1-K

The only ethical demand available to modern politics is that of the Slave, the
demand for the end of America itself.
Wilderson 10 – [Frank B Wilderson III. Associate Professor of African American Studies
and Drama at the University of California. Irvine. Former Member of militarized wing of
the ANC. “Red. White & Black: Cinema and the Structure of U.S. Antagonisms” February
26, 2010] // SJ AME
Regarding the Black position, some might ask why, after claims successfully made on the state by the Civil
Rights Movement, do I insist on positing an operational analytic for cinema, film studies, and political theory that
appears to be a dichotomous and essentialist pairing of Masters and Slaves? In other words, why
should we think of today's Blacks in the United States as Slaves and everyone else (with the exception of Indians) as Masters? One could answer these

questions by demonstrating how nothing remotely approaching claims successfully

made on the state has come to pass. In other words, the election of a Black president aside, police brutality, mass
incarceration, segregated and substandard schools and housing , astronomical rates of HIV infection, and the
threat of being turned away en masse at the polls still constitute the lived experience of Black life. But such

empirically based rejoinders would lead us in the wrong direction; we would find ourselves on "solid" ground, which would
only mystify, rather than clarify, the question. We would be forced to appeal to "facts," the "historical record," and empirical markers of stasis and change, all of which could be

Underlying such a downward spiral intosociology, political science, history, and public policy
turned on their head with more of the same.

debates would be the very rubric that I am calling into question: the grammar of
suffering known as exploitation and alienation, the assumptive logic whereby subjective dispossession is arrived at in the
calculations between those who sell labor power and those who acquire it. The Black qua the worker. Orlando Patterson has already dispelled this faulty ontological grammar in

Slavery and Social Death, where he demonstrates how and why work, or forced labor, is not a constituent element of slavery. Once the "solid" plank of
"work" is removed from slavery, then the conceptually coherent notion of "claims against the state"—the proposition that the state and
civil society are elastic enough to even contemplate the possibility of an emancipatory project for the Black

position—disintegrates into thin air. The imaginary of the state and civil society is
parasitic on the Middle Passage. Put another way, No slave, no world. And, in addition, as Patterson argues, no slave is in the
world. If, as an ontological position, that is, as a grammar of suffering, the Slave is not a laborer but an anti-Human, a

position against which Humanity establishes, maintains, and renews its coherence, its
corporeal integrity; if the Slave is, to borrow from Patterson, generally dishonored, perpetually open to

gratuitous violence, and void of kinship structure, that is, having no relations that need be
recognized, a being outside of re-lationality, then our analysis cannot be approached through the rubric of gains or
reversals in struggles with the state and civil society, not unless and until the interlocutor first explains how the

Slave is of the world. The onus is not on one who posits the Master/Slave dichotomy but on the one who argues
there is a distinction between Slaveness and Blackness. How, when, and where did
such a split occur? The woman at the gates of Columbia University awaits an answer.
Black flesh is deemed nonhuman and inscribed by accumulation and fungibility.
Colleges and universities built by slaves fuel knowledge production grounded in
antiblackness.
Stein 16, Sharon (PhD candidate in the Department of Educational Studies at the University of British
Columbia.). "Universities, slavery, and the unthought of anti-Blackness." Cultural Dynamics 28.2 (2016):
169-187.SJZD

The anti-Blackness of Man The role of slavery and its afterlife in the ordering of modern social
life operates at many levels, but perhaps most notably in the notion of humanity
itself. In her work, Sylvia Wynter offers an important distinction between “Man” and other
“genres of the human.” As modern Man (Euro-descended, middle-class, college educated) claims to be the apex of
humanity, he deems all other humans—not only racialized peoples, but also the
unemployed, the incarcerated, the homeless—to be sub- or non-human (Wynter, 1994, 2003).
This hierarchy of humanity has been used to justify the overrepresentation of Man’s
interests and the subordination of others to his will. Wynter traces how the foundations of
European modernity entailed a transformation, starting in the 15th century, from a worldview that
transcendentalized the Church and the desire for salvation, to a worldview that transcendentalized the State and secularized
knowledge (Wynter, 2003).
However, the transformations that took place were not internally
produced within Europe, but rather were enabled through Indigenous colonization
and Black enslavement. These provided both the material and conceptual conditions
for the emergence of the West, including the architectures of the nation-state, capital,
and the modern university. In order to invent himself, Man had to forcibly incorporate his Others into a European
(conception of the) world and deny their distinct modes of thinking and being the status of “alternative modes of being human”
(Wynter, 2003: 282). According to Wynter, it was to be the figure of the Negro (i.e., the category comprised by all
peoples of Black African hereditary descent) that [the West] was to place at the nadir of its Chain of Being;
that is, on a rung of the ladder lower than that of all humans. (p. 301) Categorization of
Black people as non-human and evolutionarily inferior justified their relegation to what
Fanon (2008) famously described as “the zone of nonbeing” (p. xii). In the era of chattel slavery, this translated
into a logic according to which Black flesh was inscribed and treated as fungible—that
is, interchangeable, accumulable, and objectified as property (Hartman, 1997; King, 2014; Spillers,
1987). In addition to studies of slavery, many Black Studies scholars address post-emancipation Black
subjugation, carefully cataloguing the ongoing “material, rhetorical, state, discursive,
intimate, violences to which black bodies and psyches are subjected” (Sharpe, 2014b: 206).
Particularly in the context of this study, it is imperative to note that Black people’s hard-won increased presence in higher education
institutions does not forestall this subjugation. Many universities continue to employ Black people in
poorly compensated and often-precarious staff positions (Pettit, 2008) and contribute to
the gentrification of neighborhoods surrounding their campuses, often with significant
Black populations (Baldwin, 2015; Bose, 2014). Black faculty, students, and staff regularly
experience anti-Black racism from their peers and professors (e.g. Griffin et al., 2014; Gusa, 2010;
Harper et al., 2011; Johnson-Ahorlu, 2012; Patitu and Hinton, 2003; Patton and Catching, 2009; Solórzano et al., 2000) and are
interrogated and abused by campus and local police (e.g. McMillan Cottom, 2014; Vest, 2013). Anti-
Blackness also inheres in the production of knowledge itself. In spite of the many powerful
disruptions enacted through Black Studies and associated fields, Sharpe (2014a) argues that an
anti-Black “death-
dealing episteme continue[s] to be produced in ‘think tanks’ and in the university, by
teachers, lecturers, researchers, and scholars, and then reproduced by the students
who have been educated in the classrooms and institutions where [Black people]
labor” (p. 61). This enduring “death-dealing episteme” is not merely contained within
explicitly white supremacist knowledge, like the now thoroughly discredited field of
phrenology or even today’s more blatantly pathologizing strains of mainstream social
science. Instead, according to Wynter (1994), “both the issue of ‘race’ and its classificatory logic”
are built into the basic logic of the modern order of knowledge (p. 47). Spillers (1987) called this
order an “American grammar,” arguing, “the ruling episteme that releases the dynamics of naming
and valuation, remains grounded in the originating metaphors of captivity and
mutilation” (p. 68). Yet, not only does this grammar extend beyond the United States, it
also extends beyond an enduring order of knowing to encompass an enduring order of
being as well. Silva (2013) captures both in her notion of “the ontoepistemological grammar that governs post-Enlightenment
accounts of existence” (p. 50) and that structures Man’s claims to autonomy, self-determination, and mastery of universal reason.
These claims are then used to justify the imposition of Man’s will on the world and on
(and in contrast to) those whom he deems his irrational and outer-determined racial
Others.

