Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[73]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[68]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[73]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2017-02-15 01:17:48.290
	1	+2017-02-15 01:17:48.0

Caselist.CitesClass[68]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,31 @@
	1	+Neoliberalism makes meaningful dissent impossible – there is no such thing as speaking out when the academy is controlled by money. Chatterjee and Maira 14
	2	+Chatterjee, Piya, and Sunaina Maira. "The Imperial University: race, war, and the nation-state." The imperial university: Academic repression and scholarly dissent (2014): 1-50.
	3	+Our geopolitical positions—of our immediate workplaces as well as trans- national work circuits—underscore the complex contradictions of our locations within the U.S. academy. These paradoxes of positionality and employment have seeded this project in important ways. We have both taught at the University of California for many years—in addition to other U.S. universities—and have been members of the privileged upper caste of U.S. higher education: the tenured professoriate. We have each used these privileges of class, education, and cultural capital to live and work transna- tionally and have organized around and written about issues of warfare, colo- nialism, occupation, immigration, racism, gender rights, youth culture, and labor politics, within and outside the United States. In fact, we first began working together when we collaborated in 2008 on a collective statement of feminist solidarity with women suffering from the violence of U.S. wars and occupation, during the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and the Israeli siege of Gaza.7 Yet our privileges of entry, of inclusion, and of outside-ness are also always marked by the “dangerous complicities” of imperial privi- lege and neoliberal capital, as the chapters by Julia Oparah; Sylvanna Falcón, Sharmila Lodhia, Molly Talcott, and Dana Collins; Vijay Prashad; and Laura Pulido powerfully remind us. Even as we have recognized the institutional privileges and complicities through which we can do this work, we have experienced at various moments and in different ways—as the chapters by Alexis Gumbs, Clarissa Rojas, Thomas Abowd, and Nicholas De Genova suggest—a keen sense of being “outsiders” within—in the university, in aca- demic disciplines, in different nations.8¶ As scholars and teachers located within “critical ethnic studies” and “women and gender studies,” we are also well aware of a certain politics of value, legitimacy, and marginality at play, especially as the dismantling of the public higher education system and attacks on ethnic studies around the nation accelerate. The struggles to build ethnic studies and women/gen- der/sexuality studies as legitimate scholarly endeavors within the academy, emerging from several strands of the civil rights and antiwar movements, are well chronicled and keenly debated. The precarious positions as well as increasing professionalization and policing of these interdisciplinary fields within the current restructuring of the university is a matter of deep con- cern; for example, in the wake of the assault on ethnic studies in Arizona, the dismantling of women’s studies programs, and in a climate of policing and criminalizing immigrant “others” across the nation.¶ The pressure on academics to fund one’s own research—following the dominant grant-writing models of science and technology—is now even more explicit in a time of fiscal crisis and deepening fissures between faculty in the humanities, social sciences, physical sciences, education, and business who occupy very different positions in an increasingly privatized university.9 Prashad reminds us in his chapter of the consequences of the fiscal crisis for college students who bear a massive and growing burden of debt. We recognize these pressures on faculty and students as stemming from neolib- eral capitalism and the university’s capitulation to a global “structural adjust- ment” policy that is now coming “home” to roost in the United States, as astutely argued by Farah Godrej in her analysis linking the neoliberal uni- versity to militarism and violence. The academy has also tried to market the notion of “public scholarship,” transforming activist scholarship into a commodifiable form of knowledge production and dissemination that can affirm the university’s civic engagement—confined by the parameters of per- missible politics, as incisively critiqued by Salaita, Rojas, and Abowd. If we cannot—or choose not to—market our scholarship and pedagogies through these programs of funding and institutionalization, we find our work further devalued within the dominant terms of privatization in the academy. Given that neoliberal market ideologies now underwrite the “value” of our research and intellectual work, what happens to scholars whose writing directly tack- les the questions of U.S. state violence, logics of settler colonialism, and global political and economic dominance?¶ We know from stories about campaigns related to tenure or defamation of scholars, often shared in hallways during conferences and sometimes through e-mail listservs and the media, that there are serious costs to writing and speaking about these matters. For far too many colleagues who confront the most taboo of topics, such as indigenous critiques of genocide and settler colonialism or especially the question of Palestine, the price paid has been extraordinarily high. It has included the denial of promotion to tenure, being de-tenured, not having employment contracts renewed, or never being hired and being blacklisted, as this book poignantly illustrates. Coupled with the loss of livelihood or exile from the U.S. academy, many scholars have been stigmatized, harassed, and penalized in overt and covert ways. There are numerous such cases, sadly way too many to recount here—most famously those of Ward Churchill, Norman Finkelstein, David Graeber, Joel Kovel, Terri Ginsberg, Marc Ellis, Margo Nanlal-Rankoe, Wadie Said, and Sami Al- Arian—but it is generally only the handful that generate public campaigns that receive attention while many others remain unknown, not to mention innumerable cases of students who have been surveilled or harassed, such as Syed Fahad Hashmi from Brooklyn College, while again there are countless other untold stories.10 These are the scandals and open secrets, we argue, that need to be revealed and placed in broader frames of analysis of labor and survival within the U.S. university system.11
	4	+
	5	+A focus on speech abstracts from material violence and class - the aff fails to correctly situate speech and anti-zionism within the correct economic context. Nair 11
	6	+
	7	+Nair, Yasmin. "WHO LOVES TEACHING? FREE SPEECH AND THE MYTH OF THE ACADEMY AS A PLACE TO LOVE AND BE THE LEFT." Arab Studies Quarterly 33.3/4 (2011): 204-216.
