Changes for page Collegiate YUAN Aff

Last modified by Administrator on 2017/08/29 03:34

From version < 19.1 >
edited by Kyle Yuan
on 2016/09/18 16:21
To version < 8.1 >
edited by Kyle Yuan
on 2016/09/17 15:34
< >
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Caselist.CitesClass[0]
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -2016-09-17 15:34:38.0
1 +2016-09-17 15:34:38.117
Caselist.CitesClass[1]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,10 +1,0 @@
1 -A2 Native CP
2 -The 1AC is not the end all be all. Native Nation and US Policy alliance is key to pass a strong climate bill with real solutions. This is a shift in the right direction and certainly a necessary one. Perm solves.
3 -Tom B. K. Goldtooth 10 (Mato Awanyankapi) “The State of Indigenous America Series: Earth Mother, Piñons, and Apple Pie” Wicazo Sa Review. Volume 25. Number 2. Fall 2010 pp. 11-28 University of Minnesota Press DOI: 10.1353/wic.2010.0006 muse.jhu.edu/article/400482
4 -Nuclear power is not a solution to climate change. From min- ing to nuclear waste, the nuclear cycle is far from carbon neutral and disproportionately impacts indigenous communities. Nuclear power is also economically unfeasible, and will not address climate change at the speed required to mitigate the devastation ahead. Unchecked expansion of biofuels (agrofuels) production and agricultural monocrops threaten biodiversity and food security and contribute to climate change and the destruction of rainforests, impact- ing indigenous communities worldwide. In this country, the govern- ment is planning to provide incentives for the construction of biomass waste-to-energy burners that will depend on agrofuels and potentially genetically modified trees and plants as fuels, replacing precious lands needed for food crop production. Here in the United States, our Native Nations, as sovereigns, working with our Native grassroots members have work in front of us. We must look toward the next steps at home, within our Native Nations and within the U.S. Senate. Copenhagen is over, yet our work is far from finished. We need to get more informed on climate policy and its link to energy, green jobs, and water and food policy. We need your support, as Native academia, to encourage the Senate to pass a strong climate bill—one with real solutions, not false solutions.
5 -
6 -
7 -A2 Thorium PIC
8 -You misunderstand thorium reactors, they can’t be fissile on their own, they still require uranium and plutonium to work
9 -World Nuclear Association 15 “Thorium” http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/thorium.aspx
10 -Thorium (Th-232) is not itself fissile and so is not directly usable in a thermal neutron reactor. However, it is ‘fertile’ and upon absorbing a neutron will transmute to uranium-233 (U-233)a, which is an excellent fissile fuel materialb. In this regard it is similar to uranium-238 (which transmutes to plutonium-239). All thorium fuel concepts therefore require that Th-232 is first irradiated in a reactor to provide the necessary neutron dosing to produce protactinium-233. The Pa-233 that is produced can either be chemically separated from the parent thorium fuel and the decay product U-233 then recycled into new fuel, or the U-233 may be usable ‘in-situ’ in the same fuel form, especially in molten salt reactors (MSRs).Thorium fuels therefore need a fissile material as a ‘driver’ so that a chain reaction (and thus supply of surplus neutrons) can be maintained. The only fissile driver options are U-233, U-235 or Pu-239. (None of these is easy to supply)
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2016-09-17 21:47:53.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Monica Amestoy
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Sunset AB
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -1
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -3
Team
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Collegiate YUAN Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -King Nuca 1AC v10 Normal
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Greenhill Classic
Caselist.CitesClass[2]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,81 +1,0 @@
1 -For years, Israel has hid the Dimona nuclear plant from the world. It’s production program is grounded in hypocrisy, secrecy and imperialism. America has looked away
2 -Mowla 08, Khondakar Golam Mowla, ‪The Judgment Against Imperialism, Fascism and Racism Against Caliphate and Islam, Volume 1‬, m https://books.google.com/books?id=IX02RSLJrcoCandpg=PA146andlpg=PA146anddq=Dimona+Nuclear+reactor+imperialismandsource=blandots=thzL3_6BJUandsig=FX8aIp42UHlew7NTgCAJ4QpaxuQandhl=enandsa=Xandved=0ahUKEwii1f_glJXPAhUCDz4KHaq5CGYQ6AEIGzAA#v=onepageandqandf=false 2008, page 146-147‬‬‬‬‬‬‬
3 -Both Reuters via Yahoonews.com and the New York Times reported Friday that Israel
4 -AND
5 -whole world, which is a kind of implicit terror threat.
6 -
7 -
8 - Dimona is the next Chernobyl→there are over a thousand defects at the decades old reactor.
9 -Adl 16, Carol Adl, Study Reveals That Israel’s Dimona Nuclear Reactor Has 1,537 Defectshttp://yournewswire.com/study-reveals-that-israels-dimona-nuclear-reactor-has-1537-defects/, April 29, 2016
10 -Scientists have uncovered 1,537 defects at the aluminum core in Israel’s Dimona nuclear
11 -AND
12 -require its sites to undergo regular inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
13 -
14 -Waste is PURPOSEFULLY DUMPED by ISRAELI TRUCKS IN BROWN COMMUNITIES OF COLOR. CANCER RATES, DEFORMITIES, AND OTHER FORMS OF VIOLENCE ARE SLOWLY KILLING THEM OFF. They constantly plea for help only to be ignored as they are slowly, painfully dying.
15 -Arqoub 15, Anas Abu Arqoubm https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/features/2015/6/30/is-waste-from-israels-nuclear-programme-poisoning-palestinians, The New Arab, 30 June, 2015
16 -Israel’s nuclear programme has operated in the shadows with little international oversight. Now it
17 -AND
18 -prevents international and UN experts in the field from entering the Palestinian territories.
19 -
20 -Blacks and Brown bodies in Dimona are relegated to second-class citizens—literally. Poverty, human right abuses and more types of violence pervade their lives.
21 -Abdul Mu’min 14, Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min, BLACKS USED AS HUMAN SHIELDS IN ISRAEL, AUGUST 3, 2014, NOI Research Group
22 -Dimona itself was conceived in 1953, and settled in 1955, mostly by new
23 -AND
24 -sports figures. Sounds like the same roles that Blacks play in America.
25 -
26 -These bodies, Falashas, are working and maintaining the facility.
27 -Abdul Mu’min 14, Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min, BLACKS USED AS HUMAN SHIELDS IN ISRAEL, AUGUST 3, 2014, NOI Research Group
28 -Recently, just before Israel stepped up its attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the
29 -AND
30 -back on line for what they claim are peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
31 -
32 -Workers at the Dimona reactor are exposed to these hazards and radioactive substances.
33 -Cohen 11, Gili Cohen Workers at Israel's Dimona Nuclear Reactor Say Leaks at Plant Gave Them Cancer read more: http://www.haaretz.com/workers-at-israel-s-dimona-nuclear-reactor-say-leaks-at-plant-gave-them-cancer-1.401478http://www.haaretz.com/workers-at-israel-s-dimona-nuclear-reactor-say-leaks-at-plant-gave-them-cancer-1.401478, 12/15/11
34 -Workers at the Dimona nuclear reactor say they have been sickened during their work at
35 -AND
36 -the Dimona facility was built, and I assume there still are."
37 -
38 -Ethiopian and American Black Hebrews near the area and working at facility face wipe out. Israeli War Hawks are attempting to bait Iran to blow up the reactors and kill Black Americans to get authorization from America to attack Iran. You can’t make this up.
39 -Abdul Mu’min 14, Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min, BLACKS USED AS HUMAN SHIELDS IN ISRAEL, AUGUST 3, 2014, NOI Research Group
40 -Now the war hawks in Israel are threatening to launch an airstrike against those same
41 -AND
42 -by our open enemies to be human shields for their various nefarious exploits.
43 -
44 -Attempts already made. Hamas has continued to attempt to blow up reactor.
45 -Fredericks 14, Israel bombarded by Hamas as rockets target nuclear reactor, Bob Fredericks, July 10, 2014
46 -Hamas terrorists launched three powerful rockets at an Israeli nuclear power plant on Wednesday —
47 -AND
48 -two missed their targets and detonated on the ground without causing any injuries.
