cesar, Associate Professor of Law and Director of the Program on Global Justice and Human Rights, University of the
Andes (Colombia); Hauser Global Fellow, New York University Law School; Founding member, Center for Law,
Justice, and Society, Ethnicity.gov: Global Governance, Indigenous Peoples, and the Right to Prior Consultation in
Social Minefields, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies Vol. 18 #1 (Winter), http://burawoy.berkeley.edu/Public
%20Sociology,%20Live/Rodriguez.Global%20Governance.pdf

The emancipatory effect also operates through indirect means, far from the formal
consultation meetings. In societies such as those of Latin America, where the wave
of multicultural constitutionalism of the 1990s arrived precisely when indigenous
peoples were experiencing both organizational revitalization and collective
extermination, the norms enshrined in Convention 169 and other legal instruments
opened up additional paths of resistance and political mobilization. In these
circumstances, consultation has been embraced as an instrument for slowing down
the avalanche of mining and other extractive projects engulfing indigenous
communities situated in economies bent on the exploitation of natural resources.
This explains why, as I have observed in countries like Colombia, Peru, Ecuador,
Chile and Guatemala, cases and technical legal discussions about FPIC occupy a
privileged position in the agendas of national indigenous organizations.125 As a
result, at the national level, FPIC has become a useful card that indigenous
movements can play in negotiations and litigation before States and companies.
The cards effectiveness is demonstrated by the multiple laws that regulate matters
of vital importance for companies and indigenous peoples, such as the use of
forests or the exploitation of hydrocarbons, in those countries,126 which have been
subsequently struck down by national courts for violating Convention 169.

Consult Counterplans are illegitimate and a voting issue:


A) Infinitely regressive: they could consult anyonemaking
the AFF burden impossible.
B) Moving target: the efect of the counterplan changes with
the answer the indigenous groups givemaking this
undebatable.
C) Counter Interpretation: the negative gets consultation
counterplans with state actors. Solves their consult good
ofense while guaranteeing a finite and predictable group of
organizations that can be consulted.
No link to their ofense --- Indigenous culture can still be
protected without defining indigenous groups as nation states.
Wiessner 2007
Siegfried, Professor of Law & Director Graduate Program in Intercultural Human
Rights St. Thomas University School of Law, Miami, Florida Chair, ILA Committee on

the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, United Nations Declaration on the Rights of


Indigenous Peoples, http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/ha/ga_61-295/ga_61-295.html
Indigenous peoples generally do not aspire to statehood in the sense of the political
independence of players in the Westphalian system of modern nation states. The
claim to indigenous sovereignty is primarily founded upon the aspiration to preserve
their inherited ways of life, change those traditions as they see necessary, and to
make their cultures flourish. This fundamental policy of UNDRIP is reflected in article
5, which states that [i]ndigenous peoples have the right to maintain and
strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions,
while retaining their right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political,
economic, social and cultural life of the State [emphasis added].

*2AC Privatization CP
Permutation do both

Plan is a prerequisite to the counterplan only the USFG has jurisdiction


over agents provocateurs.

Possession can be joint


Supreme Court of New Jersey 89
(State v. McCoy, 116 N.J. 293, Lexis)//BB
HN4 Possession, moreover, can be actual or constructive. Here, for example, the
driver was in actual possession of the stolen automobile. As we have previously
stated, however, "[p]hysical or manual control of the proscribed item is not required
as long as there is an intention to exercise control over it manifested in
circumstances where it is reasonable to infer that the capacity to do so exists."
Brown, supra, 80 N.J. at 597. Thus, HN5 constructive possession exists when a
person intentionally obtains a measure of control or dominion over the stolen goods
although they are under the physical control of another. Kimbrough, supra, 109
N.J.Super. at 64. Finally, HN6 [300] possession may be exercised jointly by two or
more persons at the same time. Brown, supra, 80 N.J. at 597. Consequently, the
question in the present case becomes whether defendant's relationship to the car
was sufficient to permit a finding that he shared possession with the driver

Permitting makes projects federal legal definitions concur


Calloway 97 - adjunct professor of Environmental Law at the Thomas M. Cooley
Law School
(Cheryl, The "Human Environment" Requirements of the National Environmental
Policy Act: Implications for Environmental Justice, 1997 Det. C.L. Rev. 1147)//BB
Other activities which courts have deemed "major federal action" include the grant
of a license to construct a high voltage line, 34 the issuance of an interim operating
license for a nuclear power plant, 35 and the authorization for the abandonment of
a railroad line. 36 Even when the project is constructed with non-federal funds,
federal government action may rise to the level of a "major action" if it makes
possible significant effects on the human environment. 37 In City of Atlanta v.
United States, 38 the court held that the [1157] Federal Aviation Administration's
(FAA) installation of navigational equipment and adoption of flight procedures
constituted "major federal action," even though the airport runway expansion was
not funded by the federal government. 39 These steps taken by the FAA made
possible increased air and noise pollution. 40 "[A] non-federal project is considered
a 'federal action' if it cannot begin or continue without prior approval by a federal

agency and the agency possesses authority to exercise discretion over the
outcome."

Perm solves- diferences are minor


Williams 12, PhD in economics from Harvard
Heidi, Innovation Inducement Prizes: Connecting Research to Policy, MIT
Economics, http://economics.mit.edu/files/7823
Although the specific focus of this paper is on innovation inducement prizes of the
type federal agencies may implement under the America COMPETES
Reauthorization Act, McKinsey (2009) argues that the distinctions between
governmentsponsored, philanthropic-sponsored, and corporate-sponsored prizes
are modest in terms of design and administrationimplying that much of the
discussion in this paper may also be relevant for nongovernment sponsored
innovation inducement prizes. Although the size of the prize sector is difficult to
estimate due to a lack of centralized data on offered prizes, McKinsey (2009)
estimates the prize sector is currently on the order of $1 to $2 billion. This figure
can be compared to the $55 billion U.S. universities spent on research in 2009,
about 60 percent of which was federally funded (see Stephan, 2011). However, the
McKinsey (2009) data suggest the prize sector has seen tremendous growth in
recent decades, with more than a 15- fold increase in value since 1970. They
estimate that much of the growth to date has come from the philanthropic sector,
but the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act may lead to accelerated growth in
prizes offered by the government sector.

Privatization leads to resource inequity and territorial conflict


Mitchell 8 - Professor and Department Chair Political Science University of Iowa
(Sara, Ruling the Sea: Institutionalization and Privatization of the Global Ocean
Commons, 1/1/98, Dept of Political Science Publications,
http://ir.uiowa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=polisci_pubs, HW)
While privatization is an attractive solution, its primary drawback is the potential for
the creation and/or exacerbation of resource distributional inequities. It has been
admitted that the formalization of EEZs as part of the UNCLOS agreement has
increased, rather than decreased, inequality among states, giving more to the
already well-endowed richer states (Borgese, 1995: 15). One of the most
significant problems is that the subdivision of the commons is not homogenous.
Merely allocating equivalent portions of the commons does not mean that all users
will get an equal share. States may be tempted to seek larger shares of the
commons to put more resources under their private control; a lack of information
about the resource will also complicate negotiations regarding the distribution of a
resource since a state risks getting a worthless share (Wijkman, 1982). In addition,
the migratory nature of fish stocks and the interconnectedness of the oceans
ecosystem mean that resources cannot be managed solely within the EEZ, leading
to problems with fishing fleets pursuing migratory fish stocks just outside of other

states' EEZs (Borgese, 1995; Bailey, 1996).7 Since some resources can move
between EEZs, each state has incentives to exploit the resource before another
does the same.

CP doesnt solve and links to politics


Upton 10 Analyst in Natural Resource Policy
(Harold, Open Ocean Aquaculture, 8/9/10,
http://cnie.org/NLE/CRSreports/10Sep/RL32694.pdf2, HW)
Using offshore waters for a private activity such as aquaculture is likely to be
controversial. Traditionally, nearshore waters and their resources under state
jurisdiction are considered to be held and managed in the public trust. Open
ocean aquaculture may be perceived by some as de facto privatization of the
ocean, which has historically been considered a common property resource.47
Precedents in leasing offshore areas for developing oil and gas resources may be
relevant to these concerns. However, significant questions remain concerning
whether an appropriate mechanism exists for any federal agency to provide an
open ocean aquaculture permit or lease applicant with the necessary property
rights to begin construction and operation. Siting and site tenure in federal waters
are important issues for development and private investment without assurances
and protection of exclusive rights, there is little incentive for financial investment.

2AC States CP
<READ ANSWERS TO FEDERALISM DA TOO>

TURN: The use of undercover drug stings lead to entrapment


and fuels the War on Crime rather than fight against it.
Sawyer 7/16 Free Thought Project
Mark, Creating Crime: FBI Bribes People to Take Fake Drugs onto Planes So they Can
Bust Them, 7/16/15, http://thefreethoughtproject.com/creating-crime-fbi-bribespeople-fake-drugs-planes-bust/
Dallas, TX Apparently the FBI has a hard time finding criminals these days, as
they have resorted to bribing people into committing fake crimes so they
can later bust them. Its already widely known among those who are awake to
government corruption that nearly 95 percent of terrorist arrests in the US have
been the result of the FBI foiling its own entrapment plots as a part of the so-called
post-9/11 War on Terror. Mentally diminished, poverty stricken individuals are
sought out and duped into playing along with the FBIs fake plans of fake crimes.
The poor soul whose life is then ruined is paraded around on TV and used as a
human trophy to show the world how great America is at catching and fighting
terrorists. On Monday, we broke the story of Alexander Ciccolo, 23, also known as
Ali Al Amriki, who was arrested for allegedly plotting to cause terror on behalf of
ISIS. The FBI gave this mentally ill man multiple weapons and then charged him for
possessing those weapons. According to an FBI affidavit, they began investigating
Ciccolo after a close acquaintance stated that Ciccolo had a long history of
mental illness and in the last 18 months had become obsessed with Islam. This
likely gave the FBI a warm and fuzzy feeling knowing that they had a new terrorist
to groom. Ciccolo certainly said some disturbing things, but without the help and
encouragement of the FBI, he would have likely remained a harmless mentally ill
nobody. Instead, thanks to his FBI handlers, he is now the Terrorist Arrested for
Plotting to Blow Up College Campuses. Shake in your boots America! There are FBI
created patsies terrorists everywhere! The FBI has taken this approach and is now
applying it to average citizens who dont express their mentally deranged affections
towards the Islamic State. On Wednesday, the FBI announced that dozens of
people are facing charges related to smuggling drugs on airline flights from
Dallas to other cities across the nation. The only problem here is that these
people werent actual drug smugglers, nor were they smuggling drugs. Imagine
for a moment that you are down on your luck, behind on bills, and in dire need of
some cash. Out of the blue, a friendly person says, Hey, I know how to earn $9,000
cash in just a single day. All you have to do is carry this box of cocaine onto a plane
and deliver it for me. I do it all the time; you wont get caught, trust me. You think
to yourself, I dont really want to be a drug delivery boy, but $9,000 cash would
really help me out. So you do it. When you land in your destination city, youre met
by the FBI and arrested for smuggling fake drugs. According to CBS News,
Undercover agents gave some suspects packages, purporting they
contained drugs, that were then carried onto flights for payments of up to

$9,000, according to an indictment unsealed Wednesday. Prosecutors said the


drugs were flown to Las Vegas; Newark, New Jersey; Phoenix; Chicago; Wichita,
Kansas; and San Francisco. Oddly enough the IRS was also involved in this sting
operation. The U.S. Attorneys Office in Dallas released a statement saying most of
the 46 defendants are from northern Texas and would appear in court beginning
Wednesday. They face charges that include intent to distribute cocaine and
methamphetamines, conspiracy, and money laundering, according to CBS News.
Using an undercover agent to catch a person whos going to commit a crime is one
thing. However, manipulating an otherwise innocent person into committing a crime
is something entirely different. Who is protected when the FBI bribes someone to
convince them to carry fake drugs onto a plane? Who is served by locking a person
in a cage because they needed some money and decided to make a delivery for a
drug dealer? Apparently the FBI is diligently trying to justify their bloated multibillion dollar a year budget. Unfortunately, this is done so by compromising the
trust of the American people and ruining the lives of people who may have
never caused harm to another human.

Perm do both double action means double solvency

Perm solves and shields the link states fail on their own
OPC 13 [State of California Ocean Protection Council, CALL FOR ACTION: PROECT THE NATIONS OCEANS &
COSTS, 11/27/13, http://www.opc.ca.gov/webmaster/ftp/project_pages/WCGA/0805COPC_02_Attachment.pdf,
07/15/14]

CLEAR PRIORITIES The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Coastal States Organization, and
other partners have

held public discussions around the country centered on four priorities to direct the nations

Support healthy coastal communities and coastal-dependent


economies; Protect and restore coastal ecosystems, habitats, and unique
resources; Prepare for impacts of climate change; and, Make sure that local,
state, regional, and federal coastal programs work together at all appropriate
scales. States will use these priorities and scientific and technical assessments of
state and local coastal conditions and need to prepare multi-year strategic approaches to
implement them. States will be accountable through measures of performance in meeting
priorities. State efforts will be evaluated periodically . STRENGTHEN PARTNERSHIP
AND ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS State and local government land use decisions and

future coastal efforts:

public infrastructure investments are key to the future of

protecting coastal resources and creating healthy

state and local governments need technical, planning, and


financial assistance to improve decision-making and management.
National investments are critical to enabling local governments to be
strong partners in developing and carrying out programs to meet coastal
management objectives.
communities. But

Perm solves efficiency, coordination and integration of state


and federal policies
JOCI 13 (Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, Charting the Course Securing the Future of Americas Oceans,
June 2013, http://www.virginia.edu/colp/pdf/joint-ocean-commission-initiative-2013.pdf)

Support state and regional ocean and coastal priorities Coastal states and
regions play an essential role in fostering durable ocean policy solutions that lead to
both healthier ocean ecosystems and stronger coastal economies . In fact, states and
regions often play a leadership role, developing and implementing innovative approaches that can
serve as models for national efforts. It is widely understood that decision-making
approaches led by states and regions, with strong federal support in the form of
technical resources and engaged commitment, are more effective and durable than
those driven exclusively from the federal level . The fact is that decades of insufficiently
coordinated, sector-based management of ocean and coastal resources at the
federal level have taken their toll on the health of our ocean and coastal
ecosystems. Fortunately, federal agencies are now working to create a more
efficient, integrated approach to management by setting up mechanisms to
increase coordination and reduce duplication of federal agency policies and
activities. This should lead to increased transparency, support predictable and
efficient decision making, and be undertaken in close collaboration with regional,
state, and tribal entities. Such a coordinated approach will help to reduce conflicts,
redundancies, and inefficiencies that waste time and money, and will also result in better
resource management. Federal agencies must also make efforts to think beyond their specific missions and
Action 3:

collaborate across jurisdictional boundaries to address the priorities of each region in which they operate in ways
that are appropriate for states in the region.

The Federal government has exclusive jurisdiction to research


- states would have to ask for permission- links to politics

Kritiks

*2AC Anti-Blackness K
1. Framework the af gets to weigh the enactment of the plan
against a competitive alternative. Thats best:
A) Fairness allowing the neg to change the focus of the
debate moots the 1AC
B) Education forces the debate to be about plan
implementation instead of representations
C) Inevitability of the state creates an ethical responsibility to STRIVE
toward making it ethical solvency isnt a question

Simmons 99

(William Paul, Prof @ U of Arizona, Formerly ASU and Bethany College, The Third:
Levinas Theoretical Move from An-Archical Ethics to the Realm of Justice and Politics, Philosophy &
Social Criticism, 25(6), p. 83-104, http://theology.co.kr/wwwb/data/levinas/1-levinas.pdf)//LA

We should also say that all those who attack us with such venom have no right to do so, along with this feeling of
unbounded responsibility, there is certainly a place for defence, for it is not always a question of me but of those

Id call such a defence a politics, but a politics thats


ethically necessary. Alongside ethics, there is a place for politics .55 Levinas argues
for a place for both ethics and politics, or, to employ his metaphor, a place for both the Jewish
close to me, who are also my neighbors.

tradition of ethics and responsibility and, along with it, the Greek tradition of language, justice and politics. This
section will analyze the mutual necessity of both ethics and politics. According to Levinas, ethics and politics can

Neither ethics nor


politics should be taken to their extremes; each must be moderated by the other. I
both be needed only if there is separation, that is, if each has its own justification.

think theres a direct contradiction between ethics and politics, if both these demands are taken to the extreme.

Ethics must temper the political because politics unbounded leads to tyranny ,
absolute power of the strongest. Politics ignores the individuality of each citizen,
treating each as a cipher, a member of a species. Further, without a norm outside of the scope of
the said, there is no standard to judge political regimes. The call for a standard by which to judge regimes is what
Levinas means by a return to Platonism. Plato, in the Republic, had used the good beyond being as his standard. A
return to Platonism would be necessary to restore the independence of ethics in relation to history and trace a
limit to the comprehension of the real by history. Levinas finds a standard in the ethical relationship with the Other.

If the
moral-political order totally relinquishes its ethical foundation, it must accept all
forms of society, including the fascist or totalitarian, for it can no longer evaluate or
discriminate between them. The state is usually better than anarchy but not always. In
some instances, fascism or totalitarianism, for example the political order of the
state may have to be challenged in the name of our ethical responsibility to the
other. This is why ethical philosophy must remain the first philosophy At the same time, ethics needs
politics. To reach those others who are far away, ethics must be transfixed into language, justice and politics. As
prima philosophia, ethics cannot itself legislate for society or produce rules of conduct
whereby society might be revolutionized or transformed. Although this
universalization distances the ego from the Other, it must be done to reach the
others. We must, out of respect for the categorical imperative or the others right as expressed by his face, unThe norm that must continue to inspire and direct the moral order is the ethical norm of the interhuman.

face human beings, sternly reducing each ones uniqueness to his individuality in the unity of the genre, and let
universality rule.

Thus we need laws, and yes courts of law, institutions and the state

to render justice Further, politics is necessary because there are those who will
refuse to heed the new law, Thou shall not kill. Levinas is well aware that this commandment is not an
ontological impossibility. Many will take Cains position and shun the responsibility for the Other. Thus, politics is
necessary to prohibit murder, in all its forms. A place had to be foreseen and kept warm for all eternity for Hitler

Both ethics and politics have their own justification. The justification
for ethics is found in the face-to-face relationship with the Other. The justification for
politics is to restrain those who follow Cains position and ignore the responsibility
for the Other. Politics does not subsume ethics, but rather it serves ethics. Politics is
necessary but it must be continually checked by ethics. Levinas calls for a state that
is as ethical as possible, one which is perpetually becoming more just. Levinas calls for
and his followers.61

the liberal state. The Levinasian state According to Levinas, the move from the Other to the Third is the begin- ning
of all violence. In the realm of the said, the ego must necessarily weigh others in the name of justice, but this
process reduces the Other to a cipher. Strangely enough, justice is un-ethical. When justice is uni- versalized into
laws and institutions it moves yet another step away from the an-archical responsibility for the Other. The
necessary universaliza- tion of ethical responsibility into the state is inherently un-ethical and violent. In the state,
the ego is unable to respond directly to the face of the Other. Further, the institutions of the state treat the Other as
an inter- changeable cog in its machinery, thereby denying the transcendent element in man. Even when the state
functions perfectly it is, by its very nature, opposed to ethics. For me, the negative element, the element of violence
in the state, in the hierarchy, appears even when the hierarchy functions perfectly, when every- one submits to
universal ideas. There are cruelties which are terrible because they proceed from the necessity of the reasonable

Vigilance
against violence in the state is essential. Institutions need to be constantly checked
by the ethical relationship with the Other. In order for everything to run along smoothly and freely,
it is absolutely necessary to affirm the infinite responsibility of each, for each , before
order. There are, if you like, the tears that a civil servant cannot see: the tears of the Other.62

each... As I see it, subjective protest is not received favourably on the pretext that its egoism is sacred, but because
the I alone can perceive the secret tears of the Other which are caused by the functioning albeit reasonable of

The state must be constantly reminded of its inherent violence. Levinas finds
The liberal state always asks itself whether
its own justice really is justice. What qualities does the liberal state possess that make it self-critical?
the hierarchy.

just such a self-critical state in the modern liberal state.

First, there is the freedom of the press, the freedom to criticize the government, to speak out against injustice. You
know the prophets of the bible; they come and say to the king that his method of dispensing justice is wrong. The
prophet doesnt do this in a clandestine way: he comes before the king and he tells him. In the liberal state, its the

the leader is not above the


people, but is chosen from among the people. A ruler who is in an ethical
relationship, sees humanity through the Others eyes. Against the Platonic formulation that the
press, the poets, the writers who fulfill this role. Second, in the liberal state,

best ruler is the one who is best in control of himself, Levinas argues that the best ruler is the one who is in an
ethical relationship with the Other. The State, in accordance with its pure essence, is possible only if the divine

the most important


component of the liberal state is its call for a permanent revolution. The Levinasian
liberal state is always trying to improve itself, trying to be more just . It is a rebellion that
word enters into it; the prince is educated in this knowledge. However, for Levinas,

begins where the other society is satisfied to leave off, a rebellion against injustice that begins once order begins.

Although no state can be purely ethical, the liberal state at least strives for ethics.
Such a state is the desideratum if politics cannot be ethical. There is no politics for
accomplishing the moral, but there are certainly some politics which are further
from it or closer to it. For example, Ive mentioned Stalinism to you. Ive told you that justice is always a
justice which desires a better justice. This is the way that I will characterize the liberal state. The liberal state is a

Concretely, the liberal


state has always admitted alongside the written law human rights as a parallel
institution. It continues to preach that within its justice there are always improvements to be made in human
rights. Human rights are the reminder that there is no justice yet. And consequently, I
believe that it is absolutely obvious that the liberal state is more moral than the
fascist state, and closer to the morally ideal state.69 Since it is impossible to
escape the State, 70 Levinas insists that the state be made as ethical as possible.
state which holds justice as the absolutely desirable end and hence as a perfection.

The world of institutions and justice must be held in check by the an-archical
responsibility for the Other. Levinas calls for both an-archy and justice. Alongside the an-archical
responsibility for the Other there is a place for the realm of the said, which includes ontology,
justice and politics. Levinas thought is not apolitical as many have charged. His harsh critiques of the
political realm refer to a politics unchecked by ethics. For example, in Totality and Infinity,
Levinas sees politics as antithetical to an ethics based on the Other. The art of
foreseeing war and winning it by every means politics is henceforth enjoined as
the very exercise of reason. Politics is opposed to morality, as philosophy to navet. 71 Politics
unrestrained, by necessity, totalizes the Other by reducing him or her to abstract
categories. Levinas will call for a politics that is founded on ethics and not on
ontology. The state must be answerable to the an-archical relationship with the
Other, it must strive to maintain the exteriority of the Other . Levinasian heteronomic political
thought oscillates between the saying and the said, an-archy and justice, ethics and politics. The liberal state is the
concrete manifestation of this oscillation. Levinas calls for a balance between the Greek and the Judaic traditions.

Neither tradition should dominate. The fundamental contradiction of our situation (and perhaps of our
condition) . . . that both the hierarchy taught by Athens and the abstract and slightly anarchical ethical

Each of
these principles, left to itself, only hastens the contrary of what it wants to secure.
individualism taught by Jerusalem are simultaneously necessary in order to suppress the violence.0020

2) No link They say we neglect the black body but, Extend our 2nd piece
of Kundnani evidence in the 1st advantage which is the preface of the
entire af that says the modern surveillance apparatus functions as
racialized totalitarianism regime under the guise of a liberal democracy.
The state is using surveillance to oppress the black body, and only the af
can solve for that through the elimination of the tool to rationalize
oppressive surveillance, which is aps .
3. Anti-blackness is NOT the root cause
4. Blackness cannot be actualized within the framework of a political
debate. The premise of their argument is that there is no political agency
for the non-white body. Voting for the alt proves thats incorrect, there is
political efficacy to the non-white body. This has a couple impacts:
a) The links are all disads to the alternative their strategy of
rhetorical redemption operates from an above/beyond viewpoint
that links to our ofense as well
b) Proves that the total destruction of modernity from this space is
impossible, meaning the permutation is a preferable strategy

Wilderson, 2010

(Frank, Assoc Prof of African Amerian Studies @ UC Irvine, Red, White, and Black: Cinema and the Structure of US

Antagonisms, pages 54-57)

This theoretical aphasia is symptomatic of a debilitated ensemble of


questions regarding political ontology. At its heart are two registers of imaginative
labor. The first register is that of description, the rhetorical labor aimed at explaining
the way relations of power are named, categorized, and explored. The

prescription, the rhetorical labor predicated on


the notion that everyone can be emancipated through some form of
discursive, or symbolic, intervention. But emancipation through some form of
discursive or symbolic intervention is wanting in the face of a subject
position that is not a subject positionwhat Marx calls "a speaking implement" or what Ronald Judy calls
second register can be characterized as

"an interdiction against subjectivity." In other words, the Black has sentient capacity but no relational capacity. As an accumulated and fungible object,
rather than an exploited and alienated subject, the Black is openly vulnerable to the whims of the world, and so is his or her cultural "production."

What does it meanwhat are the stakeswhen the world can whimsically
transpose one's cultural gestures, the stuff of symbolic intervention, onto another
worldly good, a commodity of style? Frantz Fanon echoes this question when he writes, "1 came into the world imbued with the will to find
a meaning in things, my spirit filled with the desire to attain to the source of the world, and then I found that 1 was an object in the midst of other
objects." He clarifies this assertion and alerts us to the stakes which the optimistic assumptions of film studies and cultural studies, the counter hegemonic
promise of alternative cinema, and the emancipatory project of coalition politics cannot account for, when he writes: "Ontologyonce it is finally admitted
as leaving existence by the waysidedoes not permit us to understand the being of the black." This presents a challenge to film production and to film
studies given their cultivation and elaboration by the imaginative labor of cultural studies, underwritten by the assumptive logic of Humanism; because if
everyone does not possess the dna of culture, that is, (a) time and space transformative capacity, (b) a relational status with other Humans through which
one's time- and space-transformative capacity is recognized and incorporated, and (c) a relation to violence that is contingent and not gratuitous, then

How do we
think outside of the conceptual framework of subalternity that is, outside of the
explanatory power of cultural studiesand think beyond the pale of emancipatory agency by
way of symbolic intervention? I am calling for a diferent conceptual
framework, predicated not on the subject-efect of cultural
performance but on the structure of political ontology, a framework
that allows us to substitute a culture of politics for a politics of
culture .
how do we theorize a sentient being who is positioned not by the dna of culture but by the structure of gratuitous violence?

because reformism and revolution are ultimately the same strategy.


Winant 1997 (Howard, Director, UC Center for New Racial Studies. Institute for Social, Behavioral, and
Economic. Research. University of California Santa Barbara, CA, Behind Blue Eyes: Contemporary White Racial
Politics, http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/faculty/winant/whitness.html)

the social historians who have


provided the core insights of the abolitionist project stress the
"invention of whiteness" as a pivotal development in the rise of US capitalism. They have
begun a process of historical reinterpretation which aims to set race
-- or more properly, the gestation and evolution of white supremacy
-- at the center of US politics and culture. Thus far, they have focused attention on a series of
Drawing their inspiration from W.E.B. Du Bois and James Baldwin,

formative events and processes: the precedent of British colonial treatment of the Irish (Allen 1994, Ignatiev 1995); the early,
multiracial resistance to indentured servitude and quasi-slavery, which culminated in the defeat of Bacon's Rebellion in late 17th
century Virginia; the self-identification of "free" workers as white in the antebellum North (Roediger 1991); and the construction of a
"white republic" in the late 19th century (Saxton 1990). These studies, in some cases quite prodigious intellectual efforts, have had
a significant impact on how we understand not only racial formation, but also class formation and the developing forms of popular
culture in US history. What they reveal above all is how crucial the construction of whiteness was, and remains, for the development

the meaning of
whiteness, like that of race in general, has time and again proved
flexible enough to adapt to shifts in the capitalist division of labor,
to reform initiatives which extended democratic rights, and to
changes in ideology and cultural representation. The core message
of the abolitionist project is the imperative of repudiation of white
identity and white privilege, the requirement that "the lie of
whiteness" be exposed. This rejection of whiteness on the part of
and maintenance of capitalist class rule in the US. Furthermore, these studies also show how

those who benefit from it, this "new abolitionism," it is argued, is a


precondition for the establishment of substantive racial equality
and social justice -- or more properly, socialism -- in the US. Whites
must become "race traitors," as the new journal of the abolitionist project calls itself. Its motto: "Treason to
whiteness is loyalty to humanity." How is this rejection of whiteness to be accomplished? Both analytical and practical measures are
envisioned. On the intellectual level, the abolitionist project invites us to contemplate the emptiness, indeed vacuity, of the white
category: It is not merely that whiteness is oppressive and false; it is that whiteness is nothing but oppressive and false.... It is the
empty and terrifying attempt to build an identity based on what one isn't and on whom one can hold back (Roediger 1994, 13;

). In short, there is no white culture, no white politics, no


whiteness, except in the sense of distancing and rejection of racially-defined
emphasis original

"otherness." On the practical level, the argument goes, whites can become "race traitors" by rejecting their privilege, by refusing to
collude with white supremacy. When you hear that racist joke, confront its teller. When you see the police harassing a nonwhite
youth, try to intervene or at least bear witness. In short, recognize that white supremacy depends on the thousands of minute acts
that reproduce it from moment to moment; it must "deliver" to whites a sense of their own security and superiority; it must make
them feel that "I am different from those "others." Single gestures of this sort, Race Traitor's editors say, ...would [not] in all
likelihood be of much consequence. But if enough of those who looked white broke the rules of the club to make the cops doubt their
ability to recognize a white person merely by looking at him or her, how would it affect the cops' behavior (Editorial 1993, 4-5)? Thus
the point is not that all whites recognize the lie of their privilege, but that enough whites do so, and act out their rejection of that lie,
to disrupt the "white club's" ability to enforce its supremacy. It is easy to sympathize with this analysis, at least up to a point. The
postwar black movement, which in the US context at least served as the point of origin for all the "new social movements" and the
much-reviled "politics of identity," taught the valuable lesson that politics went "all the way down." That is, meaningful efforts to
achieve greater social justice could not tolerate a public/private, or a collective/individual distinction. Trying to change society meant
trying to change one's own life. The formula "the personal is political," commonly associated with feminism, had its early origins

problems come when deeper


theoretical and practical problems are raised. Despite their explicit adherence to a
among the militants of the civil rights movement (Evans 1980). The

"social construction" model of race (one which bears a significant resemblance to my own work), theorists of the abolitionist project
do not take that insight as seriously as they should. They employ it chiefly to argue against biologistic conceptions of race, which is

. Is
the social construction of whiteness so flimsy that it can be
repudiated by a mere act of political will, or even by widespread and
repeated acts aimed at rejecting white privilege? I think not;
whiteness may not be a legitimate cultural identity in the sense of
having a discrete, "positive" content, but it is certainly an
overdetermined political and cultural category, having to do with
socioeconomic status, religious affiliation, ideologies of
individualism, opportunity, and citizenship, nationalism, etc. Like any other
fine; but they fail to consider the complexities and rootedness of social construction, or as we would term it, racial formation

complex of beliefs and practices, "whiteness" is imbedded in a highly articulated social structure and system of significations; rather
than trying to repudiate it, we shall have to rearticulate it. That sounds like a daunting task, and of course it is, but it is not nearly as
impossible as erasing whiteness altogether, as the abolitionist project seeks to do. Furthermore, because whiteness is a relational
concept, unintelligible without reference to nonwhiteness -- note how this is true even of Roediger's formulation about "build[ing] an
identity based on what one isn't" -- that rearticulation (or reinterpretation, or deconstruction) of whiteness can begin relatively
easily, in the messy present, with the recognition that whiteness already contains substantial nonwhite elements. Of course, that
recognition is only the beginning of a large and arduous process of political labor, which I shall address in the concluding section of
this paper. Notwithstanding these criticisms of the abolitionist project, we consider many of its insights to be vital components in the
process of reformulating, or synthesizing, a progressive approach to whiteness. Its attention is directed toward prescisely the place
where the neo-liberal racial project is weak: the point at which white identity constitutes a crucial support to white supremacy, and a
central obstacle to the achievement of substantive social equality and racial justice. CONCLUDING NOTES: WHITENESS AND

In a situation of racial dualism, as Du Bois observed more than 90 years ago,


race operates both to assign us and to deny us our identity. It both
makes the social world intelligible, and simultaneously renders it
opaque and mysterious. Not only does it allocate resources, power,
and privilege; it also provides means for challenging that allocation.
The contradictory character of race provides the context in which
racial dualism -or the "color-line," as Du Bois designated it, has
developed as "the problem of the 20th century." So what's new? Only that, as a result
CONTEMPORARY POLITICS

of incalculable human efort, sufering, and sacrifice, we now realize


that these truths apply across the board. Whites and whiteness can
no longer be exempted from the comprehensive racialization
process that is the hallmark of US history and social structure. This is the
present-day context for racial conflict and thus for US politics in general, since race continues to play its designated role of
crystallizing all the fundamental issues in US society. As always, we articulate our anxieties in racial terms: wealth and poverty,
crime and punishment, gender and sexuality, nationality and citizenship, culture and power, are all articulated in the US primarily
through race. So what's new? It's the problematic of whiteness that has emerged as the principal source of anxiety and conflict in
the postwar US. Although this situation was anticipated or prefigured at earlier moments in the nation's past -- for example, in the
"hour of eugenics" (Stepan 1991, Kevles 1985, Gould 1981) -- it is far more complicated now than ever before, largely due to the

Whiteness -visible whiteness, resurgent whiteness, whiteness as a color,


whiteness as diference -- this is what's new, and newly problematic,
in contemporary US politics. The reasons for this have already emerged in my discussion of the spectrum
of racial projects and the particular representations these projects assign to whiteness. Most centrally, the
problem of the meaning of whiteness appears as a direct
consequence of the movement challenge posed in the 1960s to
white supremacy. The battles of that period have not been resolved;
they have not been won or lost; however battered and bruised, the
demand for substantive racial equality and general social justice
still lives. And while it lives, the strength of white supremacy is in
doubt. The racial projects of the right are clear efforts to resist the challenge to white supremacy posed by the movements of
present unavailability of biologistic forms of racism as a convenient rationale for white supremacy.[7]

the 1960s and their contemporary inheritors. Each of these projects has a particular relationship to the white supremacist legacy,
ranging from the far right's efforts to justify and solidify white entitlements, through the new right's attempts to utilize the white
supremacist tradition for more immediate and expedient political ends, to the neoconservative project's quixotic quest to surgically
separate the liberal democratic tradition from the racism that traditionally underwrote it. The biologistic racism of the far right, the
expedient and subtextual racism of the new right, and the bad-faith anti-racism of the neoconservatives have many differences from
each other, but they have at least one thing in common. They all seek to maintain the long-standing association between whiteness
and US political traditions, between whiteness and US nationalism, between whiteness and universalism. They all seek in different
ways to preserve white identity from the particularity, the difference, which the 1960s movement challenge assigned to it. The racial

Both the
neoliberal racial project and the abolitionist project seek to fulfill
the movement's thwarted dreams of a genuinely (i.e., substantively)
egalitarian society, one in which significant redistribution of wealth
and power has taken place, and race no longer serves as the most
significant marker between winners and losers, haves and have
nots, powerful and powerless. Although they diverge significantly -- since the neoliberals seek to
projects of the left are the movements' successors (as is neoconservatism, in a somewhat perverse sense).

accomplish their ends through a conscious diminution of the significance of race, and the abolitionists hope to achieve similar ends
through a conscious reemphasizing of the importance of race -- they also have one very important thing in common. They both seek
to rupture the barrier between whites and racially-defined minorities, the obstacle which prevents joint political action. They both
seek to associate whites and nonwhites, to reinterpret the meaning of whiteness in such a way that it no longer has the power to

Although the diferences and indeed the hostility -between the neoliberal and abolitionist projects, between the
reform-oriented and radical conceptions of whiteness -- are quite
severe, we consider it vital that adherents of each project recognize
that they hold part of the key to challenging white supremacy in the
contemporary US, and that their counterpart project holds the other
part of the key. Neoliberals rightfully argue that a pragmatic approach to transracial politics is
vital if the momentum of racial reaction is to be halted or reversed.
impede class alliances.