	8	+
	9	+Along the way, even newer academics will increasingly explore the world of¶ op-eds and non-academic writing and as academic publishing and research seek¶ new avenues and flexibility and, frankly, different forms of capital (let us not fool¶ ourselves that this is all entirely a new form of the pursuit of knowledge). It is,¶ then, perfectly likely that many will find themselves negotiating highly public¶ controversies, as did Norman Finkelstein. Given the threat faced by the very system¶ of tenure, and given what we saw of the effectiveness of the venom from people¶ like Alan Dershowitz, it is entirely possible that we might one day be confronted¶ with a situation where someone's tenure is actually stripped from them because of¶ what their institution considers incendiary positions. We might think that all this will¶ make academia and academic freedom stronger, that the left will now be reanimated.¶ But I argue that the increasing attention paid to such matters and the placing of the¶ burden on academia as the last bastion of left principles in fact results in an attrition¶ of leftist principles. More to the point, I argue that this comes about not because of¶ the silencing of the left as much as due to the watering down of leftist critiques at¶ the expense of validating weak and watered-down liberal criticisms.¶ In early 2011, the Advocate columnist Michael Lucas successfully launched¶ an offensive against the New York City LGBT Center's plan to host an "Israeli¶ Apartheid Week (I AW)." 11 Those of us who care about the free and fair public¶ discussion of such matters were appalled, and there were several denunciations of¶ the Center's kowtowing to Lucas, who threatened to have it effectively defunded.¶ Into this waded none other than Judith Butler, considered an icon of queer theory,¶ who released an email to the Center in which she stated her denunciation of the¶ NYC Center's move to distance itself from I AW. In her statement, Butler wrote that,¶ "This is a human rights and social justice issue about which we all have to learn.¶ And it seems to me that just as the very notion of freedom must include sexual¶ freedom, and the very notion of equality must include sexual and gender equa so must we form alliances that show that our concern with social justice is one that¶ will include opposition to all forms of state subjugation and disenfranchisement."12¶ Butler's response has been taken up by several people on the left as if it were the¶ crowning glory of all such protests, but in the process we forget several critical¶ points. The first is that Butler, despite her iconicity, is in fact little more than a¶ liberal and her views as expressed in this statement draw upon fairly standard liberal¶ denunciations of censorship and a calling forth of equality and freedom. Despite¶ her being dubbed a leftist "activist" in recent years, presumably because of her¶ increasingly public stance on Israel and Palestine, her views rarely go beyond the¶ standard liberal discourse that demands free and open discourse. In contrast, the¶ views of academics like Hamid Dabashi and Norman Finkelstein, amongst others,¶ who have taken far more explicitly political and/or leftist stands against Zionism¶ have been met with backlashes that threaten or, in the case of Finkelstein, eliminate¶ their standing in academia.¶ Secondly, Butler's public proclamations about the New York LGBT Center also¶ came in the midst of her move from the public University of California at Berkeley¶ to the private Columbia University in New York. Which is to say: without delving¶ too far into what Butler's personal intentions were (I have no doubt she believes¶ in her own statements), surely we ought also to consider that her recent forays into¶ the arena of public intellectuals came and come within a complicated and murky¶ displacement of one kind of university, a publicly funded one, being forgone in¶ favor of the private kind.¶ This might appear to place too great a burden on Judith Butler. After all, to put it¶ bluntly, the University of California system is in crisis and no one should be blamed¶ for leaving for greener pastures in a highly unstable economic environment (and¶ Butler had been there for several years). But my point is less to point to Butler¶ on a personal level and more to ask that we first look more closely at her position¶ and understand that it is neither particularly revelatory nor particularly leftist, and,¶ second, that we see her positionality within the discourse on Israel-Palestine and the¶ campus movement towards boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) as one that¶ emerges from a downgrading of the very university and tenure system that grants¶ her the power to speak without retribution in the first place. What would it mean¶ for an assistant professor or an adjunct at UC Berkeley to make such statements?13¶ In the furor around BDS, other issues are ignored. At the University of Chicago,¶ students have been vigorously supporting BDS, but have nothing to add about, if they¶ are even aware of, their university's wholesale gentrification of the neighborhoods¶ in which it occupies space (see, e.g.: Patillo, 2007). Indeed, the