The libidinal economy requires blackness and gratuitous violence to function –

civil society is preconditioned on the destruction of the slave
Tibbs and Woods 08 [Tibbs, Donald F and Tyron P. Woods (2008). “The Jena Six and
Black Punishment: Law and Raw Life in the Domain of Nonexistence.” In Seattle Journal
for Social Justice (pp. 235-283)] // SJ AME
Why was slavery reserved exclusively for non-Europeans, and most particularly, for Africans ? Why were Europeans not
used for slave labor? European history is replete with the practice of labor coercion—the demonstrated willingness by European elites to kill, use, and
persecute lower classes and minority groups; and the VOLUME 7 • ISSUE 1 • 2008 248 SEATTLE JOURNAL FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE disposition to deprive
people of liberty and conscripting their labor as punishment for behaviors constructed as criminal. All of this social violence makes it appear arbitrary to

Moreover, European societies have long-standing practices of

draw the line at enslavement.73

internal racialism and of deploying differences to organize hierarchies.7 4 Despite the

fact that it would have been much more profitable to enslave fellow Europeans, there
is no evidence that Europeans ever considered instituting full chattel slavery of
Europeans in their overseas settlements. The decision to enslave Africans was as
unthinking as it was a matter of course to not enslave Europeans .75 After the eleventh century, at
least, a civilization ingrained in racialism ultimately found that its formative internal differences were not different enough to enslave.76 The “brave
New World,” built through the transmutation of Africa, was begun by approaching a particular body (the black) with direct relations of force
(slavery).77 This conception of the modern era contrasts with that of liberal historiography in which modernity is marked by the rise of the bourgeois
nation-state and the struggles of white citizen-subjects for membership and political representation.78 It also contrasts with Marxist historiography,

which understands the dawn of the modern era to be the struggles between a white body and variable capital (waged relations).79 The slave is
the very condition of possibility not only for capitalism and the success of
Enlightenment notions of the civilized, rational, and unraced subject; it is also the
foundation on which legal discourse arises. Our purpose here is to relocate rights as the result of a “fatal coupling of
power and knowledge.”80 What rights blacks have, or how best to mobilize them, are juridical debates that participate in a larger deception. The very
concept of a right presupposes something that blacks historically have never had since the dawn of Western modernity—sovereignty over their own

bodies.The Atlantic slave trade was a profound historical rupture, fundamentally

degrading the personality of black human beings, all the while obsessing over black
flesh.81 In the very processes employed to produce the body of RACISM The Jena Six and Black
Punishment 249 the African slave for consumption and use in the global libidinous system of

racial capitalism, slavery bestows visibility on the structure and enormity of what is
usually private and incommunicable, contained within the boundaries of the bodies of
those who suffer pain. At its base, slavery achieves the conversion of absolute pain
into the fiction of absolute power in an obsessive, self-conscious, fetishistic, and
parasitic display of agency.82 For this reason, the procedures essential to the history of racial slavery and its pernicious afterlife
have not been its brutal regime of labor exploitation nor its utility to the advent and maturation of Eurocentric capitalism. Rather, slavery is enabled by,
and dependent upon, the most basic of operations: “symbolic and material immobilization, the absolute divestment of sovereignty at the site of the
black body: its freedom of movement, its conditions of labor, its physical and emotional sustenance, its social and sexual reproduction, its political and
cultural representation.”83 The legacy of slavery that continues to impress itself upon our social, psychic, and legal structures into the twenty-first

we are working from a

century, bears this imprint of bodily dispossession and aggrandizement. To put it another way,

definition of slavery that is grounded in an analysis of what the practice signals about
the symbolic universe and how physical bodies are constructed in relationship to each
other. White supremacy’s reliance upon black dehumanization means that
enslavement of Africans was never reducible to mere economic logic. White violence
against the black body was compelled by a complex mixture of conscious
identification, unconscious fears, and subconscious longings .84 Loss of one’s own body
signals capture by direct relations of force. As a captive entity, fixed in an undynamic
state, “subject to be mortgaged, according to the rules prescribed by law,”85 the slave did
not enter into a transaction of value. In this way, slavery was a social death; this is what it means to say that slaves did not exist as human beings.86

The ethos of slavery that we are pointing to is an economy of desire in which value is
produced. However, because value works by mystifying its very processes VOLUME 7 • ISSUE 1
• 2008 250 SEATTLE JOURNAL FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE of determining values, the worth of white and black

bodies appears natural, rather than as the result of violent encounters .87 The symbolic economy
of slavery is more fundamental to its existence than is the political economy. In other words, the constituent elements of

slavery begin with desire for the symbols of purity , honor, and humanity represented
by whiteness and made possible by blackness and for the pleasure, exoticism, and
self-loathing epitomized by blackness as constructed in opposition to whiteness. In addition
to the surplus value produced from their labor, the accumulation of black bodies generated a symbolic economy in which slaves were valuable simply
for the fact that they existed as things for the satisfaction of the whims of the captor.88 It is for this reason that the work performed by black slaves is
historically significant, but it was not the primary reason for the slaves’ (non)being. In the constellation of values that white supremacy establishes,
bourgeois democracy mystifies the value of black bodies. As Cornel West puts it: [White supremacy] dictates the limits of the operation of American
democracy—with black folk the indispensable sacrificial lamb vital to its sustenance. Hence black subordination constitutes the necessary condition for
the flourishing of American democracy, the tragic prerequisite for America itself. This is, in part, what Richard Wright meant when he noted, “The

Negro is America’s metaphor.”89 To state it more pointedly, black death provides the very conditions of
possibility for white life.90 This point is not hyperbole or melodrama; it is drawn from an analysis of the discursive structure of slavery
and the material realities it calls into being. Slave codes in the southern United States demanded that slaves receive clothing, food, and lodging

Slaves, although dead to rights and responsibilities—civil death—

sufficient to their basic needs.

were reduced to nothing but the physical bodies, unprotected against capture,
mutilation, and torture.
Vote neg to affirm the pathology of blackness as a method of finding visible
social life within social death – that requires disinvestment from the plan’s
orientation towards the ethicality of civil society.
Sexton 11 – [Jared. Director. African American Studies School of Humanities. Associate
Professor. African American Studies School of Humanities. Associate Professor. Film &
Media Studies School of Humanities at University of California Irvine. InTensions Issue 5
Fall/Winter 2011. “The Social Life of Social Death: On Afro-Pessimism and Black
Optimism”] // SJ AME
[23] Elsewhere, in a discussion of Du Bois on the study of black folk, Gordon restates an existential phenomenological conception of
the antiblack world developed across his first several books: “Blacks here suffer the phobogenic reality posed
by the spirit of racial seriousness. In effect, they more than symbolize or signify various social pathologies—they
become them. In our antiblack world, blacks are pathology” (Gordon 2000: 87). This conception would seem
to support Moten’s contention that even much radical black studies scholarship sustains the association of blackness with a certain
sense of decay and thereby fortifies and extends the interlocutory life of widely accepted political common sense. In fact, it would
seem that Gordon deepens the already problematic association to the level of identity. And yet, this is precisely what
Gordon argues is the value and insight of Fanon: he fully accepts the definition of
himself as pathological as it is imposed by a world that knows itself through that
imposition, rather than remaining in a reactive stance that insists on the (temporal, moral, etc.)
heterogeneity between a self and an imago originating in culture. Though it may appear counterintuitive, or rather because
it is counterintuitive, this acceptance or affirmation is active; it is a willing or
willingness, in other words, to pay whatever social costs accrue to being black, to inhabiting
blackness, to living a black social life under the shadow of social death . This is not an
accommodation to the dictates of the antiblack world. The affirmation of blackness ,
which is to say an affirmation of pathological being, is a refusal to distance oneself from
blackness in a valorization of minor differences that bring one closer to health, to life,
or to sociality. Fanon writes in the first chapter of Black Skin, White Masks, “The Black Man and Language”: “A Senegalese
who learns Creole to pass for Antillean is a case of alienation. The Antilleans who make a mockery out of him are lacking in
judgment” (Fanon 2008: 21). In a world structured by the twin axioms of white superiority and black
inferiority, of white existence and black nonexistence, a world structured by a negative categorical imperative— “above all,
don’t be black” (Gordon 1997: 63)—in this world, the zero degree of transformation is the turn
toward blackness, a turn toward the shame, as it were, that “resides in the idea that ‘I am thought of as less than human’”
(Nyong’o 2002: 389).xiv In this we might create a transvaluation of pathology itself, something
like an embrace of pathology without pathos. [24] To speak of black social life and black
social death, black social life against black social death, black social life as black social death, black social life in black social
death—all of this is to find oneself in the midst of an argument that is also a profound agreement, an
agreement that takes shape in (between) meconnaissance and (dis)belief. Black optimism is not the negation of
the negation that is afro-pessimism, just as black social life does not negate black
social death by inhabiting it and vitalizing it. A living death is as much a death as it is a living.
Nothing in afro-pessimism suggests that there is no black (social) life, only that black
life is not social life in the universe formed by the codes of state and civil society, of
citizen and subject, of nation and culture, of people and place, of history and heritage, of all the things that colonial society has in
common with the colonized, of all that capital has in common with labor—the modern world system. Black life is not lived in the
world that the world lives in, but it is lived underground, in outer space. This is agreed. That is to say, what Moten asserts
against afro-pessimism is a point already affirmed by afro-pessimism, is, in fact, one of the most
polemical dimensions of afro-pessimism as a project: namely, that black life is not social, or rather that black
life is lived in social death. Double emphasis, on lived and on death. That’s the whole point of the enterprise at some
level. It is all about the implications of this agreed- upon point where arguments (should) begin, but they cannot (yet) proceed.