Abolitionists properly emphasize challenging the ongoing commitment to white supremacy on the part of many whites. Both of

these positions need to draw on each other, not only in strategic

terms, but in theoretical ones as well. The recognition that racial


identities -- all racial identities, including whiteness -- have become
implacably dualistic, could be far more liberating on the left than it
has thus far been. For neoliberals, it could permit and indeed justify an acceptance of race-consciousness and even
nationalism among racially-defined minorities as a necessary but partial response to disenfranchisement, disempowerment, and

There is no inherent reason why such a political position


could not coexist with a strategic awareness of the need for strong,
class-conscious, transracial coalitions. We have seen many such examples in the past: in the
superexploitation.

anti-slavery movement, the communist movement of the 1930s (Kelley 1994), and in the 1988 presidential bid of Jesse Jackson, to
name but a few. This is not to say that all would be peace and harmony if such alliances could come more permanently into being.
But there is no excuse for not attempting to find the pragmatic "common ground" necessary to create them. Abolitionists could also
benefit from a recognition that on a pragmatic basis, whites can ally with racially-defined minorities without renouncing their

abolitionists should
also be able to recognize that racial identities are not either-or
matters, not closed concepts that must be upheld in a reactionary
fashion or disavowed in a comprehensive act of renunciation . To use a
whiteness. If they truly agree that race is a socially constructed concept, as they claim,

postmodern language I dislike: racial identities are deeply "hybridized"; they are not "sutured," but remain open to rearticulation. "To
be white in America is to be very black. If you don't know how black you are, you don't know how American you are" (Thompson
1995, 429).

The alt fails ontological blackness creates bodies structural


dependent on sufering makes any sort of liberation
impossible
Pinn 2004 (Anthony, Anthony B. Pinn is an American professor and writer whose work focuses on liberation theology, Black religion, and
Black humanism. Pinn is the Agnes Cullen Arnold Professor of Humanities and Professor of Religious Studies at Rice University, Black Is, Black
Aint: Victor Anderson, African American Theological Thought, and Identity, Dialog: A Journal of Theology, Volume 43, Number 1 . Spring 2004

This connection between ontological blackness and religion is natural because: ontological blackness signifies the totality of black
existence, a binding together of black life and experience. In its root, religio, religion denotes tying together, fastening behind, and
binding together. Ontological blackness renders black life and experience a totality.13 According to Anderson, Black theological
discussions are entangled in ontological blackness. And accordingly, discussions of black life revolve around a theological
understanding of Black experience limited to suffering and survival in a racist system. The goal of this theology is to find the
meaning of black faith in the merger of black cultural consciousness, icons of genius, and post-World War II Black defiance. An
admirable goal to be sure, but here is the rub: Black theologians speak, according to Anderson, in opposition to ontological
whiteness when they are actually dependent upon whiteness for the legitimacy of their agenda. Furthermore , ontological

blacknesss strong ties to suffering and survival result in blackness being dependent on suffering,
and as a result social transformation brings into question what it means to be black and religious. Liberative outcomes ultimately
force an identity crisis, a crisis of legitimation and utility. In Andersons words: Talk about liberation becomes hard to

justify where freedom appears as nothing more than defiant self-assertion of a revolutionary
racial consciousness that requires for its legitimacy the opposition of white racism . Where there exists
no possibility of transcending the blackness that whiteness created, African American theologies of liberation must be seen not only
as crisis theologies; they remain theologies in a crisis of legitimation.14 This conversation becomes more refined as new cultural
resources are unpacked and various religious alternatives acknowledged. Yet the bottom line remains racialization of issues and
agendas, life and love. Falsehood is perpetuated through the hermeneutic of return, by which ontological blackness is the
paradigm of Black existence and thereby sets the agenda of Black liberation within the postrevolutionary context of present day
USA. One ever finds the traces of the Black aesthetic which pushes for a dwarfed understanding of Black life and a sacrifice of
individuality for the sake of a unified Black faith. Yet differing experiences of racial oppression (the stuff of
ontological blackness) combined

with varying experiences of class, gender and sexual oppression call


into question the value of their racialized formulations. Implicit in all of this is a crisis of faith, an
unwillingness to address both the glory and guts of Black existencenihilistic tendencies
that, unless held in tension with claims of transcendence, have the potential to overwhelm and to suffocate. At the heart
of this dilemma is friction between ontological blackness and contemporary postmodern black lifeissues, for example related to
selecting marriage partners, exercising freedom of movement, acting on gay and lesbian preferences, or choosing political
parties.15 How does one foster balance while embracing difference as positive? Anderson looks to Nietzsche. European genius,
complete with its heroic epic, met its match in the aesthetic categories of tragedy and the grotesque genius revived and espoused by
Friedreich Nietzsche. The grotesque genius served as an effective counter-discourse by embracing both the light and dark aspects
of life, and holding in tension oppositional sensationspleasure and pain, freedom and oppression.16 Utilizing Nietzsches work,
Anderson ask: what should African American cultural and religious criticism look like when they are no longer romantic in
inspiration and the cult of heroic genius is displaced by the grotesqueryfull range of expression, actions, attitudes, behaviors

everything found in African American lifeof contemporary black expressive culture and public life?17 Applied to African
Americans, the grotesque embodies the full range of African American lifeall expressions, actions, attitudes, and behavior. With a
hermeneutic of the grotesque as the foci, religio-cultural criticism is free from the totalizing nature of racial apologetics and the
classical Black aesthetic. By extension, Black theology is able to address both issues of survival (Anderson sees their importance.)
and the larger goal of cultural fulfillment, Andersons version of liberation. That is to say, placing blackness along side

other indicators of identity allows African Americans to define themselves in a plethora of


ways while maintaining their community status. This encourages African Americans to see themselves as they are complex and
diversifiedno longer needing to surrender personal interests for the sake of monolithic collective status.

5. Permutation do both its the only possibility to alt solvency


6. Reformism solves
Bhambra 10U WarwickANDVictoria MargreeSchool of Humanities, U
Brighton (Identity Politics and the Need for a Tomorrow,
http://www.academia.edu/471824/Identity_Politics_and_the_Need_for_a_Tomorrow_)
Political mobilisation around suffering engenders solidarities

between those who are


suffering and those who afford recognition of (and then action around) that suffering. Those who suffergenerally claim their common humanity with others

the request is to address those


specific circumstances on the basis of a humanity not bound to the circumstances .
The mistake of some forms of identity politics, then, is to associate
identity with sufering. While a recognition of historical (and contemporary)
suffering is an important aspect of the political process of seeking redress for the
conditions of suffering, it does not constitute identity singularly. Wounded
attachments, we would argue, do not representthe general condition of politicised identities, but rather, are prob-lematic
constructions of identities which fail to recognise (oraccept) the processes of change
associated with movements. The accumulation of different sorts of challenges
around similar issues generally leads to the gradual amelioration of the condi-tions
which generated the identity (and the associated move-ment) in the first instance. If the emphasis in the
movement is on identity then successful reform (even partial reform) reduces the
injury and thus diminishes the power of the identity claim based upon that
injury. This is because reform is necessarily uneven in terms of the impact it has. This then poses a problem for those
within the movement who would wish the reforms to go further and who see in
the reforms a weakening of the identity that they believe is a necessary prerequisite
for political action. As they can no longer mobilise the injured identity and
the associated sufering as common to all (and thus requiring address becauseof its generalised effect),
there is often, then, a perceived need to privilege that sufering as
particular and to institute a politics of guilt with regard to addressing it
truly the politics of ressentiment. The problems arise by insisting on the
necessity of political action being constituted through pre-existing identities and solidarities (for example, those of being a woman). If, instead, it was recognised that equality for
women is not separable from (or achievable separated from) wider issues of justice and
equality within society then reforms could be seen as steps towards equality . A
movement concerned with issues of social justice (of whichgender justice is an integral aspect) would allow
for provisional reforms to prevailing conditions of injustice without calling
into question the basis for the movement for there would always be more
to be achieved . 8 Each achievement would itself necessitate further revision of what equality would look like. And it
in asking forpeople to look beyond the specific circumstances of their suffer-ing, and in doing so,

necessitate revision of the particular aims that constitute the identity


afforded by participating in that movement. In this way, identity becomes more appropriately
understood as being, in part at least, about participating in a series of dialogues about
what is desired for the future in terms of understandings of social justice .
Focusing on the future, on how we would like things to be tomorrow , based
on an understanding of where we are today , would allow for partial reforms to
be seen as gains and not threats. It is only if one believes that political
action can only occur in the context of identification of past injustices as
opposed to future justice that one has a problem with (partial) reforms in the
present. Political identity which exists only through an enunciation of its injury
and does not seek to dissolve itself as an identity can lead to the
ossification of injured relations . The wounded attachment occurs when
the politicised identity can see no future without the injury also
constituting an aspect of that future. Developing on the work of Brown, we would argue that not only does a
reformed identity politics need to be based upon desire for the future , but that that desire should actually be a desire
for the dissolution (in the future) of the identity claim. The complete success of the femi-nist movement, for instance,
would also

would mean that feminists no longerexisted, as the conditions that caused people to become feministhad been addressed. Similarly, with the dalit
movement, its success would be measured by the dissolution of the identity of dalit as asalient political category. There would be no loss here, only a
gain. As we have argued, following Mohanty ([1993] 2000) andNelson (1993), it is participation in the processing of ones ownand others experiences
into knowledge about the world, in thecontext of communities that negotiate epistemological premises, which confers a notion of politicised identity.

Since it is an under-standing of tomorrow (what that would be, and how it is to beachieved) that establishes one as, for
example, a feminist, such an identity claim does not exclude others from
participation, and it does not solicit the reification of identity around the
fact of historical or contemporary sufering. By removing these obstacles to
progress, the tomorrow that is the goal, is more readily achievable . Identity
politics , then, needs a tomorrow in this sense: that the raison dtre of any politicised
identity is the bringing about of a tomorrow in which the social injustices of the
present have been overcome. But identity politics also needs that tomorrow
today in the sense that politicised identities need to inscribe that
tomorrow into their self-definition in the present , in order to avoid
consolidating activity around the maintenance of the identity rather than
the overcoming of the conditions that generated it . That the tomorrow to
be inscribed today in the self-definition of ones political identity, is one
in which that identity will no longer be required, is not a situation to be
regretted, since it is rather the promise of success for any movement for
justice.

7. Perm do the plan then the alt

8. Revenge politics is bad the ball0t serves as a palliative


that denies their investment in oppression as a means by
which to claim the power of victory
Enns 12Professor of Philosophy at McMaster University (Dianne, The Violence of
Victimhood, 28-30)

Guilt and Ressentiment We need to think carefully about what is at stake here. Why is this perspective appealing,
and what are its effects? At first glance, the argument appears simple: white, privileged women, in their theoretical
and practical interventions, must take into account the experiences and conceptual work of women who are less
fortunate and less powerful, have fewer resources, and are therefore more subject to systemic oppression. The
lesson of feminism's mistakes in the civil rights era is that this mainstream group must not speak for other
women. But such a view must be interrogated. Its effects, as I have argued, include a veneration of the other, moral
currency for the victim, and an insidious competition for victimhood. We will see in later chapters that these effects
are also common in situations of conflict where the stakes are much higher. We witness here a twofold appeal:

otherness discourse in feminism appeals both to the guilt of the privileged and to the
resentment, or ressentiment, of the other. Suleri's allusion to embarrassed privilege exposes the
operation of guilt in the misunderstanding that often divides Western feminists from women in the developing

The guilt of those who feel themselves deeply


implicated in and responsible for imperialism merely reinforces an imperialist
benevolence, polarizes us unambiguously by locking us into the categories
of victim and perpetrator, and blinds us to the power and agency of the
other. Many fail to see that it is embarrassing and insulting for those identified as
victimized others not to be subjected to the same critical intervention and held to
the same demands of moral and political responsibility . Though we are by no means
equal in power and ability, wealth and advantage, we are all collectively responsible
for the world we inhabit in common. The condition of victimhood does not absolve one of moral
responsibility. I will return to this point repeatedly throughout this book. Mohanty's perspective ignores the
possibility that one can become attached to one's subordinated status, which
introduces the concept of ressentiment, the focus of much recent interest in the injury caused by racism
world, or white women from women of color.

and colonization. Nietzsche describes ressentiment as the overwhelming sentiment of slave morality, the revolt

ressentiment itself becomes creative and gives birth to values. 19 The


sufferer in this schema seeks out a cause for his suffering a guilty agent who is susceptible to
suffering someone on whom he can vent his affects and so procure the anesthesia
necessary to ease the pain of injury. The motivation behind ressentiment, according to Nietzsche, is the
that begins when

desire to deaden, by means of a more violent emotion of any kind, a tormenting, secret pain that is becoming
unendurable, and to drive it out of consciousness at least for the moment: for that one requires an affect, as savage
an affect as possible, and, in order to excite that, any pretext at all. 20 In its contemporary manifestation, Wendy

ressentiment acts as the righteous critique of power from the


perspective of the injured, which delimits a specific site of blame for suffering by constituting
sovereign subjects and events as responsible for the injury of social subordination. Identities are fixed
in an economy of perpetrator and victim , in which revenge, rather than
power or emancipation, is sought for the injured, making the perpetrator hurt as the sufferer
Brown argues that

does. 21 30 Such a concept is useful for understanding why an ethics of absolute responsibility to the other

the triumph of a morality


rooted in ressentiment is the denial that it has any access to power or
contains a will to power. Politicized identities arise as both product of and reaction
to this condition; the reaction is a substitute for action an imaginary revenge,
Nietzsche calls it. Suffering then becomes a social virtue at the same time that the sufferer
attempts to displace his suffering onto another. The identity created by ressentiment, Brown
explains, becomes invested in its own subjection not only through its discovery of
someone to blame, and a new recognition and revaluation of that subjection, but also through the
satisfaction of revenge . 22 The outcome of feminism's attraction to theories of difference and
otherness is thus deeply contentious. First, we witness the further reification reification of the very
oppositions in question and a simple reversal of the focus from the same to the
other. This observation is not new and has been made by many critics of feminism, but it seems to have made no
appeals to the victimized. Brown remarks that, for Nietzsche, the source of

serious impact on mainstream feminist scholarship or teaching practices in women's studies programs. Second, in
the eagerness to rectify the mistakes of white, middle-class, liberal, western feminism,

the other has been

uncritically exalted, which has led in turn to simplistic designations of marginal, othered status and,
ultimately, a competition for victimhood. Ultimately, this approach has led to a new moral code in which
ethics is equated with the responsibility of the privileged Western woman, while moral immunity is granted to the
victimized other. Ranjana Khanna describes this operation aptly when she writes that in the field of transnational

the reification of the other has produced separate ethical universes in


which the privileged experience paralyzing guilt and the neocolonized, crippling
resentment. The only overarching imperative is that one does not comment on
another's ethical context. An ethical response turns out to be a nonresponse.
feminism,

23 Let us turn now to an exploration of this third outcome.

9. Perm do the alt


9 & . Cede the political - Their method cant create
institutional change- the AFF is a DA to the alt and only
the perm solves- AFF is a better strategy
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 284-285)
But as even the Stasi eventually discovered, no system of surveillance can ever produce total knowledge. Indeed,
the greater the amount of information collected, the harder it is to interpret its meaning. The relevant information in
the majority of recent US terrorist attacks was somewhere in the government's systems, but its significance was

what is obscured by the demands for ever


greater surveillance and information processing is that security is best established
through relationships of trust and political empowerment. A society that has
blocked a section of its population from shaping a process of political transformation
is one that has hollowed out its democracy until what's left is an empty,
technocratic consensus in which real politics is disavowed. When radical political
contestation is suffocated, the processes by which societies reinvent themselves
and resolve their social tensions are neutered, and in the absence of a genuinely
emancipatory alternative, the only possible outlet for the impulses generated by
social and economic marginalization is the fake radicalism of armored identity
politics, conspiracy theories, and apocalyptic fantasies.
lost amid a morass of useless data. More significantly,

10. Wilderson is wrong


A) Social death theory is wrong and demeans black pathology
Brown 2009 (Vincent, Professor of History and of African and African American
Studies at Harvard University, Social Death and Political Life in the Study of Slavery,
December)
Although the deaths of slaves could inspire such active and dynamic practices of social reconnection ,

scholars in recent years have made too little of events like the funeral aboard the Hudibras and have
too often followed Orlando Pattersons mon- umental Slavery and Social Death (1982) in positing a
metaphorical social death as the basic condition of slavery. In a
comparative study of sixty-six slaveholding societies ranging from ancient Greece and Rome to medieval Europe,
precolonial Africa, and Asia, Patterson combined statistical analysis and voluminous research with brilliant

theoretical insights drawn from Marxian theory, symbolic anthropology, law, philosophy, and literature in order to
offer what he called a preliminary definition of slavery on the level of personal relations. Recognizing violence,
violations of personhood, dishonor, and namelessness as the fundamental constituent elements of slavery,

Patterson distilled a transhistorical characterization of slavery

as the
permanent, violent domination of natally alienated and generally dishonored persons. In this way the institution of
slavery was and is a relation of domination, in which slaveholders annihilated people socially by first extracting
them from meaningful relationships that defined personal status and belonging, communal memory, and collective
aspiration and then incorporating these socially dead persons into the masters world. As a work of historical
sociology concerned primarily with the comparative analysis of institutions, the book illuminated the dynamics of a
process whereby the desocialized new slave was subsumed within slave society.5 Slavery and Social Death was

social
death has become a handy general definition of slavery, for many
historians and non-historians alike. But it is often forgotten that the
concept of social death is a distillation from Pattersons
breathtaking surveya theoretical abstraction that is meant not to
describe the lived experiences of the enslaved so much as to reduce
them to a least common denominator that could reveal the essence of slavery in an idealtype slave, shorn of meaningful heritage.6 As a concept, it is what Frederick Cooper has called
an agentless abstraction that provides a neat cultural logic but
ultimately does little to illuminate the social and political experience
of enslavement and the struggles that produce historic
transformations.7 Indeed, it is difficult to use such a distillation to
explain the actual behavior of slaves, and yet in much of the scholarship that followed in
widely reviewed and lavishly praised for its erudition and conceptual rigor. As a result of its success,

the wake of Slavery and Social Death, Pattersons abstract distillates have been used to explain the existential
condition of the enslaved. Having emerged from the discipline of sociology, social death fit comfortably within a
scholarly tradition that had generally been more alert to deviations in pat- terns of black life from prevailing social
norms than to the worldviews, strategies, and social tactics of people in black communities. Together with

social death reflected


sociologys abiding concern with social pathology; the
pathological condition of twentieth-century black life could be
seen as an outcome of the damage that black people had sufered
during slavery. University of Chicago professor Robert Park, the grand-p`ere of the social pathologists, set
Pattersons work on the distortions wrought by slavery on black families,

the terms in 1919: the Negro, when he landed in the United States, left behind almost everything but his dark

Pattersons distillation also conformed to


the nomothetic imperative of social science, which has traditionally
aimed to discover universal laws of operation that would be true
regardless of time and place, making the synchronic study of social
phenomena more tempting than more descriptive studies of
historical transformation. Slavery and Social Death took shape during a period when largely
complexion and his tropical temperament.8

synchronic studies of antebellum slavery in the United States domi- nated the scholarship on human bondage, and
Pattersons expansive view was meant to situate U.S. slavery in a broad context rather than to discuss changes as

one might see social death as an


obsolete product of its time and tradition, an academic artifact with
limited purchase for contemporary scholarship, were it not for the concepts
the in- stitution developed through time. Thus

reemergence in some im- portant new studies of slavery.9

B) Binaries bad homogenizes multiple bodies, and efaces ethnicities


cultures. This is specifically bad in the context of the 1ac.

Roksana Badruddoja. Badruddoja is and Assistant Professor of Sociology at


Manhattan College. 2006. [WHITE SPACES AND BROWN TRAVELING BODIES: A
PROJECT OF RE-WORKING OTHERNESS. International Review of Modern Sociology,
Vol. 32, No. 1 (Spring, 2006), pp. 1-34. JSTOR] VR

Moreover, Kibria (see Bashi, 1998: 962) supports that the addition of pan- ethnic
labels in the system of racial categories in the U.S. moves us away from the white
/black discourse to one that has more than two levels "white/Asian/Hispanic/Black." But, Visweswaran (1997) posits that even as we
move away from a racially bifurcated system, the centuries- long black
and white polarization simply cast the identities of South Asian groups in
the U.S. as either symbolically whitened or blackened, or to place Asian
groups in a mediating position between blacks and whites. Both, though,
speak to the racialization process unique to the U.S. Ronica's words speak to
immigrant adaptation to new racial structures in destination countries
within old hierarchies, further suggesting racialization: I definitely think that,
especially in America, there is a very strong idea of what an NRI [Non-Resident
Indian]17 is supposed to look like. If you are South Asian and you are in your
early thirties or late twenties, you should have bought a house, have this
much education, preferably in the sciences, and definitely be living out
this ideal that is very much a construct of people coming to this country and
wanting to have the best and coming here and thinking that they're a
failure unless they make lots of money. To me, [this is about] being caught in
this myth of a model, a minority, and also that there is a predestination for where
you are supposed to go sin your life based on where you come from and where you
are right now. Roica clearly refers to how modern immigration policies, as a
continuation of Orientalist practices, helped to construct a bi-modal distribution of
the South Asian population - the post-1965 group consisting of highly educated and
financially successful members, and the post-1980 group largely working-class,
including undocumented workers (Das Dasgupta and Warrier, 1997; Prashad, 2000;
Maira, 2002)-and subsequently the myth of the model minority. While AsianAmericans have overcome the status of "alien citizenship" in different ways like
naturalized citizenship and occupational and residential mobility, the model minority
stereotype, first, elides the existence of refugees, undocumented workers , and
working-class immigrants, and, second, it reproduces the idea of Asian-American's
foreignness (Ngai, 2004). Here, then, the Orientalist discourse helped to
create the myth of the model- minority and its purpose is to pacify
unwanted bodies in "non-violent" and "non-coercive" ways. Hence, like
Roica, Poore (1998) is also suspicious of the term "South Asian": The terms "South
Asian," which seemed like a perfect solution to encompass multiplicity of South
Asian communities has slowly been co-opted, frequently by Indians who have fallen
prey to and reflect Indian hegemony even beyond the subcontinent. As a
consequence, South Asians from Southeast Asia, the Caribbean, or Africa are
excluded from and in turn exclude themselves from the gatherings, collaborative
projects, and political alliances being formed by 5 an increasingly visible and vocal
South Asian community in movements for gay rights, women's rights, and college

student's rights in the United States. These exclusions further limit the geopolitical
perspectives of the South Asian diaspora.

11) Nonviolent resistance solves case studies

A) Ghana
Bartkowski 13, Senior Director at the International Center on Nonviolent
Conflict
(Maciej, Recovering Nonviolent History: Civil Resistance in Liberation Struggles, pg.
63)

Action - it doesn't include passivity or inaction - and it goes beyond


conventional methods of political communication and waging conflict, such as
discussion, negotiation or lobbying. Nonviolent action is nonviolent on the part of those who use it.
Their opponents can and often do use violence, sometimes brutally. The newly independent state of Ghana took a
leading role in advocating and using civil resistance. In Deember 1958 independent Ghana hosted the All-African
Peoples Conference, a follow-up to the 1945 Pan-African Congress. Patrice Lumumba and Tom Mboya were there

Nkrumah attributed the success of the


Ghanaian independence movement to nonviolent positive action . Kojo Botsio, who led the
CPP delegation, told countries still struggle for liberation that, with the united will of the people
behind you, the power of the imperialists can be destroyed without the use of
violence. Some delegations were unhappy with the emphasis on nonviolent resistance, especially the Algerians
along with a large Algerian contingent. In his opening speech,

and Egyptians who regarded the very word nonviolence as an insult to brothers fighting and dying for freedom.
Ultimately, the congress declared its support for peaceful means in territories where democratic means were
available but also supported those in circumstances where arms were the only protection from colonial violence. In
1959, after hearing that France planned to test nuclear weapons in the Sahara Desert at Regan, Algeria, a group of
eleven Ghanaians along with British and other international activists attempted to intervene nonviolently, but were
ejected from French territory in Upper Volta and ended up back in Ghana. Another conference to discuss the way
forward for positive action was held in Accra in April 1960, Positive Action for Peace and Security in Africa. While
Nkrumah opened the conference with a speech advocating nonviolent positive action as the main tactic, after the
criticism of Frantz Fanon and pressure from some other African delegates, the conferences emphasis on continent
wide nonviolent positive action was muted. Nevertheless, Bill Sutherland and Matt Meyer describe positive action as

Nonviolent tactics were used as part of a


self-conscious overall nonviolent strategy that led Ghana quickly to
independence with minimal casualities. They included consciousness-raising
among the people about their right to self-government, a determination to act in
concert with each other through a variety of associations, and a willingness to
accept imprisonment. Boycotts and strikes showed the people that withdrawing
cooperation leaves colonial forces powerless (and that cooperation reinforces
subjection). Many marginalized sectors of society were mobilized in a common
cause, including the youth, market women, and elementary school graduates. Newspapers and popular songs
spread the message of the movement and the leaders emphasis on the need for
nonviolent discipline resonated with peoples deeply held value systems .
being a phenomenal success for Gandhian strategy.

There was the grace to accept compromise in certain situations as well as the determination to go the harder way
of strikes and imprisonment when sacrifice was required.

The impact of mass nonviolent civil

resistance on shaping Ghanaian nationalism needs further exploration, but it is clear if rarely acknowledged
that if facilitated this process of nation building.

B) Poland
Bartkowski 13, Senior Director at the International Center on Nonviolent
Conflict
(Maciej, Recovering Nonviolent History: Civil Resistance in Liberation Struggles, pg.
274)

A critical attitude toward organic work is particularly perplexing given the extent to
which the nineteenth-century nonviolent resistance and its constructive program of
creating and running parallel institutions served as an inspiration for future
generations of Poles faced with oppression . The conspiratorial experience of organizing and running
secret education became ingrained in the collective memory of the national resistance. It was recalled during
traumatic events such as the German occupation of 1939 1945 and during communist rule, particularly during the
1970s and 1980s when widespread illegal education (including the reestablishment of the flying university) ensured
the truthful reading of national history, culture, and tradition. In fact, working at the base of society became the
imperative nonviolent strategy of the anticommunist opposition. Solidarity leaders drew parallels between their
nonviolent efforts to liberate the society from the control of the communist government and the nonviolent
strategies of nineteenth century organicists to undermine the authority of the partitioning powers. Bohdan
Cywinskis influential Genealogy of the Defiant (1971) studied the fin-de-siecle (defiant ones) and made parallels
between their nonviolent defiant attitude and practice against the czarist government and the then contemporary

Poles and showed clearly how a century


old tradition of nonviolent resistance although generally underappreciated in the
national annals could play a vital role in shaping the thinking , and determining the
strategies and actions, of a new generation of unarmed resisters struggling with no
less oppressive autocratic rulers than their indomitable predecessors who lived
under partitions. Without nonviolent resistance, Poles could not have taken charge
of their national destiny after World War I or changed the geopolitical situation in
their favor during the 1980s. It would have been equally implausible to integrate
partitioned lands after 1918 and establish statehood so swiftly without the base of
social, economic, and cultural development constructed through organic work.
Although nonviolent resistance has been widely used by different generations of
Poles against both external occupation and domestic dictatorship, this form of
struggle is still awaiting much-deserved recognition of its role in not only defending,
but essentially reimagining, the Polish nation.
resistance to communism. That book inspired thousands of

B) Not passitivity
Martin 08, Professor of Social Sciences at the University of Wollongong
(Brian, How nonviolence is misrepresented,
http://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/08gm2.html#_edn1)
Nonviolent action, as a technique of political communication and waging conflict,
can be distinguished from conventional action and from violence. Conventional
political action includes voting, lobbying and campaigning - anything that is routine
within a society. Conventional economic action includes working, and buying and selling goods and shares.
Conventional social action includes meetings of clubs or neighbours, charitable work and much else. Nonviolent
action, in contrast, goes beyond routine behaviour , often by challenging

conventional practices. Examples include protesters disrupting a government


meeting by dressing as clowns, a neighbourhood association setting up an alternative
system of social welfare, war resisters refusing to pay taxes, consumer activists
blocking service in a bank by opening and closing small accounts, bus drivers refusing to collect fares,
office workers sending large files to clog an email system, and communities setting up local currencies. The
boundary between conventional and nonviolent action depends on the circumstances. When government repression
is severe, handing out a leaflet might count as nonviolent action, whereas in some places strikes are so common
and widely accepted that participating in one might be considered conventional action. Violence means physical
force used against humans, including imprisonment, beatings, shootings, bombings and torture.[4] Nonviolent
action excludes these. Sabotage - violence against objects - lies at the boundary between violence and nonviolence.

Nonviolent action thus encompasses a wide range of activities that go beyond


conventional, routine action but do not involve physical violence against humans. When
people think about nonviolent protests, rallies and sit-ins commonly come to mind,
but there are many other sorts, such as workers refusing to tear down an iconic building,
judges resigning in protest over political pressure, roads activists digging up streets and planting
[5]

crops, and office workers misplacing or destroying files on dissidents targeted for surveillance and arrest.

1AR Permutation
Conceded permutation do the alt no new answers protect 1AR time
allocation choices; even if we lose perm do both, they dropped perm do
the alt its functionally the same as the af, we should win. Silence is a
concession.
Social death theory is wrong
A) Demeans black pathology
Brown 2009 (Vincent, Professor of History and of African and African American
Studies at Harvard University, Social Death and Political Life in the Study of Slavery,
December)
Although the deaths of slaves could inspire such active and dynamic practices of social reconnection ,

scholars in recent years have made too little of events like the funeral aboard the Hudibras and have
too often followed Orlando Pattersons mon- umental Slavery and Social Death (1982) in positing a
metaphorical social death as the basic condition of slavery. In a
comparative study of sixty-six slaveholding societies ranging from ancient Greece and Rome to medieval Europe,
precolonial Africa, and Asia, Patterson combined statistical analysis and voluminous research with brilliant
theoretical insights drawn from Marxian theory, symbolic anthropology, law, philosophy, and literature in order to
offer what he called a preliminary definition of slavery on the level of personal relations. Recognizing violence,
violations of personhood, dishonor, and namelessness as the fundamental constituent elements of slavery,

Patterson distilled a transhistorical characterization of slavery

as the
permanent, violent domination of natally alienated and generally dishonored persons. In this way the institution of
slavery was and is a relation of domination, in which slaveholders annihilated people socially by first extracting
them from meaningful relationships that defined personal status and belonging, communal memory, and collective
aspiration and then incorporating these socially dead persons into the masters world. As a work of historical
sociology concerned primarily with the comparative analysis of institutions, the book illuminated the dynamics of a
process whereby the desocialized new slave was subsumed within slave society.5 Slavery and Social Death was

social
death has become a handy general definition of slavery, for many
historians and non-historians alike. But it is often forgotten that the
concept of social death is a distillation from Pattersons
breathtaking surveya theoretical abstraction that is meant not to
describe the lived experiences of the enslaved so much as to reduce
them to a least common denominator that could reveal the essence of slavery in an idealtype slave, shorn of meaningful heritage.6 As a concept, it is what Frederick Cooper has called
an agentless abstraction that provides a neat cultural logic but
ultimately does little to illuminate the social and political experience
of enslavement and the struggles that produce historic
transformations.7 Indeed, it is difficult to use such a distillation to
explain the actual behavior of slaves, and yet in much of the scholarship that followed in
widely reviewed and lavishly praised for its erudition and conceptual rigor. As a result of its success,

the wake of Slavery and Social Death, Pattersons abstract distillates have been used to explain the existential
condition of the enslaved. Having emerged from the discipline of sociology, social death fit comfortably within a
scholarly tradition that had generally been more alert to deviations in pat- terns of black life from prevailing social
norms than to the worldviews, strategies, and social tactics of people in black communities. Together with
Pattersons work on the distortions wrought by slavery on black families,

social death reflected

sociologys abiding concern with social pathology; the


pathological condition of twentieth-century black life could be
seen as an outcome of the damage that black people had sufered
during slavery. University of Chicago professor Robert Park, the grand-p`ere of the social pathologists, set
the terms in 1919: the Negro, when he landed in the United States, left behind almost everything but his dark

Pattersons distillation also conformed to


the nomothetic imperative of social science, which has traditionally
aimed to discover universal laws of operation that would be true
regardless of time and place, making the synchronic study of social
phenomena more tempting than more descriptive studies of
historical transformation. Slavery and Social Death took shape during a period when largely
complexion and his tropical temperament.8

synchronic studies of antebellum slavery in the United States domi- nated the scholarship on human bondage, and
Pattersons expansive view was meant to situate U.S. slavery in a broad context rather than to discuss changes as

one might see social death as an


obsolete product of its time and tradition, an academic artifact with
limited purchase for contemporary scholarship, were it not for the concepts
the in- stitution developed through time. Thus

reemergence in some im- portant new studies of slavery.9

B) Empowers whiteness by assuming the Master is OUTSIDE


death
Peterson 7 (Christopher, Lecturer @ University of Western Sidney, Kindred Specters: Death, Mourning, and American
Affinity, pgs. 12-14)

redoubled ghostliness situates racial and sexual minorities in intimate


contact with death. This heightened proximity to mortality is not only social, moreover, but
material. As Karla Holloway observes in Passed On: African-American Mourning Stories, black Americans
historically have had a "particular vulnerability to an untimely death," from lynching
to suicides, from police violence to disease." Echoing Holloway, Abdul JanMohamed argues that African
What I am calling

Americans are "death-bound-subject[s] ... formed, from infancy on, by the imminent and ubiquitous threat of

slaves, and
by extension, "emancipated" black Americans, live under a constantly commuted
death sentence. Drawing from Heidegger's account of death in Being and Time, JanMohamed notes that, "if
death." Tracing the emergence of this subject in Richard Wright's fiction, JanMohamed argues that

natural death marks the termination of life and, thereby, retroactively defines the entirety of life, then this is even
more so the case for the slave because he faces the imminent presence of death on a mundane basis" (284). Jan

Heidegger's account of death does not provide a detailed


account of death's unequal social and historical distribution. Yet, in "correcting" this elision,
JanMohamed reduces death to its political deployment . He writes: The existential
description of death tends to be radically agnostic about the source or agency of death
.... For the slave, death is not an eventuality that somehow "comes" or "arrives" in the natural
course of events ... but rather something deliberately brought and imposed on him by another, by
the master. (15) The problem with this formulation, however, is that it figures death as
originally exterior to the slave, coming to inhabit him only via the master's
monopolistic violence. As Bauman astutely observes with regard to the modern interdiction of mortality,
"we do not hear of people dying of mortality. They die only of individual causes, they
die because there was an individual cause (138, his emphasis). Hence, we ought to say that
the slave's availability to death is first conditioned by his "having" a body, which
means that death is both what "comes" or "arrives" and is what the master wields as a
form of coercive control." If finitude were "always embodied in the agency of the
Mohamed is certainly right that

master," then death would name a condition unique to the slave as such (294). Indeed,
by insisting on a radical disjunction between the death that haunts all life and the
historical particularity of the immanent death to which African Americans are
uniquely bound, JanMohamed reinscribes the exceptionalist logic through which the
master evades death by projecting it onto the slave. In short, JanMohamed's analysis
overparticularizes death, thereby reproducing the "state of exception" that he seeks to
avoid. According to this logic, the master presides over the slave's life and death all the
while exempting himself from the death that he deploys." While JanMohamed contends that
the slave, unlike the master, "has always already been condemned to death ill the present," this presumes that the
master's ontology is not also always already put into question by the spectrality that disturbs each and every
present (282). Death is not a "final punctuation mark that retroactively defines" the "syntax" of one's life (298). On

death stretches along the syntax of each and every life according to
incommensurate social and political grammars. To speak of the redoubled
ghostliness of racial and sexual minorities, then, is not to subsume the particularity of
social death under a universal being-toward-death that effaces political and social
distinctions. Unlike what has often been said of death, spectrality is not the great equalizer.
However, one 'cannot fully separate the particularity of social death from the
generality of each subject's being-toward-death , as if finitude were reducible to its
political distribution, or for that matter, to its external imposition. This does not mean that we
should turn our attention away from the particular political and material losses
exacted by the history of racism and heterosexism in America. Indeed, the readings of literary
the contrary,

texts by Chesnutt, Morrison, and Faulkner offered in subsequent chapters bear witness to this violence while
working to rethink the law's erasure of minority kinship in relation to the absence that founds all social relations.
Before turning to those literary readings, however, the remainder of this chapter aims to elaborate further how
kinship is implicated in a dialectical negation that "precedes" any legal effacement of particular kinship relations.

