Changes for page Garland PHAM Neg
Last modified by Administrator on 2017/08/29 03:35
Summary
-
Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
Details
- Caselist.RoundClass[12]
-
- EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@ 1 -2017-03-09 17:44:15. 451 +2017-03-09 17:44:15.0
- Caselist.CitesClass[22]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,42 @@ 1 +====Their rights rhetoric ties notions of rights to notion of the proper political subject which inevitably creates the conditions that sustain bare life. ==== 2 +**Gündoğdu 11 **~~Ayten Gündoğdu is an assistant professor of political science at Barnard. She teaches courses on political theory and human rights. Professor Gündoğdu's current research centers on critical approaches to human rights, contemporary problems of citizenship, and political and ethical dilemmas of international migration; "Potentialities of human rights: Agamben and the narrative of fated necessity," http://www.palgrave-journals.com/cpt/journal/v11/n1/full/cpt201045a.html~~** ** 3 +Agamben's analysis of modern juridico-political developments, including rights declarations, aims to 4 +AND 5 +very subjects that they presuppose and render their subjects vulnerable to sovereign power. 6 + 7 +====Struggles for rights only situate the individual more deeply within the folds of sovereign power—this dominance of biopower makes options within the biopolitical horizon increasingly meaningless as power comes to operate through all forms of management.==== 8 +**Agamben 98** (Giorgio – Univ. Verona Philosophy professor, Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, Stanford UP, p. 120-123) 9 +1.2. Karl Lowith was the first to define the fundamental character 10 +AND 11 +disguises we will have to learn to recognize. 120-123 12 + 13 +====Government is the reason biopower exists==== 14 +**Nadesan, 08** (Majia Holmer, professor of communication in the School of Social and Behavioral Sciences in the New College of Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences, "Governmentality, Biopower, and Everyday Life", https://books.google.com/books?hl=enandlr=andid=QEqTAgAAQBAJandoi=fndandpg=PP1anddq=22economic+security22+and+biopower+and+agambenandots=iSmmUdVRPCandsig=c0GAKJJxPEdjnZJV7BjudTumxH4~~#v=snippetandq=biopower20and20governmentandf=false)//BW 15 +Foucault contended that the emergence of the early modern liberal state depended upon the institution 16 +AND 17 +—his pedagogy—ensures the upward continuity of the arts of government. 18 + 19 +====Governmental action fails to solve for the biopower of the sovereign==== 20 +**Lemke 13,** (Thomas, sociologist and social theorist, "Foucault, Politics, and Failure A Critical Review of Studies of Governmentality", Foucault, Biopolitics, and Governmentality, http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:615362/FULLTEXT03.pdf)//BW 21 +Studies of governmentality distance themselves from realist sociology and from "sociologies of rule" 22 +AND 23 +combat criminality might possibly help to account for its "raison d'être."39 24 + 25 +====This inscription within biopolitics is at the heart of violence allowing every 'citizen' to be devalued and eliminated in the name of sovereign management.==== 26 +**Agamben 98** (Giorgio – Univ. Verona Philosophy professor, Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, Stanford UP, p. 139-140) 27 +**we don't agree with the authors use of gendered language 28 +3.3. It is not our intention here to take a position on the difficult ethical problem of euthanasia, which still today, in certain coun¬tries, occupies a substantial position in medical debates and provokes disagreement. Nor are we concerned with the radicaliry with which Binding declares himself in favor of the general admissibility of euthanasia. More interesting for our inquiry is the fact that the sovereignty of the living man (person) over his (their) own life has its immediate counterpart in the determination of a threshold beyond which life ceases to have any juridical value and can, therefore, be killed without the commission of a homicide. The new juridical category of "life devoid of value" (or "life unworthy of being lived") corresponds exactly-even if in an apparently different direction-to the bare lifeof homo sacer and can easily be extended beyond the limits imagined by Binding. It is as if every valorization and every "politicization" of life (which, after all, is implicit in the sovereignty of the individual over his own existence) necessarily implies a new decision concerning the threshold beyond which life ceases to be politically relevant, becomes only "sacred life," and can as such be eliminated without punishment. Every society sets this limit; every society-even the most modern-decides who its "sacred men"(people) will be. It is even possible that this limit, on which the politicization and the exceptio of natural life in the juridical order of the state depends, has done nothing but extend itself in the history of the West and has now-in the new biopolitical horizon of states with national sovereignty-moved inside every human life and every citizen. Bare life is no longer confined to a particular place or a definite category. It now dwells in the biological body of every living being. 