Framing—vote for the debater that produces the best scholarship to reduce
black suffering. Demonstrating that the 1AC perpetuates antiblackness is a
reason to negate because that is a necessary ethical gesture to disrupt the flow
of Western epistemology.
Sexton 10 – Jared Sexton 2010 (“African American Studies,” A Concise Companion to
American Studies (Blackwell Companions in Cultural Studies) pp 221-3) brackets in
original
The latter task – the trenchant interrogation of racial blackness and/in the formulations of modernity and its leitmotif of freedom –
was advanced immeasurably by Professors Lindon Barrett, Denise Ferreira da Silva, and Ronald Judy, each in their own way. Yet, as
Wilderson again makes plain in his Red, White, and Black (2009), the grand and anxious question of freedom is preceded, logically
and ontologically, by a perhaps more confounding question: what does it mean to suffer? To address such a query
sufficiently is to disregard the official impatience that envelopes it. Of course, this sentiment of expediency plays to an
understandably popular urgency that emanates from the severity of everyday life for the vast majority of black people and the
attendant status anxiety of the so-called new black middle class. However, black creative intellectuals have done
less and less talking about our pain of late and probably a bit too much posturing
about our plans. If anything, we have a surplus of plans! What we do not have is a language – much
less a political culture – that adequately articulates both the variance and commonality
of our positions and our predicaments. African American Studies is perhaps more
inarticulate about the dimensions and details of black suffering today , in an era marked by
transnationalism and multi-racialism, than it has been at any other historical juncture. I am speaking here of
suffering in its fullest sense: not only as pain, which everyone experiences – say, the
pain of alienation and exploitation – but also as that which blacks must bear, uniquely
and singularly, that which we must stand and stand alone (see Sexton 2007).¶ The proposal and
invitation continues:¶ The yield of this gathering will be to assemble leading scholars alongside emergent voices in the field of
African American Studies in order to reflect critically upon the mutual implication of a proliferate and diverse racial formation with
the living legacies of the black radical tradition in the age of American empire. The symposium seeks to depart from prevailing
frameworks for comparative ethnic studies – that is, discerning how the respective experiences of blacks and other people of color
are similar or dissimilar and what have been their historic interactions – to consider how the matrix of enslavement,
which is to say the invention of “propertized human being” (Harris 1993), has not only shaped myriad forms of
oppression and marginalization, but has compromised their modes of resistance and
[their] claims to independence as well. If there is an overarching objective here, it is to properly
illuminate what might be termed the obscurity of black suffering, to rescue it from the
murky backwaters of persistent invisibility as well as the high-definition distortions of glaring and fascinated light.¶ Proper
illumination is a catchy byline, an instance of wishful thinking, if ever there was one. But can we not speak of it more charitably,
perhaps as a stratagem? Or as a spur that exercises the limits of our thinking?¶ In her ground-breaking Scenes of Subjection, Saidiya
Hartman calls our attention to the ease with which scenes of spectacular violence against the black body – what she terms
“inaugural moment[s] in the formation of the enslaved” – are reiterated in discourses both academic and popular, “the casualness,”
she writes, “with which they are circulated, and the consequences of this routine display of the slave’s ravaged body”:¶ Rather than
inciting indignation, too often they immure us to pain by virtue of their familiarity – the oft-repeated or restored character of these
accounts and our distance from them are signaled by the theatrical language usually resorted to in describing these instances – and
especially because they reinforce the spectacular character of black suffering. [. . .] At issue here is the precariousness of empathy
and the uncertain line between witness and spectator. Only
more obscene than the brutality unleashed
at the whipping post is the demand that this suffering be materialized and evidenced
by the display of the tortured body or endless recitations of the ghastly and terrible . In
light of this, how does one give expression to these outrages without exacerbating the indifference to suffering that is the
consequence of the benumbing spectacle or contend with narcissistic identification that obliterates the other or the prurience that
too often is the response of such displays. (Hartman 1997: 4)¶ To put it bluntly,

Allow 2NR framing and weighing on paradigm issues on this debate k2

recirpocity bc 1Ar gets weighing also solves time skew bc aff gets 7 mins in last
speech we get only 6
 2-T

Interpretation: The affirmative debater must defend that in the United States,
colleges and universities ought not consider all standardized tests in
undergraduate admissions decisions. To clarify, you cannot defend a subset of
standardized tests.
Violation: You specify ___.
Standards:
[1] Textuality – “Ought not” in the res means the aff must defend all
standardized tests
Nebel 19 Jake Nebel, 8-12-2019, "Genericity on the Standardized Tests Resolution," Briefly,
https://www.vbriefly.com/2019/08/12/genericity-on-the-standardized-tests-resolution/?fbclid=IwAR0fRUmyVJMF-
JjwDQ4Fufx8T3zQTUBKRufUtNDvU_0R5PS7fM2CkmS3i24 SJBE

One might argue that “standardized tests” is a dependent plural with respect to “colleges and universities.” On this view, if the resolution were,
“Colleges and universities ought to consider standardized tests in undergraduate admissions decisions,” the affirmative would not have to show that

colleges and universities ought to consider multiple standardized tests in undergraduate admissions decisions. Now, this wouldn’t
necessarily mean that a single-test affirmative would be topical . I hesitate because, in our other
examples of dependent plurals, each unicycle has its own wheel, and each dog has its own tail. If all colleges and universities ought to consider the
same test, would it be true that colleges and universities ought to consider standardized tests? It’s not obvious to me. Again, I’d be curious to know

what others think. For now I’m content to challenge the idea that plurals necessarily mean
“more than one” and to raise the question for further research. For present purposes, however, these
subtle distinctions don’t matter, because the resolution says “ought not.” Why does this
matter? Consider again “Unicycles have wheels.” This sentence means, roughly, that each

unicycle has at least one wheel (“roughly” because I’m glossing over the distinction between generic and universal for
simplicity). By contrast, consider “Unicycles don’t have wheels .” This sentence means,

roughly, that each unicycle has no wheels. It’s not just the logical negation of the
original proposition, which would be the following: it’s not the case that, for every unicycle, there’s a wheel that it has—i.e., that some
unicycle lacks a wheel. This means that, if “standardized tests” is a dependent plural with respect to

“colleges and universities,” the resolution means that colleges and universities not
consider any standardized tests. Compare: if the resolution were “Unicycles don’t have wheels,” they would have to argue that
unicycles don’t have any wheels, not just that there are some wheels unicycles don’t have (e.g., the wheels on my car). This is because

the negation of an existential statement (“it’s not the case that some do”) is a
universal statement (“all of them don’t”). This is the observation about quantifier scope I made about the Jan–Feb 2019
resolution, and it applies straightforwardly to the standardized tests topic because of the “ought not” wording. So, if “Colleges and

universities ought to consider standardized tests” means roughly that colleges and
universities ought to consider at least one standardized test, then the sentence
“Colleges and universities ought not consider standardized tests” would mean roughly
that colleges and universities ought to consider no standardized tests.

Impacts: a) Common usage – Nebel is a college educated assistant professor

which proves the validity of his argument – his argument has been verified by
many over the years and thus comes first under common usage b) I co-opt
pragmatics first offense—we use pragmatics to compare between two
legitimate semantic interps of the topic, but theirs isn’t even eligible for
comparison c) Jurisdiction – regardless of pragmatics, if you are not debating
the intent of the res, you are not following the pre-set resolution burden
meaning the judge cannot vote aff since there was literally not an aff. This
means jurisdiction is an independent voter that constrains all pragmatic
justifications.
[2] Limits – There are hundreds of tests that you can specify and allowing you to
specify any permutation of them explodes the topic – I have to prep against
thousands of affs individually which massively skews engagement as you have
infinite prep time to frontline your one aff whereas I won’t be prepared for
yours. Limits key to fairness and education by ensuring a manageable prep
burden to engage the aff.
[3] Ground – Speccing means you get to cherrypick the worst tests which means
your quality of ground is always going to be infinitely better than mine since it’s
self serving and I can’t read almost any of the neg prep I wrote for the topic.
Also, I’m forced to pigeonhole into reading generics like the Kant NC and
Wilderson which you always predict because none of my topical applies. That’s
key to fairness and education since ground is the basis of all in round
argumentation.
TVA solves – you could’ve read your aff advantage under a whole res advocacy.
Fairness is a voter—debate is a competitive activity that requires objective
evaluation and outweighs other voters on irreversibility we can always get
always get education from other rounds but unfairness can only be solved by
this round. Drop the debater—the abuse has already occurred and my time
allocation has shifted—also the shell indicts your whole aff—justifies severance
which skews my strat. Use competing interps—leads to a race to the top since
we figure out the best possible norm and avoids judge intervention since
there’s a clear briteline. No RVIs—
a. Baiting—they’ll just bait theory and prep it out—justifies infinite abuse and
results in a chilling effect
b. its not logical—you don’t reward them for meeting the burden of being fair,
especially on T debate where definitions are objective while your interp is
subjective. Logic is meta constraint on all args because it definitionally
determines whether an argument is valid.