1AR Cede the political


Extend our cede the political arg that says the Kritik's
leftist withdrawal from political action within the state
leaves political power to those that would enact the
violences of the kritiks the most. It turns all of their alt
solvency and is a net benefit to the perm. The perm's
combination of the kritik's mindset and political action
prevents cession of political power to right wing elites.

AT: Wilderson
Wilderson is overly reductive---he has no way to explain
historical resistance to anti-blackness because his theory
pigeon holes all oppression into the non-falsifiable register of
psychoanalysis
Sar Maty B 11, prof of film at Portsmouth University, The US Decentred,
http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/csrj/article/view/2304/2474
As we shall see below, blacks in the US cannot and do not have ontology, or so Wilderson argues, denying with the same breath the workability of analogy
as a method, because analogy can only be a ruse. Thus, what he calls the ruse of analogy grants those who fall for it, for example, Black film theorists
or Black academics, an opportunity to reflect on (black) cinema only after some form of structural alteration. (38) Analogy does seem tricky if one follows
Wildersons line of thought, that is, the Holocaust/Jews and slavery/Africans. Jews entered and came out of Auschwitz as Jews whereas Africans emerged
from the slave ships as Blacks.2 Two types of holocaust: the first Human, the second Human and metaphysical, something which leads to Wilderson

for Wilderson,
blacks are socially and ontologically dead in the sense that the black body has been violently turned into flesh, ripped
saying that the Jews have the Dead ... among them; the Dead have the Black among them. (38) It bears reiterating that

apart literally and imaginatively, that it is a body vulnerably open, an object made available (fungible) for any subject and not in the world or civil

differences between black and white


ethical dilemmas separate them dialectically into incompatible zones. As illustration
society the way white bodies are. (38) Furthermore, Wilderson argues that

Wilderson reflects on black women suffering in US prisons in the 1970s and then juxtaposes the suffering with white womens concurrent public
preoccupations in civil society. For example, the violence and neglect underwent by Safya Bukhari Alston3 in solitary confinement at the Virginia
Correctional Center for Women is linked to the similar plight of another black woman, Dorothy, in Haile Gerimas Bush Mama (1977) before Wilderson
questions what both situations mean in relation to images of [w]hite women burning bras in Harvard Square ... marching in ... Manhattan campaigning for
equal rights. (135) Wildersons answer is that the images of female black pain and white activism are irreconcilable precisely because they cannot be read

he does not develop this point,


preferring instead to examine suffering through a libidinal economy (131) leading,
predictably, to the conclusion that white radicalism, white political cinema and white
supremacy are one and the same thing. Most unfortunate though inevitable is the reason Wilderson
gives to justify this: a socalled antiBlackness that, [wilderson quote begins] as opposed to white apathy, is necessary to White
against one another without such an exercise appearing intellectually sloppy. However,

political radicalism and to White political cinema because it sutures affective, emotional, and even ethical solidarity between the ideological polar
extremes of Whiteness. This necessary antiBlackness erects a structural prohibition that one sees in White political discourse and in White political
cinema. (131) [wilderson quote ends] undamentally, the first three chapters of Red, White and Black are concerned with what it takes to think blackness
and agency together ethically, or to permit ourselves intellectual mindful reflections upon the homicidal ontology of chattel slavery. Wilderson posits ways
through which the dead (blacks) reflect on how the living can be put out of the picture. (143) There seems to be no let off or way out for blacks (The
Slave) in Wildersons logic, an energetic and rigorous, if unforgiving and sustained, treadmill of damning analysis to which Indians (The Savage/The

yet Wildersons highlighting is problematic because it


overlooks the Diaspora or African Diaspora, a key component in Yearwoods thesis that, crucially, neither
navelgazes (that is, at the US or black America) nor pretends to properly engage with
black film. Furthermore, Wilderson separates the different waves of black film theory and approaches them, only, in terms of how a most recent
Red) will also be subjected, first through Savage film analysis. <cont> And

one might challenge its precedent. Again, his approach is problematic because it does not mention or emphasise the interconnectivity of/in black film
theory. As a case in point, Wilderson does not link Tommy Lotts mobilisation of Third Cinema for black film theory to Yearwoods idea of African Diaspora.
(64) Additionally, of course, Wilderson seems unaware that Third Cinema itself has been fundamentally questioned since Lotts 1990s theory of black film

ignoring the African Diaspora is that it exposes Wildersons


corpus of films as unable to carry the weight of the transnational argument he attempts
to advance. Here, beyond the UScentricity or social and political specificity of [his] filmography, (95) I am talking about Wildersons choice of
was formulated. Yet another consequence of

films. For example, Antwone Fisher (dir. Denzel Washington, 2002) is attacked unfairly for failing to acknowledge a grid of captivity across spatial
dimensions of the Black body, the Black home, and the Black community (111) while films like Alan and Albert Hughess Menace II Society (1993),
overlooked, do acknowledge the same grid and, additionally, problematise Street Terrorism Enforcement and Prevention Act(STEP) policing. The above
examples expose the fact of Wildersons dubious and questionable conclusions on black film. Red, White and Black is particularly undermined by

Wildersons propensity for exaggeration and blinkeredness. In chapter nine, Savage Negrophobia, he writes
[wilderson quote begins] The philosophical anxiety of Skins is all too aware that through the Middle Passage, African culture became Black style ...
Blackness can be placed and displaced with limitless frequency and across untold territories, by whoever so chooses. Most important, there is nothing real
Black people can do to either check or direct this process ... Anyone can say nigger because anyone can be a nigger. (235)7 [wilderson quote ends]

Black is irredeemable

Similarly, in chapter ten, A Crisis in the Commons, Wilderson addresses the issue of Black time.
, he argues,
because, at no time in history had it been deemed, or deemed through the right historical moment and place. In other words, the black moment and place
are not right because they are the ship hold of the Middle Passage: the most coherent temporality ever deemed as Black time but also the moment of

I also
wonder what Wilderson makes of the countless historians and sociologists works on
slave ships, shipboard insurrections and/during the Middle Passage,8 or of groundbreaking jazz
studies books on crosscultural dialogue like The Other Side of Nowhere (2004). Nowhere has another side, but
no time at all on the map of no place at all. (279) Not only does Pinhos more mature analysis expose this point as preposterous (see below),

once Wilderson theorises blacks as socially and ontologically dead while dismissing
jazz as belonging nowhere and to no one, simply there for the taking, (225) there seems to be no way
back. It is therefore hardly surprising that Wilderson ducks the need to
provide a solution or alternative to both his sustained bashing of blacks and anti Blackness.9 Last but not
least, Red, White and Black ends like a badly plugged announcement of a bad Hollywood films badly planned sequel: How does one deconstruct life? Who
would benefit from such an undertaking? The coffle approaches with its answers in tow. (340)

AT: Fluidity
Our advocacy isnt fluidity---members of privileged groups
should speak out for equity
Tim Wise No Date, Antiracist Essayist, Author and Educator, former adjunct
faculty member at the Smith College School for Social Work, "F.A.Q.s",
www.timwise.org/f-a-q-s/
it makes no sense to think that if I receive privilege, I must therefore be a
hypocrite for also criticizing the privileges and the system that bestows them. By that logic,
members of dominant groups should never speak out on behalf of equity.
They should just passively accept or maybe even actively pursue their advantages, and
the maintenance of the system that bestows those advantages, so as to seem consistent. Or
perhaps we should silently oppose the system from which we benefit, but do nothing openly
to oppose it, for fear that doing so might draw attention to ourselves . But to do either of
those things passively accept or just silently oppose white supremacy would seem
like an abdication of all moral agency, not to mention strategic wisdom. Although there
may be an inherent tension between fighting white privilege and receiving it as I do, for instance, by
often being taken more seriously than people of color when they offer the same types of arguments the
alternative (to not speak out) would only further the deafening white
silence on these issues, and allow other whites to believe that the only people
who oppose racism and white supremacy are people of color. This belief, directly or indirectly,
contributes to white ambivalence and white racism, by seeming to vest whites with a
personal stake in the maintenance of the system , rather than getting them to think how we would
all be better off were that system to fall. Furthermore, to remain silent so as to defer to the voices of
people of color, perpetuates the imbalance where by people of color are responsible for
doing all the heavy lifting against white supremacy. How is that an example of solidarity or
allyship? Certainly it cannot help the antiracist struggle to say, in effect, No really, you
do all the work, and Ill just watch, thanks . Because, ya know, I wouldnt want to draw attention to
myself! Although whites who challenge racism need to be as accountable as possible to
But

people of color in the way we do the work (see the Appreciation and Accountability Statement, here, for examples
of how I try to do that, as well as the newly published Code of Ethics for Anti-Racist White Allies, which I helped

the argument that somehow white folks shouldnt engage


in that work in any real way (or at least not publicly) makes very little sense ethically,
and is absurd from a strategic perspective.
develop, for additional information),

AT: Violent Revolution


Violent resistance is intrinsically connected to violent
masculinity and patriarchy. The move towards violence
ensures resistance failure and subjugation of those seen as
weak
Bartkowski 13, Senior Director at the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict
(Maciej, Recovering Nonviolent History: Civil Resistance in Liberation Struggles, pg. 339)
Changing entrenched views about the effectiveness of armed resistance
is particularly hard as they are usually rooted in a warrior psychology that is shaped by
violent masculinity and patriarchy. Strugglesfor independence typically have privileged male
leadership. As a consequence, conspiracies of belligerent men plotting in small, secretive
circles in an atmosphere that congratulates violent bravery and rewards machismo, leave
little room for recognizing the importance of nonviolent alternatives or the contributions of
women or non-fighting-age young men to the struggle. In fact, the discourse of hegemonic
victors tends to conform to a masculinist construct that, as Jean Bethke Elshtain maintains, from
antiquity though to the present has divided society into just warriors (male fighters and
protectors) and beautiful souls (female victims and noncombatants). The circle of just
warriors is also limited as it would normally exclude men who wanted to play other roles
(i.e., gays) or their virility did not conform to the prevailing warrior achetype.
Furthermore, teaching history, including the rise of nations, formation of state institutions, conduct of state politics,
and development and implementation of public policies, shapes a nations commemorative landscape and
punctuates it with stories of military battles, patriotic risings, wars and violent defeats all dominated by men, be
they soldiers, scholars, politicians, or other elite actors. This has inhibited people from remembering,

acknowledging, and understanding the presence and efficacy of civil resistance, including
the central place of women engaged in writing and distributing petitions; organizing and leading
demonstrations and protests; setting up and running autonomous associations and educational institutions; and
supporting and participating in social and economic boycotts, strikes and sit-ins. Masculinity and Civil Resistance.
While armed struggle and violent masculinity are almostsymbiotically joined in the
historical imagination, the question of systemic male domination in civil resistance is more complex and
ambiguous. Foreign occupation and colonization has frequently been based on economic exploitation and has often
involved cultural genocide or extreme forms of coercion such as slavery, forced migration, resettlement, and
conscription. Often a systematic part of foreign domination has been sexual exploitation of women and (as
mentioned in Chapter 7 on Egypt) humiliation of indigenous men. In conditions where a foreign colonizers racist
stereotypes affected both a symbolic and real emasculation, the oppressed population particularly its men often
saw regaining manhood as a basic element of independence equivalent to self-respect or dignity. Becoming men
is thus a common theme to be found in both armed and nonviolence anticolonial stuggles, as indeed in other
struggles against other kinds of oppression.

*2AC Sousveillance K
1. Framework the af gets to weigh the enactment of the plan
against a competitive alternative. Thats best:
A) Fairness allowing the neg to change the focus of the
debate moots the 1AC
B) Education forces the debate to be about plan
implementation instead of representations
-No link The plan isnt nearly sufficient to trigger a link. There
is still a thousand diferent types of state surveillance after
passage of the plan. We dont defend surveillance good or bad
aside from agents provocateurs (only for this k), which means
that there are no spillover fx regarding state surveillance from
our plan.

-No alt solvency - Kevin carter was an example of a


sousveillance activist that captured violent instances of the
states actions. People often feel they can persuade someone
with an image. For example the Tiananmen square
photograph, or the burning Vietnam man. A widely comparable
example of when sousveillance failed is when carter entered a
clearing where he came upon a naked 9 year old girl in the
desert dying with a vulture eagerly towering over her. He took
a picture and it won the Pulitzer prize, and became one of the
most famous pics in the world. He ended up committing
suicide because of the haunting thought that he did nothing to
actually help the girl, and the world criticized him because he
didnt actually help the girl. Kevin carter is the vulture in this
instance. With all this in mind look back to the tianamen
square photograph where it just shows a single man with no
support, with his face planted into the barrel of a tank. The
photographer was of to the side taking a picture of the poor
man, and not actually taking any material action. This is the
other problem with sousveillance, it doesnt take any true form
of resistance seeing as these world famous pictures truly
amounted to no significant change. Also video evidence of
police brutality hardly changes anything, and doesnt separate
us from the states surveillance which means minority groups
are still oppressed by disciplinary power.
No alt solvency - Counter Surveillance does not remove
individuals from the gaze of the state and ultimately expands
state power.
Monahan 2006 (Torin, Prof. @ UNC Chapel Hill, Counter Surveillance as Political
Intervention? Social Semiotics 16:4)

While each of the four counter-surveillance interventions covered so


far seeks to raise public awareness and to mobilize for social change, none of them
are completely successful at moving their critique from the individual to the
institutional plane. The SCP come closest to doing this, but so far

their plays remain too isolated and discrete to efect long-term


change. This deficiency may be in part because activists construct surveillance
problems in individualized and abstracted terms in order to make them somewhat
tractable and receptive to intervention. The challenge lies in ratcheting-up the unit
of analysis to the institutional level so that lasting change can be effected. The

desired outcomes might take the form of better regulation and


oversight of surveillance and/or meaningful democratic
participation in the process of setting surveillance policies, for
instance. In the long run, as the next section will argue, the
oppositional framing of surveillance versus counter-surveillance may be counterproductive for achieving these goals.

Counter surveillance assumes equal economic and political


footing that is inaccessible to the poor turns their method
Monahan 6 (Torin, Professor of Communication Studies at The University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill, SOCIAL SEMIOTICS VOLUME 16 NUMBER 4 (DECEMBER
2006), p 11, PDF)

Manns rather unforgiving denouncement of individuals working in stores,


however, reveals certain assumptions about the problems of modern surveillance .
First, by criticizing employees as being puppets who blindly accept their
companies explanations for surveillance and comply with company policies, Mann
implies that all individuals are rational actors with equal social and economic
footing. Thus, if low-income employees elect not to fight the system like he does,
then they must be either ignorant or weak-willed, or both. Second, by calling
store clerks and security guards representatives of totalitarian surveillance regimes,
Mann conflates individuals with the institutions of which they are a part, effectively
sidestepping the important but more difficult problem of changing institutional
relations, structures, or logics. Both these assumptions lead to the conclusion that
one can contend with the problem of rampant surveillance by intervening on the
level of the individual and by educating people about their complicity with the
systems. Unfortunately, the fact that people have very real dependencies upon
their jobs or that vast asymmetrical power differentials separate workers from the
systems they work within (and perhaps from the activists as well) become
unimportant issues once the critique of surveillance is abstracted and individualized
in this way.

Perm do both - Combining legal reform and critical surveillance


studies is necessary to make meaningful political change.
Cohen 15 [Julie, professor at Georgetown University. Studying Law Studying
Surveillance, Surveillance and Society. Vol. 13 Is. 1]Relative to legal scholarship,
work in Surveillance Studies is more likely to build from a solid foundation in
contemporary social theory. Even so, such work often reflects both an insufficient
grasp of the complexity of the legal system in action and lack of interest in the ways
that legal and regulatory actors understand, conduct, and contest surveillance. By
this I dont mean to suggest that Surveillance Studies scholars need law degrees,
but only to point out what ought to be obvious but often isnt: legal processes are
social processes, too, and in overlooking these processes, Surveillance Studies
scholars also engage in a form of black-boxing that treats law as monolithic and
surveillance and government as interchangeable. Legal actors engage in a variety
of discursive and normative strategies by which institutions and resources are
mobilized around surveillance, and understanding those strategies is essential to
the development of an archaeology of surveillance practices. Work in Surveillance
Studies also favors a type of theoretical jargon that can seem impenetrable and,
more importantly, unrewarding to those in law and policy communities. As Ive
written elsewhere (Cohen 2012a: 29), [t]oo many such works find power
everywhere and hope nowhere, and seem to offer well-meaning policy makers little
more than a prescription for despair. Returning to the topics already discussed, let
us consider some ways in which Surveillance Studies might benefit from dialogue
with law. Let us return first to the problem of digitally-enhanced surveillance by law
enforcementthe problem of the high-resolution mosaic. As discussed in the
section above, works by Surveillance Studies scholars exploring issues of mobility
and control offer profound insights into the ways in which continual observation
shapes spaces and subjectivitiesthe precise questions about which, as we have
already seen, judges and legal scholars alike are skeptical. Such works reveal the
extent to which pervasive surveillance of public spaces is emerging as a new and
powerful mode of ordering the public and social life of civil society.
They offer rich food for thoughtbut not for

action. Networked surveillance is increasingly a fact of contemporary public life, and totalizing theories about its power dont take us very far toward gaining regulatory traction on it. That enterprise is, moreover, essential even if it
entails an inevitable quantum of self-delusion. Acknowledgment of pervasive social shaping by networked surveillance need not preclude legal protection for socially-shaped subjects, but that project requires attention to detail. To
put the point a different way, the networked democratic society and the totalitarian state may be points on a continuum rather than binary opposites, but the fact that the continuum exists is still worth something. If so, one needs
tools for assessment and differentiation that Surveillance Studies does not seem to provide. As an example of this sort of approach within legal scholarship, consider a recent article by legal scholars Danielle Citron and David Gray
(2013), which proposes that courts and legislators undertake what they term a technology-centered approach to regulating surveillance. They would have courts and legislators ask whether particular technologies facilitate total
surveillance and, if so, act to put in place comprehensive procedures for approving and overseeing their use. From a Surveillance Studies perspective, this approach lacks theoretical purity because its technology-specific focus
appears to ignore the fact that total surveillance also can emerge via the fusion of data streams originating from various sources. But the proposal is pragmatic; it does not so much ignore that risk as bracket it while pursuing the
narrower goal of gaining a regulatory foothold within the data streams. And because it focuses on the data streams themselves, it is administrable in a way that schemes based on linear timelines and artificial distinctions between
different types of surveillance are not. One can envision both courts and legislatures implementing the Citron and Gray proposal in a way that enables far better oversight of what law enforcement is doing.

2AC Capitalism K
1. Framework the af gets to weigh the enactment of the plan
against a competitive alternative. Thats best:
A) Fairness allowing the neg to change the focus of the
debate moots the 1AC
B) Education forces the debate to be about plan
implementation instead of representations
C) Inevitability of the state creates an ethical responsibility to STRIVE
toward making it ethical solvency isnt a question

Simmons 99

(William Paul, Prof @ U of Arizona, Formerly ASU and Bethany College, The Third:
Levinas Theoretical Move from An-Archical Ethics to the Realm of Justice and Politics, Philosophy &
Social Criticism, 25(6), p. 83-104, http://theology.co.kr/wwwb/data/levinas/1-levinas.pdf)//LA

We should also say that all those who attack us with such venom have no right to do so, along with this feeling of
unbounded responsibility, there is certainly a place for defence, for it is not always a question of me but of those

Id call such a defence a politics, but a politics thats


ethically necessary. Alongside ethics, there is a place for politics.55 Levinas argues
for a place for both ethics and politics, or, to employ his metaphor, a place for both the Jewish
close to me, who are also my neighbors.

tradition of ethics and responsibility and, along with it, the Greek tradition of language, justice and politics. This
section will analyze the mutual necessity of both ethics and politics. According to Levinas, ethics and politics can

Neither ethics nor


politics should be taken to their extremes; each must be moderated by the other. I
both be needed only if there is separation, that is, if each has its own justification.

think theres a direct contradiction between ethics and politics, if both these demands are taken to the extreme.

Ethics must temper the political because politics unbounded leads to tyranny ,
absolute power of the strongest. Politics ignores the individuality of each citizen,
treating each as a cipher, a member of a species. Further, without a norm outside of the scope of
the said, there is no standard to judge political regimes. The call for a standard by which to judge regimes is what
Levinas means by a return to Platonism. Plato, in the Republic, had used the good beyond being as his standard. A
return to Platonism would be necessary to restore the independence of ethics in relation to history and trace a
limit to the comprehension of the real by history. Levinas finds a standard in the ethical relationship with the Other.

If the
moral-political order totally relinquishes its ethical foundation, it must accept all
forms of society, including the fascist or totalitarian, for it can no longer evaluate or
discriminate between them. The state is usually better than anarchy but not always. In
some instances, fascism or totalitarianism, for example the political order of the
state may have to be challenged in the name of our ethical responsibility to the
other. This is why ethical philosophy must remain the first philosophy At the same time, ethics needs
politics. To reach those others who are far away, ethics must be transfixed into language, justice and politics. As
prima philosophia, ethics cannot itself legislate for society or produce rules of conduct
whereby society might be revolutionized or transformed. Although this
universalization distances the ego from the Other, it must be done to reach the
others. We must, out of respect for the categorical imperative or the others right as expressed by his face, unThe norm that must continue to inspire and direct the moral order is the ethical norm of the interhuman.

face human beings, sternly reducing each ones uniqueness to his individuality in the unity of the genre, and let

Thus we need laws, and yes courts of law, institutions and the state
to render justice Further, politics is necessary because there are those who will
refuse to heed the new law, Thou shall not kill. Levinas is well aware that this commandment is not an
universality rule.

ontological impossibility. Many will take Cains position and shun the responsibility for the Other. Thus, politics is
necessary to prohibit murder, in all its forms. A place had to be foreseen and kept warm for all eternity for Hitler

Both ethics and politics have their own justification. The justification
for ethics is found in the face-to-face relationship with the Other. The justification for
politics is to restrain those who follow Cains position and ignore the responsibility
for the Other. Politics does not subsume ethics, but rather it serves ethics. Politics is
necessary but it must be continually checked by ethics. Levinas calls for a state that
is as ethical as possible, one which is perpetually becoming more just. Levinas calls for
and his followers.61

the liberal state. The Levinasian state According to Levinas, the move from the Other to the Third is the begin- ning
of all violence. In the realm of the said, the ego must necessarily weigh others in the name of justice, but this
process reduces the Other to a cipher. Strangely enough, justice is un-ethical. When justice is uni- versalized into
laws and institutions it moves yet another step away from the an-archical responsibility for the Other. The
necessary universaliza- tion of ethical responsibility into the state is inherently un-ethical and violent. In the state,
the ego is unable to respond directly to the face of the Other. Further, the institutions of the state treat the Other as
an inter- changeable cog in its machinery, thereby denying the transcendent element in man. Even when the state
functions perfectly it is, by its very nature, opposed to ethics. For me, the negative element, the element of violence
in the state, in the hierarchy, appears even when the hierarchy functions perfectly, when every- one submits to
universal ideas. There are cruelties which are terrible because they proceed from the necessity of the reasonable

Vigilance
against violence in the state is essential. Institutions need to be constantly checked
by the ethical relationship with the Other. In order for everything to run along smoothly and freely,
it is absolutely necessary to affirm the infinite responsibility of each, for each , before
order. There are, if you like, the tears that a civil servant cannot see: the tears of the Other.62

each... As I see it, subjective protest is not received favourably on the pretext that its egoism is sacred, but because
the I alone can perceive the secret tears of the Other which are caused by the functioning albeit reasonable of

The state must be constantly reminded of its inherent violence. Levinas finds
just such a self-critical state in the modern liberal state. The liberal state always asks itself whether
its own justice really is justice. What qualities does the liberal state possess that make it self-critical?
the hierarchy.

First, there is the freedom of the press, the freedom to criticize the government, to speak out against injustice. You
know the prophets of the bible; they come and say to the king that his method of dispensing justice is wrong. The
prophet doesnt do this in a clandestine way: he comes before the king and he tells him. In the liberal state, its the

the leader is not above the


people, but is chosen from among the people. A ruler who is in an ethical
relationship, sees humanity through the Others eyes. Against the Platonic formulation that the
press, the poets, the writers who fulfill this role. Second, in the liberal state,

best ruler is the one who is best in control of himself, Levinas argues that the best ruler is the one who is in an
ethical relationship with the Other. The State, in accordance with its pure essence, is possible only if the divine

the most important


component of the liberal state is its call for a permanent revolution. The Levinasian
liberal state is always trying to improve itself, trying to be more just . It is a rebellion that
word enters into it; the prince is educated in this knowledge. However, for Levinas,

begins where the other society is satisfied to leave off, a rebellion against injustice that begins once order begins.

Although no state can be purely ethical, the liberal state at least strives for ethics.
Such a state is the desideratum if politics cannot be ethical. There is no politics for
accomplishing the moral, but there are certainly some politics which are further
from it or closer to it. For example, Ive mentioned Stalinism to you. Ive told you that justice is always a
justice which desires a better justice. This is the way that I will characterize the liberal state. The liberal state is a

Concretely, the liberal


state has always admitted alongside the written law human rights as a parallel
institution. It continues to preach that within its justice there are always improvements to be made in human
rights. Human rights are the reminder that there is no justice yet. And consequently, I
believe that it is absolutely obvious that the liberal state is more moral than the
fascist state, and closer to the morally ideal state.69 Since it is impossible to
escape the State, 70 Levinas insists that the state be made as ethical as possible.
The world of institutions and justice must be held in check by the an-archical
responsibility for the Other. Levinas calls for both an-archy and justice. Alongside the an-archical
state which holds justice as the absolutely desirable end and hence as a perfection.

there is a place for the realm of the said, which includes ontology,
politics. Levinas thought is not apolitical as many have charged. His harsh critiques of the
political realm refer to a politics unchecked by ethics . For example, in Totality and Infinity,
Levinas sees politics as antithetical to an ethics based on the Other. The art of
foreseeing war and winning it by every means politics is henceforth enjoined as
the very exercise of reason. Politics is opposed to morality, as philosophy to navet. 71 Politics
unrestrained, by necessity, totalizes the Other by reducing him or her to abstract
categories. Levinas will call for a politics that is founded on ethics and not on
ontology. The state must be answerable to the an-archical relationship with the
Other, it must strive to maintain the exteriority of the Other . Levinasian heteronomic political
responsibility for the Other
justice and

thought oscillates between the saying and the said, an-archy and justice, ethics and politics. The liberal state is the
concrete manifestation of this oscillation. Levinas calls for a balance between the Greek and the Judaic traditions.

Neither tradition should dominate. The fundamental contradiction of our situation (and perhaps of our
condition) . . . that both the hierarchy taught by Athens and the abstract and slightly anarchical ethical

Each of
these principles, left to itself, only hastens the contrary of what it wants to secure.
individualism taught by Jerusalem are simultaneously necessary in order to suppress the violence.0020

3.Case outweighs and turns the kritik (Racialized violence


through state surveillance begins with agent provocateurs,
simply because they are stealing peoples lives to maintain
securitization of threats. This is the life blood of the
otherization of muslims, and browns around the world. This
false threat construction needs to be exposed or else the state
will persist in its totalitarian ways)
7. No link They say we affirm neoliberalism, but that is

the very thing we are indicting, and trying to fiercely


reform Extend our 2nd piece of Kundnani evidence in the
1st advantage that says the modern surveillance apparatus
functions as racialized totalitarianism under the guise of
neoliberalism.
8. No root cause and attempts to transition only reify
proximate causes
Larrivee 10 PF ECONOMICS AT MOUNT ST MARYS UNIVERSITY MASTERS
FROM THE HARVARD KENNEDY SCHOOL AND PHD IN ECONOMICS FROM WISCONSIN,
10 [JOHN, A FRAMEWORK FOR THE MORAL ANALYSIS OF MARKETS, 10/1,
http://www.teacheconomicfreedom.org/files/larrivee-paper-1.pdf]
The Second Focal Point: Moral, Social, and Cultural Issues of Capitalism Logical errors abound in critical
commentary on capitalism. Some critics observe a problem and conclude: I see X in our
society. We have a capitalist economy. Therefore capitalism causes X. They draw their conclusion by
looking at a phenomenon as it appears only in one system. Others merely follow a host of popular theories according to which
capitalism is particularly bad. 6 The

solution to such flawed reasoning is to be comprehensive, to look


at the good and bad, in market and non-market systems. Thus the following section considers a number of issuesgreed,
selfishness and human relationships, honesty and truth, alienation and work satisfaction, moral decay, and religious

participationthat have often been associated with capitalism, but have

also been problematic in other systems

and usually in more extreme form. I conclude with some

evidence for the view that markets foster (at least some)
virtues rather than undermining them. My purpose is not to smear communism or to make the simplistic argument that
capitalism isnt so bad because other systems have problems too. The

critical point is that certain people


thought various social ills resulted from capitalism, and on this basis they took action to
establish alternative economic systems to solve the problems they had identified. That they
failed to solve the problems , and in fact exacerbated them while also creating new problems,
implies that capitalism itself wasnt the cause of the problems in the first place, at least not to the
degree theorized.

9. Perm do the plan and the alt in every other instance


either the alt overcomes the residual link or its insufficient
to overcome the status quo
9 & . Cede the political - Their method cant create

institutional change- the AFF is a DA to the alt and only


the perm solves- AFF is a better strategy
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 284-285)
But as even the Stasi eventually discovered, no system of surveillance can ever produce total knowledge. Indeed,
the greater the amount of information collected, the harder it is to interpret its meaning. The relevant information in
the majority of recent US terrorist attacks was somewhere in the government's systems, but its significance was

what is obscured by the demands for ever


greater surveillance and information processing is that security is best established
through relationships of trust and political empowerment. A society that has
blocked a section of its population from shaping a process of political transformation
is one that has hollowed out its democracy until what's left is an empty,
technocratic consensus in which real politics is disavowed. When radical political
contestation is suffocated, the processes by which societies reinvent themselves
and resolve their social tensions are neutered, and in the absence of a genuinely
emancipatory alternative, the only possible outlet for the impulses generated by
social and economic marginalization is the fake radicalism of armored identity
politics, conspiracy theories, and apocalyptic fantasies.
lost amid a morass of useless data. More significantly,

10. Globalization good the status quo is structurally improving


Goklany 7

(Indur, scholar who has 25 years of experience working and writing on global and national environmental issues. He has published
several peer-reviewed papers and book chapters on an array of issues Author of The Improving State of the World: Why We're Living Longer, Healthier,
More Comfortable Lives on a Cleaner Planet, Mar. 23, http://www.reason.com/news/show/119252.html, twm)

globalization foes are united in their fear that greater population and consumption of energy,
globalizationdegrade
human and environmental well-being. Indeed, the 20th century saw the United States population multiply by four, income
by seven, carbon dioxide emissions by nine, use of materials by 27, and use of chemicals by more than 100. Yet life expectancy
increased from 47 years to 77 years. Onset of major disease such as cancer, heart, and respiratory disease has been
Environmentalists and

materials, and chemicals accompanying economic growth, technological change and free tradethe mainstays of

postponed between eight and eleven years in the past century. Heart disease and cancer rates
have been in rapid decline over the last two decades, and total cancer deaths have actually declined
the last two years, despite increases in population . Among the very young, infant mortality has declined
from 100 deaths per 1,000 births in 1913 to just seven per 1,000 today. These improvements havent been
restricted to the United States. Its a global phenomenon. Worldwide, life expectancy has more than
doubled, from 31 years in 1900 to 67 years today. Indias and Chinas infant mortalities exceeded 190 per 1,000 births in the early 1950s; today
they are 62 and 26, respectively. In the developing world, the proportion of the population suffering from chronic hunger declined from
37 percent to 17 percent between 1970 and 2001 despite a 83 percent increase in population. Globally
average annual incomes in real dollars have tripled since 1950. Consequently, the proportion of the planet's developing-world
population living in absolute poverty has halved since 1981, from 40 percent to 20 percent. Child labor in low income
countries declined from 30 percent to 18 percent between 1960 and 2003. Equally important, the world is
more literate and better educated than ever. People are freer politically, economically, and
socially to pursue their well-being as they see fit. More people choose their own rulers, and
have freedom of expression. They are more likely to live under rule of law, and less likely to be
arbitrarily deprived of life, limb, and property. Social and professional mobility have also never been greater. Its
easier than ever for people across the world to transcend the bonds of caste, place, gender, and other accidents of birth. People today work fewer hours
and have more money and better health to enjoy their leisure time than their ancestors. Mans environmental record is more complex. The

early

stages of development can indeed cause some environmental deterioration as societies pursue
first-order problems affecting human well-being. These include hunger, malnutrition, illiteracy, and lack of education, basic public health services, safe

greater wealth alleviates these problems while


providing basic creature comforts, individuals and societies initially focus on
economic development, often neglecting other aspects of environmental quality. In
time, however, they recognize that environmental deterioration reduces their
quality of life. Accordingly, they put more of their recently acquired wealth and human capital into developing
and implementing cleaner technologies. This brings about an environmental transition via
the twin forces of economic development and technological progress, which begin to
provide solutions to environmental problems instead of creating those problems. All of which is why we today find
that the richest countries are also the cleanest. And while many developing countries have yet to
get past the green ceiling, they are nevertheless ahead of where todays developed countries used to be when they were equally
wealthy. The point of transition from "industrial period" to "environmental conscious" continues to fall. For example, the US introduced
unleaded gasoline only after its GDP per capita exceeded $16,000 . India and China
did the same before they reached $3,000 per capita. This progress is a testament to
the power of globalization and the transfer of ideas and knowledge (that lead is harmful, for example). It's also testament to
the importance of trade in transferring technology from developed to developing countries in this
water, sanitation, mobility, and ready sources of energy. Because

case, the technology needed to remove lead from gasoline. This hints at the answer to the question of why some parts of the world have been left behind
while the rest of the world has thrived. Why have improvements in well-being stalled in areas such as Sub-Saharan Africa and the Arab world? The
proximate cause of improvements in well-being is a cycle of progress composed of the mutually reinforcing forces of economic development and
technological progress. But that cycle itself is propelled by a web of essential institutions, particularly property rights, free markets, and rule of law. Other
important institutions would include science- and technology-based problem-solving founded on skepticism and experimentation; receptiveness to new
technologies and ideas; and freer trade in goods, servicesmost importantly in knowledge and ideas. In short, free and open societies prosper. Isolation,
intolerance, and hostility to the free exchange of knowledge, technology, people, and goods breed stagnation or regression. Despite all of this progress
and good news, then, there is still much unfinished business. Millions of people die from hunger, malnutrition, and preventable disease such as malaria,
tuberculosis, and diarrhea. Over a billion people still live in absolute poverty, defined as less than a dollar per day. A third of the worlds eligible population

Barriers to globalization, economic development, and


technological changesuch as the use of DDT to eradicate malaria, genetic engineering, and biotechnologyare a big
source of the problem. Moreover, the global population will grow 50 percent to 100 percent this century, and per capita consumption of
is still not enrolled in secondary school.

energy and materials will likely increase with wealth. Merely preserving the status quo is not enough. We need to protect the important sustaining
institutions responsible for all of this progress in the developed world, and we need to foster and nurture them in countries that are still developing. Mans

Ensuring
that our incredible progress continues will require not only recognizing
and appreciating the progress itself, but also recognizing and preserving
the important ideas and institutions that caused it, and ensuring that they
endure.
remarkable progress over the last 100 years is unprecedented in human history. Its also one of the more neglected big-picture stories.