49 -
50 -Plan Text: The State of Israel should prohibit the production of nuclear power by immediately decommissioning Negev Nuclear Research Center, also known as the Dimona power plant.
51 -Times of Israel, Times of Israel, Shut Dimona nuclear reactor, urges founding scientist Aging facility ‘may be world’s oldest reactor,’ says Uzi Even, after 1,537 defects found at aluminum core; says Israel couldn’t build new one without international help http://www.timesofisrael.com/writers/times-of-israel-staff/, April 26, 2016
52 -A scientist who was among the founders of the Dimona nuclear reactor on Tuesday said
53 -AND
54 -not operated as often as it used to be, the report said.
55 -
56 -
57 -Closure helps demilitarizes Israel’s military. Capability for weapons based plutonium and tritium would end. Helps reduces nuclear tension in Middle East region.
58 -Ramberg 08, Bennett Ramberg , Should Israel Close Dimona? The Radiological Consequences of a Military Strike on Israel’s Plutonium-Production Reactor , Arms Control Association ,https://www.armscontrol.org, September 3, 2008
59 -Given mounting regional tensions and the capacity of Israel's adversaries to strike Dimona, does
60 -AND
61 -keeping the facility in cold standby in the event circumstances required a restart.
62 -
63 -We address the immediate effects of the DImona plant through prohibition and paradigm shift from the status quote. If you think the Aff is a good idea vote aff.
64 -
65 -We must confront the taboo. Lack of acknowledgment itself is the cultural problem. We engage POLICY MAKING AT A SOCIAL LEVEL. PUBLIC ENFORCES THAT POLICY WITH THE SILENCE. We must confront our own privileges with nuclear power and refuse to be complilcit in the system. We are a policy that engages discourse and lack of awareness.
66 -Cohen 13, The Worst-Kept Secret: Israel's Bargain with the Bomb, Avner Cohen, 2013, (XXVIII- XXIX)
67 -My reference to Israel's nuclear taboo throughout this book is different from that used by
68 -AND
69 -given them an excuse not to feel accountable for their nation's nuclear status.
70 -
71 -Voting affirmative endorses a social critique of nuclear power. Only instrumental reform to the energy system can effectively spill over to broader systemic problems without being coopted.
72 -
73 - Martin et. Al, 84(The main authors are Jill Bowling, Brian Martin, Val Plumwood and Ian Watson, with important contributions from Ray Kent, Basil Schur and Rosemary Walters. Strategy against nuclear power http://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/86sa.html)
74 -What is a strategy anyway? A strategy links the analysis of an issue with goals and objectives. Having chosen a strategy, it is implemented through appropriate actions. An action is a 'once-off' event such as a rally, march, blockade or lobbying a particular politician. A method, such as lobbying in general, refers to all actions of a certain type. Actions are coordinated together into a campaign. The campaign gives direction to a series of events. Given our analysis in section 1 of the structural forces responsible for the nuclear fuel cycle, the goal of stopping uranium mining must be closely linked to the goal of basic structural change in the state, capitalism, patriarchy and the division of labour. As such it must involve challenges to the structures which underlie nuclear concerns. The broader objectives for an anti-nuclear movement must include encouraging mass participation in decision making rather than elite control, decentralising the distribution of political power into smaller, local groups, and bringing about self-reliance based on environmentally sound technologies. These objectives involve fundamental changes to the way our society is organised at present. In effect, an anti-nuclear strategy must involve both actions aimed at stopping nuclear power and activities which challenge existing structures and help construct viable alternatives. In this context, the success or failure of an individual campaign must be viewed from the perspective of working towards these overall goals and objectives. The actions used by the anti-uranium movement fall into two main categories. Firstly there are actions which aim at convincing or influencing elites, such as lobbying or writing letters to politicians. Secondly are the actions such as rallies and blockades which usually involve more participation from the community. While such actions may be aimed at elites they are also important in educating or giving support to those who are involved. Lobbying. Lobbying is a direct attempt to convince or pressure elite decision-makers. It does nothing to challenge the state, patriarchy or other structures underlying nuclear power, but rather hopes to oppose nuclear power by 'working through the proper channels'. This leaves elite structures unchallenged and intact. Indeed lobbying is a form of political action most suited to powerful interest groups such as corporations and professional bodies. The state is the forum of the powerful, so for these kinds of groups lobbying often is an effective strategy. For small activist groups lobbying is useful only if it appears to be backed up by politically visible mass concern or mass action. In 1983, after the election of a Labor Government, the anti-uranium movement turned strongly to lobbying in an attempt to induce the Labor Caucus to implement the Labor Party platform. This effort was unsuccessful. Participating in environmental inquiries. In making submissions to the Ranger Inquiry, environmental groups made a concerted attempt to ensure that the issue of the Ranger mine was not divorced from the general issue of uranium mining and nuclear power, and that ultimate decisions were determined by the public rather than 'experts'. The Inquiry did in fact analyse the overall dangers of the nuclear industry and concluded that no decision on uranium mining should occur without public debate. These results helped fuel the ensuing widespread public debate on uranium mining in Australia. One reason for involvement in environmental inquiries is to challenge the role of experts in service to vested interests. The Ranger Inquiry commented on the bias of distinguished scientists who testified in favour of uranium mining. The Ranger Inquiry was unusual in making full use of broad terms of reference. Many environmental inquiries have institutional constraints which can make it questionable whether activists should spend much energy in that area. Many government inquiries with severely limited terms of reference offer few opportunities for activists to intervene effectively. There is not only the danger of being 'co-opted' if activists take part, but also the prospect that any structural challenges may be deflected by superficial concessions. Often such inquiries are not genuine and are only set up as window-dressing. For example, the Australian Science and Technology Council inquiry set up in November 1983 to investigate Australia's role in the nuclear fuel cycle has terms of reference which assume the continuation of uranium mining. Working through the trade union movement. In 1976 anti-uranium groups began a major effort to persuade trade unions and their Congress delegates to adopt and support anti-uranium policies. The Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) Congress adopted an anti-uranium policy in mid-1977. Following the re-election of the Liberal-National Government in December 1977, anti-uranium groups focussed on persuading unions to implement the ACTU policy. However, the members of a number of unions - including some with anti-uranium policies - continued to work in the uranium industry. Some union leaders chose not to attempt to convince members to avoid or leave the industry, while other leaders supportive of the policies could not persuade members working in the industry or transporting its products. The efforts within the trade union movement have been strong to the extent that they have mobilised rank-and-file action. One of the most valiant efforts to stop uranium mining was by the Waterside Workers Federation - supported by the Seamen's Union and the Transport Workers Union - in refusing to load yellowcake for export from Darwin in late 1981. This direct action - an obvious challenge to the power of corporations and the state - was only called off when deregistration threats from the Liberal-National Government induced the ACTU to back down. Efforts through the trade unions have been least effective when they have depended on action only by union elites. An ACTU policy against uranium mining is not enough: it does not in itself challenge any of the driving forces behind nuclear power. When Bob Hawke was President of the ACTU, the executive showed itself disinclined to mount even a strong publicity campaign against the uranium mining industry. Working through the parliamentary system. Since 1976 a major focus of the anti-nuclear power movement has been the ALP. A massive campaign of publicising and discussing the issue at the party branch level resulted in an anti-uranium platform being adopted in mid-1977. Since that time there has been strong anti-uranium feeling within the party. In late 1977 the focus of the anti-uranium movement became the federal election campaign. During this campaign the anti-uranium movement used the resources of local anti-uranium groups to help the ALP in marginal House of Representatives electorates and for the Australian Democrats in the Senate. Many anti-uranium activists pinned their hopes on a Labor victory. But the Liberal-National coalition won the election, and the anti-uranium campaign appeared to have little impact in marginal electorates. After this defeat, many activists left the movement while a number of local groups effectively ceased to exist. The danger in relying too much on anti-uranium action by a Labor Government was demonstrated in mid-1982 when the Labor anti-uranium platform was watered down on the initiative of party power brokers in spite of continuing support for the platform at the party branch level. The danger was further demonstrated in November 1983 when Labor Caucus, at the initiative of Cabinet, gave the go-ahead for Roxby Downs, potentially the largest uranium mine in the world. In each case the impetus to maintain the anti-uranium policy came from the grassroots of the party, while it was labour elites