Next, Evaluate the theory debate after the 2NR 1) I have no 3NR, so evaluating
the theory debate after the 2AR puts me at a structural disadvantage since I
can’t point out 2AR argument shifts or extrapolations and to respond to new
2AR arguments. 2) Time skew: the aff has 7 minutes of speech time between
the 3 minute 2AR and 4 minute 1AR, while I only have a 6 minute 2NR.
 3-Dino

Interpretation: Debaters must talk about dinosaurs in the 1AC

Violation they don’t
1) Real world education – only by talking about dinosaurs can we challenge our
common thought process and understand that there is more than just us that
exists in this world
2) The absence of dinosaurs in the 1AC perpetuates humanism that
entrenches territoriality and otherization – accumulates in hundreds of
millions of deaths through the refusal to identify as the scaly others that
we are already identified as
Kriss 15 (Sam, London Bureau Chief at Full Stop. Founded in January of 2011, Full Stop focuses on debuts, works in translation,
and books published by small presses. Pale/ontology: The Dinosaurian Critique of Philosophy. http://www.full-
stop.net/2015/04/22/features/sam-kriss/paleontology-the-dinosaurian-critique-of-philosophy/ //shree)

The great failing of all philosophy is its continued refusal to properly consider the question of
dinosaurs. A baffling refusal. They have something to hide. When they don’t talk about
dinosaurs it’s because there’s something they’re trying to keep covered up. Radicals tend to not
like dinosaurs very much. They’re big, and clunky, and all of them dead; they bear royal names and privileges, they inspire a
politically dubious sense of the sublime. There doesn’t seem to be any real place in our non-alienated future for the dinosaurs. If
they mean anything it’s only the ancient regime, a grand and terrible relic of a lost age. We’ll gawp at their bones, but first they must
be bones. That’s not the real problem with dinosaurs, though: the
reason so many seemingly educated
people seem so unwilling to talk about dinosaurs is the uncomfortable feeling that they
might somehow come back. The thing about the repressed is that it always does come
back. It’s in a different form, but no number of asteroid impacts can blot out the central law of
the psyche. The primal analytic scene is this: a patient, squirming on a couch, saying this and
that thing about the problems in her life, trying to avoid the central issue in a constant
swerving series of linguistic loops, unavoidably centripetal — suddenly she seizes up. A cough.
One hand darts into the air, seized, contorted; already the polished and manicured nails
are looking somehow claw-like. When she tries to speak again her mouth opens into a long
slit running to the corners of her jaw, revealing the rows of tiny sharp teeth behind. Her face
lengthens to a snouty point, her hair frills into soft downy feathers , her ankle travels halfway up
her leg. There’s a dinosaur on the couch. Then it speaks — something ultimately quite banal about its parents or its
childhood; the point is that it’s something ancestral and inhuman, from the old dark wordless prehistory of the mind. Memory is
everywhere a form of bioengineering; the bringing back of a dinosaur. Faulkner understood it: The
past is never dead.
It’s not even past. Reintroducing the dinosaurs isn’t a matter of temporal but spatial
rearrangement. In cinema, the reanimated dinosaurs always seem to have a particular fury
that has nothing to do with hunger . It doesn’t matter if they were hiding out in some isolated valley, or brought
back by genetic engineering, or if they infiltrated our world through a rift in the fabric of time, the anger is the same. Dinosaurs
attack fences, Portaloos, helicopters, cars. Especially cars: they take particular joy in crushing heavily-built vehicles under one
gargantuan foot. When they break into homes, they’ll do their best to shred every manufactured item they find. If
they’re
ever let out in a built-up area, they’ll immediately get to work systematically
destroying skyscrapers. The carnivorous species will, admittedly, sometimes stop to eat a
few people — but this always seems like an afterthought, a snack break in their main
task of leveling large buildings. In 1953’s The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms, arguably the first dinosaur-in-the-city film
and a direct influence on the original Godzilla, the first thing an atomically reanimated Rhedosaurus does on making land in New
England is to destroy a lighthouse. It’s not at all concerned with the possible edibility of the lighthouse-keepers; instead, it bites the
building itself in half before rearing up over its castrated stump and roaring in primeval victory. In 1956’s The Beast of Hollow
Mountain (old science fiction films weren’t named creatively, but the producers knew what worked) the dinosaur sets off a cattle
rampage, seemingly deliberately, that all but demolishes a Wild West town, turning the agricultural basis of settled human
civilization against itself. As the technological means of reanimating the dinosaurs went from atom bombs and papier-mâché to
wormholes, time travel and CGI, soon no city was safe. The dinosaurs themselves came to inhabit every
achievement of industrial civilization, whether as the mechanical dinobots that stomp
on Hong Kong in Transformers: Age of Extinction or the genetically engineered creatures
(explicitly connected with dinosaurs in the film) that threaten half the planet in Pacific Rim. Over the past few
years, cinematic culture has come to resemble a series of variations on one single image: a
saurian monster pummeling, with all the fury of the unfathomably alien, a mute and
motionless office building. This is strange, because the dinosaurs never seem to have
the same antipathy towards geological structures — and it’s hard to imagine how a
dinosaur could conceive of a tall building apart from as a geological structure . Clearly it’s
not the buildings themselves the dinosaurs object to; it’s the spatial logic that they
represent, the system by which we parcel out the topology of existence into named
and comprehensible chunks. Dinosaurs are different from other monsters in that they were once here. They’re
not invaders from the outside; their claim to this space is better than ours. The place
where you’re reading this now is understood to be within some defined area: a privately owned
home or office, a neighborhood, a city, a region, a nation-state as symbolized by some
patches of color on a square of cloth somewhere, a breakaway territory, an
autonomous zone — something by which space is understood. Except it isn’t: you’re standing in the
footprints of dinosaurs. Their great herds roamed over this same land , and fought
titanic combats, and died in their millions . Over the ground that they walked , human
beings have built Ipswitch and Rotterdam and Kansas City, flyovers and business parks and shopping
centers. This little patch of soil you know so well was once a strange and terrifying
place. Human beings take the remnants of this lost universe, crush them up, and use
them to power Hyundais. No wonder dinosaurs hate cars so much: cars are the
crematoria we’ve built for our ancestors. In Jurassic Park dinosaurs are treated as the scaly
instantiations of a principle of mathematical chaos, but in fact their destruction is a finely
premeditated revenge. Philosophers don’t want to consider dinosaurs because in any
epistemology or ontology that follows Kant in featuring a distinction between human experience and the non-human
world, dinosaurs represent the ultimate point of the non-human world’s unknowability. God is
an indeterminate quantity; the real Absolute Other is twenty-three meters from end to end,
with broad flat teeth for slicing up vegetable matter and a long tapering tail that
draws lazy circles in the heavy Tithonian air. Levinas and Derrida speak of the
unfathomable void of an animal’s eyes, and in a way they’re right; there’s sometimes something
briefly terrifying in there. But it’s only a punctum, a sudden pin-prick: we know animals, we see them in the park, we
grew up with them in fables and nursery stories. It’s a wound that quickly heals. Dinosaurs are too big to fit in any
of our conceptual categories. If we’re to conceive of a noumenon, a real world as it
really is, outside our experience, the previous existence of dinosaurs on the earth is
the most important single fact about that world. They stand for the sheer unimportance
of human subjectivity: reality was around for millions of years before we arrived to
ponder its nature, and it did fine; even without a human subject to give meaning to its
objectivity it was still full of life and danger. In this light, the strange refusal to talk about dinosaurs is so
pervasive and so consistent that it can only be read as a neurotic symptom. If we don’t discuss
them, maybe they won’t come back to claw our fragile distinction from the world of
objects into shreds. It’s not just our finely wrought society that the dinosaurs threaten; it’s the idea that
human subjectivities and the world beyond them can face each other as two equal
halves, evenly matched. It’s the fantasy of an inert world, one without gargantuan teeth. It’s the idea that
humans are subjects, always subjects, and always humans . When it comes to the non-human world,
philosophers have an unusual tic: they all suddenly start talking about desks. Is the desk really brown, or is its brownness a property
of my sense-perception? Is it really made of wood, or is that just informed by discursive practices? Bertrand Russell does it in The
Problems of Philosophy. Wittgenstein does it in his Philosophical Investigations. Husserl does it in the first volume of his Ideas. Marx,
to his credit, at least has some fun with it while talking about commodity fetishism in Capital; his desk stands on its head, and
evolves out of its wooden brain grotesque ideas, far more wonderful than if it were to begin dancing of its own free will. Meanwhile,
Heidegger has the full complement: a desk, a pen, and an ink-pot. He also famously uses a hammer, but it’s not the kind of hammer
that Nietzsche encourages us to philosophize with, or the kind that one of Heidegger’s distant German ancestors might have used to
cave in the skulls of a few Roman legionaries. For Heidegger the non-human world is made of tools; his hammer is an instrument of