10. Marx was super racist, this turns the entire kritik, and
means no alt solvency
Walter Williams, WND Commentator, 2006, MARX'S RACISM,
http://www.wnd.com/2006/06/36692/
Karl Marx is the hero of some labor union leaders and civil-rights organizations, including those who organized the
recent protest against proposed immigration legislation. Its easy to be a Marxist if you havent read his writings.

Most people agree that Marxs predictions about capitalism turned out to be dead
wrong. What most people dont know is that Marx was an out and out racist
and anti-Semite. He didnt think much of Mexicans . Concerning the annexation of California after the
Mexican-American War, Marx wrote: Without violence, nothing is ever accomplished in history. Then he asks, Is
it a misfortune that magnificent California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did
not know what to do with it? Friedrich Engels, Marxs co-author of the Manifesto of the Communist Party, added,
In America, we have witnessed the conquest of Mexico and have rejoiced at it. It is to the interest of its own
development that Mexico will be placed under the tutelage of the United States. Much of Marxs ideas can be
found in a book written by former communist Nathaniel Weyl, titled Karl

Marx, Racist (1979). In a July


Marx wrote, it
is now completely clear to me that he, as is proved by his cranial formation and his
hair, descends from the Negroes from Egypt, assuming that his mother or
grandmother had not interbred with a n[egro]. Now this union of Judaism and
Germanism with a basic Negro substance must produce a peculiar product. The
obtrusiveness of the fellow is also n[egro]-like . Engels shared much of Marxs racial
philosophy. In 1887, Paul Lafargue, who was Marxs son-in-law, was a candidate for a council seat in a Paris
1862 letter to Engels, in reference to his socialist political competitor, Ferdinand Lassalle,

district that contained a zoo. Engels claimed that Paul had one-eighth or one-twelfth n[egro] blood. In an April
1887 letter to Pauls wife, Engels wrote, Being

in his quality as a n[egro], a degree nearer to


the rest of the animal kingdom than the rest of us, he is undoubtedly the most
appropriate representative of that district. Though few claim him as their own, such as leftists
claim Karl Marx, Thomas Carlyle is another unappreciated historical figure. Carlyle is best-known for giving
economics the derogatory name dismal science, an inversion of the phrase gay science, which at the time
(1849) referred to life-enhancing knowledge. Most people have incorrectly learned that the term dismal science
had its origins in reference to Thomas Malthus gloomy predictions that the global population would grow faster
than food supplies, condemning mankind to perpetual poverty and starvation. My George Mason University
colleague, professor Davy Levy, and his co-author, Sandra Peart, tell the true story in their 2001 book, The Secret
History of the Dismal Science: Economics, Religion and Race in the 19th Century. Carlyle first used the term
dismal science in his 1849 pamphlet entitled An Occasional Discourse on the N[egro] Question. He attacked the
ideas of Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill and other free market, limited-government economists for their belief in the
fundamental equality of man and their anti-slavery positions. The fact that economics assumes that people are all
the same and are equally deserving of liberty was offensive to Carlyle and led him to call economics the dismal
science. Carlyle argued that blacks were subhuman, two-legged cattle, who needed the tutelage of whites
wielding the beneficent whip if they were to contribute to the good of society. Carlyle was by no means alone in
denouncing economics for its anti-slavery and pro-equality position. No less a historical figure and a Christmastime
favorite, Charles Dickens, author of A Christmas Carol, shared Carlyles positions on slavery and blacks as

Marx, Engels, Carlyle and Dickens all share one belief prevalent throughout mankinds history down to
today: the belief that some people are endowed with superior intelligence and
wisdom, and theyve been ordained to forcibly impose that wisdom on the masses.
subhuman.

*1AR Capitalism/Neoliberalism Framework


Extend our interpretation we get to weigh the plan. This is net better:

A) Competitive Equity debate is a game and games are no fun if you


dont play by the rules denying us access to the thesis of the af moots
the 1AC
B) Political Activism the state as a construct is inevitable but our
relationship with it is fluid the fact that the state is responsible for bad
things in the past only creates an ethical imperative to work within it. You
should prioritize debates over plan implementation because its the only
lens to evaluate the materiality of our arguments

1AR Capitalism/Neoliberalism Link (ish sketchy)


<CONTEXTUALIZE TO THEIR ARGUMENTS>

Theres no link consumption is institutionalized - demand exists


independent of the af.

Maximizing energy production is human nature


Datschefski 4 (Edwin BioThinking International,
Consumption is Good ? !, January,
http://www.biothinking.com/consume.pdf)
it's natural to use energy, and the more the better. Ecologists like Lotka
(1922) and Odum and Pinkerton (1955) suggested that the biological systems that survive are those
that develop the most power inflow and u se it to best meet their needs for survival .
It seems that

Schneider and Kay (1994) proposed that a better description of these "power laws" would be that biological
systems develop in a manner as to "increase their degradation rate, and that biological growth, ecosystem

As ecosystems
develop or mature they tend to increase their total dissipation , and develop more
complex structures with greater diversity, more cycling, more energy flow and more hierarchical levels. So
ecological theory shows us that a complex adaptive system like the current
industrial system will inherently evolve to maximise throughput of energy
and materials. I'm not disputing the benefits of efficiency, or the limits to growth. But there does seem
to be a lot of (in my view) futile effort directed at encouraging people to consume l ess .
People are natural-born shoppers. I defy anyone reading this to claim that they have deprived
themselves of that hifi, boat, shoes, camera, etc. that they really fancied. You also can't solve
environmental problems by simply using less. There is a fundamental package of food and
goods that a household requires, and while it's possible to make the footprint of that package
smaller, we're still looking at about 7 tonnes of stuff per household per year, which
is about 140 tonnes including embodied energy and mass. You can avoid this shooting up to 10 or
development and evolution represent the development of new dissipative pathways."

15 tonnes of stuff by renting and buying durable products and so on, but even the thriftiest household will still have

The focus for improvement must therefore be on changing


product and process design so that materials flow is more systemic . All products are
a basic consumption requirement.

ultimately disposable. We just need all of them to be designed to go back and become food for another system. So
don't feel guilty about buying the products you have to get. Buy with caution and respect for the materials used.
And divert the energy of your concerns into action -- tell the manufacturer of your new camera / car / bed etc. about
how they can make it better. Most manufacturers think they are doing perfectly OK if they are complying with the
law and have no -one demonstrating outside their head office. Going 100% cyclic solar and safe simply isn't on the
agenda yet. So what if every member of every environment group (that's about 5 to 50% of the population,
depending what country you live in) asked the manufacturers of the myriad of products that they

We link turn the kritik Agents provocateurs is an example of bad


neoliberalism by transitioning away we fix the system

*1AR Capitalism/Neoliberalism Permutation


Reformism solves the link combining criticism with policy is only feasible
political strategy

A) The state is inevitable 2AC Simmons evidence is phenomenal, material


realities mean the only ethical imperative is to WORK WITHIN the state
B) Reformism solves modular resistance can restructure markets thats
Dixon labor unions and trustbusting prove

*1AR Cede the political


Extend our cede the political argument that says the
Kritik's leftist withdrawal from political action within the
state leaves political power to those that would enact the
violences of the kritiks the most. It turns all of their alt
solvency and is a net benefit to the perm. The perm's
combination of the kritik's mindset and political action
prevents cession of political power to right wing elites.

*1AR Capitalism/Neoliberalism Impact Turns


Impact turns are net benefits to the permutation and independent ofense
against the alt capitalism/neoliberalism is net good

A) Improvements only in the most capitalist nations has life expectancy


increased, disease rates are declining, infant mortality is decreasing,
hunger is declining along with child labor and literacy has increased
despite increasing populations. In developing nations where capitalism is
increasing, sufering has substantially decreased and rights and freedoms
have substantially increased. Only increased globalization and capitalism
can continue to solve world problemscriticisms arent based in fact
rather irrational fearsour evidence cites statistics while their
sensationalistic authors hype up their warrants with no basis thats
Golanky
B) Peace economic interdependence is the basis for peace statistics
prove that violence decreases proportionally to growth thats Gat

*2AC Histo-Mat K
1. Framework the af gets to weigh the enactment of the plan
against a competitive alternative. Thats best:
A) Fairness allowing the neg to change the focus of the
debate moots the 1AC
B) Education forces the debate to be about plan
implementation instead of representations
C) Inevitability of the state creates an ethical responsibility to STRIVE
toward making it ethical solvency isnt a question

Simmons 99

(William Paul, Prof @ U of Arizona, Formerly ASU and Bethany College, The Third:
Levinas Theoretical Move from An-Archical Ethics to the Realm of Justice and Politics, Philosophy &
Social Criticism, 25(6), p. 83-104, http://theology.co.kr/wwwb/data/levinas/1-levinas.pdf)//LA

We should also say that all those who attack us with such venom have no right to do so, along with this feeling of
unbounded responsibility, there is certainly a place for defence, for it is not always a question of me but of those

Id call such a defence a politics, but a politics thats


ethically necessary. Alongside ethics, there is a place for politics.55 Levinas argues
for a place for both ethics and politics, or, to employ his metaphor, a place for both the Jewish
close to me, who are also my neighbors.

tradition of ethics and responsibility and, along with it, the Greek tradition of language, justice and politics. This
section will analyze the mutual necessity of both ethics and politics. According to Levinas, ethics and politics can

Neither ethics nor


politics should be taken to their extremes; each must be moderated by the other. I
both be needed only if there is separation, that is, if each has its own justification.

think theres a direct contradiction between ethics and politics, if both these demands are taken to the extreme.

Ethics must temper the political because politics unbounded leads to tyranny ,
absolute power of the strongest. Politics ignores the individuality of each citizen,
treating each as a cipher, a member of a species. Further, without a norm outside of the scope of
the said, there is no standard to judge political regimes. The call for a standard by which to judge regimes is what
Levinas means by a return to Platonism. Plato, in the Republic, had used the good beyond being as his standard. A
return to Platonism would be necessary to restore the independence of ethics in relation to history and trace a
limit to the comprehension of the real by history. Levinas finds a standard in the ethical relationship with the Other.

If the
moral-political order totally relinquishes its ethical foundation, it must accept all
forms of society, including the fascist or totalitarian, for it can no longer evaluate or
discriminate between them. The state is usually better than anarchy but not always. In
some instances, fascism or totalitarianism, for example the political order of the
state may have to be challenged in the name of our ethical responsibility to the
other. This is why ethical philosophy must remain the first philosophy At the same time, ethics needs
politics. To reach those others who are far away, ethics must be transfixed into language, justice and politics. As
prima philosophia, ethics cannot itself legislate for society or produce rules of conduct
whereby society might be revolutionized or transformed. Although this
universalization distances the ego from the Other, it must be done to reach the
others. We must, out of respect for the categorical imperative or the others right as expressed by his face, unThe norm that must continue to inspire and direct the moral order is the ethical norm of the interhuman.

face human beings, sternly reducing each ones uniqueness to his individuality in the unity of the genre, and let

Thus we need laws, and yes courts of law, institutions and the state
to render justice Further, politics is necessary because there are those who will
refuse to heed the new law, Thou shall not kill. Levinas is well aware that this commandment is not an
universality rule.

ontological impossibility. Many will take Cains position and shun the responsibility for the Other. Thus, politics is
necessary to prohibit murder, in all its forms. A place had to be foreseen and kept warm for all eternity for Hitler

Both ethics and politics have their own justification. The justification
for ethics is found in the face-to-face relationship with the Other. The justification for
politics is to restrain those who follow Cains position and ignore the responsibility
for the Other. Politics does not subsume ethics, but rather it serves ethics. Politics is
necessary but it must be continually checked by ethics. Levinas calls for a state that
is as ethical as possible, one which is perpetually becoming more just. Levinas calls for
and his followers.61

the liberal state. The Levinasian state According to Levinas, the move from the Other to the Third is the begin- ning
of all violence. In the realm of the said, the ego must necessarily weigh others in the name of justice, but this
process reduces the Other to a cipher. Strangely enough, justice is un-ethical. When justice is uni- versalized into
laws and institutions it moves yet another step away from the an-archical responsibility for the Other. The
necessary universaliza- tion of ethical responsibility into the state is inherently un-ethical and violent. In the state,
the ego is unable to respond directly to the face of the Other. Further, the institutions of the state treat the Other as
an inter- changeable cog in its machinery, thereby denying the transcendent element in man. Even when the state
functions perfectly it is, by its very nature, opposed to ethics. For me, the negative element, the element of violence
in the state, in the hierarchy, appears even when the hierarchy functions perfectly, when every- one submits to
universal ideas. There are cruelties which are terrible because they proceed from the necessity of the reasonable

Vigilance
against violence in the state is essential. Institutions need to be constantly checked
by the ethical relationship with the Other. In order for everything to run along smoothly and freely,
it is absolutely necessary to affirm the infinite responsibility of each, for each , before
order. There are, if you like, the tears that a civil servant cannot see: the tears of the Other.62

each... As I see it, subjective protest is not received favourably on the pretext that its egoism is sacred, but because
the I alone can perceive the secret tears of the Other which are caused by the functioning albeit reasonable of

The state must be constantly reminded of its inherent violence. Levinas finds
just such a self-critical state in the modern liberal state. The liberal state always asks itself whether
its own justice really is justice. What qualities does the liberal state possess that make it self-critical?
the hierarchy.

First, there is the freedom of the press, the freedom to criticize the government, to speak out against injustice. You
know the prophets of the bible; they come and say to the king that his method of dispensing justice is wrong. The
prophet doesnt do this in a clandestine way: he comes before the king and he tells him. In the liberal state, its the

the leader is not above the


people, but is chosen from among the people. A ruler who is in an ethical
relationship, sees humanity through the Others eyes. Against the Platonic formulation that the
press, the poets, the writers who fulfill this role. Second, in the liberal state,

best ruler is the one who is best in control of himself, Levinas argues that the best ruler is the one who is in an
ethical relationship with the Other. The State, in accordance with its pure essence, is possible only if the divine

the most important


component of the liberal state is its call for a permanent revolution. The Levinasian
liberal state is always trying to improve itself, trying to be more just . It is a rebellion that
word enters into it; the prince is educated in this knowledge. However, for Levinas,

begins where the other society is satisfied to leave off, a rebellion against injustice that begins once order begins.

Although no state can be purely ethical, the liberal state at least strives for ethics.
Such a state is the desideratum if politics cannot be ethical. There is no politics for
accomplishing the moral, but there are certainly some politics which are further
from it or closer to it. For example, Ive mentioned Stalinism to you. Ive told you that justice is always a
justice which desires a better justice. This is the way that I will characterize the liberal state. The liberal state is a

Concretely, the liberal


state has always admitted alongside the written law human rights as a parallel
institution. It continues to preach that within its justice there are always improvements to be made in human
rights. Human rights are the reminder that there is no justice yet. And consequently, I
believe that it is absolutely obvious that the liberal state is more moral than the
fascist state, and closer to the morally ideal state.69 Since it is impossible to
escape the State, 70 Levinas insists that the state be made as ethical as possible.
The world of institutions and justice must be held in check by the an-archical
responsibility for the Other. Levinas calls for both an-archy and justice. Alongside the an-archical
state which holds justice as the absolutely desirable end and hence as a perfection.

there is a place for the realm of the said, which includes ontology,
politics. Levinas thought is not apolitical as many have charged. His harsh critiques of the
political realm refer to a politics unchecked by ethics . For example, in Totality and Infinity,
Levinas sees politics as antithetical to an ethics based on the Other. The art of
foreseeing war and winning it by every means politics is henceforth enjoined as
the very exercise of reason. Politics is opposed to morality, as philosophy to navet. 71 Politics
unrestrained, by necessity, totalizes the Other by reducing him or her to abstract
categories. Levinas will call for a politics that is founded on ethics and not on
ontology. The state must be answerable to the an-archical relationship with the
Other, it must strive to maintain the exteriority of the Other . Levinasian heteronomic political
responsibility for the Other
justice and

thought oscillates between the saying and the said, an-archy and justice, ethics and politics. The liberal state is the
concrete manifestation of this oscillation. Levinas calls for a balance between the Greek and the Judaic traditions.

Neither tradition should dominate. The fundamental contradiction of our situation (and perhaps of our
condition) . . . that both the hierarchy taught by Athens and the abstract and slightly anarchical ethical

Each of
these principles, left to itself, only hastens the contrary of what it wants to secure.
individualism taught by Jerusalem are simultaneously necessary in order to suppress the violence.0020

3. Case outweighs and turns the kritik (Racialized violence


through state surveillance begins with agent provocateurs,
simply because they are stealing peoples lives to maintain
securitization of threats. This is the life blood of the
otherization of muslims, and browns around the world. This
false threat construction needs to be exposed or else the state
will persist in its totalitarian ways)
4. Permutation do the plan and the alt
5. Reformism can challenge the state
Chris Dixon 5, Activist and founding member of Direct Action Network, Reflections
on Privilege,
Reformism, and Activism, www.geocities.com/kk_abacus/ioaa/dixon2.html,
accessed 3-6-05
Evidently sasha doesn't grasp my argument in "Finding Hope." Or else he disagrees. It's
difficult to tell because, while skillfully sidestepping engagement with my discussion of
privilege, he also sidesteps the main thrust of my essay: rethinking radicalism, particularly
in the context of privilege. As I wrote, "we have to move beyond the myopic view--often
endemic among anarchists--that the most 'important' activism only or mainly happens in
the streets, enmeshed in police confrontations." In other words, spheres of traditional
'radical action' are limited and limiting. And though I don't believe that sasha fundamentally
disagrees with this criticism, he refuses to accept its broader consequences. For instance,
where I question the bounds of 'radicalism' with examples of struggles like opposing prison
construction and establishing community and cultural centers, he conclusively points to "a
set of demands and goals of which none suggest any serious critique of capitalism and the
state in their totality." There is much more to the "totality" that we all confront than
capitalism and the state. That's unequivocal. Furthermore, a "totality" has an undeniable
physical presence, and people do in fact contest and resist it every day through a variety of
struggles using a variety of means--not all containing the "serious critique" necessary to
satisfy sasha. J. Kellstadt nicely observes this, noting that an 'activist' perspective (not
unlike sasha's)
overlooks a whole layer of more "everyday" forms of resistance - from

slacking off, absenteeism, and sabotage, to shopfloor "counter-planning" and other forms of
autonomous and "unofficial" organizing - which conventional activists and leftists (including
most anarchists) have a bad track record of acknowledging. And this still leaves out all of
those modes of struggle which take place beyond the shopfloor, such as various forms of
cultural and sexual revolution. Unfortunately, sasha doesn't deign to discuss these all-toopedestrian realities, many of which potentially embrace the very anarchist ethics he touts.
They certainly have bearing on the lives of many folks and speak to a breadth of social
struggle, but they apparently don't constitute a sufficient "critique." Even if sasha were to
acknowledge their importance, my sense is that he would erect a rationalized theoretical
division between Kellstadt's "everyday forms of resistance" and 'reformism.' No doubt, he
would use a rhetorical sleight of hand on par with the "simple fact of language that those
who want to reform the present system are called reformists." A seemingly irrefutable, selfapparent statement, this actually glosses over legitimate questions: Are 'reformists' so easily
discernable and cleanly categorized? Are all 'reforms' equal? Can they be part of a longterm revolutionary strategy? So let's talk plainly about reformism. No matter how much
some might wish otherwise, it simply isn't a cut-and-dry issue. And while it actually
deserves a book-length examination, here I'll sketch some general considerations.
Principally, I ask, assuming that we share the goal of dismantling systems of power

and restructuring our entire society in nonhierarchical ways, what role does reform
play? Must we eschew it, unconditionally embrace it, or is there another approach? sasha steadfastly represents
one rather limited 'radical' view. To bolster his critique of 'reformism,' for instance, he critically cites one of the
examples in my essay: demanding authentic public oversight of police. "[This] might be a small step for social
change in some general sense," he argues, "but ultimately it is a step backwards as it strengthens the legitimacy of
the police and of imposed decision."

I respect the intent of this critique; it makes sense if one is


in real life, it's both

privileged enough to engage with the police on terms of one's own choosing. Yet

simplistic and insulated. Look at it this way: accepting sasha's argument, are we to wait until the coming
insurrectionary upheaval before enjoying an end to police brutality? More specifically, are African-American men to patiently endure
the continued targeting of "driving while Black"? Should they hold off their demands for police accountability so as to avoid
strengthening "the legitimacy of the police and of imposed decision"? And if they don't, are they 'reformists'? Many folks who
experience daily police occupation understand that ending the "imposed decision" (often epitomized by police) will require radical
change, and they work toward it. At the same time, they demand authentic public oversight of police forces. The two don't have to
be mutually exclusive. I'll even suggest that they can be complementary, especially if we acknowledge the legacies of white
supremacy and class stratification embedded in policing. Ultimately, we need a lucid conception of social change that articulates

we need revolutionary strategy that links diverse, everyday


struggles and demands to long-term radical objectives, without sacrificing either. Of course,
this kind of complementarity. That is,

this isn't to say that every so-called 'progressive' ballot initiative or organizing campaign is necessarily radical or

Reforms are not all created equal. But some can fundamentally shake
systems of power, leading to enlarged gains and greater space for further advances.
strategic.

Andre Gorz, in his seminal book Strategy for Labor, refers to these as "non-reformist" or "structural" reforms. He
contends, "a struggle for non-reformist reforms--for anti-capitalist reforms--is one which does not base its validity
and its right to exist on capitalist needs, criteria, and rationales. A non-reformist reform is determined not in terms

the end of slavery, the eight-hour


workday, desegregation. All were born from long, hard struggles, and none were
endpoints. Yet they all struck at the foundations of power (in these cases, the state,
white supremacy, and capitalism), and in the process, they created new prospects
for revolutionary change. Now consider contemporary struggles: amnesty for undocumented immigrants,
of what can be, but what should be." Look to history for examples:

socialized health care, expansive environmental protections, indigenous sovereignty. These and many more are

None will single-handedly dismantle capitalism or other


systems of power, but each has the potential to escalate struggles and sharpen
social contradictions. And we shouldn't misinterpret these efforts as simply
meliorative incrementalism, making 'adjustments' to a fundamentally flawed
system. Certainly that tendency exists, but there are plenty of other folks working very consciously within a far
more radical strategy, pushing for a qualitative shift in struggle. "To fight for alternative solutions,"
arguably non-reformist reforms as well.

Gorz writes, "and for structural reforms (that is to say, for intermediate objectives)
is not to fight for improvements in the capitalist system; it is rather to break it up, to
restrict it, to create counter-powers which, instead of creating a new equilibrium,
undermine its very foundations." Thankfully, this is one approach among a diverse array of strategies,
all of which encompass a breadth of struggles and movements. Altogether, they give me hope.

7. No link They say we affirm neoliberalism, but that is

the very thing we are indicting, and trying to fiercely


reform Extend our 2nd piece of Kundnani evidence in the
1st advantage that says the modern surveillance apparatus
functions as racialized totalitarianism under the guise of
neoliberalism.
8. No root cause and attempts to transition only reify
proximate causes
Larrivee 10 PF ECONOMICS AT MOUNT ST MARYS UNIVERSITY MASTERS
FROM THE HARVARD KENNEDY SCHOOL AND PHD IN ECONOMICS FROM WISCONSIN,
10 [JOHN, A FRAMEWORK FOR THE MORAL ANALYSIS OF MARKETS, 10/1,
http://www.teacheconomicfreedom.org/files/larrivee-paper-1.pdf]
Logical errors abound in critical
commentary on capitalism. Some critics observe a problem and conclude: I see X in our
society. We have a capitalist economy. Therefore capitalism causes X. They draw their conclusion by
The Second Focal Point: Moral, Social, and Cultural Issues of Capitalism

looking at a phenomenon as it appears only in one system. Others merely follow a host of popular theories according to which
capitalism is particularly bad. 6 The

solution to such flawed reasoning is to be comprehensive, to look


at the good and bad, in market and non-market systems. Thus the following section considers a number of issuesgreed,
selfishness and human relationships, honesty and truth, alienation and work satisfaction, moral decay, and religious
participationthat have often been associated with capitalism, but have

also been problematic in other systems

and usually in more extreme form. I conclude with some

evidence for the view that markets foster (at least some)
virtues rather than undermining them. My purpose is not to smear communism or to make the simplistic argument that
capitalism isnt so bad because other systems have problems too. The

critical point is that certain people


thought various social ills resulted from capitalism, and on this basis they took action to
establish alternative economic systems to solve the problems they had identified. That they
failed to solve the problems , and in fact exacerbated them while also creating new problems,
implies that capitalism itself wasnt the cause of the problems in the first place, at least not to the
degree theorized.

8 & .Permutation: Do the afthe affirmative is already in


the direction and is prerequisite to the alternative
The point of no return is not strictly confined to illegal and
violent actions, but in the normalization of surveillance as part
of the fabric of a modern civil society via a war on debate and
dissent
Giroux 14-Global TV Network Chair Professorship at McMaster University in the English and Cultural Studies
Department and a Distinguished Visiting Professorship at Ryerson University [Henry, Totalitarian Paranoia in the

Post-Orwellian Surveillance State, Truthout, February 10, 2014, http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/21656totalitarian-paranoia-in-the-post-orwellian-surveillance-state, DKP]

The point of no return in the emergence of the corporate-state surveillance apparatus is not strictly
confined to the task of archiving immense pools of data collection to be used in a number of
illegal ways.18 It is in creating a culture in which surveillance becomes trivialized,
celebrated, and legitimated as reasonable and unquestioned behavior. Evidence that diverse forms
of public pedagogy are sanctioning the security state is on full display in postOrwellian America, obvious in schools that demand that students wear radio chips
so they can be tracked.19 Such anti-democratic projects are now also funded by billionaires like Bill Gates who push for
the use of biometric bracelets to monitor students' attentiveness in classrooms.20 The normalization of
surveillance is also evident in the actions of giant Internet providers who use social
messaging to pry personal information from their users. The reach of the surveillance culture can also be seen
in the use of radio chips and GPS technologies used to track a person's movements across time and space. At the same time,

cultures of surveillance work hard to trivialize the importance of a massive


surveillance environment by transforming it into a source of entertainment . This is
evident in the popularity of realty TV shows such as "Big Brother" or "Undercover Boss," which turn the event of constant

The atrophy of democratic intuitions of culture and


governance are evident in popular representations that undermine the meaning of
democracy as a collective ethos that unconditionally stands for social, economic, and political rights.22 One
surveillance into a voyeuristic pleasure.21

example can be found in Hollywood films that glorify hackers such as those in the Matrix trilogy, or movies that celebrate
professionalized modern spying and the government agents using their omniscient technological gizmos to fight terrorists and other

What is lost in the culture of surveillance is that spying and the


unwarranted collection of personal information from people who have not broken the law in the name of
national security and for commercial purposes is a procedure often adopted by totalitarian
states. The surveillance state with its immense data mining capabilities represents a historical rupture from traditional notions of
forces of evil.

modernity with its emphasis on enlightenment, reason, and the social contract. The older modernity held up the ideals of justice,
equality, freedom, and democracy, however flawed. The investment in public goods was seen as central to a social contract that
implied that all citizens should have access to those provisions, resources, institutions, and benefits that expanded their sense of

The new modernity and its expanding surveillance net


subordinates human needs, public goods, and justice to the demands of commerce
and the accumulation of capital, at all costs. The contemporary citizen is primarily a consumer and
agency and social responsibility.

entrepreneur wedded to the belief that the most desirable features of human behavior are rooted in a "basic tendency towards

Modernity is
now driven by the imperatives of a savage neoliberal political and economic system
competitive, acquisitive and uniquely self-interested behavior which is the central fact of human social life."23

that embrace what Charles Derber and June Sekera call a "public goods deficit" in which "budgetary priorities" are relentlessly
pushed so as to hollow out the welfare state and drastically reduce social provisions as part of a larger neoliberal counter revolution

Debates about
the meaning and purpose of the public and social good have been co-opted by a
politics of fear, relegating notions of the civic good, public sphere, and even the very word "public" to the status of a liability,
to lower the taxes of the rich and mega-corporations while selling off public good to private interests.24

if not a pathology.25 Fear has lost its social connotations and no longer references fear of social deprivations such as poverty,

Fear is now personalized,


reduced to an atomized fear that revolves around crime, safety, apocalypse, and
survival. In this instance, as the late Harvard economist John Kenneth Galbraith once warned, modernity now
privileges "a disgraceful combination of 'private opulence and public squalor.' " 26 This
homelessness, lack of health care, and other fundamental conditions of agency.

is not surprising given the basic elements of neoliberal policy, which as Jeremy Gilbert indicates, include the: privatization of public
assets, contraction and centralization of democratic institutions, deregulation of labor markets, reductions in progressive taxation,
restrictions on labor organization, labor market deregulation, active encouragement of competitive and entrepreneurial modes of

Under the regime of neoliberal capitalism, the


expansion of government and corporate surveillance measures become
synonymous with new forms of governance and an intensification of material and
symbolic violence.28 Rather than wage a war on terrorists, the neoliberal security state wages a
war on dissent in the interest of consolidating class power . How else to explain the merging of
relation across the public and commercial sectors.27

corporate and state surveillance systems updated with the most sophisticated
shared technologies used in the last few years to engage in illicit counterintelligence operations, participate in
industrial espionage29 and disrupt and attack pro-democracy movements such as Occupy and
a range of other nonviolent social movements protesting a myriad of state and
corporate injustices.30 This type of illegal spying in the interest of stealing industrial secrets and closing down dissent by
peaceful protesters has less to do with national security than it has to do with mimicking the abuses and tactics used by the Stasi in
East Germany during the Cold War. How else to explain why many law-abiding citizens "and those with dissenting views within the

Public outrage
seems to disappear, with few exceptions, as the state and its corporate allies do little to
protect privacy rights, civil liberties and a culture of critical exchange and dissent.
Even worse, they shut down a culture of questioning and engage in forms of domestic
terrorism. State violence in this case becomes the preferred antidote to the demanding
work of reflection, analysis, dialogue and imagining the points of views of others.
The war against dissent waged by secret counterintelligence agencies is a mode of
domestic terrorism in which, as David Graeber has argued, violence is "often the preferred
weapon of the stupid."32 Modernity in this instance has been updated, wired and
militarized. No longer content to play out its historical role of a modernized
panopticon, it has become militarized and a multilayered source of insecurity,
entertainment and commerce. In addition, this new stage of modernity is driven not
only by the need to watch but also the will to punish. Phone calls, emails, social networks and almost
law can be singled out for surveillance and placed on wide-ranging watch lists relating to terrorism."31

every other vestige of electronic communication are now being collected and stored by corporate and government organizations
such as the NSA and numerous other intelligence agencies. Snowden's exposure of the massive reach of the surveillance state with
its biosensors, scanners, face recognition technologies, miniature drones, high speed computers, massive data mining capabilities
and other stealth technologies made visible "the stark realities of disappearing privacy and diminishing liberties."33 But the NSA
and the other 16 intelligence agencies are not the only threat to privacy, freedom and democracy. Corporations now have their own
intelligence agencies and data mining offices and use these agencies and new surveillance technologies largely to spy on those who
question the abuses of corporate power. The emergence of fusion centers exemplifies how power is now a mix of corporate, local,
federal and global intelligence agencies, all sharing information that can be used by various agencies to stifle dissent and punish
pro-democracy activists. What is clear is that this combination of gathering and sharing information often results in a lethal mix of
anti-democratic practices in which surveillance now extends not only to potential terrorists but to all law-abiding citizens. Within

this sinister web of secrecy, suspicion, state-sanctioned violence and illegality, the
culture of authoritarianism thrives and poses a dangerous threat to democratic freedoms and rights. It also
poses a threat to those outside the U nited States who, in the name of national security,
are subject to "a grand international campaign with drones and special operations
forces that is generating potential terrorists at every step." 34 Behind this veil of
concentrated power and secrecy lies not only a threat to privacy rights but the very
real threat of violence on both a domestic and global level.

9. Permutation: Do the af and all non-mutually exclusive parts


of the alternative
Net benefit to the permutationthe alternative in and of
itself by starting at a materialist analysis of production
cannot explain the lack of resistance to capitalism
because they do not recognize the impacts of
surveillance.