who pushed pro-mining stances. Any Australian government, whether Labor or not, is strongly tied to the established state apparatus and to the support of capitalism. It is futile to expect the government on its own - whatever its platform may be - to readily oppose aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle. This will occur only when there is strong and continual pressure from the grassroots of the party and from the community at large. Grassroots mobilisation. The anti-uranium movement has used a wide variety of methods to inform and involve the community. Commonly used methods include leaflet distribution, articles, talks, discussions, films, petitions, rallies, marches, vigils and street theatre. Major anti-uranium rallies and marches were held each year in most large cities, especially in the peak years of the uranium debate, 1976-1979 and again since 1983. A typical grassroots activity has been the creation of nuclear-free zones, which is mainly a symbolic action which helps raise awareness and encourage local groups to openly oppose nuclear power. This activity has worked closely with the dissemination of information through the media, local groups, the alternative press and schools. In 1983 the people in the Bega Valley Shire voted to declare their area a nuclear-free zone. To counter this popular sentiment, the Shire Council called in nuclear experts in order to argue the case against the nuclear-free zone. In this case the nuclear-free zone campaign provided a channel for exposing and challenging the role of nuclear expertise and elites in promoting nuclear power. Civil disobedience has also been used by the anti-nuclear movement. In the late 1970s, nonviolent direct action was used on several occasions at ports where uranium was being loaded for export. At the Roxby Downs blockade in August 1983, several hundred people gathered to express their opposition and hinder mining operations. Two distinctive features of this protest were the use of nonviolent action and the way in which participants formed themselves into affinity groups. These are a form of political organising which is consciously anti-elitist and aims to democratise all group interactions. Education, rallies, marches, petitions and civil disobedience sometimes do little to challenge the structures underlying nuclear power. For example, the rally outside Parliament House in October 1983 was primarily aimed at putting pressure on the Labor Party at a time when it was considering its uranium policy. Similarly, the 'tent embassy' located on Parliament House lawns aimed to prick the conscience of the ALP. One of the aims of the Roxby Downs blockade was to mobilise pressure to influence the ALP. On the other hand, grassroots mobilisation often provides a potent challenge to nuclear power and the forces behind it. All the lasting successes of Australian anti-uranium campaigns have depended ultimately on grassroots mobilisation, which provides a reservoir of commitment and concern which elite-oriented activities do not. In 1975, the virtue of mining uranium was largely unquestioned among the general public and the labour movement. It was simply unthinkable that a mineral which could be profitably sold would be left in the ground. Yet by 1977 the anti-uranium view had become widely understood and strongly supported. This change in opinion happened largely through the educational and organising efforts of the local anti-uranium groups and of anti-uranium activists within organisations such as trade unions, schools and churches. The resurgence of anti-uranium activity in 1983 owed much to the framework established in the late 1970s. The anti-uranium platform adopted by the ALP in 1977 was the result of organising and education at the party branch level. ALP stands and action against uranium mining have come consistently from the party grassroots, and this in turn has depended on anti-uranium sentiment in the general community. Support for uranium mining within the ALP has always been strongest on the part of party elites. The anti-uranium stands and actions by Australian trade unions have been stronger than in any other country in the world. Building on a tradition of trade union action on social issues, this has come about from persistent grassroots education and organising at the shop floor level. It has been the rank-and-file unionists who have taken the strongest anti-uranium stands, and the trade union elites who have backed away from opposition. When in late 1981 the Seamen's Union refused to load yellowcake in Darwin, it was the rank-and-file workers who took a stand and made the sacrifices. Does grassroots mobilisation then provide the most fruitful avenue for challenging the structures behind nuclear power? Yes, but the choice of methods is not straightforward or automatic. The problem with many grassroots methods used by the anti-uranium movement is that they have not been systematically organised and focussed as part of an overall long-term strategy. Instead, individual groups - and indeed the national movement - has often just looked ahead to the next rally, the next signature drive, or the next ALP Conference. While this approach does have some merit for example in saving an area from irreversible environmental destruction, it is inadequate as an approach to stopping mining or transforming the structures underlying nuclear power. For example the closing of Roxby mine would prevent the destruction of the surrounding ecosystem including mound springs inhabited by forms of aquatic life found nowhere else in the world. If the environment is altered, these unique creatures will be gone forever. However, the closing of Roxby in isolation would do nothing to prevent mining companies from setting up or increasing production in other places. If, on the other hand, existing power structures were challenged, and the closing of Roxby were carried out in conjunction with the closing of all uranium mines and a disbanding of uranium interests, then the safety of these ecosystems would be assured. What needs to be done is to focus on vulnerable points within the structures promoting nuclear power, and to devote efforts in these areas. What are the vulnerable points, then? Before looking at specific vulnerable points, let's examine the nuclear power issue as a whole. Nuclear power is a large-scale vulnerable point in the structures of the state, capitalism and so forth. In promoting nuclear power, and thereby entrenching centralised political and economic power, other consequences result which mobilise people in opposition: environmental effects (especially radioactive waste), the connection with nuclear weapons, threats to Aboriginal land rights, threats to civil liberties, and many others. In organising to oppose these specific threats, people at the same time can challenge the driving forces behind nuclear power. Here are a few of the specific vulnerable points which have been addressed by the anti-uranium movement. Threats to Aborigines. Nuclear power is alleged to be beneficial, but uranium mining is a severe cultural threat to Aborigines, who are already a strongly oppressed group in Australia. The anti-uranium movement and the Aboriginal land rights movements have been strengthened by joint actions, such as speaking tours. Centralised decision-making. Nuclear power has widespread social effects, but promoters of nuclear power claim the decisions must be taken by political and scientific elites. This runs counter to the rhetoric of Western democracies where ordinary people are meant to have a say in political decision-making. By moving in on this embarrassing contradiction, protests which demand a role for the public in decision-making about energy also challenge political elites and the political use of expertise. Capitalism and workers. Nuclear power is alleged to be good for the economy and for workers, but in practice massive state subsidies to the industry are the rule, and few jobs are produced for the capital invested. In challenging nuclear power as an inappropriate direction for economic investment, a challenge is made to the setting of economic priorities by corporations and the state. Capitalism also directs investments only into profitable areas, irrespective of their social benefits. If activists can undermine the profitability of marginal enterprises by delaying tactics or by jeopardising state subsidies, then capitalist investment can be shunted away from socially destructive areas. For example, direct actions against Roxby Downs could in the long run undermine its profitability and cause its closure. Grassroots mobilisation is usually the most effective way to intervene at vulnerable points such as these. A suitable combination of interventions then forms the basis for a strategy against uranium mining. But how can uranium mining actually be stopped? This is a good question. Grassroots mobilisation does not by itself stop uranium mining. The mobilisation must connect with major forces in society. There are several ways this can occur. Uranium mining could be stopped: (1) by direct decision of the government; (2) by the unions acting directly through strikes or bans to prevent uranium mining, export, or construction of nuclear plants; (3) through cost escalations, for example resulting from requirements to ensure safety or environmental protection, (4) by a referendum whose results were adhered to; (5) by legal action on the part of aborigines or anti-uranium forces; (6) by direct action to physically stop mining from proceeding. A critical element necessary to the success of any of these methods is the mobilisation of a large section of the public against uranium mining. Thus for example government action to stop mining would be likely to take place only if there were mass mobilisation on the issue. Similarly 'direct action' could only succeed if popular support were so great that the government refused to use sufficient force to physically overcome the resisters. To give an idea of how grassroots methods could be coordinated into a strategy to stop uranium mining, consider a hypothetical example. Suppose an analysis of the current political situation suggested that direct action by workers and unions gave the most immediate promise for directly stopping uranium mining, while government decision and cost escalations were also likely avenues for