carpentry, one that you would use to build a desk. All this betrays a critical lack of imagination. Read enough philosophy and you’ll
end up with the impression that the entire world is some vast university building, a network of tiny wood-paneled rooms sprawling
over the entire surface of the planet, each one containing nothing more than a single desk and a puzzled man trying to figure out his
relationship to it. Of course, nobody is watching the philosopher. All these philosophers needed to get out more: searching for an
example, they settled on the desk in front of them, when they could have gone down to the museum and looked at the dinosaurs.
This isn’t just a cosmetic point: a desk is not like a dinosaur. Both might be dead objects that were once alive, but unlike the grinning
calcified skeletons in the museums, felled trees don’t plot many schemes for revenge. A wooden desk might give you a splinter, but
other than that it’s stupidly compliant, happily representing a static world. The
faddish recent trend towards
object-oriented philosophy, for all its pretensions, does little better. Its central feature is what’s
called an ‘anthropodecentrism’; a rejection of any philosophical approach that ascribes some intrinsic
difference to the human experience of the world or routes all relations between objects through
humans. Objects don’t require a subject; they don’t just have existence in themselves but must too have a being-for-itself. As
Graham Harman — its foremost advocate — argues, who are we to say with certitude that a hammer (of course, it’s still a hammer;
sometimes a lizard or a piece of fruit, never a dinosaur) doesn’t move knowingly towards its own Being? Why do we malign a
banana’s perspective on the world? This sounds like the kind of philosophy that would be able to
finally face the dinosaurian core of reality; in fact it does precisely the opposite . They
refuse to consider the non-human world as being properly non-human . All they do is execute
the same Beauty and the Beast maneuver that Marx does in Capital, but with none of his irony; rather than standing in
awe of the inhuman, they have candles and teapots dancing around in a grim
pantomime. Rather than resurrect the dinosaurs, they’d have the dinosaurs play at
being human. With all their Lovecraftian references, object-oriented ontologists and speculative realists make a point of
stressing the “weirdness” of their philosophical project, but while there’s often an Unheimlich element to the world of lifelike
automatons and inorganic demons they claim to inhabit, it’s not necessarily as strange as they insist. Things come to life crop up
constantly in popular culture. There’s the Freudian nightmare of the Toy Story films, or worse yet the hellscape of Pixar’s Cars series,
in which human-like cars dominate the world, working in factories and offices, with the only reasonable explanation for all this being
that long in the film’s past the cars have unshackled themselves from the yoke of humanity and slaughtered every last living person.
Maybe the fossilized remains of the people that once built these cars are being used to power their engines. Even dinosaurs are
subjected to this logic, with the cutesy talking banalized creatures of The Land Before Time. Object-oriented philosophy isn’t much
more than commodity fetishism; Harman’s ‘vicarious causation’ is less a profoundly weird innovation that reveals a hidden truth
than the old Marxian analysis of capitalism raised to a universal: material relations between people, social relations between things.
Real strangeness isn’t in the vaudeville act of objects perceiving and relating to each other, but a collapse of the human-world
distinction that brings out the non-human in humanity. When
the dinosaurs come back, it’s through us.
An ancestral statement is ancestral, in our buried history. As any knowledgeable
animist will tell you, our ancestors continue to live through us . First there’s the
psychoanalytic subject, suddenly seized by a saurian remembrance. When you excavate the
buried truth about yourself, all the repressed memories and hidden feelings, you’re no longer fully yourself at all. The bones were
always visible, half-poking out through the stony strata (in one of his seminars Lacan remarked that it wouldn’t be a bad thing if
every analyst went out and bought a small book on geology), but that person in the past is suddenly revealed as a very different
person to the one that remembers, unaccountably attached to a similar body: not bones any more, but a living, breathing, roaring
dinosaur. But in fact this resurrection of the dinosaurs happens all the time. For a start, it’s the basis of the process of material
production under capitalism. Workers are, for a few hours each day, entirely subordinated to the process of production; subjectivity
takes place on the level of the firm, while actual human beings are interchangeable units slotted carelessly into the assembly-line.
Then in their leisure time they’re approached in their role as consumers, subjects again, and sold images of dinosaurs destroying
their workplaces with teeth and claws. The point is to resolve our feelings of alienation into the figure of a giant scaly monster, in the
hope that the pseudo-catharsis of the dinosaurian revolution onscreen will stop it happening in the streets. Our task is to
not be afraid of dinosaurs, because we are dinosaurs. Any encounter with another person
takes place across the void of the Real: you look into their eyes and see the hungry glint of a
velociraptor, the utter foreignness of the other’s desire. This is what’s called
objectification: the transformation of another person into something entirely
unknowable, the brief resurrection of the dinosaurs . A normal philosophy will try to
collapse all of humanity into the single figure of a philosopher staring, baffled, at his
own desk. (The desk doesn’t stare back.) A figure invariably coded as one that’s probably male and certainly
white, a solipsist who stands detached from things, looking at them, resting his chin on one hand. There’s
nothing quite so stupid and solipsistic as the insistence that you are exactly what you feel yourself to be. This is perfectly exemplified
by Hegel’s famous dialectic of the master and slave. In the Hegelian myth, when two people first encountered each other, they both
demand that the other recognize them not as object but as a self-consciousness, a reflective subject. In such an immediate
confrontation, this kind of recognition is impossible: in practical terms, what this means is that they both immediately try to club
each other to death. The one who is not afraid of death wins, and the other is enslaved. Then, sheltered in the
dialectical oasis of Knechtschaft, the slave comes to recognize the master as subject, allowing the relation to progress to a
higher form. In the end, full consciousness is reached by both, at the small cost of hundreds of
millions of deaths. There’s another way. The necessary alternative is to fully inhabit your
existence as an object, to admit that you too are a dinosaur in the eyes of the other. If
humanity is fully represented by the unobserved observer confused by carpentry, or the stupid waltz of master and slave, then none
of us are fully human. We are the desk, not the philosopher: at some point always the object of someone else’s puzzled stare.
Look at your hands: is that skin you’re seeing, or scales? You are not who you think
you are. Once this is recognized, maybe we can turn our mutual inhumanity into a
solidarity of the non-human. We can accept that we ourselves are strange and
terrifying beasts, and then finally let the fury of the dinosaurs loose.
Case
 Case
1. fiat is illusory – voting aff doesn’t mean a policy passed – the alt is
something the judge can implement and endorse has a better educational
praxis for how we should view the world, finding the better heuristic to view
the world is key since it’s the only thing we take out of the debate. The aff is
merely addictive roleplay which breeds self-hatred- turns the case because
it means the plan opens up a space for tyranny
2. Don’t allow AC offense weighing- your aff analysis starts from the wrong
point, that’s an epistemological indict, all your offense just feed back into
the anti-black state
3. Alt solves case- we’re a better explanation of the root cause of the AC
impacts specifically how individuals are deemed non human to allow for
gratuities violence which the alt solves back-
4. Solvency deficit- your aff does nothing but allow anti-black violence to
fester, that’s the Wilderson 10, means turns solvency, actively bad because
ruse of solvency means we focus on the wrong part
 Method
Passiviity DA – outsourcing your agency via scenario analysis causes internal
resentiment. Psycological violence indepent reason to drop you
Antonio 95. (Nietzsche’s antisociology: Subjectified Culture and the End of History”;
American Journal of Sociology; Volume 101, No. 1; July 1995, jstor,)
According to Nietzsche, the "subject" is Socratic culture's most central, durable foundation. This prototypic expression of ressentiment, master reification, and ultimate justification for slave morality and mass
discipline "separates strength from expressions of strength, as if there were a neutral substratum . . . free to express strength or not to do so. But there is no such substratum; there is no 'being' behind the doing,
effecting, becoming; 'the doer' is merely a fiction added to the deed" (Nietzsche 1969b, pp. 45-46). Leveling of Socratic culture's "objective" foundations makes its "subjective" features all the more important. For
example, the subject is a central focus of the new human sciences, appearing prominently in its emphases on neutral standpoints, motives as causes, and selves as entities, objects of inquiry, problems, and targets
of care (Nietzsche 1966, pp. 19-21; 1968a, pp. 47-54). Arguing that subjectified culture weakens the personality, Nietzsche spoke of a "remarkable antithesis between an interior which fails to correspond to any
exterior and an exterior which fails to correspond to any interior" (Nietzsche 1983, pp. 78-79, 83). The "problem of the actor," Nietzsche said, "troubled me for the longest time."'12 He considered "roles" as
"external," "surface," or "foreground" phenomena and viewed close personal identification with them as symptomatic of estrangement. While modern theorists saw differentiated roles and professions as a matrix