9 & . Cede the political - Their method cant create

institutional change- the AFF is a DA to the alt and only


the perm solves- AFF is a better strategy
Kundnani, 2012 (Arun, Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, and
teaches terrorism studies at John Jay College. The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic
War on Terror, p. 284-285)
But as even the Stasi eventually discovered, no system of surveillance can ever produce total knowledge. Indeed,
the greater the amount of information collected, the harder it is to interpret its meaning. The relevant information in
the majority of recent US terrorist attacks was somewhere in the government's systems, but its significance was

what is obscured by the demands for ever


greater surveillance and information processing is that security is best established
through relationships of trust and political empowerment. A society that has
blocked a section of its population from shaping a process of political transformation
is one that has hollowed out its democracy until what's left is an empty,
technocratic consensus in which real politics is disavowed. When radical political
contestation is suffocated, the processes by which societies reinvent themselves
and resolve their social tensions are neutered, and in the absence of a genuinely
emancipatory alternative, the only possible outlet for the impulses generated by
social and economic marginalization is the fake radicalism of armored identity
politics, conspiracy theories, and apocalyptic fantasies.
lost amid a morass of useless data. More significantly,

10. Globalization good the status quo is structurally improving


Goklany 7

(Indur, scholar who has 25 years of experience working and writing on global and national environmental issues. He has published
several peer-reviewed papers and book chapters on an array of issues Author of The Improving State of the World: Why We're Living Longer, Healthier,
More Comfortable Lives on a Cleaner Planet, Mar. 23, http://www.reason.com/news/show/119252.html, twm)

globalization foes are united in their fear that greater population and consumption of energy,
materials, and chemicals accompanying economic growth, technological change and free tradethe mainstays of globalizationdegrade
human and environmental well-being. Indeed, the 20th century saw the United States population multiply by four, income
by seven, carbon dioxide emissions by nine, use of materials by 27, and use of chemicals by more than 100. Yet life expectancy
increased from 47 years to 77 years. Onset of major disease such as cancer, heart, and respiratory disease has been
postponed between eight and eleven years in the past century. Heart disease and cancer rates
have been in rapid decline over the last two decades, and total cancer deaths have actually declined
the last two years, despite increases in population . Among the very young, infant mortality has declined
from 100 deaths per 1,000 births in 1913 to just seven per 1,000 today. These improvements havent been
restricted to the United States. Its a global phenomenon. Worldwide, life expectancy has more than
doubled, from 31 years in 1900 to 67 years today. Indias and Chinas infant mortalities exceeded 190 per 1,000 births in the early 1950s; today
they are 62 and 26, respectively. In the developing world, the proportion of the population suffering from chronic hunger declined from
37 percent to 17 percent between 1970 and 2001 despite a 83 percent increase in population. Globally
average annual incomes in real dollars have tripled since 1950. Consequently, the proportion of the planet's developing-world
population living in absolute poverty has halved since 1981, from 40 percent to 20 percent. Child labor in low income
countries declined from 30 percent to 18 percent between 1960 and 2003. Equally important, the world is
more literate and better educated than ever. People are freer politically, economically, and
socially to pursue their well-being as they see fit. More people choose their own rulers, and
have freedom of expression. They are more likely to live under rule of law, and less likely to be
Environmentalists and

arbitrarily deprived of life, limb, and property. Social and professional mobility have also never been greater. Its
easier than ever for people across the world to transcend the bonds of caste, place, gender, and other accidents of birth. People today work fewer hours
and have more money and better health to enjoy their leisure time than their ancestors. Mans environmental record is more complex. The

early

stages of development can indeed cause some environmental deterioration as societies pursue
first-order problems affecting human well-being. These include hunger, malnutrition, illiteracy, and lack of education, basic public health services, safe

greater wealth alleviates these problems while


providing basic creature comforts, individuals and societies initially focus on
economic development, often neglecting other aspects of environmental quality. In
time, however, they recognize that environmental deterioration reduces their
quality of life. Accordingly, they put more of their recently acquired wealth and human capital into developing
and implementing cleaner technologies. This brings about an environmental transition via
the twin forces of economic development and technological progress, which begin to
provide solutions to environmental problems instead of creating those problems. All of which is why we today find
that the richest countries are also the cleanest. And while many developing countries have yet to
get past the green ceiling, they are nevertheless ahead of where todays developed countries used to be when they were equally
wealthy. The point of transition from "industrial period" to "environmental conscious" continues to fall. For example, the US introduced
unleaded gasoline only after its GDP per capita exceeded $16,000 . India and China
did the same before they reached $3,000 per capita. This progress is a testament to
the power of globalization and the transfer of ideas and knowledge (that lead is harmful, for example). It's also testament to
the importance of trade in transferring technology from developed to developing countries in this
water, sanitation, mobility, and ready sources of energy. Because

case, the technology needed to remove lead from gasoline. This hints at the answer to the question of why some parts of the world have been left behind
while the rest of the world has thrived. Why have improvements in well-being stalled in areas such as Sub-Saharan Africa and the Arab world? The
proximate cause of improvements in well-being is a cycle of progress composed of the mutually reinforcing forces of economic development and
technological progress. But that cycle itself is propelled by a web of essential institutions, particularly property rights, free markets, and rule of law. Other
important institutions would include science- and technology-based problem-solving founded on skepticism and experimentation; receptiveness to new
technologies and ideas; and freer trade in goods, servicesmost importantly in knowledge and ideas. In short, free and open societies prosper. Isolation,
intolerance, and hostility to the free exchange of knowledge, technology, people, and goods breed stagnation or regression. Despite all of this progress
and good news, then, there is still much unfinished business. Millions of people die from hunger, malnutrition, and preventable disease such as malaria,
tuberculosis, and diarrhea. Over a billion people still live in absolute poverty, defined as less than a dollar per day. A third of the worlds eligible population

Barriers to globalization, economic development, and


technological changesuch as the use of DDT to eradicate malaria, genetic engineering, and biotechnologyare a big
source of the problem. Moreover, the global population will grow 50 percent to 100 percent this century, and per capita consumption of
is still not enrolled in secondary school.

energy and materials will likely increase with wealth. Merely preserving the status quo is not enough. We need to protect the important sustaining
institutions responsible for all of this progress in the developed world, and we need to foster and nurture them in countries that are still developing. Mans

Ensuring
that our incredible progress continues will require not only recognizing
and appreciating the progress itself, but also recognizing and preserving
the important ideas and institutions that caused it, and ensuring that they
endure.
remarkable progress over the last 100 years is unprecedented in human history. Its also one of the more neglected big-picture stories.

10. Marx was super racist, this turns the entire kritik
Walter Williams, WND Commentator, 2006, MARX'S RACISM,
http://www.wnd.com/2006/06/36692/
Karl Marx is the hero of some labor union leaders and civil-rights organizations, including those who organized the
recent protest against proposed immigration legislation. Its easy to be a Marxist if you havent read his writings.

Most people agree that Marxs predictions about capitalism turned out to be dead
wrong. What most people dont know is that Marx was an out and out racist
and anti-Semite. He didnt think much of Mexicans . Concerning the annexation of California after the
Mexican-American War, Marx wrote: Without violence, nothing is ever accomplished in history. Then he asks, Is
it a misfortune that magnificent California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did
not know what to do with it? Friedrich Engels, Marxs co-author of the Manifesto of the Communist Party, added,
In America, we have witnessed the conquest of Mexico and have rejoiced at it. It is to the interest of its own

development that Mexico will be placed under the tutelage of the United States. Much of Marxs ideas can be
found in a book written by former communist Nathaniel Weyl, titled Karl

Marx, Racist (1979). In a July


Marx wrote, it
is now completely clear to me that he, as is proved by his cranial formation and his
hair, descends from the Negroes from Egypt, assuming that his mother or
grandmother had not interbred with a n[egro]. Now this union of Judaism and
Germanism with a basic Negro substance must produce a peculiar product. The
obtrusiveness of the fellow is also n[egro]-like . Engels shared much of Marxs racial
philosophy. In 1887, Paul Lafargue, who was Marxs son-in-law, was a candidate for a council seat in a Paris
1862 letter to Engels, in reference to his socialist political competitor, Ferdinand Lassalle,

district that contained a zoo. Engels claimed that Paul had one-eighth or one-twelfth n[egro] blood. In an April
1887 letter to Pauls wife, Engels wrote, Being

in his quality as a n[egro], a degree nearer to


the rest of the animal kingdom than the rest of us, he is undoubtedly the most
appropriate representative of that district. Though few claim him as their own, such as leftists
claim Karl Marx, Thomas Carlyle is another unappreciated historical figure. Carlyle is best-known for giving
economics the derogatory name dismal science, an inversion of the phrase gay science, which at the time
(1849) referred to life-enhancing knowledge. Most people have incorrectly learned that the term dismal science
had its origins in reference to Thomas Malthus gloomy predictions that the global population would grow faster
than food supplies, condemning mankind to perpetual poverty and starvation. My George Mason University
colleague, professor Davy Levy, and his co-author, Sandra Peart, tell the true story in their 2001 book, The Secret
History of the Dismal Science: Economics, Religion and Race in the 19th Century. Carlyle first used the term
dismal science in his 1849 pamphlet entitled An Occasional Discourse on the N[egro] Question. He attacked the
ideas of Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill and other free market, limited-government economists for their belief in the
fundamental equality of man and their anti-slavery positions. The fact that economics assumes that people are all
the same and are equally deserving of liberty was offensive to Carlyle and led him to call economics the dismal
science. Carlyle argued that blacks were subhuman, two-legged cattle, who needed the tutelage of whites
wielding the beneficent whip if they were to contribute to the good of society. Carlyle was by no means alone in
denouncing economics for its anti-slavery and pro-equality position. No less a historical figure and a Christmastime
favorite, Charles Dickens, author of A Christmas Carol, shared Carlyles positions on slavery and blacks as

Marx, Engels, Carlyle and Dickens all share one belief prevalent throughout mankinds history down to
today: the belief that some people are endowed with superior intelligence and
wisdom, and theyve been ordained to forcibly impose that wisdom on the masses.
subhuman.

11. The K is Wrong Racism First


Charles Mills, 1997, The Racial Contract, p. 31-40
The classic social contract, as I have detailed, is primarily moral/political in nature. But it is also economic in the
background sense that the point of leaving the state of nature is in part to secure a stable
environment for the industrious appropriation of the world . (After all, one famous definition of politics is that it is
about who gets what and why.) Thus even in Locke's moralized state of nature, where people generally do obey natural law, he is concerned about the
safety of private property, indeed proclaiming that "the great and chief end therefore, of Mens uniting into Commonwealths, and putting themselves
under Government, is the Preservation of their Property."42 And in Hobbes's famously amoral and unsafe state of nature, we are told that "there is no

So part of the point of bringing


society into existence, with its laws and enforcers of the law, is to protect what you have
accumulated. / What, then, is the nature of the economic system of the new society? The general contract does not itself prescribe a particular
place for Industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain; and consequently no Culture of the Earth."43

model or particular schedule of property rights, requiring only that the "equality" in the prepolitical state be somehow preserved. This provision may be
variously interpreted as a self-interested surrender to an absolutist Hobbesian government that itself determines property rights, or a Lockean
insistence that private property accumulated in the moralized state of nature be respected by the constitutionalist government. Or more radical political
theorists, such as socialists and feminists, might argue that state-of-nature equality actually mandates class or gender economic egalitarianism in
society. So, different

political interpretations of the initial moral egalitarianism can be advanced, but


the general background idea is that the equality of human beings in the state of nature is
somehow (whether as equality of opportunity or as equality of outcome) supposed to carry over into the economy of the
created sociopolitical order, leading to a system of voluntary human intercourse and exchange in
which exploitation is precluded. / By contrast, the economic dimension of the Racial Contract is
the most salient, foreground rather than background, since the Racial Contract is calculatedly
aimed at economic exploitation. The whole point of establishing a moral hierarchy and
juridically partitioning the polity according to race is to secure and legitimate the privileging of

those individuals designated as white/persons and the exploitation of those individuals


designated as nonwhite/subpersons. There are other benefits accruing from the Racial Contractfar greater political influence,
cultural hegemony, the psychic payoff that comes from knowing one is a member of the Herrenvolk (what W. E. B. Du Bois once called "the wages of

Globally, the Racial Contract creates Europe as the


continent that dominates the world; locally, within Europe and the other continents, it
designates Europeans as the privileged race. / The challenge of explaining what has been called "the European
miracle"the rise of Europe to global domination has long exercised both academic and lay
opinion.45 How is it that a formerly peripheral region on the outskirts of the Asian land mass, at
the far edge of the trade routes, remote from the great civilizations of Islam and the East, was
able in a century or two to achieve global political and economic dominance? The explanations
historically given by Europeans themselves have varied tremendously, from the straightforwardly racist
and geographically determinist to the more subtly environmentalist and culturalist. But what
they have all had in common, even those influenced by Marxism, is their tendency to depict this
development as essentially autochthonous, their tendency to privilege some set of internal
variables and correspondingly-downplay or ignore altogether the role of colonial conquest and
African slavery. Europe made it on its own, it is said, because of the peculiar characteristics of Europe and Europeans. / Thus whereas no
whiteness")44but the bottom line is material advantage.

reputable historian today would espouse the frankly biologistic theories of the past, which made Europeans (in both pre- and post-Darwinian accounts)
inherently the most advanced race, as contrasted with the backward/less-evolved races elsewhere, the thesis of European specialness and
exceptionalism is still presupposed. It is still assumed that rationalism and science, innovativeness and inventiveness found their special home here, as
against the intellectual stagnation and traditionalism of the rest of the world, so that Europe was therefore destined in advance to occupy the special
position in global history it has. James Blaut calls this the theory, or "super-theory" (an umbrella covering many different versions: theological,
cultural, biologistic, geographical, technological, etc.), of "Eurocentric diffusionism," according to which European progress is seen as "natural" and
asymmetrically determinant of the fate of non-Europe." Similarly, Sandra Harding, in her anthology on the "racial" economy of science, cites "the
assumption that Europe functions autonomously from other parts of the world; that Europe is its own origin, final end, and agent; and that Europe and

Third World
theorists have traditionally dissented from this notion of happy divine or natural European
dispensation. They have claimed, quite to the contrary, that there is a crucial causal connection between
European advance and the unhappy fate of the rest of the world. One classic example of such
scholarship from a half century ago was the Caribbean historian Eric Williams's Capitalism and Slavery,
which argued that the profits from African slavery helped to make the industrial revolution
possible, so that internalist accounts were fundamentally mistaken. 48 And in recent years, with decolonization,
people of European descent in the Americas and elsewhere owe nothing to the rest of the world."47 / Unsurprisingly, black and

the rise of the New Left in the United States, and the entry of more alternative voices into the academy, this challenge has deepened and broadened.
There are variations in the authors' positionsfor example, Walter Rodney, Samir Amin, Andre Guilder Frank, Immanuel Wallerstein9but the basic

the exploitation of the empire (the bullion from the great gold and silver mines in
Mexico and Peru, the profits from plantation slavery, the fortunes made by the colonial
companies, the general social and economic stimulus provided by the opening up of the "New
World") was to a greater or lesser extent crucial in enabling and then consolidating the takeoff of what had
previously been an economic backwater. It was far from the case that Europe was specially
destined to assume economic hegemony; there were a number of centers in Asia and Africa of a
comparable level of development which could potentially have evolved in the same way. But the
European ascent closed off this development path for others because it forcibly inserted them
into a colonial network whose exploitative relations and extractive mechanisms prevented
autonomous growth. / Overall, then, colonialism "lies at the heart" of the rise of Europe. 50 The economic
theme is that

unit of analysis needs to be Europe as a whole, since it is not always the case that the colonizing nations directly involved always benefited in the long
term. Imperial Spain, for example, still feudal in character, suffered massive inflation from its bullion imports. But through trade and financial
exchange, others launched on the capitalist path, such as Holland, profited. Internal national rivalries continued, of course, but this common identity
based on the transcontinental exploitation of the non-European world would in many cases be politically crucial, generating a sense of Europe as a

As Victor Kiernan puts it, "All countries within the


European orbit benefited however, as Adam Smith pointed out, from colonial contributions to a
common stock of wealth, bitterly as they might wrangle over ownership of one territory or another... [T]here was a sense in
which all Europeans shared in a heightened sense of power engendered by the successes of any
of them, as well as in the pool of material wealth ... that the colonies produced."51 / Today,
correspondingly, though formal decolonization has taken place and in Africa and Asia black, brown, and yellow
natives are in office, ruling independent nations, the global economy is essentially dominated by the former colonial
powers, their offshoots (Euro-United States, Euro-Canada), and their international financial institutions,
lending agencies, and corporations. (As previously observed, the notable exception, whose history confirms rather than challenges
cosmopolitan entity engaged in a common enterprise, underwritten by race.

the rule, is Japan, which escaped colonization and, after the Meiji Restoration, successfully embarked on its own industrialization.) Thus one could say
that the world is essentially dominated by white capital.

Global figures on income and property ownership are, of course, broken down nationally rather
than racially, but if a transnational racial disaggregation were to be done, it would reveal that
whites control a percentage of the world's wealth grossly disproportionate to their numbers.
Since there is no reason to think that the chasm between First and Third Worlds (which largely
coincides with this racial division) is going to be bridgedvide the abject failure of various
United Nations plans from the "development decade" of the 1960s onwardit seems undeniable
that for years to come, the planet will be white dominated. With the collapse of communism and
the defeat of Third World attempts to seek alternative paths, the West reigns supreme, as
celebrated in a London Financial Times headline: "The fall of the Soviet bloc has left the IMF
and G7 to rule the world and create a new imperial age."52 Economic structures have been set in
place, causal processes established, whose outcome is to pump wealth from one side of the globe
to another, and which will continue to work largely independently of the ill will/good will,
racist/antiracist feelings of particular individuals. This globally color-coded distribution of
wealth and poverty has been produced by the Racial Contract and in turn reinforces adherence
to it in its signatories and beneficiaries. / Moreover, it is not merely that Europe and the former
white settler states are globally dominant but that within them, where there is a significant
nonwhite presence (indigenous peoples, descendants of imported slaves, voluntary nonwhite
immigration), whites continue to be privileged vis-a-vis non-whites. The old structures of
formal, de jure exclusion have largely been dismantled, the old explicitly biologistic ideologies
largely abandoned53the Racial Contract, as will be discussed later, is continually being
rewrittenbut opportunities for nonwhites, though they have expanded, remain below those for
whites. The claim is not, of course, that all whites are better off than all nonwhites, but that, as a
statistical generalization, the objective life chances of whites are significantly better. / As an
example, consider the United States. A series of books has recently documented the decline of
the integrationist hopes raised by the 1960s and the growing intransigence and hostility of
whites who think they have "done enough," despite the fact that the country continues to be
massively segregated, median black family incomes have begun falling by comparison to white
family incomes after some earlier closing of the gap, the so-called "black underclass" has
basically been written off, and reparations for slavery and post-Emancipation discrimination
have never been paid, or, indeed, even seriously considered.54 Recent work on racial inequality
by Melvin Oliver and Thomas Shapiro suggests that wealth is more important than income in
determining the likelihood of future racial equalization, since it has a cumulative effect that is
passed down through intergenerational transfer, affecting life chances and opportunities for
one's children. Whereas in 1988 black households earned sixty two cents for every dollar earned
by white households, the comparative differential with regard to wealth is much greater and,
arguably, provides a more realistically negative picture of the prospects for closing the racial
gap: "Whites possess nearly twelve times as much median net worth as black s,or $43,800 versus
$3,700. In an even starker contrast, perhaps, the average white household controls $6,999 in
net financial assets while the average black household retains no NFA nest egg whatsoever."
Moreover, the analytic focus on wealth rather than income exposes how illusory the muchtrumpeted rise of a "black middle class" is: "Middle class blacks, for example, earn seventy cents
for every dollar earned by middle-class whites but they possess only fifteen cents for every dollar
of wealth held by middle-class whites." This huge disparity in white and black wealth is not
remotely contingent, accidental, fortuitous; it is the direct outcome of American state policy and
the collusion with it of the white citizenry. In effect, "materially, whites and blacks constitute
two nations,"55 the white nation being constituted by the American Racial Contract in a
relationship of structured racial exploitation with the black (and, of course, historically also the
red) nation. / A collection of papers from panels organized in the 1980s by the National

Economic Association, the professional organization of black economists, provides some insight
into the mechanics and the magnitude of such exploitative transfers and denials of opportunity
to accumulate material and human capital. It takes as its title The Wealth of Racesan ironic
tribute to Adam Smith's famous book The Wealth of Nationsand analyzes the different
varieties of discrimination to which blacks have been subjected: slavery, employment
discrimination, wage discrimination, promotion discrimination, white monopoly power
discrimination against black capital, racial price discrimination in consumer goods, housing,
services, insurance, etc.56 Many of these, by their very nature, are difficult to quantify;
moreover, there are costs in anguish and suffering that can never really be compensated.
Nonetheless, those that do lend themselves to calculation offer some remarkable figures. (The
figures are unfortunately dated; readers should multiply by a factor that takes fifteen years of
inflation into account.) If one were to do a calculation of the cumulative benefits (through
compound interest) from labor market discrimination over the forty-year period from 1929 to
1969 and adjust for inflation, then in 1983 dollars, the figure would be over $1.6 trillion.57 An
estimate for the total of "diverted income" from slavery, 1790 to 1860, compounded and
translated into 1983 dollars, would yield the sum of $2.1 trillion to $4.7 trillion.58 And if one
were to try to work out the cumulative value, with compound interest, of unpaid slave labor
before 1863, underpayment since 1863, and denial of opportunity to acquire land and natural
resources available to white settlers, then the total amount required to compensate blacks "could
take more than the entire wealth of the United States"59 / So this gives an idea of the centrality
of racial exploitation to the U.S. economy and the dimensions of the payoff for its white
beneficiaries from one nation's Racial Contract. But this very centrality, these very dimensions render the
topic taboo, virtually undiscussed in the debates on justice of most white political theory. If
there is such a backlash against affirmative action, what would the response be to the demand
for the interest on the unpaid forty acres and a mule? These issues cannot be raised because they
go to the heart of the real nature of the polity and its structuring by the Racial Contract. White
moral theory's debates on justice in the state must therefore inevitably have a somewhat farcical
air, since they ignore the central injustice on which the state rests . (No wonder a hypothetical
contractarianism that evades the actual circumstances of the polity's founding is preferred!) /
Both globally and within particular nations, then, white people, Europeans and their
descendants, continue to benefit from the Racial Contract, which creates a world in their
cultural image, political states differentially favoring their interests , an economy structured
around the racial exploitation of others, and a moral psychology (not just in whites but
sometimes in nonwhites also) skewed consciously or unconsciously toward privileging them,
taking the status quo of differential racial entitlement as normatively legitimate, and not to be
investigated further.

*1ar extensions
Extend our Giroux evidence that talks about the point of
no return surveillance net subordinates human needs, public
goods, and justice to the demands of commerce and the
accumulation of capital. This means curtailing surveillance is key
to the end of capitalism.

2AC Speaking For Others K (super sketch)


1. The subalternity of identity is not static but rather socially contingent
that means fracturing linearities of history by piecing together ensembles
of narratives to re-conceptualize power relationships.
2. Silence is never the answer our pedagogical performance is productive
Giroux 13

(Henry Giroux, Distinguished Visiting Professorship at Ryerson University, Hope in a Time of


Permanent War, 09/04/13, AD: 12/4/14, http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/18578-hope-in-a-time-of-permanentwar | Kushal)

War has become not simply a strategy but a way of life in the United States. It has
been elevated to an all-encompassing ideology and politics that includes a view of
all citizens as potential terrorists in need of surveillance and an ongoing attack on
dissidents, critical journalists, educators and any public sphere capable of
questioning authority. Hope provides a potential register of resistance , a new
language, a different understanding of politics and a view of the future in which the
voices of the public are heard rather than silenced. Hope also accentuates how
politics might be played out on the terrain of imagination and desire as well as in
material relations of power and concrete social formations. Freedom and justice, in
this instance, have to be mediated through the connection between civic education
and political agency, which presupposes that the goal of hope is not to liberate the
individual from the social - a central tenet of neoliberalism - but to take seriously
the notion that the individual can only be liberated through the social. Democratic
hope is a subversive, defiant practice that makes power visible and interrogates and
resists those events, social relations and ideas that pose a threat to democracy. It
refuses to escape into firewall of obtuse academic discourse removed from the
problems of everyday life, it rejects the alleged neutrality of mainstream media,
rebuffs the discourse of idiocy and simplification that characterizes celebrity culture,
and it disallows a sterile and empty discourse of common sense, which wages a war
on informed criticism, the imagination and the very possibility of imagining a better
world. Hope at its best provides a link, however transient, provisional and
contextual, between passion, vision and critique, on the one hand, and engagement
and transformation, on the other. But for such a notion of hope to be consequential
it has to be grounded in a pedagogical project that has some hold on the present.
Hope becomes meaningful to the degree that it identifies agencies and processes,
offers alternatives to an age of profound pessimism, reclaims an ethic of
compassion and justice, and struggles for those institutions in which equality,
freedom and justice flourish as part of the ongoing struggle for a global democracy.
Yet, such hopes do not materialize out of thin air. They have to be nourished,
developed, debated, examined and acted upon to become meaningful . And this
takes time, and demands what might be called an "impatient patience." When
outrage dissipates into silence, crippling the mind, imagination, spirit, and collective
will, it becomes almost impossible to fight the galloping forces of authoritarianism
that beset the United States and many other countries. But one cannot dismiss as

impossible what is simply difficult, even if such difficulty defies hope itself. Bauman
is right, once again, in arguing that "As to our hopes: hope is one human quality we
are bound never to lose without losing our humanity. But we may be similarly
certain that a safe haven in which to drop its anchor will take a very long time to be
found."[xx] As the current administration tries to persuade the American public and
a cravenly Congress that military intervention is necessary in Syria, Obama is
betting against hope - against the possibility that his investment in war, state
violence and secrecy will be challenged by the American public. There is more at
stake here than a military strike against Syria, there is the Hobbesian imaginary of
endless permanent war and the presence of a security-warfare state that can only
imagine violence as a solution to whatever problem it identifies. The future of
American society lies in opposition to the warfare state, its warfare culture, its mad
machinery of violence and its gross misdeeds. State violence is not a measure of
greatness and honor. Such violence trades in incredulous appeals to security and
fear mongering in its efforts to paralyze the impulse for justice, the culture of
questioning, and the civic courage necessary to refuse and oppose complicity with
state terrorism. Hope turns radical when it exposes the acts of aggression against
injustices perpetuated by a militarized state that can only dream of war. But hope
does more than critique, dismantle, and expose the ideologies, values, institutions,
and social relations that are pushing so many countries today into authoritarianism.
It begs for more than a retreat into the language of criticism by developing a
renewed sense of what it means to imagine otherwise , rethink a more just sense of
the future, reclaim the principles of a real democracy, and organize a political
discourse that inhabits not common sense but reflective sense, good sense a
sense that the struggle is not over and demands a broad based social movement in
which the struggle for a new democratic global social order can be constructed.

3. Authentic representation should not be a reason for rejection because


any understanding of identity is internal. The affirmatives scholarship is
NOT a PRESCRIPTION of our own identities thats 1AC Prashad. This has
two impacts:
A) Liminality DA their critique does not take into account the
insufficiency of racial categorization. Because of the multiplicity of
identity, claims to authenticity only serve whiteness because it limits
inter-racial and inter-subaltern solidarity and is reminicist of divide and
conquer politics this turns the K
B) Shared Heritage DA we all are burdened with the legacies of African,
South Asian, and South American heritages. Arguing that only blacks can
represent blacks, and only desis can represent desis builds our
communities behind high walls. This reifies cultural oppression. This
prevents social justice
C) Divide and Conquer DA they reconstitute the divide and conquer
tactics of white colonialism
Bell Hooks 3, social critic extraordinaire, Beyond Black Only: Bonding Beyond
Race, http://prince.org/msg/105/50299?pr
African Americans have been at the forefront of the struggle to end racism and white supremacy in the United States since individual free black
immigrants and the larger body of enslaved blacks first landed here. Even though much of that struggle has been directly concerned with the plight of
black people, all gains received from civil rights work have had tremendous positive impact on the social status of all non-white groups in this country.

Bonding between enslaved Africans, free Africans, and Native Americans is well
documented. Freedom fighters from all groups (and certainly there were many traitors in all three groups who
were co-opted by rewards given by the white power structure ) understood the importance of solidarityof struggling against the common enemy, white supremacy. The enemy was not white people. It was white supremacy. Organic freedom fighters, both
Native and African Americans, had no difficulty building coalitions with those white folks who wanted to work for the freedom of everyone. Those early
models of coalition building in the interest of dismantling white supremacy are often forgotten. Much has happened to obscure that history. The
construction of reservations (many of which were and are located in areas where there are not large populations of black people) isolated communities of
Native Americans from black liberation struggle. And as time passed both groups began to view one another through Eurocentric stereotypes, internalizing
white racist assumptions about the other. Those early coalitions were not maintained. Indeed the bonds between African Americans struggling to resist
racist domination, and all other people of color in this society who suffer from the same system, continue to be fragile, even as we all remain untied by
ties, however frayed and weakened, forged in shared anti-racist struggle. Collectively, within the United States people of color strengthen our capacity to

Since white supremacy emerged here within the


context of colonization, the conquering and conquest of Native Americans, early on it was
obvious that Native and African Americans could best preserve their cultures by
resisting from a standpoint of political solidarity. The concrete practice of solidarity between the two groups
has been eroded by the divide-and-conquer tactics of racist white power and
by the complicity of both groups. Native American artist and activist of the Cherokee people Jimmie Durham, in his
resist white supremacy when we build coalitions.

collection of essays A Certain Lack of Coherence, talks about the 1960s as a time when folks tried to regenerate that spirit of coalition: In the 1960s and
70s American Indian, African American and Puerto Rican activists said, as loudly as they could, This country is founded on the genocide of one people
and the enslavement of another. This statement, hardly arguable, was not much taken up by white activists. As time passed, it was rarely taken up by

the fear that ones specific group might receive more attention has led to
greater nationalism, the showing of concern for ones racial or ethnic plight without
linking that concern to the plight of other non-white groups and their struggles for liberation.
Bonds of solidarity between people of color are continuously ruptured by our complicity with
white racism. Similarly, white immigrants to the United States, both past and present, establish their right to citizenship within white
anyone. Instead

supremacist society by asserting it in daily life through acts of discrimination and assault that register their contempt for and disregard of black people
and darker-skinned immigrants mimic this racist behavior in their interactions with black folks. In her editorial On the Backs of Blacks published in a
recent special issue of TIME magazine Toni Morrison discusses the way white supremacy is reinscribed again and again as immigrants seek assimilation:
All immigrants fight for jobs and space, and who is there to fight but those who have both? As in the fishing ground struggle between Texas and
Vietnamese shrimpers, they displace what and whom they canIn race talk the move into mainstream America always means buying into the notion of
American blacks as the real aliens. Whatever the ethnicity or nationality of the immigrant, his nemesis is understood to be African AmericanSo addictive
is this ploy that the fact of blackness has been abandoned for the theory of blackness. It doesnt matter anymore what shade the newcomers skin is. A

hostile posture toward resident blacks must be struck at the Americanizing door. Often people of color, both those who are citizens and those who are
recent immigrants, hold black people responsible for the hostility they encounter from whites. It is as though they see blacks as acting in a manner that

scapegoating is the mark of the colonized sensibility


which always blames those victimized rather than targeting structures of
domination. Just as many white Americans deny both the prevalence of racism in the United States and the role they play in perpetuating
makes things harder for everybody else. This type of

and maintaining white supremacy, non-white, non-black groups, Native, Asian, Hispanic Americans, all deny their investment in anti-black sentiment even
as they consistently seek to distance themselves from blackness so that they will not be seen as residing at the bottom of this societys totem pole, in the
category reserved for the most despised group. Such jockeying for white approval and reward obscures the way allegiance to the existing social structure
undermines the social welfare of all people of color. White supremacist power is always weakened when people of color bond across differences of culture,
ethnicity, and race. It is always strengthened when we act as though there is no continuity and overlap in the patterns of exploitation and oppression that
affect all of our lives. To ensure that political bonding to challenge and change white supremacy will not be cultivated among diverse groups of people of
color, white ruling groups pit us against one another in a no-win game of who will get the prize for model minority today. They compare and contrast,
affix labels like model minority, define boundaries, and we fall into line. Those rewards coupled with internalized racist assumptions lead non-black

This will to
disassociate is a gesture of racism . Even though progressive people of color consistently critique these standpoints, we
people of color to deny the way racism victimizes them as they actively work to disassociate themselves from black people.

have yet to build a contemporary mass movement to challenge white supremacy that would draw us together. Without an organized collective struggle

forgetting common concerns sets the


stage for competing concerns. Working within the system of white supremacy, non-black people of color often feel as though
that consistently reminds us of our common concerns, people of color forget. Sadly

they must compete with black folks to receive white attention. Some are even angry at what they wrongly perceive as a greater concern on the part of
white of the dominant culture for the pain of black people. Rather than seeing the attention black people receive as linked to the gravity of our situation
and the intensity of our resistance, they want to make it a sign of white generosity and concern. Such thinking is absurd. If white folks were genuinely
concerned about black pain, they would challenge racism, not turn the spotlight on our collective pain in ways that further suggest that we are inferior.
Andrew Hacker makes it clear in Two Nations that the vast majority of white Americans believe that members of the black race represent an inferior strain
of the human species. He adds: In this view Africans-and Americans who trace their origins to that continent-are seen as languishing at a lower
evolutionary level than members of other races. Non-black people of color often do not approach white attention to black issues by critically interrogating
how those issues are presented and whose interests the representations ultimately serve. Rather than engaging in a competition that sees blacks as
winning more goodies from the white system than other groups, non-black people of color who identify with black resistance struggle recognize the danger
of such thinking and repudiate it. They are politically astute enough to challenge a rhetoric of resistance that is based on competition rather than a
capacity on the part of non-black groups to identify with whatever progress blacks make as being a positive sign for everyone. Until non-black people of
color define their citizenship via commitment to a democratic vision of racial justice rather than investing in the dehumanization and oppression of black
people, they will always act as mediators, keeping black people in check for the ruling white majority. Until racist anti-black sentiments are let go by other
people of color, especially immigrants, and complain that these groups are receiving too much attention, they undermine freedom struggle. When this
happens people of color war all acting in complicity with existing exploitative and oppressive structures. As more people of color raise our consciousness
and refuse to be pitted against one another, the forces of neo-colonial white supremacist domination must work harder to divide and conquer. The most
recent effort to undermine progressive bonding between people of color is the institutionalization of multiculturalism. Positively,

multiculturalism is presented as a corrective to a Eurocentric vision of model


citizenship wherein white middle-class ideals are presented as the norm. Yet this positive intervention is undermined by
visions of multiculturalism that suggest everyone should live with and identify with
their own self contained group. If white supremacist capitalist patriarchy is
unchanged then multiculturalism within that context can only become a breeding
ground for narrow nationalism, fundamentalism, identity politics, and cultural, racial, and ethnic separatism. Each
separate group will then feel that it must protect its own interests by keeping outsiders at bay, for the group will always appear vulnerable, its power and

When people of color think this way, white supremacy remains


intact. For even though demographics in the United States would suggest that in the future the nation will be more populated by people of color, and
identity sustained by exclusivity.

whites will no longer be the majority group, numerical presence will in no way alter white supremacy if there is no collective organizing, no efforts to build
coalitions that cross boundaries. Already, the white Christian Right is targeting large populations of people of color to ensure that the fundamentalist
values they want this nation to uphold and represent will determine the attitudes and values of these groups. The role Eurocentric Christianity has played
in teaching non-white folks Western metaphysical dualism, the ideology that under girds binary notion of superior/inferior, good/bad, white/black, cannot
be ignored. While progressive organizations are having difficulty reaching wider audiences, the white-dominated Christian Right organizes outreach
programs that acknowledge diversity and have considerable influence. Just as the white-dominated Christian church in the U.S. once relied on biblical
references to justify racist domination and discrimination, it now deploys a rhetoric of multiculturalism to invite non-white people to believe that racism
can be overcome through a shared fundamentalist encounter. Every contemporary fundamentalist white male-dominated religious cult in the U.S. has a
diverse congregation. People of color have flocked to these organizations because they have felt them to be places where racism does not exist, where
they are not judged on the basis of skin color. While the white-dominated mass media focus critical attention on black religious fundamentalist groups like
the Nation of Islam, and in particular Louis Farrakhan, little critique is made of white Christian fundamentalist outreach to black people and other people of
color. Black Islamic fundamentalism shares with the white Christian Right support for coercive hierarchy, fascism, and a belief that some groups are
inferior and others superior, along with a host of other similarities. Irrespective of the standpoint, religious fundamentalism brainwashes individuals not to
think critically or see radical politicization as a means of transforming their lives. When people of color immerse themselves in religious fundamentalism,
no meaningful challenge and critique of white supremacy can surface. Participation in a radical multiculturalism in any form is discouraged by religious
fundamentalism.