stopping mining. A grassroots strategy might include the following: Systematic community organising and education, to provide a basis in popular sympathy and support for direct action by workers. Points to be emphasised would include the right of workers to take direct action on conscience issues as well as work-related issues, and the importance of questioning decisions made solely on the basis of corporate profitability or state encouragement of large-scale economic investment. Development of alternative plans for investment and jobs based on input from workers and communities, and widespread dissemination of the ideas and rationale for the alternative plans. A series of rallies, marches, vigils and civil disobedience, aimed at both mobilising people and illustrating the strength of anti-uranium feeling. These actions would be coordinated towards major points for possible worker intervention, such as trade union conferences or the start of work for new mines. Through consultation with unions, workers and working-class families, the establishment of support groups and funds for workers and unions penalised for direct action against uranium mining. Plans to make parallel challenges to those by workers, such as simultaneous defiance of the Atomic Energy Act by trade unionists and community activists. Black bans of corporations or state instrumentalities by unionists could be coordinated with boycotts organised by community groups. With such a strategy, it is likely that the workers taking action would come under strong attacks from both corporations and the government. Preparation to oppose such attacks would depend on community mobilisation to demonstrate support for the workers in the media, in the streets, through informal communication channels and to the workers themselves. If direct action by workers began to be sustained through community support, it is quite possible that other channels for stopping uranium mining could come into play: the government - especially a Labor government - might back away from confrontation with unions supported by the community, or corporations might decide investment in this controversial area was too risky. Plans would be required to continue the campaign towards these or other avenues for stopping uranium mining. How does grassroots mobilisation provide a challenge to the structures underlying nuclear power? It challenges the division of labour and the role of elites, especially the role of political elites which have a corner on the exercise of social responsibility, by mobilising in a widespread way the social concern of ordinary people and by demonstrating the direct exercise of this concern for example by groups in the workplace. Grassroots mobilisation challenges the division of labour and the role of scientific elites through a challenge to the prestige and credibility of scientists who advocate nuclear power. As the nuclear power issue has been widely debated, it has become obvious to many people that the expertise of pro-nuclear scientists and engineers is tied to vested interests. The nuclear debate has greatly weakened the belief that 'the experts know best'. Grassroots mobilisation challenges the masculine rationality of dominant structures through calling contemporary values and attitudes to nature and to the future into question. Within the antinuclear movement, patriarchy has been challenged as at least some groups have addressed domination by men and developed egalitarian modes of interaction and decision-making. This sometimes has been fostered by nonviolent action training used to prepare for civil disobedience actions. The anti-nuclear movement has inevitably involved questioning the growth of energy use and development of programmes for a 'soft energy future' involving energy efficiency, renewable energy sources, and redesign of communities to reduce energy requirements. The challenge to unending energy growth is a direct challenge to the state and capitalism, whose power is tied to traditional economic expansion. Mass mobilisation against uranium also challenges capitalism by bringing under scrutiny the rationale of pursuing profitability at the expense of social responsibility and by direct economic blows to corporate profitability. More fundamentally, nuclear power represents a potential new stage in the entrenchment of centralised political and economic control and of specialist knowledge in the service of elites. By challenging the political and economic rationale for nuclear power, and by making demands for local control over energy decision-making, a direct challenge is made to the power of the state and corporations. It is important to realise that none of these challenges on their own are likely to bring down these structures however much they may weaken them. Sufficiently many blows however over a sustained period could do so. Thus campaigns on the nuclear issue could begin or be part of a process of sustained challenge which could weaken them irreversibly. A grassroots strategy against nuclear power and uranium mining can be seen as a 'non-reformist reform': namely, it can achieve effective change within the system in a way which weakens rather than strengthens dominant structures, or which helps to prevent the entrenchment of new, more powerful structures. Such a strategy does not simply attempt to bypass the 'macro' level of existing structures in the way that some focusses on alternatives do, such as promoting changes in lifestyles only at the level of the individual. Rather such a strategy aims at interactions with existing structures in a way which goes beyond them.
75 -
76 -
77 -Traditional debate embodies the systems of whiteness. Small or not possible impacts are useless. The judge should hold debaters accountable for their speech act. Don’t try to escape hard discussions.
78 -Wise, anti-racist activist and speaker, 2008.(Tim., B.A. from Tulane University in political science.,White Like Me: Reflections on Race From a Privileged Son., pg 32-36). Ef
79 -The reason I call this process a white one is because whites(and especially
80 -AND
81 -actions, their money,their judging criteria, and even their ballots.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2016-09-18 16:20:45.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Aimun Khan
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Strake RC
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -5
Team
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Collegiate YUAN Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -1AC Dimona
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Greenhill
Caselist.CitesClass[3]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,81 +1,0 @@
1 -For years, Israel has hid the Dimona nuclear plant from the world. It’s production program is grounded in hypocrisy, secrecy and imperialism. America has looked away
2 -Mowla 08, Khondakar Golam Mowla, ‪The Judgment Against Imperialism, Fascism and Racism Against Caliphate and Islam, Volume 1‬, m https://books.google.com/books?id=IX02RSLJrcoCandpg=PA146andlpg=PA146anddq=Dimona+Nuclear+reactor+imperialismandsource=blandots=thzL3_6BJUandsig=FX8aIp42UHlew7NTgCAJ4QpaxuQandhl=enandsa=Xandved=0ahUKEwii1f_glJXPAhUCDz4KHaq5CGYQ6AEIGzAA#v=onepageandqandf=false 2008, page 146-147‬‬‬‬‬‬‬
3 -Both Reuters via Yahoonews.com and the New York Times reported Friday that Israel
4 -AND
5 -whole world, which is a kind of implicit terror threat.
6 -
7 -
8 - Dimona is the next Chernobyl→there are over a thousand defects at the decades old reactor.
9 -Adl 16, Carol Adl, Study Reveals That Israel’s Dimona Nuclear Reactor Has 1,537 Defectshttp://yournewswire.com/study-reveals-that-israels-dimona-nuclear-reactor-has-1537-defects/, April 29, 2016
10 -Scientists have uncovered 1,537 defects at the aluminum core in Israel’s Dimona nuclear
11 -AND
12 -require its sites to undergo regular inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
13 -
14 -Waste is PURPOSEFULLY DUMPED by ISRAELI TRUCKS IN BROWN COMMUNITIES OF COLOR. CANCER RATES, DEFORMITIES, AND OTHER FORMS OF VIOLENCE ARE SLOWLY KILLING THEM OFF. They constantly plea for help only to be ignored as they are slowly, painfully dying.
15 -Arqoub 15, Anas Abu Arqoubm https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/features/2015/6/30/is-waste-from-israels-nuclear-programme-poisoning-palestinians, The New Arab, 30 June, 2015
16 -Israel’s nuclear programme has operated in the shadows with little international oversight. Now it
17 -AND
18 -prevents international and UN experts in the field from entering the Palestinian territories.
19 -
20 -Blacks and Brown bodies in Dimona are relegated to second-class citizens—literally. Poverty, human right abuses and more types of violence pervade their lives.
21 -Abdul Mu’min 14, Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min, BLACKS USED AS HUMAN SHIELDS IN ISRAEL, AUGUST 3, 2014, NOI Research Group
22 -Dimona itself was conceived in 1953, and settled in 1955, mostly by new
23 -AND
24 -sports figures. Sounds like the same roles that Blacks play in America.
25 -
26 -These bodies, Falashas, are working and maintaining the facility.
27 -Abdul Mu’min 14, Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min, BLACKS USED AS HUMAN SHIELDS IN ISRAEL, AUGUST 3, 2014, NOI Research Group
28 -Recently, just before Israel stepped up its attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the
29 -AND
30 -back on line for what they claim are peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
31 -
32 -Workers at the Dimona reactor are exposed to these hazards and radioactive substances.
33 -Cohen 11, Gili Cohen Workers at Israel's Dimona Nuclear Reactor Say Leaks at Plant Gave Them Cancer read more: http://www.haaretz.com/workers-at-israel-s-dimona-nuclear-reactor-say-leaks-at-plant-gave-them-cancer-1.401478http://www.haaretz.com/workers-at-israel-s-dimona-nuclear-reactor-say-leaks-at-plant-gave-them-cancer-1.401478, 12/15/11
34 -Workers at the Dimona nuclear reactor say they have been sickened during their work at
35 -AND
36 -the Dimona facility was built, and I assume there still are."
37 -
38 -Ethiopian and American Black Hebrews near the area and working at facility face wipe out. Israeli War Hawks are attempting to bait Iran to blow up the reactors and kill Black Americans to get authorization from America to attack Iran. You can’t make this up.
