Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- bosu_aff [2014/09/20 13:39]
darthsuo
+++ bosu_aff [2014/11/24 02:02] (current)
darthsuo
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+=====PAS Aff=====
+====1AC====
+**In the beginning, there was zoe: the indestructible force of life that exceeds any individuation. From zoe, liberal humanism hewed the subject – that fragile creature of finitude – and gave it supreme importance. But when the subject dies, life continues; what, then, are we to make of suicide?**\\
+**__Shildrick 8__** (Margrit, Professor of Gender and Knowledge Production, TEMA Institute for Interdisciplinary Gender Studies, Linköping University, Former Professor of Gender Studies at Queen’s University Belfast, (Ph.D Warwick, M.Sc. Liverpool) “Deciding on Death: Conventions and Contestations in the Context of Disability” Bioethical Inquiry (2008) 5:209–219 DOI 10.1007/s11673-007-9074-1
+My point is that all that has so . . . . ([36], p. 8)
+**We are always already committing suicide – not from terminal illness or an excess of suffering, but because it is in our nature to die. PAS is a mode through which we style our deaths in a manner that affirm zoe – it marks a virtual potential that can disintegrate all notions of the subject as such.**\\
+**__Braidotti 9__** (Rosi, Distinguished Professor in the Humanities at Utrecht University in the Netherlands, founding director of the Centre for the Humanities at Utrecht University and Honorary Visiting Professor in the Law School of Birkbeck College, University of London “Locating Deleuze’s Eco-Philosophy between Bio/Zoe-Power and Necro-Politics” in Deleuze and Law: Forensic Futures, ed. C. Colebrook, R. Braidotti & P. Hanafin, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pg. 107-109
+Life is cosmic energy, simultaneously empty chaos . . . are non-essentialistic brands of vitalism.
+**The figure who demands PAS as a right represents the ultimate challenge to a legal order bent on death control. The affirmative is the invention of a jurisprudence that calls this right into being.**\\
+**__Hanafin 9__** (Patrick, Professor of Law at Birkbeck College, University of London, UK. He has been a visiting professor at the School of Law at the University of Porto, Portugal, and at the Law Faculty at the University of Pretoria in South Africa. He has held research fellowships at the European University Institute in Florence and at the Human Rights Program at Harvard Law School, “Rights of Passage: Law and the Biopolitics of Dying” Deleuze and Law: Forensic Futures, London: Palgrave Macmillan Ed. R. Braidotti, C. Colebrook, P. Hanafin, pg. 47-57
+The figure who refuses is a particularly troubling . . . Tripodina, 2001, p. 1727).
+**This politics of radical and vital affirmation is necessary to interrupt the contemporary necro-political condition that makes extinction inevitable.**\\
+**__Braidotti 13 __**(Rosi, holds Italian and Australian citizenship, was born in Italy and grew up in Australia, where she received degrees from the Australian National University in Canberra in 1977 and was awarded the University Medal in Philosophy and the University Tillyard prize. Braidotti then moved on to do her doctoral work at the Sorbonne, where she received her degree in philosophy in 1981. She has taught at the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands since 1988, when she was appointed as the founding professor in women's studies.[1] In 1995 she became the founding Director of the Netherlands research school of Women's Studies, a position she held till 2005. Braidotti is a pioneer in European Women's Studies: she founded the inter-university SOCRATES network NOISE and the Thematic Network for Women's Studies ATHENA, which she directed till 2005. She was a Leverhulme Trust Visiting Professor at Birkbeck College in 2005-6; a Jean Monnet professor at the European University Institute in Florence in 2002-3 and a fellow in the school of Social Science at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton in 1994. Braidotti is currently Distinguished University Professor at Utrecht University and founding Director of the Centre for the Humanities, onored with a Royal Knighthood from Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands; in August 2006 she received the University Medal from the University of Lodz in Poland and she was awarded an Honorary Degree in Philosophy from Helsinki University in May 2007. In 2009, she was elected Honorary Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities. Since 2009 she is a board member of Consortium of Humanities Centre and Institutes, The Posthuman Malden: polity, pg. 110-141
+This chapter deals with the multi-layered . . . expansion of new 'studies' areas in chapter 4.