4. Some forms of commodification are inevitable our redeployment


solves the terminal impacts
Rich 12

(Camille Gear Rich, shes an associate professor of law at USC specializing in feminist and racial legal
theory, Racial Commodification in the Era of Elective Race: Affirmative Action and the Lesson of Elizabeth Warren,
http://lawweb.usc.edu/centers/cleo/working-papers/olin/documents/12_19_paper.pdf) gz

To be clear, this essay is largely supportive of the current cultural trend encouraging greater respect for individuals
racial self-identification decisions. However, it also shows that there is a need to reclaim so-called authenticity
judgments about race and properly name them for what they are: functionalist inquiries that structure and limit
employer discretion to define racial categories. For functionalist inquiries about race in the employment context
allow the law to consider with precision how race is being commodified or used by an employer in a given setting,

by proposing
substantive standards for this functionalist inquiry, ones that reject essentialist uses
of race, the analysis charts a path that allows us to avoid the primary concerns
Leong raises about racial commodification. For despite Leongs concerns about the
tendency of employers to racially commodify employees while administering
diversity-based affirmative action programs, she also recognizes that it is unlikely
we can fully extricate race from market pressures.17 This essay demonstrates that a properly
tailored functionalist analysis will serve as the market control that ensures that
diversity programs do not become unintended vehicles for racial stereotyping and
subordination. Antidiscrimination scholars will recognize my approach as a variant of the sociological
and to set fair terms for what Nancy Leong calls a racial capital exchange.16 Additionally,

approach to antidiscrimination law articulated by Robert Post, a method that recognizes governments unavoidable
and necessary role in shaping racial categories, even as it attempts to blunt their negative social significance.18
However, unlike Post, in this essay I fully embrace the functionalist logic of employment discrimination law.19 I
show that functionalist inquiries that explore races use value do not by definition creating stereotyping dangers.

a properly tailored functionalist inquiry that uses race to explore and


understand employees varied experiences of racialization gives us a unique
opportunity to redefine diversity in a more effective manner. More specifically, by
redesigning diversity initiatives to select for employees with diverse experiences of
racialization, we can both destabilize race and discourage employers from engaging
in racial essentialism.
Rather

5. Permutation do the 1AC and all non-mutually exclusive parts


of the alternative
6. Perm do the alt the af is an instance of genuine activism.

Butler and Spivak 10 (Judith Butler and Gayatri Spivak, Who Sings the NationState? Page 66-69, 2010)
I don't think it would be very easy to imagine Arendt singing and I'm not sure I'd want to. She doesn't have that
Nietzschean moment. And I'm not sure I'd want Nietzsche singing either. It would probably still have those
Wagnerian undertones. But I confess to liking the singing I heard on the street. That seemed good, that seemed like
good singing. I think it leaves us with a question about language, performance, and politics. Once we reject the view
that claims that no political position can rest on performative contradiction, and allow the performative function as
a claim and an act whose effects unfold in time, then we can actually entertain the opposite thesis, namely, that

there can be no radical politics of change without performative contradiction . To


exercise a freedom and to assert an equality precisely in relation to an authority that would preclude both is to
show how freedom and equality can and must move beyond their positive articulations. The contradiction
must be relied upon, exposed, and worked on to move toward something new. There seems to be no other way. I

we can understand it as a mobilization of discourse with some degree of


freedom without legal legitimation on the basis of which demands for both equality
and freedom are made. But this also involves a deformation of dominant language, and
reworking of power, since those who sing are without entitlement . But that does not mean their
lives are not mired in power. Obviously, the folks who are singing are not singing from a state of Nature. They're
singing from the streets in San Francisco and Los Angeles. And this means that they alter not
just the language of the nation but its public space as well . It would finally be an offense to
regard it in any other way. SPNAK. Finally what? BUTLER. An offense. SPIVAK. Yes, a defense, a fantasy. BUTLER .
think

The call for that exercise of freedom that comes with citizenship is the exercise of that
freedom in incipient form: it starts to take what it asks for. We have to understand the public
exercise as enacting the freedom it posits, and positing what is not yet there. There's a gap between the
exercise and the freedom or the equality that is demanded that is its object, that is
its goal. It's not that everything is accomplished through language . No, it is not as if "I can say
I'm free and then my performative utterance makes me free." No. But to make the demand on
freedom is already to begin its exercise and then to ask for its legitimation
is to also announce the gap between its exercise and its realization and to
put both into public discourse in a way so that that gap is seen, so that
that gap can mobilize.

7. Alternative fails
A) Inaction is complicity
Alcof 94 [Linda, Asst. Prof. of Philosophy, Syracuse University, Feminist Nightmare:
Women at Odds, pgs. 296]
The major problem with such a retreat is that it significantly undercuts possibility of
political effectivity. There are numerous examples of the practice of speaking for
others that have been politically efficacious in advancing the needs of those spoken
for, from Rigoberta Menchu to Edward Said and Steven Biko. Menchus efforts to speak for the thirty-three Indian
communities facing genocide in Guatemala have helped to raise money for the revolution and bring pressure

The point is
not that for some speakers the danger of speaking for others does not arise, but
that in some cases certain political effects can be garnered in no other way.
against the Guatemalan and U.S. governments, who have committed the massacres in collusion.

B) Reinforcement of oppression
Blomley 94 (Nicholas K. Blomley Professor of Geography at Simon Fraser
University, 1994, Activism and the Academy, http://www.praxisepress.org/CGR/CG_Whole.pdf) //MD
why the silence? Several reasons spring to mind. One likely option is that, for many, it is
not an issue, given that many progressive academics seem to think that activist
work is not really intellectual work. If people engage in external struggle, they
do so on their own time, as citizens. Certainly this is something that tenure committees
So

seem to believe. For example, my university carefully codes it as community service and weighs it

That uncoupling of the categories


academic and activist seems, for me, difficult to sustain. I was struck by the view of
one friend, who noted that she did not see herself as an academic occasionally engaged
in activism, but thought of herself as an activist who happens to be an academic. It
could also be said that such a distancing evades a special charge what Noam Chomsky once
termed the political responsibility of intellectuals. Intellectuals in the academy enjoy a
special privilege that comes from political liberty, access to information, and
freedom of expression. For a privileged minority, Chomsky (1969, 324) insists,
Western democracy provides the leisure, the facilities, and the training to seek the
truth behind the veil of misrepresentation, ideology and class interest through
which the events of current history are presented to us. To neglect that
responsibility is, at the very best, to acquiesce to oppression. There are more
as some small percentage of my total academic worth.

reasons for this self-silencing, perhaps, as we come to embrace a postmodern humility,


caution against speaking for the Other. Although such a prudence is laudable, it can also
all too easily become a self-serving excuse for inaction. We certainly need to be alert to the
perils of the academic colonization of community life, but we should also avoid any romantic
assumptions of some authentically pure field of activism. The activists I have
encountered have all had complex, and occasionally self-serving, agendas. As we all occupy
multiple subject positions, so activism is a field of contradiction and diversity.
recent
and

8. Ethnically fixed representation is the same notion of


normativity that underlies whiteness truly endorsing a
politics of social locations means accepting the fact that
political resistance requires multiple nodes of attack only a
broad-based account can give us an efective map with which
to navigate politics
Rosi Braidotti 6, contemporary philosopher and feminist theoretician,
Transpositions: On Nomadic Ethics, 7-8
'transposition' refers to mobility and cross-referencing between
disciplines and discursive levels . I rely on transposable notions that drift nomadically among different
texts - including those I authored myself - while producing their own specific effects. Transposable concepts
are 'nomadic notions' that weave a web connecting philosophy to social realities ;
theoretical speculations to concrete plans; concepts to imaginative figurations. TransSecondly, the term

disciplinary in structure, transposable concepts link bio-technology to ethics and connect them both with social and

I will inject feminism, anti-racism, environmental and human


rights as an extra booster of theoretical energy and then let nomadic flows of becoming
run loose through them all.
political philosophy. Moreover,

Thirdly, the notion of transposition describes the connection between the text and its social and historical context,
in the material and discursive sense of the term. The passion that animates this book is a concern for my historical

amor fati
motivates me, not as fatalism, but rather in the pragmatic mode of the
cartographer. I am seeking modes of representation and forms of accountability that are
adequate to the complexities of the real-life world I am living in. I want to think
about what and where I live - not in a flight away from the embodied and
embedded locations which I happen to inhabit. In Metamorphoses I argued that, if you
do not like complexities you couldn't possibly feel at home in the third millennium .
Transpositions enacts this notion by proposing creative links and zigzagging
interconnections between discursive communities which are too often kept apart
from each other. To name but a few significant ones: bio-technologies and ethics and political
agency; the omnipresence of a state of crisis on the one hand and the possibility of sustainable
futures on the other; the practice of nomadic politics of difference versus technological
monoculture; the creative potential of hybrid subjectivity, in opposition to new and more
virulent forms of ethnically fixed identities; cartographic accounts of
locations and normative stances . Ultimately: post-structuralism and ethical norms or values.
situation, in so-called advanced, post-industrial cultures at the start of the third millennium. A kind of

More specifically, I will transpose nomadically from philosophical theory to ethical


practice. Loyal to the feminist politics of locations, I remain committed to the task of
providing politically informed maps of the present, convinced of the usefulness of a

situated approach as a critical tool to achieve an enlarged sense of objectivity and a


more empowering grasp of the social. Politically, a cartographic method based on
the politics of locations results in the recognition that not one single
central strategy of resistance is possible (Grewal and Kaplan 1994; Patton
2000; Massumi 1992b). A heterogeneous style of politics is needed instead, based
on centrelessness. As a corollary, this implies a variety of possible political
strategies and the non-dogmatic acceptance of potentially contradictory positions. A
scattered, weblike system is now operational, which defies and denies any pretence
at avant-garde leadership by any group. Resistance being as global as power, it is
centreless and just as non-linear: contemporary politics is rhizomic.

2AC University K (sketchy)


Reclaiming the university is absolutely vital it serves as a
pipeline to the political transforming debate into a site for
critical pedagogy allows us to become efective critically
engaged citizens
Henry Giroux, #1 badass, November 11th 2011, Occupy Colleges Now: Students
as the New Public Intellectuals, http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/5046:occupycolleges-now--students-as-the-new-public-intellectuals
Finding our way to a more humane future demands a new politics, a new set of
values, and a renewed sense of the fragile nature of democracy. In part, this means
educating a new generation of intellectuals who not only defend higher education as a
democratic public sphere, but also frame their own agency as intellectuals
willing to connect their research, teaching, knowledge, and service with
broader democratic concerns over equality, justice, and an alternative
vision of what the university might be and what society could become. Under
the present circumstances, it is time to remind ourselves that academe may be one of the few
public spheres available that can provide the educational conditions for
students, faculty, administrators, and community members to embrace
pedagogy as a space of dialogue and unmitigated questioning, imagine diferent
futures,
become border-crossers, and embrace a language of critique and possibility that makes visible the urgency of a
politics necessary to address important social issues and contribute to the quality of public life and the common
good. As people move or are pushed by authorities out of their makeshift tent cities in Zuccotti Park and other
public spaces in cities across the United States, the harsh registers and interests of the punishing state become
more visible. The corporate state cannot fight any longer with ideas because their visions, ideologies and survival of

Students all over the country are


changing the language of politics while reclaiming pedagogy as central to any
viable notion of agency, resistance and collective struggle. In short, they have become
the new public intellectuals, using their bodies, social media, new digital technologies, and any other
viable educational tool to raise new questions, point to new possibilities, and register their criticisms of the
the fittest ethic are bankrupt, fast losing any semblance of legitimacy.

various antidemocratic elements of casino capitalism and the emerging punishing state. Increasingly, the Occupy
Wall Street protesters are occupying colleges and universities, setting up tents, and using the power of ideas to
engage other students, faculty, and anyone else who will listen to them. The call is going out from the University of
California at Berkeley, Harvard University, Florida State University, Duke University, Rhode Island College, and over
120 other universities that the time has come to connect knowledge not just to power, but to the very meaning of
what it means to be an engaged intellectual responsive to the possibilities of individual and collective resistance
and change. This poses a new challenge not only for the brave students mobilizing these protests on college
campuses, but also to faculty who often relegate themselves to the secure and comfortable claim that scholarship
should be disinterested, objective and removed from politics.

There is a great deal these students and

young people can learn from this turn away from the so-called professionalism of disinterested knowledge and
the disinterested intellectual by reading the works of Noam Chomsky, Edward Said, Jacques Derrida, Howard Zinn,
Arundhati Roy, Elaine Scarry, Pierre Bourdieu and others who offer a treasure trove of theoretical and political
insights about what it means to assume the role of a public intellectual as both a matter of social responsibility and
political urgency. As the world rises up against economic injustice, Truthout brings you the latest news and analysis,
free of corporate influence. Help support this work with a tax-deductible donation today. In response to the political
indifference and moral coma that embraced many universities and scholars since the 1980s, the late Said argued
for intellectuals to move beyond the narrow interests of professionalism and specialization as well as the cheap

seductions of celebrity culture being offered to a new breed of publicity and anti-public intellectuals. Said wanted to
defend the necessity - indeed, keep open the possibility - of the intellectual who does not consolidate power, but
questions it, connects his or her work to the alleviation of human suffering, enters the public sphere in order to
deflate the claims of triumphalism and recalls from exile those dangerous memories that are often repressed or
ignored. Of course, such a position is at odds with those intellectuals who have retreated into arcane discourses
that offer the cloistered protection of the professional recluse. Making few connections with audiences outside of
the academy or to the myriad issues that bear down on everyday lives, many academics became increasingly
irrelevant, while humanistic inquiry suffers the aftershocks of flagging public support. The Occupy Wall Street
protesters have refused this notion of the deracinated, if not increasingly irrelevant, notion of academics and
students as disinterested intellectuals. They are not alone. Refusing the rewards of apolitical professionalism or

intellectuals need to
ask themselves some very "uncomfortable questions about our values and
traditions, our vision for the future, our responsibilities as citizens, the legitimacy of our 'democratic
institutions,' the role of the state, the police, the army, the judiciary, and the intellectual
obscure specialization so rampant on university campuses, Roy has pointed out that

community."[1] Similarly, Scarry points to the difficulty of seeing an injury and injustice, the sense of futility of one's
own small efforts, and the special difficulty of lifting complex ideas into the public sphere.[2] Derrida has raised
important questions about the relationship between critique and the very nature of the university and the
humanities, as when he writes: The university without condition does not, in fact, exist, as we know only too well.
Nevertheless, in principle and in conformity with its declared vocation, its professed essence, it should remain an
ultimate place of critical resistance - and more than critical - to all the power of dogmatic and unjust appropriation.
[3] Chomsky and the late Zinn have spoken about and demonstrated for over 40 years what it means to think
rigorously and act courageously in the face of human suffering and manufactured hardships. All of these

theorists are concerned with what it means for intellectuals both within and outside of higher
education to embrace the university as a productive site of dialogue and
contestation, to imagine it as a site that ofers students the promise of a
democracy to come, to help them understand that there is no genuine
democracy without genuine opposing critical power and the social
movements that can make it happen. But there is more at stake here than
arguing for a more engaged public role for academics and students , for demanding the
urgent need to reconnect humanistic inquiry to important social issues, or for insisting on the necessity for
academics to reclaim a notion of ethical advocacy and connective relationships. There is also the challenge of
connecting the university with visions that have some hold on the present, defending education as more than an
investment opportunity or job credential, students as more than customers, and faculty as more than technicians or

At a time when higher education is increasingly being


dominated by a reductive corporate logic and technocratic rationality unable to differentiate training
from a critical education, we need a chorus of new voices to emphasize that the humanities, in
particular, and the university, in general, should play a central role in keeping critical
thought alive while fighting back all attempts to foreclose and pre-empt
the further unraveling of human possibilities, prodding human society to go on questioning
a subaltern army of casualized labor.

itself and prevent that questioning from ever stalling or being declared finished. Corporations and the warfare state
should not dictate the needs of public and higher education, or, for that matter, any other democratic public sphere.
As the Occupy student protesters have pointed out over the last few months, one of the great dangers facing the
21st century is not the risk of illusory hopes, but those undemocratic forces that promote and protect state
terrorism, massive inequality, render some populations utterly disposable, imagine the future only in terms of
immediate financial gains, and promote forms of self-serving historical reinvention in which power is measured by
the degree to which it evades any sense of actual truth and moral responsibility. Students, like their youthful

education, even in its imperfect


state, still holds the promise, if not the reality, of being able to ofer them the
complex knowledge and interdisciplinary related skills that enable existing
and future generations to break the continuity of common sense, come to terms with
their own power as critical agents, be critical of the authority that speaks
to them, translate private considerations into public issues, and assume the responsibility of not only being
counterparts in the 1960s, are once again arguing that higher

governed but learning how to govern. Inhabiting the role of public intellectuals, students can take on the difficult
but urgent task of reclaiming the ideal and the practice of what it means to reclaim higher education in general and
the humanities, more specifically, as a site of possibility that embraces the idea of democracy not merely as a mode
of governance but, most importantly- as journalist Bill Moyers points out - as a means of dignifying people so they

it is
crucial to struggle for the university as a democratic public sphere and the need to
use that sphere to educate a generation of new students, faculty and others about
the history of race, racism, politics, identity, power, the state and the struggle for
justice. They are increasingly willing to argue in theoretically insightful and profound
ways about what it means to defend the university as a site that opens up and
sustains public connections through which people's fragmented, uncertain,
incomplete narratives of agency are valued, preserved, and made available for exchange while
being related analytically to wider contexts of politics and power. They are moving to reclaim, once
again, the humanities as a sphere that is crucial for grounding ethics, justice
and morality across existing disciplinary terrains , while raising both a sense of urgency
can become fully free to claim their moral and political agency. Students are starting to recognize that

and a set of relevant questions about what kind of education would be suited to the 21st-century university and its
global arrangements as part of a larger project of addressing the most urgent issues that face the social and

The punishing state can use violence with impunity to eject young
people from parks and other public sites, but it is far more difficult to eject them
from sites that are designed for their intellectual growth and well-being , make a claim to
educate them, and register society's investment and commitment to their future. Students can be forced
out of parks and other public spaces, but it is much more difficult to force them out
of those sites designed to educate them - places that are identified with young
people and register the larger society's obligation to their future and well-being . The
political world.

police violence that has taken place at the University of California campuses at Berkeley and Davis does more than
border on pure thuggery; it also reveals a display of force that is as unnecessary as it is brutal, and it is impossible
to justify. These young people are being beaten on their campuses for simply displaying the courage to protest a
system that has robbed them of both a quality education and a viable future. But there is more. It is also crucial not
to allow casino capitalism to transform higher education into another extension of the corporate and warfare state.

If higher education loses its civic purpose and becomes simply an adjunct of corporate and military
power, there will be practically no spaces left for dissent, dialogue , civic
courage, and a spirit of thoughtfulness and critical engagement. This is all the
more reason to occupy colleges and use them as a launching pad to both educate and to expand the very meaning

Knowledge is about more than the truth; it is also a weapon of


change. The language of a radical politics needs more than hope and outrage; it needs
institutional spaces to produce ideas, values, and social relations capable of
fighting off those ideological and material forces of casino capitalism that are intent in sabotaging
of the public sphere.

any viable notion of human interaction, community, solidarity, friendship, and justice. Space is not the ultimate
prize here.[4] Politics and ideology are the essence of what this movement should be about. But space becomes
invaluable when it its democratic functions and uses are restored. In an age when the media have become a means

the university ofers a site of informed


engagement, a place where theory and action inform each other, and a
space that refuses to divorce intellectual activities from matters of
politics, social responsibility and social justice . As students and faculty increasingly use
the space of the university as a megaphone for a new kind of critical education and politics, it will hopefully
reclaim the democratic function of higher education and demonstrate what it means
for students, faculty, and others to assume the role of public intellectuals dedicated
to creating a formative culture that can provide citizens and others with the knowledge and skills
of mass distraction and entertainment,

necessary for a radical democracy. Rather than reducing learning to a measurable quantity in the service of a
narrow instrumental rationality, learning can take on a new role, becoming central to developing and expanding the
capacity for critical modes of agency, new forms of solidarity, and an education in the service of the public good, an
expanded imagination, democratic values, and social change. The student intellectual as a public figure merges
rigor with civic courage, meaning with the struggle for eliminating injustice wherever it occurs and hope with a
realistic notion of social change. Hopefully, the Occupy Wall Street movements will expand their appropriation of
public space to the university. And if so, let's hope that higher education will be viewed as a crucial public good and
democratic public sphere. Under such circumstances,

the university might be transformed into a

new and broad-based community of learning and resistance . This is a huge


possibility, but one worth struggling for. Unlike the youth movements of the past, such a
movement will not crystallize around specific movements, but will create, hopefully, a community of the broadest

movement will connect to the


larger world through a conversation and politics that links the particular
with broader notions of freedom and justice. And against the pedagogical machine and
possible resistance and political clout. In this way, the Occupy

political forces of casino capitalism, this expanding movement will fight hopefully with renewed energy. It will be
determined in its mission to expand the capacities to think otherwise, and courageous in its attempts to take risks.

It will be brave in its willingness to change the nature of the questions asked, fight
to hold power accountable, and struggle to provide the formative culture for
students and others to fight for those economic, political, social, and cultural
conditions that are essential both to their future and to democracy itself .

Try or die for the academy


Henry A. Giroux, #1 badass, 11-20-2008, Against the Militarized Academy,
http://www.truth-out.org/archive/item/81138:against-the-militarized-academy
While there is an ongoing discussion about what shape the military-industrial complex will take under an Obama

what is often left out of this analysis is the intrusion of the military into
education. One example of the increasingly intensified and expansive
symbiosis between the military-industrial complex and academia was on full display
when Robert Gates, the secretary of defense, announced the creation of what he calls
a new "Minerva Consortium," ironically named after the goddess of wisdom, whose purpose is to
fund various universities to "carry out social-sciences research relevant to national
security."(1) Gates's desire to turn universities into militarized knowledge factories
producing knowledge, research and personnel in the interest of the Homeland (In)Security State
should be of special concern for intellectuals , artists, academics and others who believe that the
presidency,
higher

university should oppose such interests and alignments. At the very least, the emergence of the Minerva
Consortium raises a larger set of concerns about the ongoing militarization of higher education in the United States.

the increasing spread of


the discourse and values of militarization throughout the social order is intensifying
the shift from the promise of a liberal democracy to the reality of a militarized
society. Militarization suggests more than simply a militaristic ideal - with its celebration of war
as the truest measure of the health of the nation and the soldier-warrior as the most
noble expression of the merging of masculinity and unquestioning patriotism [and]
an intensification and expansion of the underlying values, practices, ideologies,
social relations and cultural representations associated with military culture . What
appears new about the amplified militarization of the post-9/11 world is that it has become
normalized, serving as a powerful educational force that shapes our lives,
memories and daily experiences. As an educational force, military power
produces identities, goods, institutions, knowledge, modes of
communication and afective investments - in short, it now bears down on all aspects of
social life and the social order. As Michael Geyer points out, what is distinctive about the militarization of the
social order is that civil society not only "organizes itself for the production of
violence,"(2) but increasingly spurs a gradual erosion of civil liberties . Military power and
In a post-9/11 world, with its all-embracing war on terror and a culture of fear,

policies are expanded to address not only matters of defense and security, but also problems associated with the
entire health and social life of the nation, which are now measured by military spending, discipline and loyalty, as
well as hierarchical modes of authority. As citizens increasingly assume the roles of informer, soldier and consumer

we see the very idea of the


university as a site of critical thinking, public service and socially responsible
research being usurped by a manic jingoism and a market-driven fundamentalism that enshrine the
willing to enlist in or be conscripted by the totalizing war on terror,

entrepreneurial spirit and military aggression as means to dominate and control society. This should not surprise us,
since, as William G. Martin, a professor of sociology at Binghamton University, indicates, "universities, colleges and
schools have been targeted precisely because they are charged with both socializing youth and producing
knowledge of peoples and cultures beyond the borders of Anglo-America."(3) But rather than be lulled into

we need to be prepared to
reclaim institutions such as the university that have historically served as vital
democratic spheres protecting and serving the interests of social justice
and equality. What I want to suggest is that such a struggle is not only political, but
also pedagogical in nature. Over 17 million students pass through the
hallowed halls of academe, and it is crucial that they be educated in ways
that enable them to recognize creeping militarization and its efects
throughout American society, particularly in terms of how these efects
threaten "democratic government at home just as they menace the
independence and sovereignty of other countries." (4) But students must also recognize
complacency by the insidious spread of corporate and military power,

how such anti-democratic forces work in attempting to dismantle the university itself as a place to learn how to
think critically and participate in public debate and civic engagement.(5) In part, this means giving them the tools

resist complicity with the


production of knowledge, information and technologies in classrooms and research
labs that contribute to militarized goals and violence. Even so, there is more at stake than
to fight for the demilitarization of knowledge on college campuses - to

simply educating students to be alert to the dangers of militarization and the way in which it is redefining the very
mission of higher education. Chalmers Johnson, in his continuing critique of the threat that the politics of empire

if the United States is not to


degenerate into a military dictatorship, in spite of Obama's election, a grass-roots
movement will have to occupy center stage in opposing militarization,
government secrecy and imperial power, while reclaiming the basic
principles of democracy.(6) Such a task may seem daunting, but there is a crucial need for
faculty, students, administrators and concerned citizens to develop alliances for long-term
organizations and social movements to resist the growing ties among higher education, on the one
presents to democracy at home and abroad, argues that

hand, and the armed forces, intelligence agencies and war industries on the other - ties that play a crucial role in

Opposing militarization as part of a broader pedagogical


strategy in and out of the classroom also raises the question of what kinds of competencies, skills and
knowledge might be crucial to such a task. One possibility is to develop critical educational theories
and practices that define the space of learning not only through the critical
consumption of knowledge but also through its production for peaceful and socially just ends. In the fight
against militarization and "armed intellectuals," educators need a language of critique, but they
also need a language that embraces a sense of hope and collective struggle . This
reproducing militarized knowledge.

means elaborating the meaning of politics through a concerted effort to expand the space of politics by reclaiming
"the public character of spaces, relations, and institutions regarded as private" on the other.(7) We live at a time
when matters of life and death are central to political governance. While registering the shift in power toward the
large-scale production of death, disposability and exclusion, a new understanding of the meaning and purpose of
higher education must also point to notions of agency, power and responsibility that operate in the service of life,
democratic struggles and the expansion of human rights. Finally, if higher education is to come to grips with the
multilayered pathologies produced by militarization, it will have to rethink not merely the space of the university as

the global space in which intellectuals, educators, students, artists,


labor unions and other social actors and movements can form transnational alliances to oppose
the death-dealing ideology of militarization and its effects on the world - including violence,
a democratic public sphere, but also

pollution, massive poverty, racism, the arms trade, growth of privatized armies, civil conflict, child slavery and the

it is time for educators and


students to take a stand and develop global organizations that can be mobilized in
ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As the Bush regime comes to an end,

the effort to supplant a culture of war with a culture of peace, whose elemental
principles must be grounded in relations of economic, political, cultural and social
democracy and the desire to sustain human life.

They are contradictory because they engage academia while


also saying it is bad that sustains whiteness
Nakayama & Krizek 95 Asst Prof, Dept of Communication @ Arizona State
Univ. Asst Prof, Dept of Communication @ St. Louis Univ. 1995 Thomas K. -& Robert
L.-; WHITENESS: A Strategic Rhetoric; QUATERLY JOURNAL OF SPEECH 81, 291-309
Whether or not one discursively positions oneself as white, there is little room for
maneuvering out of the power relations imbedded in whiteness. Whiteness, stated or
unstated, in any of its various forms, leaves one invoking the historically constituted and
systematically exercised power relations. This creates an enormous problem for those in the
center who do not want to reinforce the hegemonic position of the center and for those
elsewhere who would challenge this assemblage and its influence on their lives . As Foucault
observed, discursive formations are replete with contradictions. In the assemblage of whiteness, we find

contradictions are an important element in the construction of


whiteness, as it is by these contradictions that whiteness is able to maneuver through and
that these

around challenges to its space. The dynamic element of whiteness is a crucial aspect of the
persuasive power of this strategic rhetoric. It garners its representational power
through its ability to be many things at once, to be universal and particular, to be
a source of identity and difference. The discourses of nationality, for example, run counter to those of
scientific classification; yet the emergence of a racialized nation has been marked out time and again in the U.S.
and elsewhere. The discourses that define whiteness through its historical relationships to Europe further
problematize these discursive movements. Whiteness eludes essentialism through this multiplicity

and dynamism, while at the same moment containing within it the discourses of
essentialism that classify it scientifically or define it negatively . Our point here is not that there are
contradictions within this discursive assemblage. Rather our principal thesis is that these contradictions are
central to the dynamic lines of power that resecure the strategic, not tactical space of
whiteness, making it all the more necessary to map whiteness. Whiteness is complex and
problematic; yet in communication interactions we are expected to understand what it means when someone
says white or American or even All-American. It is perhaps when whites use whiteness in
communicating with other whites that the lines of power are particularly occluded, yet
resilient as ever. This also has significant implications for communication researchers.

Some forms of commodification are inevitable our


redeployment solves your impacts
Rich 12 (Camille Gear Rich, shes an associate professor of law at USC
specializing in feminist and racial legal theory, Racial Commodification in the Era of
Elective Race: Affirmative Action and the Lesson of Elizabeth Warren,
http://lawweb.usc.edu/centers/cleo/workingpapers/olin/documents/12_19_paper.pdf) gz
To be clear, this essay is largely supportive of the current cultural trend encouraging greater respect for individuals
racial self-identification decisions. However, it also shows that there is a need to reclaim so-called authenticity
judgments about race and properly name them for what they are: functionalist inquiries that structure and limit

employer discretion to define racial categories. For functionalist inquiries about race in the employment context
allow the law to consider with precision how race is being commodified or used by an employer in a given setting,

by proposing
substantive standards for this functionalist inquiry, ones that reject essentialist uses
of race, the analysis charts a path that allows us to avoid the primary concerns
Leong raises about racial commodification. For despite Leongs concerns about the
tendency of employers to racially commodify employees while administering
diversity-based affirmative action programs, she also recognizes that it is unlikely
we can fully extricate race from market pressures.17 This essay demonstrates that a properly
tailored functionalist analysis will serve as the market control that ensures that
diversity programs do not become unintended vehicles for racial stereotyping and
subordination. Antidiscrimination scholars will recognize my approach as a variant of the sociological
and to set fair terms for what Nancy Leong calls a racial capital exchange.16 Additionally,

approach to antidiscrimination law articulated by Robert Post, a method that recognizes governments unavoidable
and necessary role in shaping racial categories, even as it attempts to blunt their negative social significance.18
However, unlike Post, in this essay I fully embrace the functionalist logic of employment discrimination law.19 I
show that functionalist inquiries that explore races use value do not by definition creating stereotyping dangers.

a properly tailored functionalist inquiry that uses race to explore and


understand employees varied experiences of racialization gives us a unique
opportunity to redefine diversity in a more effective manner. More specifically, by
redesigning diversity initiatives to select for employees with diverse experiences of
racialization, we can both destabilize race and discourage employers from engaging
in racial essentialism.
Rather

2AC Tuck and Yang (sketchy)


TRY OR DIE FOR RESEARCH research may be coopted, but its
the only hope for inquiry permutation solves because
research isnt just saying no, but investigating the crime,
which is what the af does
Tuck and Yang 14 Assistant Professor of Educational Foundations, SUNY New Paltz and Assistant
Professor of Ethnic Studies, UC San Diego (Eve Tuck and K. Wayne Yang, R-Words: Refusing Research, Humanizing
Research, https://faculty.newpaltz.edu/evetuck/files/2013/12/Tuck-and-Yang-R-Words_Refusing-Research.pdf, p. 223,
MM)

Research is a dirty word among many Native communities (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999), and arguably, also among ghettoized
(Kelley, 1997), Orientalized (Said, 1978), and other communities of overstudied Others. The ethical standards of the
academic industrial complex are a recent development , and like so many post-civil rights reforms,
do not always do enough to ensure that social science research is deeply ethical,
meaningful, or useful for the individual or community being researched. Social
science often works to collect stories of pain and humiliation in the lives of those
being researched for commodification. However, these same stories of pain and humiliation
are part of the collective wisdom that often informs the writings of researchers who attempt
to position their intellectual work as decolonization. Indeed, to refute the crime,
we may need to name it. How do we learn from and respect the wisdom and desires in the stories that we (over)
hear, while refusing to portray/betray them to the spectacle of the settler colonial gaze? How do we develop an ethics for research

as
fraught as research is in its complicity with power, it is one of the last
places for legitimated inquiry. It is at least still a space that proclaims to care about
curiosity. In this essay, we theorize refusal not just as a "no," but as a type of
investigation into "what you need to know and what I refuse to write in" (Simpson, 2007, p. 72). Therefore, we
present a refusal to do research, or a refusal within research, as a way of thinking about
humanizing researchers.
that differentiates between powerwhich deserves a denuding, indeed petrifying scrutinyand people? At the same time,

Research is uniquely good in context of the af a combination


of desire and pain centered narratives, the perm, solves the
impact to the K
* By having our desire and the damage research together, we generate productive
tension between different epistomologies

Tuck and Yang 14 Assistant Professor of Educational Foundations, SUNY New Paltz and Assistant
Professor of Ethnic Studies, UC San Diego (Eve Tuck and K. Wayne Yang, R-Words: Refusing Research, Humanizing
Research, https://faculty.newpaltz.edu/evetuck/files/2013/12/Tuck-and-Yang-R-Words_Refusing-Research.pdf, p. 237,
MM)

Research is just one form of knowing , but in the Western academy, it eclipses all others. In this way,
the relationship of research to other human ways of knowing resembles a colonizing formation, acquiring, claiming,

In the current neoliberal moment, there are few spaces that remain
dedicated to human curiosity and human inquiry aside from research. This
component of research is valuable, and worth sustaining, yet we must
simultaneously protect and nurture other nonresearch spaces/approaches for
curiosity and inquiry. Calling everything research doesn't help to ensure that there
are multiple opportunities to be curious, or to make meaning in life. We aren't
advising anyone to insert artificial or insurmountable barriers between research and
absorbing, consuming.

other forms of human inquiry, or to think of research and art as impermeable or


discretejust to attend to the productive tensions between genres/epistemologies,
to gather the benefits of what might be a dialogical relationship between research
and art.

Their argument creates the personal as inevitably inferior


recreates our impacts
Ahmed 4 (Sara, Australian and British academic working at the intersection of
feminist theory, queer theory, critical race theory and postcolonialism The Cultural
Politics of Emotion, http://books.google.com/books?
hl=en&lr=&id=QT8YAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Emotion+Pain+Spectacle&ots
=G1xGus-RMD&sig=WTOzM5XSx5ggYFmCKBHpZj4aW-g#v=onepage&q=Emotion
%20Pain%20Spectacle&f=false)
I have associated emotions not with individuals, and their interior states or character, nor with the quality of

emotions have often


been linked to the power of language . But they are often constructed as an
instrument: as something that we use simply to persuade or seduce others into
false belief (emotion as rhetoric, rhetoric as style without content). Such a view constructs emotion
as a possession, at the same time that it presumes that emotions are a lower form
of speech. This presumption in turn elevates reasonableness or detachment
into a better address, one that does not seek to stir up trouble . I have offered an
alternative view of emotions as operating precisely where we dont register their effects in the
determination of the relation between signs, a relation that is often concealed by the form of the
objects, but with signs and how they work on and in relation to bodies. Of course,

relation: the metonymic proximity between signs. In Chapter 4, I called this determination stickiness, examining
how signs become sticky or saturated with affect. My discussion of emotive language was not then a discussion of
a special class or genre of speech, which can be separated from other kinds of speech. Rather this model of sticky

language works as a form of power in which emotions align some


bodies with others, as well as stick different figures together, by the way they move
us. If emotions are not possessions, then the terrain of (in)justice cannot be a question of having or not having
an emotion. Interestingly, in moral and political philosophy, those who argue that emotions
are relevant to justice, often do so via a model of character and virtue. Robert C. Solomon, for example,
signs shows us how

following from a classical view of justice as virtue, and David Humes and Adam Smiths concept of moral
sentiments, argues that: Justice is first of all a function of personal character, a matter of ordinary, everyday

Justice becomes a form of feeling, which is about fellow-feeling,


a capacity to feel for others, and to sympathise with their pain (Solomon 1995:3, see also
feeling (Solomon 1995:3).

