Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[16]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[17]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[16]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-11-12 06:26:21.830
	1	+2016-11-12 06:26:21.0

Caselist.CitesClass[17]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,37 @@
	1	+====The 1AC is an act of settler futurity. It endorses settlement as something to be continued, furthering the ongoing elimination of native people. The speech act renders a settler future knowable and ethical through performance. To affirm is to work within the false assumption that the state can be ethical. Gaztambide-Fernandez and Tuck 13====
	2	+**Ruben Gaztambide-Fernandez and Eve Tuck, Curriculum Replacement and Settler Futurity, 2013 (In Dropbox Under: Native StudiesSettler Colonialism as Structure)**
	3	+The settler colonial curricular project of replacement is invested in settler futurity, or what
	4	+AND
	5	+now-settlers in the ways that settler futurity requires of Indigenous peoples.
	6	+
	7	+
	8	+====The 1AC ignores the violence committed against indigenous people and defers action into the receding temporal horizon. This is especially damning in the context of this resolution which is wrapped up in indigenous oppression. Byrd 11: ====
	9	+Byrd, Jodi (2011). The Transit of Empire: Indigenous Critiques of Colonialism. University of Minnesota Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.ctttv97j
	10	+The Transit of Empire has taken as its point of entry the constellating discourses that
	11	+AND
	12	+that seek new lands, resources, and peoples to feed capitalistic consumption.
	13	+
	14	+
	15	+====The AC framework’s liberalism and demand for recognition strengthens the settler state’s claim to sovereignty by allowing it to determine what statues and positionalities are deemed meaningful and worth saving. This forecloses upon the possibility of an indigenous normativity free from settler control. Rifkin 1:====
	16	+**Mark Rifkin, Indigneizing Agamben, 2009 (In Dropbox under Native Studies Land and Geography)**
	17	+Both of these strategies within Indigenous political the- ory treat sovereignty as a particular
	18	+AND
	19	+, and dependent on, the "peculiar"-ization of Native peoples.
	20	+
	21	+
	22	+====The impact is the relegation of native people to an ontological condition of living death. Colonialism demands the continual death of the native in order to reaffirm its claim on the land. This always outweighs under their framework. Native people are condemned as savage and non-living in the eyes of the settler state. They’re not only un-grievable; their ongoing death is literally structurally mandated by settler colonialism. Razack 12.====
	23	+Memorializing Colonial Power: The Death of Frank Paul Sherene H. Razack Law and Social Inquiry Volume 37, Issue 4, 908–932, Fall 2012
	24	+In an essay on the fiction of Amos Tutuola (Mbembe 2003b) and in
	25	+AND
	26	+peoples their rightful claim over the land" (Smith 2006, 68).
	27	+
	28	+
	29	+====So, the ROB is to vote for the debater who best interrogates and rejects settler futurity.====
	30	+
	31	+
	32	+====The alternative is to endorse decolonialism through an ethic of incommensurability. This necessitates a literal end of the settler colonial state and demands the return of lands to native peoples. Tuck and Yang 12:====
	33	+Eve Tuck Wayne Yang, Decolonization is not a Metaphor, 2012
	34	+
	35	+An ethic of incommensurability,
	36	+and
	37	+It is an elsewhere.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-11-12 06:26:23.625

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Timmons Kuang Martinez

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Harvard Westlak CE

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+16

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Doubles

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Evanston FrankSiegel Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Probably every topic- Incommensurability K

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+St Marks