+[Braidiotti continues . . . ]
+Speaking from the position of an embodied and embedded female subject, capable of reproducing the future … this on-going engagement with the political accountability of posthuman subjectivity.
+**Thus the plan: The United States should legalize physician-assisted suicide.**\\
+**The plan is an act of law-as-creation, the inauguration of a new world that makes radical change possible. Our becoming-democratic is a affirmative practice of jurisprudence that can reclaim the failures of actually-existingdemocracy **\\
+**__Bogue 12__** (Ronald, Distinguished Research Professor and Josiah Meigs Distinguished Teaching Professor of Comparative Literature at the University of Georgia, “Nature, Law and Chaosmopolitanism” in Revisiting Normativity with Deleuze Ed. R. Braidotti and P. Pisters London: Bloomsbury, pg. 107-112
+Finally, if Deleuze-Guattari's politics can . . . task of fashioning a genuinely democratic political order.
+**The legalization of PAS shifts the coordinates of medicalization and the life/death distinction – this act is fragile, but so is every emergent clamor for rights. Evaluate this debate not on the immediate effects of implementation but on the tantalizing possibilities that our new right creates.**\\
+**__Honig 8__** (Bonnie Honig is Nancy Duke Lewis Professor in the departments of Modern Culture and Media (MCM) and Political Science, 2008, “The Time of Rights: Emergent Thoughts in an Emergency Setting” in The New Pluralism:  William Connolly and the Contemporary Global Condition, kindle
+Connolly’s politics of becoming brings together critical responsiveness . . . Well, when one is doing philosophy.47
+======Deleuze Aff======
+====1AC Wake Round 8====
+**The abstract machine of faciality continually threatens to reduce identity to dyads: either an antagonistic position towards structures of oppression and other individuals surrounding us or the re-invocation of static, ossified categories. The topic invites both a historical, self-reflexive examination of the diverse modalities of oppression and a simultaneous affirmation of becoming. The modern prostitution regime gained power from the image of the seductive Asian man threatening the purity of white European womanhood while at the same time allowing large numbers of Chinese women so long as they remained prostitutes. Weed restrictions drew upon the rhetorical economy of the Chinese opium scare but combined this with a new xenophobia framed around a Mexican invasion, creating new regimes of violence. Militarism expands through fears of the “rise of China.” These contingent historical moments become sedimented through repetitions and reaffirmations, employed against other groups – Black Americans, East Asian migrants – in novel ways. Michael’s family immigrated to the United States from China and he is marked in the American racial code as foreign and Other. Within the dominant regimes of racialization he’s still, so they say, doing quite well. The long history of racial and sexual oppression in America makes it obvious that this isn’t true—brutal disposability of Chinese workers, Chinese Exclusion, and the murder of Vincent Chin, the myth of the “model minority” coexists with a violent suspicion of Asian otherness. Facialty operates by defining identity positions in terms of their deviance from the white heterosexual male. This process of demarcation is the condition of possibility for identitarian violence.**\\
+**__Saldanha ‘7__** /Arun, Associate Professor, Department of Geography, Environment, and Society, University of Minnesota and Senior Lecturer of Social Sustainability at Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Psychedelic White: Goa Trance and the Viscosity of Race, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pg.194-196/
+My disagreement is not with Fanon’s and Martín . . . countered with a Hegelian sublation into the universal.
+**Vote affirmative to activate this space as site of becoming. This regime maintains its position via the construction of synthetic opposition between staticized identity groups. Against this we must intensify the production of difference, by growing grass. Growing grass means affirming the multiplicity of identity. Identity should become multiple—where the tree of identitarian totality once stood, thousands of molecular identities should sprout.**\\
+**__ Saldanha ‘6__** /Arun, Associate Professor, Department of Geography, Environment, and Society, University of Minnesota and Senior Lecturer of Social Sustainability at Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, “Reontologising race: the machinic geography of phenotype”, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 2006, volume 24, pages 9-24, DOI:10.1068/d61j/
+Every time phenotype makes … out what is keeping them from becoming actual.