39 -Abdul Mu’min 14, Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min, BLACKS USED AS HUMAN SHIELDS IN ISRAEL, AUGUST 3, 2014, NOI Research Group
40 -Now the war hawks in Israel are threatening to launch an airstrike against those same
41 -AND
42 -by our open enemies to be human shields for their various nefarious exploits.
43 -
44 -Attempts already made. Hamas has continued to attempt to blow up reactor.
45 -Fredericks 14, Israel bombarded by Hamas as rockets target nuclear reactor, Bob Fredericks, July 10, 2014
46 -Hamas terrorists launched three powerful rockets at an Israeli nuclear power plant on Wednesday —
47 -AND
48 -two missed their targets and detonated on the ground without causing any injuries.
49 -
50 -Plan Text: The State of Israel should prohibit the production of nuclear power by immediately decommissioning Negev Nuclear Research Center, also known as the Dimona power plant.
51 -Times of Israel, Times of Israel, Shut Dimona nuclear reactor, urges founding scientist Aging facility ‘may be world’s oldest reactor,’ says Uzi Even, after 1,537 defects found at aluminum core; says Israel couldn’t build new one without international help http://www.timesofisrael.com/writers/times-of-israel-staff/, April 26, 2016
52 -A scientist who was among the founders of the Dimona nuclear reactor on Tuesday said
53 -AND
54 -not operated as often as it used to be, the report said.
55 -
56 -
57 -Closure helps demilitarizes Israel’s military. Capability for weapons based plutonium and tritium would end. Helps reduces nuclear tension in Middle East region.
58 -Ramberg 08, Bennett Ramberg , Should Israel Close Dimona? The Radiological Consequences of a Military Strike on Israel’s Plutonium-Production Reactor , Arms Control Association ,https://www.armscontrol.org, September 3, 2008
59 -Given mounting regional tensions and the capacity of Israel's adversaries to strike Dimona, does
60 -AND
61 -keeping the facility in cold standby in the event circumstances required a restart.
62 -
63 -We address the immediate effects of the DImona plant through prohibition and paradigm shift from the status quote. If you think the Aff is a good idea vote aff.
64 -
65 -We must confront the taboo. Lack of acknowledgment itself is the cultural problem. We engage POLICY MAKING AT A SOCIAL LEVEL. PUBLIC ENFORCES THAT POLICY WITH THE SILENCE. We must confront our own privileges with nuclear power and refuse to be complilcit in the system. We are a policy that engages discourse and lack of awareness.
66 -Cohen 13, The Worst-Kept Secret: Israel's Bargain with the Bomb, Avner Cohen, 2013, (XXVIII- XXIX)
67 -My reference to Israel's nuclear taboo throughout this book is different from that used by
68 -AND
69 -given them an excuse not to feel accountable for their nation's nuclear status.
70 -
71 -Voting affirmative endorses a social critique of nuclear power. Only instrumental reform to the energy system can effectively spill over to broader systemic problems without being coopted.
72 -
73 - Martin et. Al, 84(The main authors are Jill Bowling, Brian Martin, Val Plumwood and Ian Watson, with important contributions from Ray Kent, Basil Schur and Rosemary Walters. Strategy against nuclear power http://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/86sa.html)
74 -What is a strategy anyway? A strategy links the analysis of an issue with goals and objectives. Having chosen a strategy, it is implemented through appropriate actions. An action is a 'once-off' event such as a rally, march, blockade or lobbying a particular politician. A method, such as lobbying in general, refers to all actions of a certain type. Actions are coordinated together into a campaign. The campaign gives direction to a series of events. Given our analysis in section 1 of the structural forces responsible for the nuclear fuel cycle, the goal of stopping uranium mining must be closely linked to the goal of basic structural change in the state, capitalism, patriarchy and the division of labour. As such it must involve challenges to the structures which underlie nuclear concerns. The broader objectives for an anti-nuclear movement must include encouraging mass participation in decision making rather than elite control, decentralising the distribution of political power into smaller, local groups, and bringing about self-reliance based on environmentally sound technologies. These objectives involve fundamental changes to the way our society is organised at present. In effect, an anti-nuclear strategy must involve both actions aimed at stopping nuclear power and activities which challenge existing structures and help construct viable alternatives. In this context, the success or failure of an individual campaign must be viewed from the perspective of working towards these overall goals and objectives. The actions used by the anti-uranium movement fall into two main categories. Firstly there are actions which aim at convincing or influencing elites, such as lobbying or writing letters to politicians. Secondly are the actions such as rallies and blockades which usually involve more participation from the community. While such actions may be aimed at elites they are also important in educating or giving support to those who are involved. Lobbying. Lobbying is a direct attempt to convince or pressure elite decision-makers. It does nothing to challenge the state, patriarchy or other structures underlying nuclear power, but rather hopes to oppose nuclear power by 'working through the proper channels'. This leaves elite structures unchallenged and intact. Indeed lobbying is a form of political action most suited to powerful interest groups such as corporations and professional bodies. The state is the forum of the powerful, so for these kinds of groups lobbying often is an effective strategy. For small activist groups lobbying is useful only if it appears to be backed up by politically visible mass concern or mass action. In 1983, after the election of a Labor Government, the anti-uranium movement turned strongly to lobbying in an attempt to induce the Labor Caucus to implement the Labor Party platform. This effort was unsuccessful. Participating in environmental inquiries. In making submissions to the Ranger Inquiry, environmental groups made a concerted attempt to ensure that the issue of the Ranger mine was not divorced from the general issue of uranium mining and nuclear power, and that ultimate decisions were determined by the public rather than 'experts'. The Inquiry did in fact analyse the overall dangers of the nuclear industry and concluded that no decision on uranium mining should occur without public debate. These results helped fuel the ensuing widespread public debate on uranium mining in Australia. One reason for involvement in environmental inquiries is to challenge the role of experts in service to vested interests. The Ranger Inquiry commented on the bias of distinguished scientists who testified in favour of uranium mining. The Ranger Inquiry was unusual in making full use of broad terms of reference. Many environmental inquiries have institutional constraints which can make it questionable whether activists should spend much energy in that area. Many government inquiries with severely limited terms of reference offer few opportunities for activists to intervene effectively. There is not only the danger of being 'co-opted' if activists take part, but also the prospect that any structural challenges may be deflected by superficial concessions. Often such inquiries are not genuine and are only set up as window-dressing. For example, the Australian Science and Technology Council inquiry set up in November 1983 to investigate Australia's role in the nuclear fuel cycle has terms of reference which assume the continuation of uranium mining. Working through the trade union movement. In 1976 anti-uranium groups began a major effort to persuade trade unions and their Congress delegates to adopt and support anti-uranium policies. The Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) Congress adopted an anti-uranium policy in mid-1977. Following the re-election of the Liberal-National Government in December 1977, anti-uranium groups focussed on persuading unions to implement the ACTU policy. However, the members of a number of unions - including some with anti-uranium policies - continued to work in the uranium industry. Some union leaders chose not to attempt to convince members to avoid or leave the industry, while other leaders supportive of the policies could not persuade members working in the industry or transporting its products. The efforts within the trade union movement have been strong to the extent that they have mobilised rank-and-file action. One of the most valiant efforts to stop uranium mining was by the Waterside Workers Federation - supported by the Seamen's Union and the Transport Workers Union - in refusing to load yellowcake for export from Darwin in late 1981. This direct action - an obvious challenge to the power of corporations and the state - was only called off when deregistration threats from the Liberal-National