Smith 1966:10). We have already seen the risks of justice defined in terms of sympathy or compassion: justice then
becomes a sign of what I can give to others, and works to elevate some subjects over others, through the reification
of their capacity for love or fellow-feeling (see Chapters 1 and 6). But we must also challenge the view that justice
is about having the right kind of feelings, or being the right kind of subject. Justice is not about good character. Not
only does this model work to conceal the power relations at stake in defining what is good-in-itself, but it also works
to individuate, personalize and privatize the social relation of (in) justice. Character is, after all, an effect rather than

Emotions then cannot be installed as the truth of injustice, partly


as they do not simply belong to subjects.
a ground of social life.

Pain and sufering cannot be separated from political


methodology their attempt to links to the 1AC
Ahmed 4 (Sara, Australian and British academic working at the intersection of
feminist theory, queer theory, critical race theory and postcolonialism The Cultural
Politics of Emotion, http://books.google.com/books?
hl=en&lr=&id=QT8YAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Emotion+Pain+Spectacle&ots

=G1xGus-RMD&sig=WTOzM5XSx5ggYFmCKBHpZj4aW-g#v=onepage&q=Emotion
%20Pain%20Spectacle&f=false)
The relation between injustice and feeling bad is complicated. Lauren Berlant has argued that injustice cannot be

Although pain and injustice cannot be reduced,


they also cannot be separated: the fact of suffering, for example, has something to
do with what is wrong about systematic forms of violence, as relations of force and
harm (see Chapter 1). The effects of violence arc something to do with why violence can be judged as bad. Now,
reduced to pain, or feeling bad (Berlant 2000: 35).

this is not to say that what makes violence bad is the others suffering. To make such a claim is dangerous: it makes
the judgement of right and wrong dependent upon the existence of emotions. The reduction of judgements about
what is bad or wrong to experiences of hurt, pain or suffering would be deeply problematic. For the claim would
allow violence to be sustained in the event that the other claimed not to suffer, or that I claimed the other did not

some forms of violence remain concealed as violence, as


effects of social norms that are hidden from view. Given this, violence itself could be
justified on the grounds of the absence of consciously-felt suffering . The reduction
of injustice to emotions also justifies claims of access to the inferiority of the
feelings of others. We have probably all heard arguments that justify power relations through the claim that
suffer. We must remember that

this other is in fact not hurting, or might even be content, or happy. Indeed, I could make this claim about

emotions are not transparent and


they are not simply about a relation of the subject to itself, or even the relation of
the subject to its own history.
myself: I do not hurt, I am happy, therefore it is not wrong. But

2AC Abelism
Theres no alternativereclaiming language solvevoting af
in light of their k solves
Vidali, Dept of English U of Colorado-Denver, 10
[Amy, Seeing What We Know: Disability and Theories of Metaphor, Journal of
Literary & Cultural Disability Studies, v4, #1, pp33-54]

This process has made it obvious that

there is no possibility of breaking the links between

metaphor and disability, which is emphasized in a recent discussion of disability metaphors on the Society
for Disability Studies listserv (which generated 19 posts).'5 In discussing the metaphorical concept
of "paralysis," Stephen Kuusisto argued that "disability as a cognitive metaphor is always pejorative and its
use as a trope represents a failure of critical and/or imaginative thinking." In response, Cynthia LewieckiWilson suggested that there is little "'pure' language without metaphor " and that perhaps
we can "trope it for new ends." Growing from this, Anne Finger claimed that she is not
incapable of motion because her right leg is paralyzed, but rather, as she says, "it means I
have to find other, out of the ordinary ways of moving," and she suggests we avoid taking the
"red pencil to all such language about disability" (Kuusisto, Lewiecki-Wilson, and Finger). This
exchange reflects the difficulty of drawing attention to disability metaphors, as identification can lead to avoidance

phrases like totally lame might


best be weeded out of language, but writing off a metaphor like understanding is grasping,
because it assumes a body that can grasp, misses an opportunity to consider the often ignored
kinesthetic ways that many of us learn. The imperative, then, is not simple avoidance
of the knowing is seeing metaphor and other metaphors, but a willing embrace of
the opportunity to diversify our writing to represent a wider range of bodily and
cognitive experience. For example, we can ask students to find the "scents" of previous course ideas while
and the "red pencil," rather than thoughtful engagement. To be sure,

reading a new article, as an exciting alternative to asking them to "see" the main point. We might suggest that
colleagues taste and digest a new subject, in order to encourage bodily ways of knowing and interacting that go

Changing the verb from see/highlight/envision to a new sensory


experience not only recognizes, but creates, new ways of knowing. In Talking Sketching Moving:
Multiple Literacies in the Teaching of Writing, Patricia Dunn argues that we must engage "visual, aural,
spatial, emotional, kinesthetic, or social ways of knowing " (1). Similarly, so must the
language of Disability Studies scholarship and teaching and the metaphors we use
represent this diversity, rather than relying on "seeing." As May and Ferri note, the disability
community must always be "re-deploying disability metaphors in ironic or agential
ways that disrupt simplistic equivalences between disability and social death" (124).
And in a piece on theater and disability, Carrie Sandahl similarly argues, " Exerting some control over
metaphorical representation in language, theory, politics, and artistic practice is a
vital strategy for radical disability culture," and she importantly critiques the metaphors that
manifest in her own stage productions (13, also see Tolan). While a mere policing of language is not
helpful, disability communities must actively challenge ableist models and reclaim
disability metaphors. Such shifts are more than playful language: like the impact of she or she or he as
third-person pronouns that replace the supposedly neutral he, these revised metaphors do matter
and can facilitate change and awareness, most immediately in our own
communities.'7
beyond "witnessing" texts.'6

Everything we say is embedded with unintended meaning


because oppressive structures are subliminally embedded in
each of us we must willing to make mistakes and learn to
combat oppression
Brown 11

, Artist Initiative Grantee at Minnesota State Arts Board Senior Academic Adviser for the College of Education and Human Development at University of

Minnesota Steering Committee at Education Abroad Network at University of Minnesota Volunteer Coordinator for Social Inclusion and Bullying Prevention at Marcy Open School see less
Past 2012-2013 Buckman Fellow at Buckman Fellowship Travel and Study Grantee at Jerome Foundation Loft Mentor Series Award Winner for Poetry at The Loft Literary Center Institute
on Community Integration Post-graduate Certificate Graduate Student at University of Minnesota University of Minnesota College of Education and Human Development/University
Honors Program Liaison at University of Minnesota University Honors Program Academic Advisor at University of Minnesota University of Minnesota Learning Abroad Center/University
Honors Program Liaison at University of Minnesota Foreign Lecturer--English Studies, Cultural Awareness, Humanities at Hokkaido University of Education Educational Technologies postgrad certificate program at University of British Columbia, Vancouver Adjunct Lecturer--Japanese Language at Wayne County Community College Adjunct Lecturer--English Composition at
Wayne State University Foriegn Lecturer--English Studies, Creative Writing, English Literature at Sophia University--Tokyo, Japan Screw normal: Resisting the myth of normal by
questioning medias depiction of people with autism and their families, http://blog.lib.umn.edu/gara0030/iggds/Screw%20Normal_FINAL_Dosch%20Brown.pdf

In sum, none of us in society, no matter what labels society gives us, are
immune to the silent machinery that is ableism, or racism, or any ism. This
is the crux of the argument essential to dismantle the messages the media
sends to us about autismthe media teaches us silently and we learn well and
treat Others based on what we are taught. So, we all therefore must be cautious
about the silent power of the messaging inside us and be willing to unveil the
hidden news frames that put ableist machinery to work in our society and in our
beliefs. We need to risk making mistakes as we grow better at seeing what
has been left silent for so long because ableism is deeply and subliminally
embedded within the culture (Campbell, 2008, p. 153), and it is also deeply
and subliminally embedded within every one of our minds

*2AC Nietzsche K
1. Framework the af gets to weigh the enactment of the plan
against a competitive alternative. Thats best:
A) Fairness allowing the neg to change the focus of the
debate moots the 1AC
B) Education forces the debate to be about plan
implementation instead of representations
Nietzsche is wrong:

A. Cause for Joy. You cant just order someone to be happy it


requires a reason.
Victor Frankl, Holocaust survivor; M.D., PH.D.; Visiting Professor, Harvard University; received over 29 honorary doctorate degrees,
Search for Meaning.

2K, Mans

Let us first ask ourselves what should be understood by "a tragic optimism." In brief it means that one is,
and remains, optimistic in spite of the "tragic triad," as it is called in logotherapy, a triad which consists of those aspects of human existence
which may be circumscribed by: (1) pain; (2) guilt; and (3) death. This chapter, in fact, raises the question. How is it possible
to say yes to life in spite of all that? How, to pose the question differently, can life retain its potential meaning
in spite of its tragic aspects? After all, "saying yes to life in spite of everything," to use the phrase in which
the title of a German book of mine is couched, presupposes that life is potentially meaningful under any
conditions, even those which are most miserable. And this in turn presupposes the human capacity to creatively turn life's
negative aspects into something positive or constructive. In other words, what matters is to make the best of any
given situation. "The best," however, is that which in Latin is called optimumhence the reason I speak of a tragic optimism, that is, an
optimism in the face of tragedy and in view of the human potential which at its best always allows for: (1) turning suffering into a human achievement

deriving from life's


transitoriness an incentive to take responsible action. / It must be kept in mind, however, that
optimism is not anything to be commanded or ordered. One cannot even force oneself to be
optimistic indiscriminately, against all odds, against all hope. And what is true for hope is also true for the other two
and accomplishment; (2) deriving from guilt the opportunity to change oneself for the better; and (3)

components of the triad inasmuch as faith and love cannot be commanded or ordered either. / To the European, it is a characteristic of the American

again and again, one is commanded and ordered to "be happy." But happiness cannot be pursued; it
must ensue. One must have a reason to "be happy." Once the reason is found, however, one becomes happy automatically. As
we see, a human being is not one in pursuit of happiness but rather in search of a reason to become
happy, last but not least, through actualizing the potential meaning inherent and dormant in a given situation.
culture that,

B. Ontology of Freedom. Seeking to better the world is the


best reason it articulates a fresh way of being.
Todd May, Ph.D.; Professor of Philosophy @ Clemson University, 200 5, Philosophy and Social Criticism 31 (5-6)

This moment when you are seeking to change the world, whether by making a suggestion in a meeting or singing at a rally
or marching in silence or asking for a signature on a petition, is not a moment in which you dont exist. Its not a moment of yours that you
sacrifice for others so that it no longer belongs to you. It remains a moment of your life, sedimenting in you to make you
what you will become, emerging out of a past that is yours as well. What will you make of it, this moment? How will you be with others, those others
around you who also do not cease to exist when they begin to organize or to protest or to resist? The illusion is to think that this has nothing to do with

you. Youve made a decision to participate in world-changing. Will that be all there is to it? Will it seem to you a simple
sacrifice, for this small period of time, of who you are for the sake of others? Are you, for this moment, a political ascetic? Asceticism like that is

Freedom lies not in our distance from the world but in the historically fragile and
contingent ways we are folded into it, just as we ourselves are folds of it. If we take MerleauPontys Being not as a rigid foundation or a truth behind appearances but as the historical folding and refolding of a univocity,
dangerous.

then our freedom lies in the possibility of other foldings.

Merleau-Ponty is not insensitive to this point. His elusive


concept of the invisible seems to gesture in this direction. Of painting, he writes: the proper essence of the visible is to have a layer of invisibility in the
strict sense, which it makes present as a certain absence . . . There is that which reaches the eye directly, the frontal properties of the visible; but there is
also that which reaches it from below . . . and that which reaches it from above . . . where it no longer participates in the heaviness of origins but in free

the surface of the visible, is doubled up over its


whole extension with an invisible reserve; and if, finally, in our flesh as the flesh of things, the actual, empirical,
ontic visible, by a sort of folding back , invagination, or padding, exhibits a visibility, a possibility that is
not the shadow of the actual but its principle . . . an interior horizon and an exterior horizon between which the actual visible
accomplishments.9 Elsewhere, in The Visible and the Invisible, he says: if . . .

is a partitioning and which, nonetheless, open indefinitely only upon other visibles . . .10 hat are we to make of these references? We can, to be sure, see
the hand of Heidegger in them. But we may also, and for present purposes more relevantly, see an intersection with Foucaults work on freedom.

There is an ontology of freedom at work here, one that situates freedom not in the private reserve of an individual
but in the unfinished character of any historical situation. There is more to our historical juncture, as there is to a painting,
than appears to us on the surface of its visibility. The trick is to recognize this, and to take advantage of it, not only with our thoughts but with our lives.

that is why, in the end, there can be no such thing as a sad revolutionary. To seek to change the
world is to offer a new form of life-celebration. It is to articulate a fresh way of being, which is at once a
way of seeing, thinking, acting, and being acted upon. It is to fold Being once again upon itself, this
And

time at a new point, to see what that might yield. There is, as Foucault often reminds us, no guarantee that this fold will not itself turn out to contain the

there is no certainty
about the results of our experiments. Our politics are constructed from the same vulnerability that is the stuff of our art and our
daily practices. But to refuse to experiment is to resign oneself to the intolerable ; it is to abandon both the struggle to
change the world and the opportunity to celebrate living within it. And to seek one aspect without the other life-celebration without
world-changing, world-changing without life-celebration is to refuse to acknowledge the chiasm of body and world
that is the wellspring of both. If we are to celebrate our lives, if we are to change our world, then perhaps the best place to begin to think is
intolerable. In a complex world with which we are inescapably entwined, a world we cannot view from above or outside,

our bodies, which are the openings to celebration and to change, and perhaps the point at which the war within us that I spoke of earlier can be both

That is the fragile beauty that, in their different ways, both Merleau-Ponty and Foucault have
placed before us. The question before us is whether, in our lives and in our politics, we can be worthy of it.
waged and resolved.

AND this ontology solves life-affirmation even in the face of


total failure to reduce sufering.
Mitchell Smolkin, M.D., 1989, Understanding Pain: Interpretation and Philosophy, p. 75-9
For Camus, the absurdity of the human condition consists in the incongruity between what humans naturally desire, and the reality of the world.

Humans naturally desire not to be injured and killed. They desire to understand life and to find meaning in living. They
desire to feel at home in the universe. Despite these natural needs, man is confronted with a silent universe that does not answer human
questions about meaning. He is surrounded by irrational destructiveness, and by the spectre of suffering
and pain hurtling out of the void capriciously at human recipients with no regard for their relative merits.
Man is estranged from a universe which seems so antagonistic to his natural needs. He feels homeless, in exile, a stranger in his own land. He
[Humanity] hears his nights and days filled always, everywhere with the eternal cry of human
pain.56 Man has been sentenced, for an unknown crime to an indeterminate period of punishment. And while a good many people adapted
themselves to confinement and carried out their humdrum lives as before, there were others who rebelled, and whose one idea was to break loose from
the prison house. Like Ivan Karamozov (Bk V, Chap 4), Camus refuses to accept the idea that future goods such as Divine salvation or eternal
happiness can compensate for a single moment of human suffering,57 or a childs tears. Both Ivan Karamozov and Camus believe that if evil is
essential to Divine creation, then creation is unacceptable. They wish to replace the reign of grace by the reign of justice.58 They both assert that no
good man would accept salvation on these terms. There is no possible salvation for the man who feels real compassion, because he would side with

how does one avoid merely


beating the sea with rods in a nihilistic orgy? . This error is more subtle than shooting at random into the crowd, but leads
to much more killing and human suffering than the nihilist sniper. Camus criticizes Nietzsche, at least in his theory of
super-humanity, and Marx before him, with his classless society, [who] both replace The Beyond by the Later On.62 In this respect, these
thinkers have not abandoned the notion that history marches toward redemption in which some
messianic goal will be realized. Camus urges moderation in the quest for distant goals. He writes, the absolute is not attained nor,
the damned and for their sake reject eternity.59 What is to be gained by rebellion, what are its dangers, and

above all, created through history. Politics is not religion, or if it is, then it is nothing but the inquisition.63 He contrasts rebellion, which he applauds
with revolution which leads to murder in the name of vague future goals. Revolution consists in loving[those] a man who does not yet exist, and in
murdering [those] men who do exist.64 He who dedicates himself to this history, dedicates himself to nothing, and in his turn is nothing.65 In The
Plague, the character Tarrou renounces his revolutionary past. He states, For many years Ive been ashamed, mortally ashamed of having been, even
with the best intentions, even at many removes, a murderer in my turn. . . All I maintain is that on this earth there are pestilences and there are victims,
and its up to us, so far as possible, not to join forces with the pestil- ences.66 Though obviously attuned to the dangers of rebellion, he insists that these

What is the
original purpose that has been forgotten? Rebellion begins because the rebel denounces the lack of justice in the world. He
consequences are in no way due to rebellion itself, or at least they occur to the extent that the rebel forgets his original purpose.67

denounces the idea that the end, whether it be the coming of the messianic age, or the revo- lution, or eternal bliss, justifies means which involve so

man needs to exert all his effort against injustice and


in solidarity with the sufferers in the world. Killing existing men for a questionable future good, would not be a rational
method of exhibi ting solidarity with the sufferers. Nor would solidarity be shown by stoical acceptance of the status
quo. Camus urges his rebels to renounce murder completely and work for justice and for a decrease in suffering. Like Dr. Rieux in The Plague, one
should take the victims side and share with his fellow citizens the only certitude they have in common
love, exile, suffering.68 What can be accomplished through rebellion? Camus goals are modest. He realizes that the rebel is
doomed to a never ending defeat,69 in that death, finitude and suffering will always conquer
him. He realizes that after [humanity] man has mastered everything in creation that can be mastered and rectified everything that can be rectified,
children will still die unjustly even in a perfect society. Even by his greatest effort man can only purpose to diminish
arithmetically the sufferings of the world. But the injustice and the suffering will remain and, no matter how limited they are,
they will not cease to be an outrage.7 However, there are ephemeral victories and rewards for the rebel. He who dedicates himself for the
duration of his life to the house he builds, to the dignity of mankind, dedicates himself the earth and reaps from it the harvest
that sows its seed and sustains the world again and again. Those whose desires are limited to man and his humble yet
formidable love, should enter, if only now and then, into their reward. They know that if there is one thing one can always yearn
for and sometimes attain, it is human love. Society must be arranged to limit injustice and suffering as
much as possible so that each individual has the leisure and freedom to pursue his own search for
meaning. Future utopias must be renounced, and history can no longer be presented as an object of worship.74 It is time to forsake our age and
much suffering. Once injustice and suffering are denounced, [people]

its adolescent furies, and to aim for what is possiblemore justice, solidarity, and love among [people] men. The rebel must reject divinity in order to

Redemption is impossible. Human dignity and love can


intermittently be achieved with struggle and constant vigilance against the plague bacillus that never dies
or disappears for good. .. [but can] rouse up its rats again and send them forth to die in a happy
city.76
share in the struggles and destiny of all men.75

C. Value-Creation. Compassionate sufering is key to true


creativity.
Michael Fraser, B.A., Ph.D.; Assistant Professor @ Harvard University, 200 6, The Compassion of Zarathustra.

This conventional interpretation of the close of Nietzsche's epic, however, is surely incorrect. A close examination of the
passage in question reveals that Zarathustra never overcomes his compassion in the sense of ridding himself of it once and for all. There is no
indication that our hero will fail to experience compassion upon further encounters with suffering, or even that he has ceased to feel compassion for the

Achieving mastery over a virtue or sentiment, remember, necessarily implies retaining it in


one's psyche, not abandoning it. Rather than ridding himself of all sympathetic sentiments once and for all, Zarathustra affirms his
feelings for the higher men as having had their time as an essential component of his destiny. Compassion may cause him real
misery, but, when properly harnessed, it helps rather than hinders Zarathustra's creativity. Indeed, as tightly
bound as sympathetic feelings are with the possession of knowledge and the faculty of imagination, they are
necessarily present in any creative psyche. Remembering, then, that the telos of human striving is
not happiness but creation (more specifically value-creation), the experience of compassion is nothing to be
regretted. / While Rosen acknowledges that the pitiful must be accepted as a natural part of human existence, he nonetheless interprets
higher men.

Nietzsche to maintain that it must also be destroyed in order for the creation of higher values that will themselves exclude or minimize pity by the

valuecreation does not require the destruction of compassion; it requires affirmation of the
imaginative strength which allows the wise to share suffering with the objects of their allencompassing knowledge. A mere brute warrior may not need to experience compassion, but a
warrior-artist and value-creator surely must, albeit without allowing this suffering to interfere with his work. Though the
weak may be unable to withstand even the slightest pain, the strong and creative not only
withstand their suffering and their sympathetic suffering they positively embrace them. Such suffering is of no
imposition of a natural hardness that is for Nietzsche the indispensable complement to the birth of a race of warrior-artists.48 Yet

matter to them, for it is no hindrance in their creative task, only a hindrance to the pursuit of happiness undertaken by the last man and other such

Compassion, Zarathustra concludes, is an unbearable burden only for


those who mistakenly believe the true goal of human existence to be contentment rather than
creation. / Elsewhere, speaking of his philosophical honesty, Nietzsche reasons that, despite this honesty's regrettable aspects, supposing that this
degenerates (See Z I Prologue 5, p. 129).

is our virtue from which we cannot get away, we free spiritswell, let us work on it with all our malice and love and not weary of perfecting ourselves

sympathetic suffering is inseparable


from his imaginative creativity, and then returning to his destined task with the glow of a healthy soul ready to use all his faculties
in our virtue (JGB VII:227, p. 345).49 Zarathustra treats compassion similarly, realizing that

including compassionate imaginationin pursuit of his chosen task.50 This, remember, is how value-creation first appears, as a great self-affirmation
on the part of the naturally noble (see GM I:2, p. 462).

Such a value-creator seizes the right to call even his propensities for

sympathetic suffering of Mitleidby the name of virtue. The virtue so


chosen will inevitably shine forth as a sign of his strength, and be put to service in the
advancement of life.
sufferingincluding a propensity for the

They are an essentialist understanding of oppression only the


af solves
Hutchinson 99 Assistant Professor, Southern Methodist University School of
Law (Darren Lenard Hutchinson, Winter, 1999, Ignoring the Sexualization of Race: Heteronormativity, Critical Race Theory and Anti-Racist
Politics, 47 Buffalo L. Rev. 1, lexis)

scholars
and activists engaged in the development of strategies to combat social inequality
must recognize the inherent complexity of systems of oppression (e.g., patriarchy,
white supremacy and heterosexism) and the social identity categories around which
social power and disempowerment are distributed (e.g., race, gender and sexual orientation).
Multidimensionality and Intersectionality: Similarities and Differences / In a prior article, I argued that

n25 Placing legal theory and politics concerning issues of homosexuality and heterosexism at the focal point of my

social identity categories and systems of


oppression are "inextricably and forever intertwined, " n26 that the failure of
gay and lesbian legal theorists to interrogate and challenge racial and class
subordination produces [*10] essentialist theories that invariably reflect the
experiences of class and race-privileged gays, lesbians and bisexuals , n27 and that
gay and lesbian essentialism precludes adequate political, legal and theoretical
responses to the contingent and varying effects of heterosexist oppression. n28 Having
analysis, I asserted that the various

demonstrated the experiential diversity of gay and lesbian existence, I urged gay and lesbian legal theorists and

employ "multidimensionality" as a theoretical framework for


challenging heterosexist subordination. Within the gay and lesbian context,
multidimensionality serves as "a methodology by which to analyze the impact of
racial and class oppression (or other sources of social inequality) upon sexual subordination
and gay and lesbian experience and identity and to cease treating these forces
as separable, mutually exclusive, or even conflicting phenomena." n29 By offering
political activists to

multidimensionality to law and sexuality scholars, I hoped to provoke a discourse on the intricacy of sexual
subordination and to help reshape legal theory to account for this complexity. n30 More generally,

multidimensionality posits that individual acts of discrimination and the various


institutions of oppression are complex and multilayered , owing their existence to a
host of interlocking sources of advantage and disadvantage. / My analysis arose,
primarily, out of an impressive body of feminist and critical race literature that has
painstakingly countered the notion that sources of oppression operate in
isolation from one another. n31 This scholarship has criticized, most extensively, feminist and antiracist legal theory and politics for failing to examine how the convergence of racial oppression and gender hierarchy
often creates unique experiences for women of color - experiences that essentialist theories either submerge or fail

Applying a theoretical approach commonly [*11] referred to as


"intersectionality," these scholars have proposed several public policy and doctrinal
reforms that would make civil rights law responsive to the needs and experiences of
women of color. n33 / Although I locate my work on the interlocking nature of race, class and sexuality within
established scholarship on the synergistic nature of oppression, I also view my writing as both a
substantive and conceptual extension and redirection of this literature . While the
multidimensionality paradigm differs substantively and conceptually from the
intersectionality scholarship, the insightful observations of intersectional scholars created the conditions
to explain accurately. n32

for the development and evolution of multidimensionality and of other theoretical extensions and rearticulations of

intersectionality. n34 / My analysis represents a substantive extension of the prevailing literature on the
"intersectionality" of oppression because this latter work has been limited, almost exclusively, to understanding and
exploring the operation of just two sources of oppression - patriarchy and racism - in the lives of women of color.

My analysis builds upon - yet [*12] differs from - this work because it explores the
social meaning of sexual identity (along with race, gender and class ), a topic which,
recent scholarship notwithstanding, remains largely unexplored in the intersectionality corpus
n35

and in legal theory generally. n36 / Conceptually, my analysis differs from the pre-existing body of intersectional

it attempts to complicate the implication of this latter work that


social identity categories or systems of oppression only "intersect" in the lives of
persons burdened by multiple sources of disempowerment, such as women of color .
The idea that "intersecting" systems of oppression only affect limited categories of
individuals is implied by statements in several writings in the race and gender line of analysis. n37 These
scholarship because

statements, together with the almost exclusive focus the literature has given to experiences of women of color rather than those of white women and men of color - suggest a limited relevance of intersectionality. n38 Nevertheless, white women and men of color also experience "multi-dimensional" oppression .
Men of color and white women, [*13] however, may not typically conceive of their subordination as a combination
of gender and racial hierarchy because "maleness" and "whiteness," privileged and dominant categories in a
patriarchal and white supremacist society, are rarely acknowledged to exist but, nevertheless, form the invisible
foundation for social policy, civil rights strategies and critical theory. n39 Although some race-gender scholars have

n40 they have not explored


signi [*14] ficantly the dimensions of these experiences but have limited their
analyses primarily to uncovering the multidimensionality of women of color and
their historical experiences with subordination . n41 / Placing the emergence of intersectionality
acknowledged the multiplicity of white women and men of color experiences,

into an historical context provides a basis for understanding its heavy emphasis on issues of women of color, which,
perhaps unintentionally, helped to create a false implication that only women of color experience multilayered
subordination. When intersectionality was first introduced to legal theory, there were virtually no analyses of the
unique effects of subordination on women of color in feminist legal theory and traditional civil rights scholarship;
furthermore, judicial decision-making demonstrated a remarkable misunderstanding of or lack of appreciation for
the ways in which women of color were affected by racial hierarchy and patriarchy. n42 Thus, by centering their
analyses on women of color, the intersectionality scholars filled (and continue to fill) a tremendous void in civil

While the intersectionality critiques have provided substantial


insight into the complexity of oppression, the limited (explicitly and implicitly) nature of the
critiques leaves the intersectional paradigm open to a charge that it only applies to
a specific category of individuals (e.g., women of color or poor white lesbians). n44 Consequently,
rights jurisprudence. n43 /

skeptics can disparage or question the importance of argu [*15] ments concerning the complexity of oppression
and regarding

the need for more sophisticated paradigms for confronting social

inequality. In the gay and lesbian context, for example, white gay male critic Richard Mohr has dismissed
demands by lesbian feminists and people of color that gay political organizations challenge issues of racial
subordination and patriarchal oppression and form coalitions with anti-racist and feminist groups. Mohr criticizes
such efforts as an "unnecessary and... wasteful drain on the movement." n45 Because intersectionality and related
scholarship imply that the multiplicity of identity and oppression has limited relevance and significance, these
works may actually leave the impression that claims such as Mohr's are correct in a very limited, but troubling,
sense. If, for instance, multilayered identities and oppression only implicate women of color and their experiences,
then an examination of the "intersectionality" of race and gender might indeed be a "wasteful" - or at least less
relevant - venture for white women and men of color. /

2AC Intersectionality K
Intersectionality must be replaced with multidimensionality in
order to generate pragmatic theory that faces the reality of
the interconnection of everyones identity and oppression.
Hutchinson 97 Assistant Professor, Southern Methodist University School of
Law (Darren Lenard Hutchinson, Winter, 1997, Out Yet Unseen: A Racial Critique of Gay and Lesbian Legal Theory and Political Discourse, 29
Conn. L. Rev. 561, lexis)
B. Sources of Multidimensional Thought: Critical Race Theory and Feminist Legal Theory / Lesbian theorists and a small group of race theorists have
introduced anti-essentialism into gay and lesbian legal theory. The most extensive anti-essentialist critiques in equality jurisprudence, however, have
occurred in critical race theory and feminist legal theory. n318 Women

of color, and other scholars, writing in these areas have


generated a sizeable body of literature that analyzes "intersectional" oppression, specifically
racism and sexism, and that exposes the inadequacies of essentialist theories of equality. These
critics argue for the development of equality theories that confront multiple forms of
disempowerment--theories that respond to the complexity of subordination. Their scholarship has greatly

informed this Article and offers gay and lesbian scholars and activists guidance for the task of recentering gay and lesbian political discourse and legal
theory away from essentialism and toward multidimensionality. / Kimberle Crenshaw, for example, explores the interactions of race and gender
utilizing "intersectionality." Crenshaw states that "in examining the intersections of race and gender, I engage the dominant assumptions that these are
essentially separate . . . ." n319 In addition, Mari Matsuda observes that "working in coalition forces us to look for both the obvious and non-obvious
relationships of domination, helping us to realize that no form of subordination ever stands alone." n320 Matsuda encourages legal scholars to "ask the
other question," that is, to examine what multiple forms of subordination a particular act or structure of exclusion may involve. n321 Similarly, Angela
Harris, criticizing "the attempt to extract an essential female self and voice from the diversity of women's experience," argues that the survival of
feminist legal theory depends upon its proponents' ability "to root out and examine [their] differences . . . ." n322 Harris thus argues that feminist legal
scholars must "subvert [legal theory] with . . . accounts of the particular, the different, and the hitherto silenced." n323 Finally, Elvia Arriola rejects the
idea of arbitrarily separating out categories to address discrimination in our society. Instead [she] understands discrimination as a problem that arises
when multiple traits and stereotypes constructed around them converge in a specific harmful act. Traditional categories then become points of
departure for a deeper, more subtle analysis that explores the historical relationships between certain special groups, as well as an individual's
experience within each of these groups. n324 / These

critics challenge legal scholars and activists to endeavor


toward discovering the multiple perspectives of the oppressed by employing "intersectionality,"
n325 "multiple consciousness," n326 and "holistic" n327 liberation theories. They counter, moreover, the
notion that we can adequately examine or dismantle any one form of subordination without
considering its interaction with other sources of disempowerment. n328 Their scholarship therefore serves as a
model for moving gay and lesbian legal theory away from essentialism. / C. Multidimensionality: An Extension of Intersectional Analysis / This
Article prescribes multidimensionality for gay and lesbian legal theorists. I see multidimensionality as a
methodology by which to analyze the impact of racial and class oppression (or other sources of
social inequality) upon sexual subordination and gay and lesbian experience and identity and to
cease treating these forces as separable, mutually exclusive, or even conflicting phenomena.
Multidimensionality exposes the various layers of social power that inform heterosexism and
homophobia. Multidimensional analysis also reveals the multiple dimensions of social identity
categories and offers a comprehensive framework for conceptualizing sexual subordination that
neither "destroys" nor "fragments" n329 our lives. / Multidimensionality does not require every
piece of scholarship to reflect everyone's personal histories. This is an impossible task. Rather,
multidimensionality demands that we make explicit the racial and class (and other) assumptions
that undergird our theories, realize these assumptions might (and likely do) limit the application
of our theories, strive to discover the vast differences among individuals in oppressed social
groups, and learn how these differences should (and do) affect theory and politics. Ultimately, I
view multidimensionality as a discursive project aimed at unveiling the complexity of
subordination and identity and reshaping legal theory to reflect and respond to this complexity. /
The extensive, pre-existing body of anti-essentialist legal scholarship on race and gender and on the general connections between multiple oppressions
is most commonly referred to as "intersectionality" by commentators, including Kimberle Crenshaw, its most notable theorist (and, perhaps, founder).
Some readers may then wonder why I have chosen a new term--"multidimensionality"--to represent my analysis. I have done so for the following
reasons. / First, I believe that the

terms "gay," "lesbian," "woman," "person of color," "racism," "sexism,"


and "homophobia" possess multiple dimensions and contextual layers. "Gay," for example, has racial,
gender, and class dimensions. Therefore, "gay" may describe a poor, Latino male, a black,
lesbian feminist, or a white, middle-class male--depending on the context of its usage. I also believe that
these various dimensions are inextricably and forever intertwined. Multidimensionality

accurately captures this reality. / "Intersectionality," by contrast, subtly implies a convergence,


particularly in the lives of people of color, of otherwise separate and independent categories. The
term "intersectionality" thus suggests a separability of the host of identities and forces that define
social groups and social power. I therefore prefer multidimensionality because it more effectively
captures the inherent complexity and irreversibly multilayered nature of everyone's identities
and of oppression. While the term intersectionality suggests a separability of identities and oppressions, the scholarship in this area has
forcefully taught us otherwise. Crenshaw, for example, wishes "ultimately" to "disrupt the tendencies to see
race and gender as exclusive or separable categories." n330 Accordingly, she views
"intersectionality" as a "provisional" or "transitional concept that . . . can be replaced as our
understanding of each category becomes more multidimensional." n331 Viewed in this context,
multidimensionality is not a wholly alternative paradigm. Rather it can be seen as drawing upon, extending, and
developing intersectionality by pushing legal theorists and political actors toward a "more
multidimensional" understanding of social identity categories and subordination.

AT: Irigaray
Irigarays politics of two sexes leads to the oppression of
intersex and transsexual people and relinks them to
heterosexuality
Lisa Guenther, xx-xx-2010, Other Fecundities: Proust and Irigaray on Sexual Difference,
http://www.academia.edu/302807/Other_Fecundities_Proust_and_Irigaray_on_Sexual_Difference
Even in a feminist utopia, it is not clear that each and every woman would identify with
Irigarays account of our real natures, nor is it clear that everyone who identifies
as a woman would count as such for Irigaray. The conviction that there are two and
only two sexes marginalizes an experience of bodily multiplicity that is just as
phenomenologically real and compelling as the experience of sexual duality (Luce 85,
11213). Irigarays repeated suggestion that the only genuine encounter with
difference can happen between the two sexes enforces a heterosexual paradigm
that marginalizes same-sex relationships (Luce 7, 48, 18990, 22122) and makes it impossible
for Irigaray to account for intersex or transsexual bodies without characterizing
them as aberrant or unnatural (Luce 49, 11321).