+**Why should you affirm? Because critique and negativity are not the same thing. Melancholia and mourning have become the hallmarks of our context, and as a result critiques of domination have stalled. Affirmation is the only way out of a stifling paradox between negativity as critique and activating affect as a modality for change.**\\
+**__Bradiotti ‘9__**, (Rosi, Humanities, Utrecht, New Formations, Issue 68, Fall 2009)\\
+This paper addresses a paradox: how to engage in … from the epistemological to the ontological turn in ¶ poststructuralist philosophy. ¶
+**Rather than viewing our affirmation as either the inscription of Michael’s scholarship into my white world, the production and performance of the 1AC juxtapose our hybridizing cis-male positionalities and ask about the possibilities this generates. This generative politics is the politics of becoming: a simultaneous recognition of the constitutive exclusion in our public acts and an attentiveness to the same. If there is any value to debate to begin with, it must start from the presupposition of non-exclusion**\\
+**__Braidotti ‘6__** /Rosi, Utrecht University and Birkbeck College, “Affirmation versus Vulnerability: On Contemporary Ethical Debates” Symposium: Canadian Journal of Continental Philosophy, vol. 10, no. 1, Spring / Printemps 2006, pp 235-254/
+The ethics of affirmation, with its … in the pursuit of change is a political act.
+**Why does the ballot matter? It is a site for debate becoming something different—in transfiguring the orthodoxy of debate as a series of dialectical exchanges premised on the logic of either/or, you can write debate as a site where affirmation produces new modes of becoming**\\
+**__Conway 10__**\\, Philosophy, CSU LA, 2010 (Jay, Gilles Deleuze: Affirmation in Philosophy)
+How exactly does the phrase “the middle” secure the atmosphere of Deleuze’s … index of any reorganization of social life.
+=====1AC=====
+**White supremacist polarizations continually threaten to reduce identity to dyads: either an antagonistic position towards structures of oppression and other individuals surrounding us or the re-invocation of static, ossified categories.**\\
+**Michael Suo is from a Chinese family that immigrated to the United States. He is marked in the American racial code as foreign and Other. And yet within the logic that dominant regimes of racialization deploy he’s still, so they say, doing comparatively well.**\\
+**The long history of racial oppression in America makes it obvious that this isn’t true—brutal disposability of Chinese workers, Chinese Exclusion, and the murder of Vincent Chin, the myth of the “model minority” coexists with a violent suspicion of Asian otherness. Prostitution restrictions emerged against the image of the seductive Asian man threatening the purity of white European womanhood. Weed restrictions drew upon the rhetorical economy of the Chinese opium scare but combined this with a new xenophobia framed around a Mexican invasion, creating new regimes of violence. These contingent historical moments become sedimented through repetitions and reaffirmations, employed against other groups – Black Americans, East Asian migrants – in novel ways**\\
+**Discussion of race needs to stay as creative as the individuals who bear it. When it remains within a binary, all people of color will be stuck in a white supremacist system. **\\
+**__Alcoff ‘6__** (Linda Martín Alcoff, Prof. of Philosophy at CUNY, Latinos, Asian Americans, and the Black‐White Binary, in Visible Identities: Race, Gender, and the Self, Oxford Scholarship Online)
+Similar to the Mexican Americans in Texas, . . . 1994; Prashad 2000; Wu 2002).
+**The silence bred by reducing racialization to simplicity allows conservative forces to divide and conquer – the model minority myth, the tale of the high-performing Asian who proves that social uplift is possible is a paradigmatic example of a liminal identity being redeployed as a weapon**\\
+**__Prashad 2__** (Vijay Prashad, George and Martha Kellner Chair in South Asian History and Professor of International Studies, 2002, “Everybody Was Kung Fu Fighting,” pp. 40-46
+The moral and political weight of the civil . . . content of their character’’ message than we suspect.