Government induced the ACTU to back down. Efforts through the trade unions have been least effective when they have depended on action only by union elites. An ACTU policy against uranium mining is not enough: it does not in itself challenge any of the driving forces behind nuclear power. When Bob Hawke was President of the ACTU, the executive showed itself disinclined to mount even a strong publicity campaign against the uranium mining industry. Working through the parliamentary system. Since 1976 a major focus of the anti-nuclear power movement has been the ALP. A massive campaign of publicising and discussing the issue at the party branch level resulted in an anti-uranium platform being adopted in mid-1977. Since that time there has been strong anti-uranium feeling within the party. In late 1977 the focus of the anti-uranium movement became the federal election campaign. During this campaign the anti-uranium movement used the resources of local anti-uranium groups to help the ALP in marginal House of Representatives electorates and for the Australian Democrats in the Senate. Many anti-uranium activists pinned their hopes on a Labor victory. But the Liberal-National coalition won the election, and the anti-uranium campaign appeared to have little impact in marginal electorates. After this defeat, many activists left the movement while a number of local groups effectively ceased to exist. The danger in relying too much on anti-uranium action by a Labor Government was demonstrated in mid-1982 when the Labor anti-uranium platform was watered down on the initiative of party power brokers in spite of continuing support for the platform at the party branch level. The danger was further demonstrated in November 1983 when Labor Caucus, at the initiative of Cabinet, gave the go-ahead for Roxby Downs, potentially the largest uranium mine in the world. In each case the impetus to maintain the anti-uranium policy came from the grassroots of the party, while it was labour elites who pushed pro-mining stances. Any Australian government, whether Labor or not, is strongly tied to the established state apparatus and to the support of capitalism. It is futile to expect the government on its own - whatever its platform may be - to readily oppose aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle. This will occur only when there is strong and continual pressure from the grassroots of the party and from the community at large. Grassroots mobilisation. The anti-uranium movement has used a wide variety of methods to inform and involve the community. Commonly used methods include leaflet distribution, articles, talks, discussions, films, petitions, rallies, marches, vigils and street theatre. Major anti-uranium rallies and marches were held each year in most large cities, especially in the peak years of the uranium debate, 1976-1979 and again since 1983. A typical grassroots activity has been the creation of nuclear-free zones, which is mainly a symbolic action which helps raise awareness and encourage local groups to openly oppose nuclear power. This activity has worked closely with the dissemination of information through the media, local groups, the alternative press and schools. In 1983 the people in the Bega Valley Shire voted to declare their area a nuclear-free zone. To counter this popular sentiment, the Shire Council called in nuclear experts in order to argue the case against the nuclear-free zone. In this case the nuclear-free zone campaign provided a channel for exposing and challenging the role of nuclear expertise and elites in promoting nuclear power. Civil disobedience has also been used by the anti-nuclear movement. In the late 1970s, nonviolent direct action was used on several occasions at ports where uranium was being loaded for export. At the Roxby Downs blockade in August 1983, several hundred people gathered to express their opposition and hinder mining operations. Two distinctive features of this protest were the use of nonviolent action and the way in which participants formed themselves into affinity groups. These are a form of political organising which is consciously anti-elitist and aims to democratise all group interactions. Education, rallies, marches, petitions and civil disobedience sometimes do little to challenge the structures underlying nuclear power. For example, the rally outside Parliament House in October 1983 was primarily aimed at putting pressure on the Labor Party at a time when it was considering its uranium policy. Similarly, the 'tent embassy' located on Parliament House lawns aimed to prick the conscience of the ALP. One of the aims of the Roxby Downs blockade was to mobilise pressure to influence the ALP. On the other hand, grassroots mobilisation often provides a potent challenge to nuclear power and the forces behind it. All the lasting successes of Australian anti-uranium campaigns have depended ultimately on grassroots mobilisation, which provides a reservoir of commitment and concern which elite-oriented activities do not. In 1975, the virtue of mining uranium was largely unquestioned among the general public and the labour movement. It was simply unthinkable that a mineral which could be profitably sold would be left in the ground. Yet by 1977 the anti-uranium view had become widely understood and strongly supported. This change in opinion happened largely through the educational and organising efforts of the local anti-uranium groups and of anti-uranium activists within organisations such as trade unions, schools and churches. The resurgence of anti-uranium activity in 1983 owed much to the framework established in the late 1970s. The anti-uranium platform adopted by the ALP in 1977 was the result of organising and education at the party branch level. ALP stands and action against uranium mining have come consistently from the party grassroots, and this in turn has depended on anti-uranium sentiment in the general community. Support for uranium mining within the ALP has always been strongest on the part of party elites. The anti-uranium stands and actions by Australian trade unions have been stronger than in any other country in the world. Building on a tradition of trade union action on social issues, this has come about from persistent grassroots education and organising at the shop floor level. It has been the rank-and-file unionists who have taken the strongest anti-uranium stands, and the trade union elites who have backed away from opposition. When in late 1981 the Seamen's Union refused to load yellowcake in Darwin, it was the rank-and-file workers who took a stand and made the sacrifices. Does grassroots mobilisation then provide the most fruitful avenue for challenging the structures behind nuclear power? Yes, but the choice of methods is not straightforward or automatic. The problem with many grassroots methods used by the anti-uranium movement is that they have not been systematically organised and focussed as part of an overall long-term strategy. Instead, individual groups - and indeed the national movement - has often just looked ahead to the next rally, the next signature drive, or the next ALP Conference. While this approach does have some merit for example in saving an area from irreversible environmental destruction, it is inadequate as an approach to stopping mining or transforming the structures underlying nuclear power. For example the closing of Roxby mine would prevent the destruction of the surrounding ecosystem including mound springs inhabited by forms of aquatic life found nowhere else in the world. If the environment is altered, these unique creatures will be gone forever. However, the closing of Roxby in isolation would do nothing to prevent mining companies from setting up or increasing production in other places. If, on the other hand, existing power structures were challenged, and the closing of Roxby were carried out in conjunction with the closing of all uranium mines and a disbanding of uranium interests, then the safety of these ecosystems would be assured. What needs to be done is to focus on vulnerable points within the structures promoting nuclear power, and to devote efforts in these areas. What are the vulnerable points, then? Before looking at specific vulnerable points, let's examine the nuclear power issue as a whole. Nuclear power is a large-scale vulnerable point in the structures of the state, capitalism and so forth. In promoting nuclear power, and thereby entrenching centralised political and economic power, other consequences result which mobilise people in opposition: environmental effects (especially radioactive waste), the connection with nuclear weapons, threats to Aboriginal land rights, threats to civil liberties, and many others. In organising to oppose these specific threats, people at the same time can challenge the driving forces behind nuclear power. Here are a few of the specific vulnerable points which have been addressed by the anti-uranium movement. Threats to Aborigines. Nuclear power is alleged to be beneficial, but uranium mining is a severe cultural threat to