university as a¶ primary procurer of cheap labor and a tool in the neoliberal privatization of the¶ cityscape is an aspect of its foundation that students and faculty ought to first¶ and fully understand and resi university has spaces in the downtown loop area as well as the now completely¶ gentrified Lincoln Square area (a once more rundown area that was home to the artist¶ Henry Darger, who rented a room there). Similarly, locating BDS in an academic¶ context that erases the materiality of the violence that exists around the university¶ also serves to render invisible the discussion around Palestinian trauma. There can¶ be no comparison between the war zones navigated by Palestinian children who¶ face the guns of Israeli soldiers on their way to school and the violence of gang¶ wars that often take the lives of Chicago schoolchildren. However, it is incumbent¶ upon those of us who decry the violence of Zionism to consider that it, like the¶ violence of gentrification and the recruitment of young Latina/os into the US war¶ machine, is also built upon the violence of physical displacement of property and¶ the heightening of trauma that makes space potentially uninhabitable for residents.¶ What connects the militarization of Senn High School, the working conditions of¶ adjuncts, and the refusal of tenure to academics or the curtailing of "free speech"?¶ Circulating around these nodes are the quotidian forms of repression/violence that¶ are silenced and erased from public consciousness. Whose free speech are we¶ talking about? Does free speech matter more or less when it comes attached to a¶ tenure-track or tenured faculty member or to an adjunct? When we speak out, what¶ is the role of "love" for academia that we attach to our discourse, and how might¶ this in fact enable further exploitation? What does the loss of tenure mean when¶ increasing numbers of faculty are in fact adjuncts? Speaking out politically, even¶ being seen at an anti-war march, means that "rabble-rousers" are not going to get¶ their contracts renewed. In what contexts do we talk about academic freedom if¶ adjuncts and others don't have those rights anyway?¶ The problem with the notion of free speech, especially with the issues around¶ Israel and Palestine, is that it assumes a certain parity on the part of those who speak¶ out. It erases the fact that "academic" is itself a term that some must keep fighting¶ to identify with if they do not enjoy or subscribe to the politics of institutional¶ affiliation. It reinscribes the notion that academia is the only place where such¶ freedom can exist. But what if we were to turn around in the midst of calling¶ for the preservation of academic freedom, and demand from the university that it¶ acknowledge the quotidian forms of violence that enable its very existence
	10	+
	11	+And, BDS perpetuates neoliberalism and diverts resistance from the most meaningful political ways to reject Zionism. The AFF’s use of boycott is a naïve form of politics that does more harm than good. Any awareness raised directly tradesoff with effective politics. Desimone 14
	12	+
	13	+ARTURO DESIMONE writer and visual artist living between Argentina and the Netherlands. 27 September 2014 Critique of the boycott divestment sanctions movement, from a Jewish supporter of the Palestinian cause https://www.opendemocracy.net/arab-awakening/arturo-desimone/critique-of-boycott-divestment-sanctions-movement-from-jewish-support
	14	+
	15	+Today they are distancing themselves from what the Boycott Divestment Sanctions movement has in its at times neoliberal terminology called ''brand Israel,'' a brand needing to be dropped without any further involvement or responsibility by those who through their incessant lobbying aided Israel in its steadily rightward militarization.¶ A large part of the American liberal-left intellectual establishment's former support for Israeli warfare has turned, perhaps quite fortunately for the world, to condemnation, and even the New York Times no longer functions as Eli Wiesel's anti-depressant of choice.¶ The pro-Palestine activist Norman Finkelstein for years predicted ''the breakup of American Zionism'' and most recently made a fitting analogy in an essay published in Guernica where he confronts some of Israel's former defenders among the American left. Before moving on to the critique of Ari Shavit's latest defense of Israel, the scholar describes the momentum of BDS popularity, in its new logic: product Israel was sold to them like the tobacco industry and Philip Morris' cigarettes, but today the Zionist product is exposed as a health hazard.¶ This consumption-morality way of thinking about this issue began with the BDS movement, particularly among the European, mostly non-Jewish former supporters of Israel. These were converts from philo-zionism, who had joined the BDS movement claiming that they had been deceived when they flocked to the kibbutzim during the 1960s and 1970s, braving in bunkers the Yom Kippur war's momentary turbulence and helping with volunteer-work to build what they considered a progressive beacon. This way of thinking suggests that Israel's former supporters are really victims and not major players in the conflict, whether the support came from guilt-motivated European non-Jews or from American Jewish elites hungering for an identity politics that was also conveniently aligned with American foreign policy interests.