+**VOTE AFF TO AFFIRM A PEDAGOGY OF POLYCULTURALISM**\\
+**Obliterating the strength that the black/white binary gives White Supremacy means neither embracing liberal/multicultural color-blindedness, nor advocating a primordial position of absolute difference between races. Instead it begins with an understanding of race for the complex phenomenon that it is**\\
+**__Prashad 2__** (Vijay Prashad, George and Martha Kellner Chair in South Asian History and Professor of International Studies, 2002, “Everybody Was Kung Fu Fighting,” pp. 38-40)
+The problem of the twenty-first century. . . , values. But more on that later.
+**Authenticity should not be a justification for exclusion. Polycultural politics affirms the centrality of internal differentiation for any understanding of identity. If there is any value to debate to begin with, it must start from the presupposition of non-exclusion**\\
+**__Prashad 2__** (Vijay Prashad, George and Martha Kellner Chair in South Asian History and Professor of International Studies, 2002, “Everybody Was Kung Fu Fighting,” pp. 64-69)
+Disenfranchised by white supremacy, many people of . . . is indeed in some way equal.136
+**Growing grass means affirming the multiplicity of identity. Identity should become multiple—where the tree of identitarian totality once stood, thousands of molecular identities should sprout.**\\
+**__ Saldanha ‘6__** /Arun, Associate Professor, Department of Geography, Environment, and Society, University of Minnesota and Senior Lecturer of Social Sustainability at Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, “Reontologising race: the machinic geography of phenotype”, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 2006, volume 24, pages 9-24, DOI:10.1068/d61j/
+Every time phenotype makes another machinic …. is keeping them from becoming actual.
+**Why should you affirm? Because critique and negativity are not the same thing. Melancholia and mourning have become the hallmarks of our context, and as a result critiques of domination have stalled. Affirmation is the only way out of a stifling paradox between negativity as critique and activating affect as a modality for change.**\\
+ Bradiotti, Humanities, Utrecht, 2009 (Rosi, New Formations, Issue 68, Fall 2009)
+This paper addresses a paradox: how to engage in … ¶ poststructuralist philosophy. ¶
+======Anarchism Aff======
+=====1AC=====
+**The spectre haunting politics is power – in an era where the state has become predatory and the populace disillusioned, we must ask the question of a politics without party and a power beyond the state**\\
+**__Newman 10__** (Saul Newman, Professor of Political Theory at the University of London at Goldsmiths, 2010, “The Politics of Postanarchism,” pub. Edinburgh University Press, pp. 104-107
+We observe a similar silence about anarchism in . . . with a more consistent ethical and political framework.
+**The resolution asks us to bring a set of practices into the law, sustaining the omnivorous nature of state power while simultaneously obscuring it. We reject this juridico-sovereign dialectic of prohibition and legalization. Ours is a politics of an-arche – the withering away of any first principle that can govern our existence. The 1AC is an immanent, agonistic contestation of the law; an unruly space of resistance carved from its very heart. **\\
+**__Newman 12__** (Saul Newman, Professor of Political Theory, Goldsmiths, University of London, “Anarchism and Law: Towards a Post-Anarchist Ethics of Disobedience,” Griffith Law Review (2012) Vol. 21 No. 2
+I do not want by any means to . . . political philosophy most closely aligned with justice.
+**Voting aff is an endorsement of the creation of a space beyond the law. Faced with the injunction to be technicians refining the machinery of power, we instead desert our role, an exodus that asserts our power to legalize whatever practices we desire.**\\
+**__Noterman and Pusey 12__** (Elsa Noterman is Program Associate at the Community Strategies Group of the Aspen Insitute, Andre Pusey is a PhD candidate in the School of Geography at the University of Leeds, UK, “Inside, Outside, and on the Edge of the Academy: Experiments in Radical Pedagogies” in Anarchist Pedagogies: Collective Action, Theories, and Critical Reflections on Education, pp. 192-194
+So, how do we build this new . . . , while rediscovering the subversiveness of teaching.
+**Liberalism tries to seize control of the state and direct the flow of history; a suturing of the subject infected by the possibility for fascism. Against this we affirm an anarchy of becoming – a micropolitical reconfiguration of the subject that shatters the possibility of domination**\\
+**__Call 2__** (Lewis Call, Associate Professor of History at Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo, 2002, Postmodern Anarchism. Lexington: Lexington Books, pp. 47-56
+But the usual suspects have another, much . . . all fixed politics, economics, and culture.