Aborigines, who are already a strongly oppressed group in Australia. The anti-uranium movement and the Aboriginal land rights movements have been strengthened by joint actions, such as speaking tours. Centralised decision-making. Nuclear power has widespread social effects, but promoters of nuclear power claim the decisions must be taken by political and scientific elites. This runs counter to the rhetoric of Western democracies where ordinary people are meant to have a say in political decision-making. By moving in on this embarrassing contradiction, protests which demand a role for the public in decision-making about energy also challenge political elites and the political use of expertise. Capitalism and workers. Nuclear power is alleged to be good for the economy and for workers, but in practice massive state subsidies to the industry are the rule, and few jobs are produced for the capital invested. In challenging nuclear power as an inappropriate direction for economic investment, a challenge is made to the setting of economic priorities by corporations and the state. Capitalism also directs investments only into profitable areas, irrespective of their social benefits. If activists can undermine the profitability of marginal enterprises by delaying tactics or by jeopardising state subsidies, then capitalist investment can be shunted away from socially destructive areas. For example, direct actions against Roxby Downs could in the long run undermine its profitability and cause its closure. Grassroots mobilisation is usually the most effective way to intervene at vulnerable points such as these. A suitable combination of interventions then forms the basis for a strategy against uranium mining. But how can uranium mining actually be stopped? This is a good question. Grassroots mobilisation does not by itself stop uranium mining. The mobilisation must connect with major forces in society. There are several ways this can occur. Uranium mining could be stopped: (1) by direct decision of the government; (2) by the unions acting directly through strikes or bans to prevent uranium mining, export, or construction of nuclear plants; (3) through cost escalations, for example resulting from requirements to ensure safety or environmental protection, (4) by a referendum whose results were adhered to; (5) by legal action on the part of aborigines or anti-uranium forces; (6) by direct action to physically stop mining from proceeding. A critical element necessary to the success of any of these methods is the mobilisation of a large section of the public against uranium mining. Thus for example government action to stop mining would be likely to take place only if there were mass mobilisation on the issue. Similarly 'direct action' could only succeed if popular support were so great that the government refused to use sufficient force to physically overcome the resisters. To give an idea of how grassroots methods could be coordinated into a strategy to stop uranium mining, consider a hypothetical example. Suppose an analysis of the current political situation suggested that direct action by workers and unions gave the most immediate promise for directly stopping uranium mining, while government decision and cost escalations were also likely avenues for stopping mining. A grassroots strategy might include the following: Systematic community organising and education, to provide a basis in popular sympathy and support for direct action by workers. Points to be emphasised would include the right of workers to take direct action on conscience issues as well as work-related issues, and the importance of questioning decisions made solely on the basis of corporate profitability or state encouragement of large-scale economic investment. Development of alternative plans for investment and jobs based on input from workers and communities, and widespread dissemination of the ideas and rationale for the alternative plans. A series of rallies, marches, vigils and civil disobedience, aimed at both mobilising people and illustrating the strength of anti-uranium feeling. These actions would be coordinated towards major points for possible worker intervention, such as trade union conferences or the start of work for new mines. Through consultation with unions, workers and working-class families, the establishment of support groups and funds for workers and unions penalised for direct action against uranium mining. Plans to make parallel challenges to those by workers, such as simultaneous defiance of the Atomic Energy Act by trade unionists and community activists. Black bans of corporations or state instrumentalities by unionists could be coordinated with boycotts organised by community groups. With such a strategy, it is likely that the workers taking action would come under strong attacks from both corporations and the government. Preparation to oppose such attacks would depend on community mobilisation to demonstrate support for the workers in the media, in the streets, through informal communication channels and to the workers themselves. If direct action by workers began to be sustained through community support, it is quite possible that other channels for stopping uranium mining could come into play: the government - especially a Labor government - might back away from confrontation with unions supported by the community, or corporations might decide investment in this controversial area was too risky. Plans would be required to continue the campaign towards these or other avenues for stopping uranium mining. How does grassroots mobilisation provide a challenge to the structures underlying nuclear power? It challenges the division of labour and the role of elites, especially the role of political elites which have a corner on the exercise of social responsibility, by mobilising in a widespread way the social concern of ordinary people and by demonstrating the direct exercise of this concern for example by groups in the workplace. Grassroots mobilisation challenges the division of labour and the role of scientific elites through a challenge to the prestige and credibility of scientists who advocate nuclear power. As the nuclear power issue has been widely debated, it has become obvious to many people that the expertise of pro-nuclear scientists and engineers is tied to vested interests. The nuclear debate has greatly weakened the belief that 'the experts know best'. Grassroots mobilisation challenges the masculine rationality of dominant structures through calling contemporary values and attitudes to nature and to the future into question. Within the antinuclear movement, patriarchy has been challenged as at least some groups have addressed domination by men and developed egalitarian modes of interaction and decision-making. This sometimes has been fostered by nonviolent action training used to prepare for civil disobedience actions. The anti-nuclear movement has inevitably involved questioning the growth of energy use and development of programmes for a 'soft energy future' involving energy efficiency, renewable energy sources, and redesign of communities to reduce energy requirements. The challenge to unending energy growth is a direct challenge to the state and capitalism, whose power is tied to traditional economic expansion. Mass mobilisation against uranium also challenges capitalism by bringing under scrutiny the rationale of pursuing profitability at the expense of social responsibility and by direct economic blows to corporate profitability. More fundamentally, nuclear power represents a potential new stage in the entrenchment of centralised political and economic control and of specialist knowledge in the service of elites. By challenging the political and economic rationale for nuclear power, and by making demands for local control over energy decision-making, a direct challenge is made to the power of the state and corporations. It is important to realise that none of these challenges on their own are likely to bring down these structures however much they may weaken them. Sufficiently many blows however over a sustained period could do so. Thus campaigns on the nuclear issue could begin or be part of a process of sustained challenge which could weaken them irreversibly. A grassroots strategy against nuclear power and uranium mining can be seen as a 'non-reformist reform': namely, it can achieve effective change within the system in a way which weakens rather than strengthens dominant structures, or which helps to prevent the entrenchment of new, more powerful structures. Such a strategy does not simply attempt to bypass the 'macro' level of existing structures in the way that some focusses on alternatives do, such as promoting changes in lifestyles only at the level of the individual. Rather such a strategy aims at interactions with existing structures in a way which goes beyond them.
75 -
76 -
77 -Traditional debate embodies the systems of whiteness. Small or not possible impacts are useless. The judge should hold debaters accountable for their speech act. Don’t try to escape hard discussions.