of autonomy and reflexivity, Nietzsche held that persons (especially male professionals) in specialized occupations overidentify with their positions and engage in gross fabrications to obtain
advancement. They look hesitantly to the opinion of others, asking themselves, "How ought I feel about this?" They are so thoroughly absorbed in simulating effective

role players that they have trouble being anything but actors -"The role has actually become the character." This highly
subjectified social self or simulator suffers devastating inauthenticity. The powerful authority given the social greatly amplifies Socratic culture's already self-indulgent "inwardness." Integrity,

decisiveness, spontaneity, and pleasure are undone by paralyzing overconcern about possible causes, meanings,
and consequences of acts and unending internal dialogue about what others might think, expect, say, or do (Nietzsche 1983, pp. 83-86; 1986, pp. 39-40; 1974, pp.
302-4, 316-17). Nervous rotation of socially appropriate "masks" reduces persons to hypostatized "shadows," "abstracts," or simulacra. One adopts "many roles," playing them "badly and superficially" in the
fashion of a stiff "puppet play." Nietzsche asked, "Are you genuine? Or only an actor? A representative or that which is represented? . . . [Or] no more than an imitation of an actor?" Simulation is so pervasive that
it is hard to tell the copy from the genuine article; social selves "prefer the copies to the originals" (Nietzsche 1983, pp. 84-86; 1986, p. 136; 1974, pp. 232- 33, 259; 1969b, pp. 268, 300, 302; 1968a, pp. 26-27).
Their inwardness and aleatory scripts foreclose genuine attachment to others. This type of actor cannot plan for the long term or participate in enduring networks of interdependence; such a person is neither
willing nor able to be a "stone" in the societal "edifice" (Nietzsche 1974, pp. 302-4; 1986a, pp. 93-94). Superficiality rules in the arid subjectivized landscape. Neitzsche (1974, p. 259) stated, "One thinks with a
watch in one's hand, even as one eats one's midday meal while reading the latest news of the stock market; one lives as if one always 'might miss out on something. ''Rather do anything than nothing': this
principle, too, is merely a string to throttle all culture. . . . Living in a constant chase after gain compels people to expend their spirit to the point of exhaustion in continual pretense and overreaching and
anticipating others." Pervasive leveling, improvising, and faking foster an inflated sense of ability and an oblivious attitude about the fortuitous circumstances that contribute to role attainment (e.g., class or
ethnicity). The most mediocre people believe they can fill any position, even cultural leadership. Nietzsche respected the self-mastery of genuine ascetic priests, like Socrates, and praised their ability to redirect

ressentiment creatively and to render the "sick" harmless. But he deeply feared the new simulated versions. Lacking the "born physician's" capacities, these impostors amplify the worst
inclinations of the herd; they are "violent, envious, exploitative, scheming, fawning, cringing, arrogant, all according to circumstances. " Social selves are fodder for the "great man of the masses." Nietzsche held
that "the less one knows how to command, the more urgently one covets someone who commands, who commands severely- a god, prince, class, physician, father confessor, dogma, or party conscience . The

combination of desperate conforming and overreaching and untrammeled ressentiment paves the way
deadly

for a new type of tyrant (Nietzsche 1986, pp. 137, 168; 1974, pp. 117-18, 213, 288-89, 303-

US Education institutions and policy are animated by antiblackness– the threat

of blackness underscores punitive policies against black youth and reinforces
the achievement gap
Dumas 15 Michael J. Dumas is an Assistant Professor at the University of California,
Berkeley in the Graduate School of Education and the African American Studies
Department. He earned a Ph.D. in Urban Education with an emphasis in social and
educational policy studies from The Graduate Center of the City University of New York.
His research sits at the intersection(s) of the cultural politics of Black education, the
cultural political economy of urban education, and the futurity of Black childhood(s).
“Against the Dark: Antiblackness in Education Policy and Discourse”, Theory Into
Practice, 2015, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2016.1116852 - JP
A recent issue of National Geographic (2013) celebrated “the changing face of America”
in which “race is no longer so black and white.” Featuring portraits of men, women
and children of multiracial heritage, the story points to the year 2060, when the US
Census Bureau estimates that 40 white people will no longer be the majority of the
nation’s population. These images, then, rep- resent our imagined—and ideal(ized)—
future, in which we are so mixed that race becomes meaningless, or at least, more
fluid. “If we can’tslot people into familiar categories,” the accompanying article
explained, “perhaps we’ll be forced to reconsider existing definitions of race and
identity, presumptions about who is us and who is them” (Funderburg, 2013, October).If
these portraits represent the “us,” then the 50 United States will be a country
completely rid of dark-skinned Black people: most of the 25 people featured are light in
complexion and not one is darker than the proverbial brown paper bag (Kerr, 2006). In
this nation that has “advanced” beyond Black and white, it is the Black that becomes
anachronistic, an impediment to the realization of our own national-popular
imagination of who “we” want to be. Even as the nation (and indeed, 60 the world)
embraces a certain kind of multi- culturalism, we strain against the dark (Gordon,
1997, 2000; Kelley, 2002; Sexton, 2008, 2010; Wilderson, 2010). In this context, Black
youth, families and 65 communities struggle to make sense of what are widely
regarded in Black cultural spaces as cases of (anti-)Black suffering and death: The
killings of Oscar Grant, and more recently, Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, John Crawford,
Mike Brown 70 and Akai Gurley. Marlene Pinnock, the 51-year- old Black
grandmother, punched repeatedly in the face by a white California Highway Patrol
officer; Jordan Davis, age 17, sitting in the back seat of a car with a group of friends,
shot dead by 75 a white man who believed they were playing rap (that is, Black) music
too loud; Renisha McBride, age 19, shot and killed through a locked door by a white
homeowner who said he feared for his life. In schools across the nation, recent stories
attest 80 to this anti-Black social imagination: A teacher in Illinois repeatedly referred
to two Black students as “nigger,” even after they asked him not to (Malm, 2014,
October 30). In Florida, school officials warned a young Black girl that she 85 needed
to either straighten or cut off her naturally curly hair, or face expulsion
(Munzenrieder, 2013, November 26). And in New York, a school principal called Black
teachers “gorillas” and derided their “big lips” and “nappy hair” (Klein, 90 2013, July
10).Although most educational researchers and practitioners would acknowledge all
of these stories as lamentable examples of racism or (multi)cultural insensitivity (or in
more critical 95 scholarship, as the enactment of white supremacy), thus far there has
been little theorizing in education on the specificity of anti-Black racism, or what I
would contend is the broader terrain of antiblackness. Intellectual inquiry on
antiblackness, which is mostly situated in comparative literature, philosophy,
performance studies, and cultural studies, insists that Black humanity is, as Frank
Wilderson asserted, “a paradigmatic impossibility” because to be Black is to be “the
very antithesis of a Human subject” (2010, p. 9). 105 Antiblackness scholarship, so
necessarily motivated by the question of Black suffering, interrogates the psychic and
material assault on Black flesh, the constant surveillance and mutilation and murder
of Black people (Alex- 110 ander, 1994; Tillet, 2012). It also grapples with the position
of the Black person as socially dead—that is denied humanity and thus ineligiblefor full
citizenship and regard within the polity (Patterson, 1982). And in all the theorizing on
115 antiblackness, there is a concern with what it means to have one’s very existence
as Black constructed as ‘problem’—for white people, for the public (good), for the
nation-state, and even as a problem for (the celebration of) racial difference (Gordon,
1997, 2000; Melamed, 2011). Inspired by this theoretical work on antiblackness, I argue
here that any incisive analyses of racial(ised) discourse and policy processes in 125
education must grapple with cultural disregardfor and disgust with blackness. I aim to
explain how a theorization of antiblackness allows us tomore precisely identify and
respond to racism in education discourse and in the formation and implementation of
education policy. Briefly,I contend that deeply and inextricably embedded within
racialized policy discourses is not merely a general and generalizable concern about
dis- proportionality or inequality, but also, fundamentally and quite specifically, a
concern with the bodies of Black people, the signification of (their) blackness, and the
threat posed by the Black to the educational well-being of other students.
 Impact scenario
Standardized testing is key to transition all levels of students into college-level rigor.
Ellis 18 Sonya Ellis, 4-23-2018, "Why Standardized Tests Matter Beyond College Admissions," US News & World Report,
https://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/college-admissions-playbook/articles/2018-04-23/3-benefits-of-standardized-testing-
beyond-college-admissions SJCP//JG