+**Politics that does not begin with the creation of the self is doomed to reactivity and ressentiment. This inscribes hatred into the place of power, reaffirming existing structures of domination.**\\
+**__Newman 2k__** (Saul Newman, Professor of Political Theory at the University of London at Goldsmiths, 2000, “Anarchism and the Politics of Ressentiment,” Theory and Event, 4:3
+Ressentiment is diagnosed by Nietzsche as our modern . . . philosophies, like anarchism, that advocate it.\\
+**[Newman continues . . .]**\\
+Has anarchism as a political and social theory of revolution been invalidated because of the …, in other words, an anarchism without ressentiment.
+**Our act of playful self-creation ruptures the processes of political subjectivization that make liberal violence thinkable**\\
+**__Clifford 1__** (Michael Clifford, associate professor of philosophy @ Mississippi State Univ, 2k1 [Political Genealogy after Foucault: Savage Identities, p. 144-146]
+Foucault's genealogical analyses reveal that “the self is not given to us” – there is no essential identity around which discourse, power relations, and modes of subjectivation revolve, but rather the subject is an effect of their interplay. This recognition of the subject as historically contingent effect, rather than essential, metaphysical entity, leads Foucault to a Nietzschean conclusion, that “we have to create ourselves as a work of art.” 60 We have to become involved in an ongoing process of creative self-transformation, of self-overcoming, in a genuinely Nietzschean sense. Yet when Foucault says that we have to create ourselves, he is not expressing this as a moral demand; it is, rather, a description of our situation. Constituting ourselves as subjects is a creative endeavor that involves giving meaning – style – to our existence, whether we recognize it as such or not. And Foucault is also extending an invitation: he is inviting us to open a space of freedom for ourselves, a freedom that consists in affirming ourselves “as a creative force.” 61 In abandoning any notion of metaphysical essentiality or anthropological necessity regarding who and what we are, we are able to recognize the creative contribution of the subject in the process of his or her own self-formation. This recognition itself is a kind of liberation, a distancing from the processes of subjection and subjectivization, through which the power of a particular identity is suspended. In the affirmation, not of a discourse of truth about ourselves as “creative beings,” but of creative activity in and for itself, recognition is no longer a determination. Through this affirmation, identity becomes a game, in which the relationships we have to ourselves are not of unity and coherence, but of difference and creation. In this way subjectivity becomes, not a limitation, but an art. Perhaps all this sounds too playful for the serious business of politics. In fact, this is just the sort of play required to break through, to fracture, the most oppressive forms of political subjection. A whole range of social problems, from limitations on social opportunities to declarations of war, are in part attributable to processes of subjectivization. The constitution of a political identity for ourselves involves the appropriation of values and beliefs that commit us to certain practices-practices that have real political consequences. We alternately lament or praise such consequences with little or no sense that their source lies in part in the arbitrary appropriation or imposition of an identity. We condemn the persecution of minorities, for instance, but how often do we ever really question the endemic processes of differentiation and identification that divides human beings along line-limits-of race and gender? War is the most tragic of human dramas, we say, even when it is “necessary” to secure our liberty, but to what extent is this necessity tied to an arbitrary drawing of lines-limits-on a map, to the contingency of a national identity that marshals troops for its perpetuation? The bigot and the dictator are micro- and macro-symbols of our political subjection. We raise our opposition against them willingly, enthusiastically, thinking that freedom consists simply of overcoming their petty, or global, tyrannies. We never think to overcome a much finer, more pervasive, less violent but more pernicious, quotidian form of subjection; that is, we never think to overcome ourselves. Political subjectivity is played out every day in struggles of domination and submission. Real freedom, concrete freedom, consists in fracturing the political identities-our liberalism, our conservatism, our patriotism, our individualism-through which we are bound to, limited by, rationalities that make these struggles necessary. If we can come to recognize the optionality and lack of necessity of given forms of political subjectivity, we might have a point of departure for changing (overcoming) certain kinds of real political relations. If this sounds utopian or idealistic, we have only to consider that most if not all political conflict in this half-century can be understood as clashes of identity. Most political movements in the last forty years in the United States can be understood in these terms. 62 Such movements have been (to some degree) successful in upsetting certain entrenched political identifications that had been the basis of their subjection and domination. The resistance that such movements have raised against their subjection is predicated on a refusal of a subjectival conceptualization and its limitations. Moreover, we have seen evidence that such refusals have gained wider social acceptance; they increasingly infiltrate the social structure through institutionalization and demarginalization. Of course, there are backslidings and retrenchments on a fairly regular basis (consider recent legislation to ban gay marriages, or the platform statement of Southern Baptists that wives “submit graciously to the servant leadership of their husbands”). Still, in many instances the political battles over identity-women in the military as a policy (though, of course, in practice sexual harassment and discrimination are still very prevalent), for example-have at least lifted such movements from the shadows and given them an air of legitimacy.