78 -Wise, anti-racist activist and speaker, 2008.(Tim., B.A. from Tulane University in political science.,White Like Me: Reflections on Race From a Privileged Son., pg 32-36). Ef
79 -The reason I call this process a white one is because whites(and especially
80 -AND
81 -actions, their money,their judging criteria, and even their ballots.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2016-09-18 16:21:00.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Aimun Khan
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Strake RC
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -3
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -5
Team
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Collegiate YUAN Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -1AC Dimona
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Greenhill
Caselist.RoundClass[0]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -0
Caselist.RoundClass[1]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -1
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2016-09-17 21:47:52.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Monica Amestoy
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Sunset AB
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -3
RoundReport
... ... @@ -1,2 +1,0 @@
1 -1AC King Nuca
2 -1NC Thorium Natives Warming Gas Case
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Greenhill Classic
Caselist.RoundClass[2]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2016-09-18 16:20:40.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Aimun Khan
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Strake RC
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -5
RoundReport
... ... @@ -1,4 +1,0 @@
1 -1AC Dimona
2 -1NC
3 -T
4 -Agamben
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Greenhill
Caselist.RoundClass[3]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -3
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2016-09-18 16:20:46.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Aimun Khan
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Strake RC
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -5
RoundReport
... ... @@ -1,4 +1,0 @@
1 -1AC Dimona
2 -1NC
3 -T
4 -Agamben
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Greenhill

Schools

Aberdeen Central (SD)
Acton-Boxborough (MA)
Albany (CA)
Albuquerque Academy (NM)
Alief Taylor (TX)
American Heritage Boca Delray (FL)
American Heritage Plantation (FL)
Anderson (TX)
Annie Wright (WA)
Apple Valley (MN)
Appleton East (WI)
Arbor View (NV)
Arcadia (CA)
Archbishop Mitty (CA)
Ardrey Kell (NC)
Ashland (OR)
Athens (TX)
Bainbridge (WA)
Bakersfield (CA)
Barbers Hill (TX)
Barrington (IL)
BASIS Mesa (AZ)
BASIS Scottsdale (AZ)
BASIS Silicon (CA)
Beckman (CA)
Bellarmine (CA)
Benjamin Franklin (LA)
Benjamin N Cardozo (NY)
Bentonville (AR)
Bergen County (NJ)
Bettendorf (IA)
Bingham (UT)
Blue Valley Southwest (KS)
Brentwood (CA)
Brentwood Middle (CA)
Bridgewater-Raritan (NJ)
Bronx Science (NY)
Brophy College Prep (AZ)
Brown (KY)
Byram Hills (NY)
Byron Nelson (TX)
Cabot (AR)
Calhoun Homeschool (TX)
Cambridge Rindge (MA)
Canyon Crest (CA)
Canyon Springs (NV)
Cape Fear Academy (NC)
Carmel Valley Independent (CA)
Carpe Diem (NJ)
Cedar Park (TX)
Cedar Ridge (TX)
Centennial (ID)
Centennial (TX)
Center For Talented Youth (MD)
Cerritos (CA)
Chaminade (CA)
Chandler (AZ)
Chandler Prep (AZ)
Chaparral (AZ)
Charles E Smith (MD)
Cherokee (OK)
Christ Episcopal (LA)
Christopher Columbus (FL)
Cinco Ranch (TX)
Citrus Valley (CA)
Claremont (CA)
Clark (NV)
Clark (TX)
Clear Brook (TX)
Clements (TX)
Clovis North (CA)
College Prep (CA)
Collegiate (NY)
Colleyville Heritage (TX)
Concord Carlisle (MA)
Concordia Lutheran (TX)
Connally (TX)
Coral Glades (FL)
Coral Science (NV)
Coral Springs (FL)
Coppell (TX)
Copper Hills (UT)
Corona Del Sol (AZ)
Crandall (TX)
Crossroads (CA)
Cupertino (CA)
Cy-Fair (TX)
Cypress Bay (FL)
Cypress Falls (TX)
Cypress Lakes (TX)
Cypress Ridge (TX)
Cypress Springs (TX)
Cypress Woods (TX)
Dallastown (PA)
Davis (CA)
Delbarton (NJ)
Derby (KS)
Des Moines Roosevelt (IA)
Desert Vista (AZ)
Diamond Bar (CA)
Dobson (AZ)
Dougherty Valley (CA)
Dowling Catholic (IA)
Dripping Springs (TX)
Dulles (TX)
duPont Manual (KY)
Dwyer (FL)
Eagle (ID)
Eastside Catholic (WA)
Edgemont (NY)
Edina (MN)
Edmond North (OK)
Edmond Santa Fe (OK)
El Cerrito (CA)
Elkins (TX)
Enloe (NC)
Episcopal (TX)
Evanston (IL)
Evergreen Valley (CA)
Ferris (TX)
Flintridge Sacred Heart (CA)
Flower Mound (TX)
Fordham Prep (NY)
Fort Lauderdale (FL)
Fort Walton Beach (FL)
Freehold Township (NJ)
Fremont (NE)
Frontier (MO)
Gabrielino (CA)
Garland (TX)
George Ranch (TX)
Georgetown Day (DC)
Gig Harbor (WA)
Gilmour (OH)
Glenbrook South (IL)
Gonzaga Prep (WA)
Grand Junction (CO)
Grapevine (TX)
Green Valley (NV)
Greenhill (TX)
Guyer (TX)
Hamilton (AZ)
Hamilton (MT)
Harker (CA)
Harmony (TX)
Harrison (NY)
Harvard Westlake (CA)
Hawken (OH)
Head Royce (CA)
Hebron (TX)
Heights (MD)
Hendrick Hudson (NY)
Henry Grady (GA)
Highland (UT)
Highland (ID)
Hockaday (TX)
Holy Cross (LA)
Homewood Flossmoor (IL)
Hopkins (MN)
Houston Homeschool (TX)
Hunter College (NY)
Hutchinson (KS)
Immaculate Heart (CA)
Independent (All)
Interlake (WA)
Isidore Newman (LA)
Jack C Hays (TX)
James Bowie (TX)
Jefferson City (MO)
Jersey Village (TX)
John Marshall (CA)
Juan Diego (UT)
Jupiter (FL)
Kapaun Mount Carmel (KS)
Kamiak (WA)
Katy Taylor (TX)
Keller (TX)
Kempner (TX)
Kent Denver (CO)
King (FL)
Kingwood (TX)
Kinkaid (TX)
Klein (TX)
Klein Oak (TX)
Kudos College (CA)
La Canada (CA)
La Costa Canyon (CA)
La Jolla (CA)
La Reina (CA)
Lafayette (MO)
Lake Highland (FL)
Lake Travis (TX)
Lakeville North (MN)
Lakeville South (MN)
Lamar (TX)
LAMP (AL)
Law Magnet (TX)
Langham Creek (TX)
Lansing (KS)
LaSalle College (PA)
Lawrence Free State (KS)
Layton (UT)
Leland (CA)
Leucadia Independent (CA)
Lexington (MA)
Liberty Christian (TX)
Lincoln (OR)
Lincoln (NE)
Lincoln East (NE)
Lindale (TX)
Livingston (NJ)
Logan (UT)
Lone Peak (UT)
Los Altos (CA)
Los Osos (CA)
Lovejoy (TX)
Loyola (CA)
Loyola Blakefield (MA)
Lynbrook (CA)
Maeser Prep (UT)
Mannford (OK)
Marcus (TX)
Marlborough (CA)
McClintock (AZ)
McDowell (PA)
McNeil (TX)
Meadows (NV)
Memorial (TX)
Millard North (NE)
Millard South (NE)
Millard West (NE)
Millburn (NJ)
Milpitas (CA)
Miramonte (CA)
Mission San Jose (CA)
Monsignor Kelly (TX)
Monta Vista (CA)
Montclair Kimberley (NJ)
Montgomery (TX)
Monticello (NY)
Montville Township (NJ)
Morris Hills (NJ)
Mountain Brook (AL)
Mountain Pointe (AZ)
Mountain View (CA)
Mountain View (AZ)
Murphy Middle (TX)
NCSSM (NC)
New Orleans Jesuit (LA)
New Trier (IL)
Newark Science (NJ)
Newburgh Free Academy (NY)
Newport (WA)
North Allegheny (PA)
North Crowley (TX)
North Hollywood (CA)
Northland Christian (TX)
Northwood (CA)
Notre Dame (CA)
Nueva (CA)
Oak Hall (FL)
Oakwood (CA)
Okoboji (IA)
Oxbridge (FL)
Oxford (CA)
Pacific Ridge (CA)
Palm Beach Gardens (FL)
Palo Alto Independent (CA)
Palos Verdes Peninsula (CA)
Park Crossing (AL)
Peak to Peak (CO)
Pembroke Pines (FL)
Pennsbury (PA)
Phillips Academy Andover (MA)
Phoenix Country Day (AZ)
Pine Crest (FL)
Pingry (NJ)
Pittsburgh Central Catholic (PA)
Plano East (TX)
Polytechnic (CA)
Presentation (CA)
Princeton (NJ)
Prosper (TX)
Quarry Lane (CA)
Raisbeck-Aviation (WA)
Rancho Bernardo (CA)
Randolph (NJ)
Reagan (TX)
Richardson (TX)
Ridge (NJ)
Ridge Point (TX)
Riverside (SC)
Robert Vela (TX)
Rosemount (MN)
Roseville (MN)
Round Rock (TX)
Rowland Hall (UT)
Royse City (TX)
Ruston (LA)
Sacred Heart (MA)
Sacred Heart (MS)
Sage Hill (CA)
Sage Ridge (NV)
Salado (TX)
Salpointe Catholic (AZ)
Sammamish (WA)
San Dieguito (CA)
San Marino (CA)
SandHoke (NC)
Santa Monica (CA)
Sarasota (FL)
Saratoga (CA)
Scarsdale (NY)
Servite (CA)
Seven Lakes (TX)
Shawnee Mission East (KS)
Shawnee Mission Northwest (KS)
Shawnee Mission South (KS)
Shawnee Mission West (KS)
Sky View (UT)
Skyline (UT)
Smithson Valley (TX)
Southlake Carroll (TX)
Sprague (OR)
St Agnes (TX)
St Andrews (MS)
St Francis (CA)
St James (AL)
St Johns (TX)
St Louis Park (MN)
St Margarets (CA)
St Marys Hall (TX)
St Thomas (MN)
St Thomas (TX)
Stephen F Austin (TX)
Stoneman Douglas (FL)
Stony Point (TX)
Strake Jesuit (TX)
Stratford (TX)
Stratford Independent (CA)
Stuyvesant (NY)
Success Academy (NY)
Sunnyslope (AZ)
Sunset (OR)
Syosset (NY)
Tahoma (WA)
Talley (AZ)
Texas Academy of Math and Science (TX)
Thomas Jefferson (VA)
Thompkins (TX)
Timber Creek (FL)
Timothy Christian (NJ)
Tom C Clark (TX)
Tompkins (TX)
Torrey Pines (CA)
Travis (TX)
Trinity (KY)
Trinity Prep (FL)
Trinity Valley (TX)
Truman (PA)
Turlock (CA)
Union (OK)
Unionville (PA)
University High (CA)
University School (OH)
University (FL)
Upper Arlington (OH)
Upper Dublin (PA)
Valley (IA)
Valor Christian (CO)
Vashon (WA)
Ventura (CA)
Veritas Prep (AZ)
Vestavia Hills (AL)
Vincentian (PA)
Walla Walla (WA)
Walt Whitman (MD)
Warren (TX)
Wenatchee (WA)
West (UT)
West Ranch (CA)
Westford (MA)
Westlake (TX)
Westview (OR)
Westwood (TX)
Whitefish Bay (WI)
Whitney (CA)
Wilson (DC)
Winston Churchill (TX)
Winter Springs (FL)
Woodlands (TX)
Woodlands College Park (TX)
Wren (SC)
Yucca Valley (CA)