Students will take tests throughout their college careers. While

3. Preparation for college-level exams: 

the nature of these tests may change at the university level, the content on AP, IB,
CLEP and UExcel exams, as well as on the ACT and SAT, is intended to help prepare
high school students for the rigors of college. For example, the redesigned SAT's essay requires students to conduct a
form of analysis, a skill students will need to do well in many majors. Certain 100-level classes may also administer exams in similar formats to high

Rather than viewing these tests as arbitrary barriers, it can help high
school standardized tests.

school students to realize that they are likely moving toward harder tasks in the
future. Learning to take notes on ACT and SAT reading passages, for instance, can
partially prepare students for the rigors of college learning. If it is difficult to read a short passage and
answer 10 questions about that passage, it will likely be even harder to read an entire novel and retain strong recall over the weeks before writing a

Students studying for the ACT, SAT and other tests can take away
paper or taking a test.

transferable skills from their studies that will help later in life. Use standardized exams
as opportunities to bolster and review the skill sets you've learned. Such tests can also
build focus, study habits and academic stamina that will help you adjust to the
difficulties of college.
Standardized testing quickens societal progression – allows college crediting early on
and ensures broader ability to use skills.
Ellis 18 Sonya Ellis, 4-23-2018, "Why Standardized Tests Matter Beyond College Admissions," US News & World Report,
https://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/college-admissions-playbook/articles/2018-04-23/3-benefits-of-standardized-testing-
beyond-college-admissions SJCP//JG

In addition to popular academic course options like Advanced Placement,

2. College credit:

International Baccalaureate and dual enrollment, in which a student enrolls in college

courses and earns college credit while still in high school, it is also possible to earn
credit with just a standardized test score. The College-Level Examination Program, or CLEP, for example, offers a way for
students who have gained relevant skills outside the classroom to objectively verify
their knowledge. A student who has completed an internship in the business sector,
for instance, may find it worthwhile to sit for the Principles of Marketing exam and get
college credit based on his or her score. Students who are interested in this path may also want to consider UExcel exams,
which similarly allow you to earn credit without having to take a course. Exam options range widely, from Introduction to Music to Workplace

Whether you are pursuing credit for knowledge gained via an

Communication With Computers.

internship, a volunteer opportunity or some other method, always first check with
your top-choice schools if they accept the exam.
Elevated CO2 lets cotton thrive
Kakani et al, 4 – Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, Department of Plant and
Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, and USDA
UV-B Monitoring and Research Program, Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins
(Vijaya Gopal Kakani, Kambham Raja Reddy, Duli Zhao and Wei Gao, 2004, “Senescence and hyperspectral reflectance of
cotton leaves exposed to
ultraviolet-B radiation and carbon dioxide”, PHYSIOLOGIA PLANTARUM 121: 250–257. 2004, pubmed.gov | JJ)

Considerable growth and developmental variations occur in plants exposed to UV-B

radiation and atmospheric [CO2 ]. Selection of leaves from a plant at different node positions provided us
with leaves that differed in age, and the leaves at same node in different treatments enabled us to study the effect of
different intensities of UV-B radiation and [CO2 ] on leaves of the same age. In
cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L. cv.
DES119), Sassenrath-Cole et al. (1996) found that changes in leaf
photosynthetic responses to
light environment during leaf ageing were solely as a result of
physiological changes within the senescing leaf and not the result of
photon flux density environment or shading. Decline in
photosynthesis and chlorophyll are early symptoms of senescence,
with chloroplasts as one of the primary targets for degradation (Thomas
and Stoddart 1980, Grove and Mohanty 1992). In cotton, remobilization of leaf N to
reproductive organs appears to be the principle component leading to
photosynthetic decline (Pettigrew et al. 2000) and the data also suggest that
environmental factors can play a role in causing the photosynthetic
decline. In our study, atmospheric [CO2 ] did not alter the senescence as indicated by Pn and chlorophyll pigments.
Elevated [CO2 ], however, increased Pn by 35% similar to that recorded in
earlier studies in well-watered and well fertilized conditions (Reddy et al.
1997, 2000). In this study, at 0 kJ of UV-B and with increase in leafage, a decrease in Pn was recorded with no change in
chlorophyll pigments indicating that decline in Pn is a stimulant for leaf senescence in cotton. The
photosynthesis activity below a certain threshold level is known to
induce leaf senescence (Smart 1994, Dai et al. 1999). Hensel et al. (1993) postulated that a decrease in
photosynthesis efficiency reduces sugar levels that may be an early signal for induction of senescence. In the current study,
near ambient UV-B radiation (7.7 kJ) reduced the Pn of30day-old leaves by 50% compared with that at 0 kJ UV-B
radiation. In detached maize leaves, senescence induced loss of chlorophyll and photosynthesis was significantly enhanced
by UV-B radiation (Biswal et al. 1997). Under high UV-B of15.1 kJ, the 12-day-old leaves had Pn on par with the 30-day-
old leaves in the control treatment. The 21-day-old leaves exposed to high UV-B were on par with the 30-day-old leaves
exposed to ambient and high UV-B, suggesting that these leaves were in a similar senescence phase as a result of their
exposure to UV-B radiation. Thus, the UV-B radiation resulted in accelerated leaf ageing.

Cotton’s key to the Pakistani economy – we control uniqueness

Nadeem et al, 10 - Department o f Agronomy, University o f Agriculture, Faisalabad , Pakistan, University 1=

College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences , Islamia University, Bahawalpur , Pakistan (Muhammad Ather
Nadeem, Asghar Ali, Muhammad Tahir , Muhammad Naeem 1 , Asim Raza Chadhar and Sagheer Ahmad, 2010, “Effect of
Nitrogen Levels and Plant Spacing on Growth and Yield of Cotton”, Pakistan Journal of Life and Social Sciences, Vol. 8
No. 2, http://www.pjlss.edu.pk/sites/default/files/121-124%20(dr.%20Athar%202).pdf | JJ)

Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) is considered as mainstay of Pakistan’s

economy. It is an important cash crop, major source of foreign
exchange and plays an important role in agriculture , industry and
economic development of the country. In Pakistan cotton is grown on
an area is 3.22 million hectares with total production of 12417
thousand bales and average seed cotton yield of 732 kg ha -1 (Anonymous, 2007). Despite of
concerted efforts of breeders and agronomists, yield per unit area is
still far below from many other cotton producing countries of the
world. Low yield of cotton in Pakistan is attributed to some production as well as economic constraints. Poor quality
seed, low seed rate, low plant population, poor management or agronomic practices, conventional sowing methods,
imbalanced fertilizer application, weed infestation and insect attack are main causes of its low yield. In cotton plant,
spacing has effects on the growth and yield characteristics of the plant. Plant population (density) is very important for
attaining optimum crop growth and yield under irrigated conditions. Mostly, farmers maintain plant spacing and density
according to their traditional methods of planting rather than variety requirement and hence do not obtain the high crop
yield. Hussain et al. (2000) reported that 30 cm spacing between cotton plants increased plant height, number of bolls per
plant and boll weight as compared to 10 cm and 20 cm. However, plant spacing did not affect ginning out turn or fiber
quality. On the other hand Muhammad et al. (2002) found that boll weight decreased by increasing plant population. The
field conditions that produce short stature plants can generally tolerate higher plant density without incurring significant
yield reduction (Hake et al., 1991). Adequate plant population facilitates the efficient use of applied fertilizers and
irrigation (Abbas, 2000). When density is low, fruiting branches are longer and a greater percentage of bolls are produced
on outer position of fruiting branches but first position bolls produced by high density are the biggest and best resulting in
high yield. Fruit initiation was influenced by plant density in upland cotton (Buxton et al., 1977).