139-140 29 + 30 +====Vote negative to refuse attempts to reform the system and doom it to its own nihilistic destruction—this is the only way to liberate us from bare life and biopolitical control==== 31 +**Prozorov 10** (Sergei Prozorov, professor of political and economic studies at the University of Helsinki, "Why Giorgio Agamben is an optimist," Philosophy Social Criticism 2010 36: pg. 1065) 32 +In a later work, Agamben generalizes this logic and transforms it into a basic ethical imperative of his work: '~~There~~ is often nothing reprehensible about the individual behavior in itself, and it can, indeed, express a liberatory intent. What is disgraceful – both politically and morally – are the apparatuses which have diverted it from their possible use. We must always wrest from the apparatuses – from all apparatuses – the possibility of use that they have captured.'32 As we shall discuss in the following section, this is to be achieved by a subtraction of ourselves from these apparatuses, which leaves them in a jammed, inoperative state. What is crucial at this point is that the apparatuses of nihilism themselves prepare their demise by emptying out all positive content of the forms-of-life they govern and increasingly running on 'empty', capable only of (inflict- ing) Death or (doing) Nothing. On the other hand, this degradation of the apparatuses illuminates the 'inoperosity' (worklessness) of the human condition, whose originary status Agamben has affirmed from his earliest works onwards.33 By rendering void all historical forms-of-life, nihi- lism brings to light the absence of work that characterizes human existence, which, as irreducibly potential, logically presupposes the lack of any destiny, vocation, or task that it must be subjected to: 'Politics is that which corresponds to the essential inoperability of humankind, to the radical being-without-work of human communities. There is pol- itics because human beings are argos-beings that cannot be defined by any proper oper- ation, that is, beings of pure potentiality that no identity or vocation can possibly exhaust.'34 Having been concealed for centuries by religion or ideology, this originary inoperos- ity is fully unveiled in the contemporary crisis, in which it is manifest in the inoperative character of the biopolitical apparatuses themselves, which succeed only in capturing the sheer existence of their subjects without being capable of transforming it into a positive form-of-life: ~~T~~oday, it is clear for anyone who is not in absolutely bad faith that there are no longer historical tasks that can be taken on by, or even simply assigned to, men. It was evident start- ing with the end of the First World War that the European nation-states were no longer capa- ble of taking on historical tasks and that peoples themselves were bound to disappear.35 Agamben's metaphor for this condition is bankruptcy: 'One of the few things that can be declared with certainty is that all the peoples of Europe (and, perhaps, all the peoples of the Earth) have gone bankrupt'.36 Thus, the destructive nihilistic drive of the biopolitical machine and the capitalist spectacle has itself done all the work of emptying out positive forms-of-life, identities and vocations, leaving humanity in the state of destitution that Agamben famously terms 'bare life'. Yet, this bare life, whose essence is entirely con- tained in its existence, is precisely what conditions the emergence of the subject of the coming politics: 'this biopolitical body that is bare life must itself be transformed into the site for the constitution and installation of a form-of-life that is wholly exhausted in bare life and a bios that is only its own zoe.'37 The 'happy' form-of-life, a 'life that cannot be segregated from its form', is nothing but bare life that has reappropriated itself as its own form and for this reason is no longer separated between the (degraded) bios of the apparatuses and the (endangered) zoe that functions as their foundation.38 Thus, what the nihilistic self-destruction of the appara- tuses of biopolitics leaves as its residue turns out to be the entire content of a new form-of-life. Bare life, which is, as we recall, 'nothing reprehensible' aside from its con- finement within the apparatuses, is reappropriated as a 'whatever singularity', a being that is only its manner of being, its own 'thus'.39 It is the dwelling of humanity in this irreducibly potential 'whatever being' that makes possible the emergence of a generic non-exclusive community without presuppositions, in which Agamben finds the possi- bility of a happy life. ~~If~~ instead of continuing to search for a proper identity in the already improper and sense- less form of individuality, humans were to succeed in belonging to this impropriety as such, in making of the proper being-thus not an identity and individual property but a singularity without identity, a common and absolutely exposed singularity, then they would for the first time enter into a community without presuppositions and without subjects.40 Thus, rather than seek to reform the apparatuses, we should simply leave them to their self-destruction and only try to reclaim the bare life that they feed on. This is to be achieved by the practice of subtraction that we address in the following section. 