+**The place of power is death.**\\
+**__Beres 94__** (Louis Rene Beres, Ph.D., Princeton University. Professor of International Law, Department of Political Science, Purdue University, “Self-Determination, International Law and Survival on Planet Earth,” 11 Ariz. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 1 1994, Gender modified
+To fulfill the expectations of a new global . . . that brings self-affirmation and safety.
+======Death Aff======
+=====1AC=====
+**The expulsion of death forms the nucleus of modern politics. Unable to come to terms with the symbolic reversibility of death, the system reduces life to mere industrial prolongation, encoding the conditions of possibility for all exclusion.**\\
+**__Robinson 12__** (Andrew, Political Theorist, Activist Based in the UK and research fellow affiliated to the Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice (CSSGJ), University of Nottingham, “Jean Baudrillard: The Rise of Capitalism & the Exclusion of Death”, March 30, http://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/in-theory-baudrillard-2/
+Symbolic exchange – or rather, its suppression . . . life or death serves the reproduction of domination.
+**This reversibility forms the substrate of our relationship to the world – the real now floats fragmented upon the map we constructed in its image. Our only recourse is to abandon knowledge in favor of a poetics of radical alterity; in a word: death. **\\
+**__Baudrillard 2k__** (Jean Baudrillard, 2000, The Vital Illusion, pp. 61-83
+Murder of the Real: it sounds like . . . more unintelligible, even more enigmatic.
+**Organ transplantation is only made possible by this symbolic exchange between life and death – a unique site where reversibility manifests in the social world**\\
+**__Ben-David 5__** (Orit Brawer Ben-David, Lecturer in Medical Sociology and Anthropology at Tel Aviv University, 2005, Organ Donation and Transplantation: Body Organs as an Exchangeable Socio-Cultural Resource, pp. xv-xvii
+This book deals with life and death and . . . had realizable and socially legitimate interests.
+**The symbolic resonance of organ transplantation cannot be consumed and reappropriated by any rational system of thought – death remains an accursed share, disturbing the ontological certainty of the subject**\\
+**__Ben-David 5__** (Orit Brawer Ben-David, Lecturer in Medical Sociology and Anthropology at Tel Aviv University, 2005, Organ Donation and Transplantation: Body Organs as an Exchangeable Socio-Cultural Resource, pp. 105-112
+Sociologists and anthropologists, when dealing with the . . . dead body that can be used for transplants.
+**However, organ transplantation remains locked inside a semiotic system that divests it of its radical potential – its accursed share turned destructive. The system casts organ transplantation as an “altruistic” act to bracket it from an exchange relationship. Organs were always already for sale: it’s just that the price is death.**\\
+**Rather than examine the so-called “gift of life,” we must endorse the reversibility of the exchange: vote affirmative to legalize the gift of death.**\\
+**__Scheper‐Hughes 2k__** (Nancy Scheper‐Hughes is Professor of Anthropology at the University of California, Berkeley, “The Global Traffic in Human Organs,” Current Anthropology, Vol. 41, No. 2, April 2000, DOI: 10.1086/300123
+Death is, of course, another key . . . to the machine in today's intensive care units.