Nuclear War
Guthrie, 2K (Grant, J.D. candidate, 2000, University of California, Hastings College of the Law., Hastings
International and Comparative Law Review “Nuclear Testing Rocks the Sub-Continent: Can International Law Halt the
Impending Nuclear Conflict Between India and Pakistan?” Spring/Summer 2000, pg lexis wyo-ef)

Nuclear testing creates political instability because it requires a

substantial economic investment. One, small fission device typically costs five million U.S. dollars
to manufacture. 84 Pakistan's economy is fragile already. 85 Pakistan's total
budget for 1996-1997 was $ 12.5 [*503] billion, out of which 45 percent was spent
on debt service and 24 percent on defense. 86 If Pakistan begins
increasing its defense budget there will be nothing left for its people . 87
The spending effects of continued nuclear tests might bankrupt the
Pakistani economy. One day, the Pakistani government might be
forced to sell nuclear fuel, nuclear weapons or nuclear technology to
generate capital. Uncontrollable nuclear proliferation could ensue
and the world political regime might become destabilized . There are
strong political forces contending for control of Pakistan . 88 Pakistan
has been ruled on and off by the military for half of its history. 89 In
October of 1999, Pakistan's democratically elected government was overthrown and traded for a military regime. 90 If
Pakistan's political climate does not eventually stabilize , Pakistan
may become divided and compartmentalized, like a warlord-ridden,
nuclear Somalia. Each faction would control nuclear weapons and a
nuclear civil war could ensue. The world could be at the mercy of a
rogue nuclear state. The effect on the world could be incredibly
destabilizing.

CO2 increases Ginger’s cancer prevention properties

Jaafar et. al ’11 [Hawa and Ali Ghasemzadeh, Department of Crop Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University
Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia, 7/18/2011. “Antioxidant potential and anticancer activity of young
ginger (Zingiber officinale Roscoe) grown under different CO2 concentration”,
http://www.academicjournals.org/jmpr/PDF/pdf2011/18July/Ghasemzadeh%20and%20Jaafar.pdf] DHirsch

The rhizome of Z. officinale is generally used as a culinary spice in Malaysia, and also
for the treatment of oral diseases, leucorrhoea, stomachb pain, stomach
discomfort, diuretic, inflammation and dysentery. Shukla et al. (2007) reported
cancer preventive properties of ginger and showed that this ability is related to
[6]-gingerol. Kuokkanen et al. (2001) showed that the concentration of total phenolics was
significantly increased in the birch leaves produced in the CO2-enriched air , as has
also been observed in the experiments of Lavola and Julkunen (1994), Williams et al. (1994), Kinney et al. (1997) and
Ibrahim et al. (2011). Environmental conditions, cultural practice, and management approaches can impact the quality of
food by their abilities to promote good health and well being. In fact, new management strategies are emerging that use
ecophysiological factors to elevate phytochemical concentrations in food crops. Some
ecophysiological
conditions that are thought to have significant impact on enhancing the health
promoting phytochemicals in a number of plants include environmental
conditions and cultural and management practices (Schreiner, 2005).
Thus, there is an increasing interest in using appropriate strategies and management practices to improve the quality of
Information about anticancer
food crops by enhancing their nutritive and health-promoting properties.
and antioxidant activities of enriched ginger by elevated CO2 concentration is
scarce. On the other hand, the impacts of cultural conditions and CO2 concentration on
biopharmaceutical production in herbs have not been widely investigated and it
needs to be understood, especially when the objective is the optimization of the
herb chemistry. The aim of this study was to screen antioxidant potential and
anticancer activities (in vitro) of two Malaysian young ginger varieties (Z.
officinale) grown under different CO2 concentration.
Ginger growing in CO2 is key to solve cancer
Jaafar et. al ’11 [Hawa and Ali Ghasemzadeh, Department of Crop Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University Putra
Malaysia, 43400 UPM, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia, 7/18/2011. “Antioxidant potential and anticancer activity of young
ginger (Zingiber officinale Roscoe) grown under different CO2 concentration”,
http://www.academicjournals.org/jmpr/PDF/pdf2011/18July/Ghasemzadeh%20and%20Jaafar.pdf] DHirsch

Cancer is one of the extensive diseases in humans and there is substantial

scientific and commercial attention in continuing discovery of new anticancer
agents from natural product sources. Currently, about 50% of drugs used in clinical trials for anticancer
activity were isolated from natural sources such as herbs and spices or are related to them (Newman and Cragg, 2007). A
number of active compounds such as flavonoids, diterpenoids, triterpenoids and alkaloids have been shown to possess
anticancer activity. The results showed strong inhibitory activity of Malaysian young
ginger varieties on human breast cancer cells (MCF–7 and MDA–MB–231). Our results
in this study indicate that some compounds in Malaysian young ginger varieties
posses anticancer activities and may contribute to the therapeutic effect of this
medicinal herb. According to the report of the American National Cancer Institute (NCI), the criteria of anticancer
activity for the crude extracts of herbs is an IC50<30 µg/ml (Itharat et al., 2004). Thus, according to the
results from current study seems that enriched ginger varieties by elevated CO2
concentration could be employed in ethno-medicine for the management of
breast cancerous diseases. Therefore, more focused clinical studies are necessary to establish whether these
varieties can be exploited to reach cancer blocking or remedial effects in human body.
Warming’s not real – the Earth has been cooling for decades
Ferrara 12 [Peter, Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy for the Heartland Institute, and Senior
Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis. Served in the White House Office of Policy
Development, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States, Graduate of Harvard
College and Harvard Law School, 5/23/2012, “Sorry Global Warming Alarmists, The Earth Is Cooling”,
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/05/31/sorry-global-warming-alarmists-the-earth-is-
cooling/] DHirsch

Climate change itself is already in the process of definitively rebutting climate

alarmists who think human use of fossil fuels is causing ultimately catastrophic
global warming. That is because natural climate cycles have already turned from
warming to cooling, global temperatures have already been declining for more
than 10 years, and global temperatures will continue to decline for another two
decades or more. That is one of the most interesting conclusions to come out of the seventh International Climate
Change Conference sponsored by the Heartland Institute, held last week in Chicago. I attended, and served as one of the
speakers, talking about The Economic Implications of High Cost Energy. The conference featured serious natural science,
contrary to the self-interested political science you hear from government financed global warming alarmists seeking to
justify widely expanded regulatory and taxation powers for government bodies, or government body wannabees, such as
the United Nations. See for yourself, as the conference speeches are online. What you will see are calm, dispassionate
presentations by serious, pedigreed scientists discussing and explaining reams of data. In sharp contrast to these climate
realists, the climate
alarmists have long admitted that they cannot defend their theory
that humans are causing catastrophic global warming in public debate . With the
conference presentations online, let’s see if the alarmists really do have any response. The Heartland Institute has
effectively become the international headquarters of the climate realists, an analog to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC). It has achieved that status through these international climate conferences, and the
publication of its Climate Change Reconsidered volumes, produced in conjunction with the Nongovernmental
International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). Those Climate Change Reconsidered volumes are an equivalently
thorough scientific rebuttal to the irregular Assessment Reports of the UN’s IPCC. You can ask any advocate of human
caused catastrophic global warming what their response is to Climate Change Reconsidered. If they have none, they are
not qualified to discuss the issue intelligently. Check
out the 20th century temperature record,
and you will find that its up and down pattern does not follow the industrial
revolution’s upward march of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), which is the
supposed central culprit for man caused global warming (and has been much,
much higher in the past). It follows instead the up and down pattern of naturally
caused climate cycles. For example, temperatures dropped steadily from the late
1940s to the late 1970s. The popular press was even talking about a coming ice age. Ice ages have cyclically
occurred roughly every 10,000 years, with a new one actually due around now. In the late 1970s, the natural cycles turned
warm and temperatures rose until the late 1990s, a trend that political and economic interests have tried to milk
mercilessly to their advantage. The incorruptible satellite measured global atmospheric temperatures show less warming
during this period than the heavily manipulated land surface temperatures.