AT: Asian Women


Colonialism is the root cause
Card Sunny Woan, Spring, 2008, J.D., Public Interest and Social Justice Law, emphasis in Critical Race Theory, Santa Clara University School
of Law, WHITE SEXUAL IMPERIALISM: A THEORY OF ASIAN FEMINIST JURISPRUDENCE, 14 Wash. & Lee J. Civil Rts. & Soc. Just. 275, Lexis

the
underlying cause of sexual-racial inequality between White men and non-White women is White
sexual imperialism. This principle holds that the history of Western political, military, and economic
domination of developing n5 nations compelled women of these nations into sexual submission
by White men. Moreover, at the global level, the vestige of Western imperialism has left women of
color subordinate to White men even today. The White sexual imperialism principle applies to the
prevailing rationale for social inequality whenever: (1) the sexual-gender dynamic involves a White male and a non-White female, and (2) the
non-White female descends from a culture or community that has been historically colonized by
European or Anglican nations. This Article will focus specifically on how this theory applies to Asian feminist jurisprudence and the
This Article proposes a new framework for studying the intersection of feminist jurisprudence and critical race theory. It claims that

experiences of Asian and diasporic n6 Asian women. / The first part of the Article reviews the stereotype of the Asian woman as hyper-sexualized yet
demure and submissive, and traces its origins back to White heterosexual male presence in East Asian wars, particularly the Philippine-American War,
World War II, and the Vietnam War. n7 The following parts of this Article tackle some of the most crucial issues that Asian feminist jurisprudence
confronts, such as the portrayal of Asian women in pornography, n8 the rise in popularity of mail-order brides, n9 the "Asian fetish" syndrome, n10 and
the underreported rates of sexual violence against Asian women, n11 all through the context of White sexual imperialism. Briefly, the Article also will

the problem of inequality can be


addressed today through recognition of White sexual imperialism as a theory in both feminist
and critical race jurisprudence. n12 / II. An American History of Hyper-Sexualizing Asian Women /
White sexual imperialism permeates through all events in history involving U.S.-Asian relations.
also show how dominance theory affirms the principle of White sexual imperialism and how

The first part of this section discusses the stereotype of the hyper-sexed Asian woman. n13 The second part then briefly revisits the history of Western
imperialism in the East and the interplay of it with Orientalism and sexism. n14 Finally, the third part expands on the correlation between rape and war
and the role of that dynamic in shaping White-Asian relationships. n15 / A. "Me Love You Long Time" and the Hyper-sexed Asian Woman / The Asian
woman of White male sexual fantasies toddles into view--"small, weak, submissive and erotically alluring," n16 her "eyes almond-shaped for mystery,
black for suffering, wide-spaced for innocence, high cheekbones swelling like bruises, cherry lips." n17 She not only exemplifies hyper-sexuality, but
hyper-heterosexuality, male-centered and male-dominated. n18 She is presented as the perfect complement to the exaggerated masculinity of the
White Man, existing solely to serve men and be sexually consumed by them. n19 Oriental Girls, an article published in Gentleman's Quarterly (GQ),
described the Western male's fantasy n20 of the Asian female: / When you get home from another hard day on the planet, she comes into existence,
removes your clothes, bathes you and walks naked on your back to relax you . . . She's fun you see, and so uncomplicated. She doesn't go to
assertiveness-training classes, insist on being treated like a person, fret about career moves, wield her orgasm as a non-negotiable demand. . . . She's
there when you need shore leave from those angry feminist seas. She's a handy victim of love or a symbol of the rape of third world nations, a real
trouper. n21 / The dominant class often pits one marginalized group against another, compelling one group to feel inadequate in comparison to the
other for not possessing a certain attribute or behaving in a manner that pleases the dominant class. This strategy incites enmity between the two
groups, setting them as rivals who ought to battle for the approval of the dominant class. n22 In the end, though, this strategy only serves to both
discipline and maintain the supremacy of the dominant class. / For example, mainstream white America often uses the "model minority" n23 myth
associated with Asian Americans to overemphasize and blame black Americans for their "non-model" attributes and behavior, mainly their political
activism, resistance, and civil disobedience. n24 Similarly, the direct comparison in the passage above between Asian women and white women serves
to denigrate white women for "go[ing] to assertiveness-training classes, insist[ing] on being treated like a person, fret[ting] about career moves," or
"wield[ing] her orgasm as a non-negotiable demand." n25 In other words, for pursuing sex equality. n26 As Professor Sumi K. Cho phrased it, "Asian
Pacific women are particularly valued in a sexist society because they provide the antidote to visions of liberated career women who challenge the
objectification of women." n27 Their sexuality, viewed as "naturally excessive and extreme against a [w]hite female norm," clearly exists not only within
a sexual construct but within a racial construct as well. n28 Furthermore, this sexual-racial stereotype emerged as a direct result of the colonial
encounter of war, n29 presenting the Asian woman as an "object for western consumption and the satisfaction of western desires." n30 / While
contemporary media and the arts portray women generally as objects for consumption, they cast Asian women into the most inferior of all positions,
below the white woman. Portrayals of the interrelationships between white American GIs n31 who go overseas, the Asian women they meet there, and
the white American women back home show this dynamic. The 1989 musical Miss Saigon n32 epitomizes the subordinate and objectified position of
Asian women. In the musical, an American marine arranges a one-night-stand with Kim, a Vietnamese bar-girl in Saigon shortly before the fall of the
city. n33 After the destruction of her village, Kim flees to Saigon fantasizing about finding a "strong GI to protect her." n34 The American marine then
leaves Vietnam, stranding Kim in Ho Chi Minh City with their son, Tam. n35 The marine returns home to the United States where he marries a white
woman. n36 He continues with his life happily. n37 Meanwhile, Kim tries to escape and reunite with the marine. n38 She ends up in Bangkok, Thailand
with her son, where she works at a massage parlor, n39 a consistent affirmation that Asian women in her position have no more function than to
provide sexual services to men. The marine and his white wife meet Kim in Saigon. n40 When Kim realizes her American lover has no intention of
marrying her, she commits suicide, leaving Tam under the care of the marine and his new wife, n41 quietly suggesting, perhaps, that Kim represents an
unfit mother while the marine's wife, a white woman, is better suited to raise Tam. Lea Salonga, a Filipina singer-actress, became the first Asian to take
on the leading role as Kim in the production. n42 Due to her immense popularity and success, producers of the show now hold regular casting calls in
Manila and, in fact, anywhere with a sizable Asian female population. n43 Interestingly, the leading role as Kim is almost always played by a Filipina.
n44 This casting suggests rather flippantly that all Asian women in this kind of situation are interchangeable and usable body parts, or "messy
complications behind the male games of military history and foreign affairs." n45 Miss Saigon became an iconan icon of the sex tour industry that

Said n47
described "Orientalism" n48 as a "Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having
authority over the Orient." n49 He noted the confluence of Orientalism and Sexism:
"[Orientalism] view[s] itself and its subject matter with sexist blinders. . . . [The local] women
are usually the creatures of a male power-fantasy. They express unlimited sensuality, they are more or less stupid, and
above all they are willing." n50 Moreover, "[w]hen women's sexuality is surrendered, the nation is more or less
sprouted in Asia as a result of American military presence. n46 / B. Imperialism, Orientalism, Sexism / In the late 1970s, Edward

conquered." n51 Thus, the sexual conquest of Asia's women correlates with the conquest of Asia
itself. / In 1899, Rudyard Kipling dubbed the West's imperialist campaign in the East as "the White Man's burden." n52 He coined the term in a
poem written to rouse Americans to colonize and rule the Philippines. n53 One former U.S. President took this message to heart. From 1894 until his

Theodore Roosevelt wrote and lectured widely on taking up Kipling's "White Man's
burden." n54 He called imperialism a "manly" duty that American men must take up. n55 Civilized
men had a "manly duty to 'destroy and uplift' lesser, primitive men," namely Asians, "for their
own good and the good of civilization." n56 Roosevelt's express and blatant collocation of
colonizing Asia and labeling that act as "manly" illustrates how throughout American history
imperialism in and even Western scholarship on Asia has been viewed in a sexualized context. n57
presidency in 1901,

/ [*283] During the Philippines' revolt against Spanish inquisition in the late 1800s, the Americans came, promising to help. n58 Though the Filipinos
hesitated at first, fearing the U.S. might try to colonize their country, President William McKinley gave his word that the U.S. "had no design of
aggrandizement and no ambition of conquest." n59 Thus, the Filipinos accepted help from the United States and together they defeated the Spanish.
n60 Before a Republic of the Philippines could be established, however, the United States issued the Proclamation of Benevolent Assimilation in which
President McKinley "announced the U.S.'s intention to annex the Philippines. To make it legal, the United States paid Spain twenty million silver

The Filipinos resisted American colonization and the PhilippineAmerican war raged on for more than a decade, murdering over 250,000 Filipinos. n62 Famine
and disease decimated entire towns, as the United States Army slashed-and-burned its way
through villages. n63 More than half the country lay in waste from American-caused destruction.
n64 / While occupying the islands, the American soldiers referred to the Filipinas as "little brown
fucking machines powered by rice." n65 A sex industry sprang up to cater the U.S. military men, offering "a girl for the price of a
burger." n66 It was the imperialistic conquest of the islands by the Americans that jump-started the sex
entertainment industry in the Philippines. n67 During the Vietnam War, five U.S. military bases
stationed in Thailand sheltered 40,000 to 50,000 American GIs at any given time. n68 Between 1966 and
1969, as many as [*284] 70,000 U.S. soldiers came to Thailand for "Rest and Recreation" ("R&R")
n69 and ignited a sex industry. n70 R&R facilities have been, and continue to be, a vital component
of the U.S. military policy. n71 With pervasive disregard for human rights, the military accepts
access to indigenous women's bodies as a "necessity" for American GIs stationed overseas. n72 /
After the Vietnam War ended, "there was a major campaign on tourism" targeting White men to sustain Thailand's sex industry. n73 By the early
1990s, several million tourists from Europe and the United States visited Thailand annually, many
of them specifically for its sex and entertainment industry. n74 In 1995, for example, a study
reported that sixty-five percent of tourists to Thailand "were reportedly single men on vacation."
n75 The White conquest of Asia is "far from being 'a thing of the past' but is a lived experience of
many." n76 As result of White imperialism, "Asians and members of the Asian Diasporas have existed and still exist through a colonized
pesos--or two silver pesos per Filipino." n61

experience." n77 / C. Twin Pillars of White Male Domination: Rape and War / Sexual violence against women functions as a fundamental tool of
war.79 In wartime, the rape of women by armed and uniformed state forces pose the greatest direct threat to civilian women.80 Often, combatants
view the women of the conquered land as a legitimate spoil of war.81 Rape and sexual violence of indigenous women by military men have been
tolerated precisely because it is so commonplace.82 Battle-hardened or brutalized soldiers, who are often removed from access to the usual outlets for
sexual frustration, are especially likely to become rapists.83 Moreover, chiefly characteristic of Western armies, group machismo evolves in close-knit
combat units where sexual performance is prized just as highly as combat performance.84 In the first and second conflicts in Iraq, U.S. troops were

While prostitution may be seen around


any U.S. military base generally, military prostitution in Asia instituted by the U.S. occur within
a colonial context, which distinguishes it from the nature of prostitution that takes place within
the U.S. or Western European locations.86 Western societies often view Asian societies as less
developed or underdeveloped, less sophisticated in comparison, and thus inferior to the West. 87
These perceptions in turn color the interactions between U.S. servicemen and Asian women,
which are further exacerbated by sexually denigrating stereotypes the West casts on Asian
women.88 The narratives of many Asian women reveal the denigrating treatment they received from American soldiers.89 Filipina sex workers ,
frequently shown violent pornography by their superiors to increase aggression.85 /

for example, frequently report being treated like a toy or a pig by the American [soldiers] and being required to do three holes oral, vaginal and anal

The systems of prostitution perpetuated around U.S. military bases in Asia reaffirm the
Wests perception of Asian women as sex objects. 91 In these contexts, Asian sex workers are registered
and tagged like domestic pets, further relegating them to a less than human status. 92 Despite
significant improvements in racial and sex equality over the last few decades, U.S. military
mens treatment of women in Asia have failed to progress. As recent as the mid- 90s, international controversy flared
sex.90

over an incident in Japan where two U.S. Marines and a U.S. Navy seaman gang-raped a 12-year-old Japanese girl in Okinawa, Japan.93 They watched
the girl enter a stationary store and decided to ambush her.94 The two Marines bound the girl with tape, pulled her shorts and underwear down to her
ankles, and after the three men raped her, remarked that the girl looked like she enjoyed it.95 To filter an analysis of the Okinawa incident through
either sex inequality or racial inequality exclusively fails to convey fully why this 12-year-old girl suffered. While many scholars see the convergence of
sex and race stereotypes as the root cause of the incident, examination of these two components only is not enough.96 To realize the gravity of harm

caused by sexual-racial disparities between White men and Asian women, a tripartite inquest of colonial history along with the intersection of sex- and

race- related forces must be applied. / F irst, the legacy of imperialism explains why the U.S. servicemen occupied Japan. / After the Allies defeated

World War II, the United States took it upon itself to meddle in East Asian political
affairs, namely, regulating Japan to prevent it from engaging in imperialism. A sense of White
supremacy meant the world could fall complacent to the idea that White imperialism was
somehow better than Asian imperialism. Thus, while Japanese military presence in East Asia
posed a threat to the world, American military presence would not. / Second, the prevailing attitude that Asian
the Axis powers in

women occupy an inferior position to White women and, even more so, White men, assuaged the consciences of these three servicemen enough for
them to not only rape the girl, but also express belief that she enjoyed the sexual conquest. Recall that, in the eyes of White men, Asian women seem to
exist solely for their sexual gratification as hyper-sexed and unconditionally submissive creatures.97 The stereotype of Asian women as always
consenting to sex allowed the three servicemen to deny the act as a rape. It is this potent triple combination of imperialist thought, racial inequality,
and sexual inequality that perpetuate violence against Asian women by White men. Had these components not come together under White sexual
imperialism, the Okinawa incident would never have occurred. III. Revealing the Undercurrent of White Sexual Imperialism in Contemporary Asian
Feminist Issues / Asian a nd diasporic Asian women face higher risks of racial and sexual harassment than their White female peers. One of the main

the Asian experience cannot escape the stain of sexual imperialism, a stain
which simply does not apply to the White woman's experience. n96 Although the theory of intersectionality n97
theories behind this is that

between race and gender alone cannot fully articulate Asian and diasporic Asian women's lives; rather, the concurrent operation and interactive mutual
dependency between race, sexuality, and dimensions of colonialism expound on their subordination. n98 / This section comments on the present-day
ramifications of White male exploitation and domination of Asian women and the feminist issues raised by the grievous legacy of White sexual
imperialism left in both Asia and Asian America. The first part surveys Joo v. Japan, n99 a recent court decision where Asian women, who were the
victims of atrocious war and sex crimes, brought suit in U.S. courts. n100 The omission of an analysis through White sexual imperialism may explain
why the court ruled against the women. n101 The second part then shows how White sexual imperialism provides a compelling rationale for several
contemporary issues of sexual-racial inequality facing Asian and diasporic Asian women. n102 / A. Joo v. Japan: A Case Exemplifying How the
Invisibility of White Sexual Imperialism Affects Asian Women / 1. When is Prostitution Not a Commercial Activity? / In Joo, fifteen women n103 from
China, Taiwan, South Korea, and the Philippines brought suit against Japan in federal district court pursuant to the Alien Tort Claims Act ("ATCA").
n104 Under the ATCA, federal district courts have jurisdiction over civil claims by aliens for torts committed "in violation of the law of nations or a
treaty of the United States." n105 The women alleged that Japanese soldiers routinely raped, tortured and mutilated them during World War II and
that such acts by the Japanese government caused a direct effect on the United States. n106 In response, the defendant, Japan, argued that the
plaintiffs lacked personal jurisdiction under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ("FSIA"), n107 which bars plaintiffs from bringing a cause of action
against a sovereign nation. n108 / FSIA does not apply, however, if, "the action is based upon a commercial activity carried on . . . outside the territory
of the United States in connection with a commercial activity of the foreign state elsewhere and that act causes a direct effect in the United States." n109
The plaintiffs contended that Japan's acts of prostituting the women to its military men constituted a "commercial activity" n110 within the meaning of
the FSIA exception. n111 Furthermore, plaintiffs brought forth substantial evidence indicating that U.S. military men subsequently used the same
prostituted "comfort women" for their own sexual gratification, thereby "caus[ing] a direct effect in the United States." n112 / The district court held
that Japan's conduct did not constitute "commercial activity," and therefore FSIA immunity applied. Since the court found that the defendant's conduct
was not "commercial activity," the court chose not to address the issue of direct effect by way of the American military men using the same "comfort
women" after the Allies defeated Japan. / In 2005, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit heard the case on remand from the U.S.
Supreme Court. n113 It affirmed the district court's decision "on the ground that Japan would have been afforded absolute immunity from suit in the
United States at the time of the alleged activities." n114 In 2006, the Supreme Court denied certiorari, n115 and it seems no semblance of justice will
likely be afforded to these women. / 2. Criticisms of the Joo Decision / Scholars argue that "court precedents and legislation concerning the proper
inquiry for what constitutes a commercial activity strongly support an argument that commodified sexual slavery qualifies as a 'commercial activity'
under Section 1605(a)(2)." n116 Furthermore, the framers of the FSIA recognized that "states increasingly enter[ed] the marketplace [to] compete with
private market players." n117 Thus, despite the theory of foreign sovereign immunity, the Act wanted to make sure foreign states would not be "immune
for suits based on their commercial or private acts." n118 To level the market playing field between private players and states acting as private players,
the Act wanted to make sure states would not be absolved from liability for torts. n119 / In making its case, the District of Columbia District Court
"compared Joo to a prior Supreme Court [decision], Saudi Arabia v. Nelson, n120 to demonstrate how the activities conducted by the Japanese did not
constitute 'commercial activity' under the FSIA." n121 In Nelson, the Saudi government arrested the plaintiff at the government hospital he worked at,
took him to a prison, and allegedly tortured him. n122 The plaintiff then brought suit against Saudi Arabia, claiming the commercial activity exception
under FSIA against Saudi Arabia's sovereign immunity. n123 The Supreme Court, however, held that the alleged act came at the "hands of the Saudi
police, and not in connection with the hospital" where the plaintiff worked. n124 Thus, "the nature of his arrest did not qualify as a commercial
activity." n125 / The Joo court applied Nelson to justify why Japan's operation of comfort women stations did not fall within the FSIA commercial
activity exception. It reasoned that the act of kidnapping women from their homes was not enough to invoke the commercial activity exception. n126
Even though the Japanese military used and regulated the comfort women stations, required soldiers to pay a fee for use, a fee which depended on the
woman's nationality and his length or time of visit based on his ranking, and even received a substantial portion of the revenue from these exchanges,
the court nonetheless found Japan's activities to be non-commercial. n127 Critics of the Joo decision argue that the court did not properly distinguish
Joo from Nelson and misapplied precedent to fit a conclusion it desired. n128 They note the striking similarity in arguments and word choice between
the court's opinion and the Statement of Interest submitted by the U.S. State Department. n129 This suggests that perhaps the court "succumbed to the
pressure of the Bush administration to dismiss the case." n130 / Finally, one compelling aspect of the World War II comfort women case recently
surfaced. In the aftermath of the war, when American troops entered Japan, the U.S. soldiers used the same comfort women stations Japan had set up.
n131 The "GIs paid upfront and were given tickets and condoms. . . . [T]he charge for a short session with a prostitute was fifteen yen, or about a dollar,
roughly the cost of half a pack of cigarettes." n132 First, ignoring the court's ruling against the women, the opinion referred to the acts committed by the
Japanese soldiers as a "violation of 'both positive and customary international law,'" human rights violations and war crimes. n133 It remained entirely
silent, however, on the contention the women raised about American GIs using the comfort women stations. n134 What the Japanese men did to the
plaintiffs seemed patently abhorrent to the women; however, when American soldiers were charged with the same crime against the same women, the
court declined to find a violation of either customary or international law. n135 / B. What Happens In Asia Does Not Stay In Asia: Consequences of

American military men stationed in Asia brought back to the


stereotypes of Asian women as "cute, doll-like, and unassuming, with
extraordinary sexual powers," which then became an expectation White men had of all women
of Asian descent. n136 This section addresses the negative, and often dark, ramifications caused by the hyper-sexed stereotype has caused. / 1.
White Sexual Imperialism on Diasporic Asian Women /
United

States their

Asian Women in American Pornography / Few mediums reveal the White sexual imperialistic exploitation of Asian women more so than pornography.
n137 In a 2002 study conducted by Jennifer Lynn Gossett and Sarah Byrne, out of thirty-one pornographic websites that depicted rape or torture of
women, more than half showed Asian women as the rape victim and one-third showed White men as the perpetrator. n138 The study further uncovered
a strong correlation between race and pedophilia, advertising with titles such as "Japanese Schoolgirls" or "Asian Teens." n139 Furthermore, images of
Asian women in pornographic forms consistently came up through a keyword search for "torture." n140 / Many scholars warn that race-specific

pornography contributes to race-specific sexual violence. n141 Since the overwhelming majority of violent pornography features Asian women in
particular, it follows that Asian women are at even greater risk of sexual violence due to their role in violent pornography. n142 Helen Zia, a noted social
activist, suggests a direct connection between racial-sexual stereotyped pornography and actual violence against Asian women. n143 Additionally,

Kandice Chuh argues that "because Asian/American women are depicted as always consenting,
they cannot be raped in the eyes of the law ." n144 / Pornography leads to other alarming sexual-racial trends involving Asian
women as well. For example, depictions of Filipinas as sexual commodities on the Internet have been linked to the bride industry in Australia. n145
Researchers further speculate that online sexual commodification of Filipinas may at least partially explain why Filipinas experience disproportionate
levels of domestic violence compared to non-Filipina women. n146 / White men's fascination with Asian women in pornography stems from early

To colonize the Asian nations, countries such as the United States flooded
Asia with military forces. n148 As an inevitable result of military presence, prostitution centers
consisting of local civilian women sprung up to cater to the White servicemen. n149 With these
sexual experiences as their main, if not only, encounters with Asian women, White servicemen
returned home with the generalization that Asian women are hyper-sexualized and always
willing to comply with White man's prurient demands. n150 This germinated even more interest
in Asian women as sexual objects. n151 To sustain this increased interest, the Asian sex tour
industry developed. n152 Asian sex tourism further perpetuates the stereotype of Asian women as
hyper-sexualized and always willing. n153 If Asian women are perceived as hyper-sexual, it understandably follows that sexually
nineteenth century Western imperialism. n147

explicit materials, pornography for example, would include a preponderance of Asian women. n154 The next two subsections on the Asian fetish
syndrome and mail-order brides will discuss how depictions of Asian women in pornography have produced gravely detrimental consequences on the
Asian and diasporic Asian woman's experience. / 2. Bartering for Mail-Order Brides / In the 1970s when conservative White men grew discontent with
the American feminist movement and White women's ensuing push for liberation, they turned to the mail-order bride industry in East Asia. n155
Believing American women to be too radical and career-oriented, many American men turned to mail-order bride companies for Asian wives who are
"loyal and undemanding." n156 Guided by sexual stereotypes of Asian women as subservient, these men saw Asian mail-order brides as the muchwelcomed antithesis to the White American woman. n157 Where the White feminist woman actively resisted subjugation, the Asian woman was
portrayed as enjoying it. n158 While these perceptions of Asian women originated from the colonial era, they have endured through the decades,
haunting the experiences of Asian women even today. n159 / 3. Case of the Asian Fetish Syndrome / Michael Lohman, a third-year doctoral student at
Princeton University, ranked in the top of his class in the applied and computational mathematics department. n160 In March 2005, the state charged
him with reckless endangerment, tampering with a food product, harassment, and theft. n161 Lohman had surreptitiously cut locks of hair from at least
nine Asian women and poured his urine and semen into the drinks of Asian women more than fifty times in Princeton's graduate student dining hall.
n162 When investigators entered Lohman's apartment, which he shared with his wife, an Asian woman, they found stolen women's underwear and
mittens filled with the hairs of Asian women, which they believe Lohman used to masturbate. n163 When the University released e-mail notifications of
the incident to the student body, it failed to mention that Lohman's victims were all Asian women. n164 While the institution*n treated the case as an

Yin Ling Leung, organizational director of the National Asian


Pacific American Women's Forum ("NAPAWF"), contended that the University misidentified the problem. n165 Leung argued that
isolated instance of a psychologically unstable man,

the Asian fetish syndrome triggered Lohman's behavior. n166 Activists in the Asian American community complained about the fact that the University
ignored how Lohman specifically targeted Asian women and clearly harbored a sexual fetish for them. For example, Leung said that to protect Asian

stated: "Sexual assault of


Asian women on college campuses is a major issue. You get a room of five Asian American
women together, and they all have stories about sexual harassment." n168 Mainstream America shrugs off the
American female students, the University should have been more "culturally competent." n167 Leung further

notion of Asian fetishes, believing men who have such fetishes "are harmless." n169 However, Leung warns, "It's not as innocent as it looks." n170

Helen Zia, a Princeton graduate, commented: "It's the image of Asian American women being
exotic and passive and won't fight back and speak up. Predators think they have free rein with
Asian American women." n171 In another and even more disturbing case, David Dailey and Edmund "Eddie" Ball abducted, handcuffed,
and blindfolded two Japanese schoolgirls, ages eighteen and nineteen, in Spokane, Washington. n172 The two girls were taken to a house and raped
repeatedly over a span of seven hours. n173 Eddie Ball, the mastermind behind the crime, professed an avid fascination in bondage, sadomasochism,
and Japanese culture. n174 He collected Japanese bondage videos and was an expert in Japanese rope-tying techniques. n175 At his home, police found
numerous Japanese-language books. n176 Ball specifically targeted Japanese students because he believed them to be submissive and thus, less likely
to report the rapes. n177 However, he believed wrongly. n178 The students reported the crime and aided police in catching the perpetrators. n179 Dailey
and Ball faced sentences of twenty-one to twenty-eight years in prison. n180 Then there was the case of Lili Wang, a North Carolina State University
("NCSU") graduate student, who became the victim of what may have been a racially-motivated crime. n181 Richard Borelli Anderson had a strong
sexual preference for Asian women because, as Anderson allegedly said, "they study hard, and they're very nice, soft speaking." n182 In October of
2002, Anderson fired four gunshots into Wang, killing her before turning the gun on himself. n183 Police found his body five feet away from Wang.
n184 Professor Andrew Chin maintained that this was a hate crime, but the NCSU police disagreed. n185 "There is no evidence to suggest that the
offender, Richard Anderson, acted on any bias against Lili Wang because of her race," said John Daily, deputy director of the NCSU Police Department.
n186 Professor Chin contended, "[I]f you view the chain of events and link the events together, including what may appeared to have been unwanted
advances on a married woman [Wang], which lead to the murder, this may be a form of racial discrimination against an [Asian] woman." n187 Chin
believed the victim did nothing to bring about the senseless act, other than being an Asian woman. n188 / 4. On Violence Against Asian and Diasporic

During a U.S. Bureau of Justice statistical study on victimization and race that took
place over the course of five years, n189 thirty-five percent of Asian victims of violence n190 reported
the race of their offenders to be White. n191 Twenty-six percent of the Asian victims reported their
offenders to be Black and thirty percent reported their offenders as "Other." n192 The greatest
proportion of perpetrators on Asians were non-Asian, which is not the case for White and Black
victims, where both groups reported the greatest proportion of perpetrators to be members of
their own race. n193 Thus, while Blacks most often fall victim to Black offenders and Whites most
often fall victim to White offenders, Asians most often fall victim to White offenders, not Asian.
Asian Women /

For rape and sexual assault rates among women, the Bureau of Justice Statistics Study reported that Asian females had the lowest rate of rape and

sexual assault. n194 The frequency of rapes and sexual assaults among women by race, however, is highly contested from study to study. n195 Some
studies, like the one conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, report no significant variation in the prevalence of rape among different ethnic
groups. n196 Other studies, however, suggest considerable variations, finding that Asian women appear to have lower incidences of rape. n197 A 2001
psychological study by Rozee and Koss on rape hypothesized that the conflicting results of these studies could be due to "methodological differences in
the studies," "lack of disclosure due to mistrust of police," "language barriers," and "differences in defining rape." n198 / Increasingly, however,
scholars and researchers realize that perhaps one crucial reason for the lower rate of reported rapes among Asian women comes from cultural
differences. n199 Generally, Asian victims are the least likely to disclose their experiences of sexual victimization to authorities and even to friends or
family. n200 Asians, both men and women, tend to hold much more negative attitudes toward rape victims and believed more strongly in rape myths
than their White counterparts. n201 / Also, the Bureau of Justice study found that, at higher rates than any other race, Asians said the reasons they
chose not to report violence to the police were because either there was small or no loss, lack of proof, or it was inconvenient. n202 One recent and
haunting example of Asian women's hesitancy to come forward about rape and sexual assault is the Japanese women sexually exploited by American
GIs in Japan after World War II. n203 In 2007, historical documents and records surfaced revealing how American authorities permitted official
brothel systems to operate in Japan despite internal reports that the Japanese women were being coerced into prostitution to the U.S. servicemen.
n204 Despite the blatant sexual exploitation and often violence perpetrated on these women, not one Japanese woman has come forward to seek
compensation or an apology. n205 Under such astounding circumstances that would shock any conscience, Asian women still opt not to report the sex
crime. Thus, the tremendously low numbers of reported sex crimes against Asian women not only seems unsurprising, but also leaves an indelibly
strong suspicion that the numbers are inaccurate. / IV. White Sexual Imperialism Within Existing Theoretical and Social Constructs / A. Revisiting

Women are sexually assaulted because they are


women: not individually or at random, but on the basis of sex, because of their membership in a
group defined by gender. Forty-four percent of women in the United States have been or will be
victims of rape or attempted rape at least once in their lives. Women of color experience
disproportionately high incidence rates. n206 / The dominance approach to feminist theory frames the question of equality as "a
MacKinnon: Dominance Theory Applied to Asian Feminist Jurisprudence /

question of the distribution of power." n207 Thus, gender equality, as a question of power, scrutinizes "male supremacy and female subordination."

For the Asian woman at the


intersection of gender and race, achieving equality means overthrowing not only male
supremacy or White supremacy, but specifically White male supremacy. Since "sexuality appears as the
n208 Following this logic, racial equality scrutinizes White supremacy and non-White subordination.

interactive dynamic of gender as an inequality" n209 and "aggression against those with less power is experienced as sexual pleasure, an entitlement of
masculinity," n210 it is the White male's sexual dominance over the Asian female which emerges as the source of inequality that the Asian female

"colonial and military domination are interwoven with sexual


domination." n211 The Western military's involvement in Asia, both in colonial and neo-colonial
history, has led to Asia's sex tourism industry. n212 This is an industry where the buyers of bodies
for sexual pleasure are predominantly White men and the sellers of their bodies for sexual
pleasure are predominantly Asian women. No other fact or condition confirms the imbalanced
power relations between the East and the West. This imbalance of power came from White men
imperializing Asia n213 and, in the course of conquest, the taking of Asian women's bodies as their
spoils. n214 The pervasiveness of sexual objectification establishes in the minds of Westerners a
stereotype of Asian women as hyper-sexualized, since their only utility to Westerners for
centuries came from their sexual submission. n215 / B. Where Do We Go From Here? / The U.S. recognizes the profound
suffers. / Moreover, for Asian feminist jurisprudence,

harms that the institution of slavery caused during the early parts of American history which still endure today. Yet what about imperialism? Students
read of it from textbooks in neutral language. No sense of penance comes with the recounts of U.S. occupation in Asia. Considering the general trends
of the Asian and diasporic Asian communities enumerated in this essay, chiefly, severe underreporting of violent crimes inflicted upon them and a lack
of scholarship examining the role imperialism played in the subjugation of Asian women, it comes as no surprise that history, through America's eyes,
would white-wash the imperialized experience Asians endure even well into this century. Asian men feel emasculated from the American media's
portrayal of them as effeminate, and many Asian women's subconscious preference for dating White men over Asian men--a trend which has become
increasingly popular. White men display the "Asian fetish" syndrome, a symptom of not only the desire for male dominance, but also the imported
stereotype that Asian women want to be dominated. The mail-order bride industry flourishes, capitalizing on the "Asian fetish." Then, the
overrepresentation of Asian women in pornography perpetuate the entire cycle of White sexual imperialism as experienced by Asian women today. /

The action this Article calls for is humble, but significant: recognition. Recognize the
pervasiveness of White sexual imperialism, understand its roots and where the branches pan
out, and see how firmly implanted it is in the lives of those in the Asian community. The author
asks for little more for now: merely recognition.

Irigarays critique ignores the role of race in shaping gender


relations whiteness takes the place of masculinity
Hom, 13. SABRINA L. HOM, Lecturer of Philosophy at Georgia College. Between
Races and Generations: Materializing Race and Kinship in Moraga and lrigaray.
Hypatia vol. 28, no. 3 (Summer 2013) clawan
Mary Bloodsworth-Lugo argues that to claim an ontological status for sexual difference is to construct sexual difference as unmarked by race (Bloodsworth-Lugo
2007, 45); this claim is plausible only if sexual difference is taken as fixed rather

than dynamic, and it fails to acknowledge the ways in which race is materialized on
and through the sexed body. With Irigaray and Seshadri-Crooks, I will take sex as an
irre- ducible, ontological difference, but I will argue that it is marked and
transformed through racialization. Seshadri-Crooks argues for a Lacanian conception
of race that at once acknowledges the intricate relation between race and sex and
recognizes important differences between the workings of the two. She
acknowledges that race is not like sex in that sex is indeterminate and exceeds
language (Seshadri-Crooks 2000, 4) and is in the Real, sexual difference is
significant and existent in human bodies before cultural meaning is imposed upon
them, as humans are always gener- ated on the condition of the existence of at
least two sexes of human being, and 426 Hypatia always already marked by this
difference. Whereas Irigaray argues persuasively that we should take sex as
irreducible difference, the genesis of race in the history of colo- nialism attests
obviously to its arbitrariness.3 As theorists like Evelynn Hammonds and Sander
Gilman demonstrate, race is attributed through sexed means such as the
miscegenation taboo and the myth of black hypersexuality (among other means)
(Gilman 1985; Hammonds 1994). We should note, then, that Seshadri-Crooks agrees
with the first clause of Irigarays notoriously problematic claim in I Love to You that
sexual difference is an immediate natural given ... the problem of race is a
secondary problem (Irigaray 1995, 47). It is the second claim, that race can then
be analyti- cally separated from sex and subordinated as a problem , that fails to
comprehend the ways that racialization morphs the sexed body . Seshadri-Crooks
argues that race should be understood both as functioning through sexual
difference and as a consolation for the disappointments of sex (or, more precisely,
that whiteness is a consolation for the disappointments of masculinity) (SeshadriCrooks 2000, 43; 59).4 Seshadri-Crooks and I follow theorists such as Lacan in
taking phallogocentric and racial dominance to be rooted in the specular; sexual
and racial hierarchies depend largely on visible differences, always read as lacks. In
clas- sical psychoanalytic thought, the woman is always marked by the nothing to
see, the visible lack of a phallus. Sexual difference offers an inferior other that
promises to shore up the male ego, but since the spectacle of castration is
simultaneously anxiety- producing (as castration looms as a threat to masculinity)
and mysterious (since the female sex is marked not by a lack but by a genuine
difference, one that may not be immediately visible but that is nonetheless present
as a troubling excess to the phallic system), sexual difference is not fully successful
as a means of assuring male wholeness and value. Where language necessarily fails
to capture the excess of sex, racial differen- tiation and the logic of colonialism
promise to present an other who can be wholly mastered . Although the phallic ideal
of power and hardness is ultimately impossible to sustain even for a man, whiteness
is posited as a new form of specular assurance . Here whiteness signifies precisely
the wholeness, value, and purity that, as Irigaray argues, the imperfectly flat mirror
of woman fails to project (Irigaray 1985). Femininity repre- sents lack because to
specular logic women have nothing to see; the enigma of the female sex, however,
which would be better said to exceed the gaze, can of course be reappropriated as a
threat to phallic specularity. The rhetoric of race as visibility, how- ever, promises an
unambiguous visual signifier of inferiority in the other; the