33 + 34 +====The role of the ballot is to promote the best form of politics-==== 35 + 36 +====The alternative's form of Resistance disrupts power- that creates the possibility for ethical politics==== 37 +**Atterton 94 **Peter Atterton, philosophy professor, University of California San Diego, HISTORY OF THE HUMAN SCIENCES JOURNAL, 1994, p. http://www.acusd.edu/~~atterton/Publications/foucault.htm. VM 38 +Must we pessimistically assume, therefore, that bio-history, becoming more and more elaborate and powerful, proceeds with more or less unfettered sway without anything being able to interrupt or escape it? The question is not Foucaldian, not least because it presents power as a sovereign unitary force given at the outset. As we have seen, if bio-power can be understood vectorially as having force and direction, dominance and strategy, it is only through the resolution of a complex strategical situation within a societal body as a multiplicity of power relations each with their own local aims and objectives. This does not rule out the possibility of different tactics whose aims would be opposed to dominant alignments as they feature on the side of bio-power. On the contrary, Foucault insists (though it is doubtless in this connection that more research needs to be done) that it is only insofar as opposing tactics 'play the role of adversary, target, support or handle in power relations', that such hegemonic alignments are possible, by which I take him to mean that they serve as a local center around which multifarious disciplinary technologies may coalesce so as eventually to integrate them into an overall strategy of administrative control. All the same, this does not mean that, prior to their being integrated or resolved in this manner - operating within what Deleuze and Guattari have called an 'inclusive disjunction,' such as the 'madman' of anti-psychiatry, the bi-sexual, non-Oedipalized child, and so on - these opposing forces, or what Foucault calls 'resistances,' are to be understood merely as another element in the functioning of power, i.e. 'only a reaction, a rebound, forming with respect to the basic domination an underside that is in the end passive, doomed to perpetual defeat. They are disruptive and serve as the source of power's ultimate instability. 39 + 40 +====Each individual act is critical to challenge power politics==== 41 +**Foucault 69 **Michel Foucault, really cool French philosopher, Director, Institute Francais at Hamburg, THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF KNOWLEDGE, 1969, http://www.thefoucauldian.co.uk/bodypower.htm. VM 42 +We must ask ourselves what purpose is ultimately served by this suspension of all the accepted unities, if, in the end, we return to the unities that we pretended to question at the outset. In fact, the systematic erasure of all given unities enables us first of all to restore to the statement the specificity of its occurrence, and to show that discontinuity is one of those great accidents that create cracks not only in the geology of history, but also in the simple fact of the statement; it emerges in its historical irruption; what we try to examine is the incision that it makes, that irreducible - and very often tiny - emergence. However banal it may be, however unimportant its consequences may appear to be, however quickly it may be forgotten after its appearance, however little heard or however badly deciphered we may suppose it to be, a statement is always an event that neither the language (langue) nor the meaning can quite exhaust. It is certainly a strange event: first, because on the one hand it is linked to the gesture of writing or to the articulation of speech, and also on the other hand it opens up to itself a residual existence in the field of a memory, or in the materiality of manuscripts, books, or any other form of recording; secondly, because, like every event, it is unique, yet subject to repetition, transformation, and reactivation; thirdly, because it is linked not only to the situations that provoke it, and to the consequences that it gives rise to, but at the same time, and in accordance with a quite different modality, to the statements that precede and follow it. - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2017-03-09 17:44:16.634 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Josh Aguilar - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Kempner FH - ParentRound
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +12 - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +1 - Team
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Garland PHAM Neg - Title
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Mar-Apr Biopower K - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +TFA State