+**Death constitutes the irreducible horizon of power – the organ is the symbolic gift that the system can only receive by destroying itself**\\
+**__Baldwin 12 __**(Jon Baldwin, lecturer in Critical and Contextual Studies at London Metropolitan University, “Potlatch Politics – Baudrillard’s Gift,” The International Journal of Baudrillard Studies, Volume 9, Number 3 (October 2012)
+“[A]nything that cannot be exchanged . . . may be” (Baudrillard 1993: 38).
+**The 1AC is an act of affirmative nihilism – not an act of revolutionary purification, but of joyful simulation. The gift of death confronts the system with its limit, passing beyond the law while laughing at its carcass**\\
+**__Call 2__** (Lewis Call, Associate Professor of History at Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo, 2002, Postmodern Anarchism. Lexington: Lexington Books, pp. 104-113
+But if this is really Baudrillard’s position, . . . drives crash. And even signs must burn.
+=====2AC Framework=====
+====2AC Fairness====
+**Call for fairness produces life-denying ossification of debate**\\
+**__Grimm 77__** (Ruediger Hermann, art historian and Goethe scholar, Nietzsche's Theory of Knowledge, ed. M. Montinari, W. Miiller-Lauter & H. Wenzel, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, pg. 30-33, Gender modified
+Western logic and metaphysics have been traditionally founded . . . , als ein Kampf . . .0 0
+====2AC Proliferation====
+**The proliferation of meaning and consciousness raising rely on a fantasy of communication which imlodes under its own wieght. More knowledge does not change reality.**\\
+**__Baudrillard 2000__** /http://www.egs.edu/faculty/jean-baudrillard/articles/simulacra-and-simulations-viii-the-implosion-of-meaning-in-the-media/
+ We live in a world where there . . . and regeneration of meaning and of speech.
+====2AC Dialogue====
+**Idea that subjects should be maximally reciprocal destroys the possibility for individual value**\\
+**__Robinson 12__** (Andrew, Political Theorist, Activist Based in the UK and research fellow affiliated to the Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice (CSSGJ), University of Nottingham, April 14, 2012, “Jean Baudrillard: Critique of Alienation – Draft 1,” http://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/in-theory-baudrillard-3/
+Baudrillard also sees communication and sociality being corrupted . . . instead using them as inducements to conformity.
+====2AC Communication====
+**Communication denies singularity.**\\
+**__Baudrillard 9__** (Jean, Dead frenchy currently teaching at the EGS, formerly Professor Emeritus at the Université de Paris X, Nanterre “The Vanishing Point of Communication” in Jean Baudrillard: Fatal Theories, Edited by David B. Clarke, Marcus A. Doel, William Merrin and Richard G. SmithThis text is based on a transcript of a lecture delivered in English by Jean Baudrillard to the Department of Social Sciences, Loughborough University, UK, New York:Routledge, pg. 15-23
+Everything about communication seems to have been said. . . the interface, of contiguity and networks.
+====2AC Fairness====
+**Call for fairness produces life-denying ossification of debate**\\
+**__Grimm 77__** (Ruediger Hermann, art historian and Goethe scholar, Nietzsche's Theory of Knowledge, ed. M. Montinari, W. Miiller-Lauter & H. Wenzel, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, pg. 30-33, Gender modified
+Western logic and metaphysics have been traditionally founded . . . als ein Kampf . . .0 0
+====2AC Policy Education====
+**Policy debate is fake**\\
+**__Claude 1988__** (Inis, Professor of Government and Foreign Affairs, University of Virginia, States and the Global System, pages 18-20)
+This view of the state as an institutional . . . them–and that they sometimes claim.
 ====== 2013-2014 ======
@@ Line 783: / Line 997: @@
 **Plan: The United States federal judiciary should permanently enjoin enforcement of section 1021(b)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for the Fiscal Year 2012 on the grounds that it is facially overbroad.**

BoSu Wiki

User Tools

Site Tools

Differences

Page Tools