¶ Victim identity politics are in demand in contemporary western culture. Unfortunately the support for Palestinian solidarity has had to pass through the prism of victim identity politics—despite the irony of Palestinians being the victims of a state that has justified 40 years of brutal and humiliating occupation by politicizing a sentimentalized victimhood and a tyrannical misuse of the holocaust memory.¶ On the other side of the new cold war lines, the Russia Today state-broadcast company recently announced skyrocketing sales of new ''Boycott-apps'' for phones. Purchases soared in St Petersburg and Moscow. There is irony in this Russian popular condemnation of a state of Israel armed and supported by its official cold war enemy, the United States. Israel has committed atrocities similar to those of Russia in recent Chechen wars, using ''war on terror'' rhetoric. The normalization of discrimination against Muslims in Russia can only be surpassed by the traditional normalcy of anti-Semitism, in a city where Jews were once typically forbidden from having living quarters.¶ A potential danger lurks in a mirror image: the moral degeneration of Israel having its shadow in the moral degeneration of pro-Palestinian solidarity efforts which increasingly embrace a consumerist logic, as courage becomes less of a requirement in order to publicly condemn Israel, and the liberal elite's ideological fashions switch from ‘the Israeli product’ to that of ‘cultural boycott’. The more courageous path is that of pushing for the big resounding ‘S’ in B-D-S: state sanctions. These have been declared by the majority of South American states, including perhaps most importantly, Argentina. Argentina has the third largest Jewish community in the world. And indeed, pressure upon the state is vital, both for a US arms embargo, and for the labelling of all products proceeding from settlement enterprise as the equivalent of blood diamonds.¶ The European Union announcing their markets' divestment from all settlement-related businesses was a far greater and more resounding achievement than anything achieved by the activists who stood outside Jewish and Israeli theatre festivals in European cities, protesting that they must not sell apartheid in the candy-wrapping of art. This logic implies a post-politics, an embrace of neoliberalism and the pragmatic belief that such glibness of art-as-therapy can somehow substitute for doing actual politics. It cannot be expected of every actor, dancer or painter to embody a direct political activism in the creative process, and it is doubtful that most politically activist art today has any real resonance outside the insular circles of the art world. The BDS pressure on artists to manufacture placebo politics inevitably falls into a general conformism that is already prevalent in the contemporary art world, which despite its artivism is steadily less supported by its audiences.¶ “Poetry cannot serve as an emotional bandage for the blood and guts of warfare; such an industry is doomed to dishonor the dead as well as the living”, as the poet Yusuf Kumunyakaa wrote in his letter to Poetry magazine, criticizing the US army's MFA program, (called Operation Homecoming, part of the promotion of 'creative writing' as therapy).¶ The boycott app phenomenon alone might be a sign that the ''internal criticism'' made of BDS within the Palestinian solidarity movement has strong moral grounds, even though Chomsky and Finkelstein have been much maligned by the BDS. In a recent openDemocracy article, Chomsky was even called ''perverse'' for doubting the efficacy of BDS, despite the fact that he argued for state sanctions as being more important than a consumer or cultural boycott and insisted that the comparison often made by the Boycott Divestment movement to South Africa is unjust—mostly because Israeli expansionism is much worse than the violence of the Apartheid state.¶ The first time I directly encountered the rage of BDS movement activists against Chomsky's supposed reticence, was when he gave a lecture in February 2011 in Amsterdam. Most Dutch BDS activists were witnessing a live broadcast of his speech, not in Amsterdam but on a screen in the neighbouring city of Utrecht, so as not to be present at his lecture, perhaps thereby safe from violating the ''boycott'.¶ There was an explosive rage at how Chomsky had spent 40 minutes talking about the entirety of the Arab world in revolt, with cases like Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and the violently repressed uprisings in Bahrain and Gulf states, and only 20 minutes on Israel Palestine. This was denounced as a sign of Zionism and preferential treatment for Jews, despite the relevance of Arab uprisings that had made history only a month earlier. ¶ The boycott divestment sanctions movement insists on a comparison to South African apartheid for a number of reasons. Here are about three that were listed for me by Norman Finkelstein when I sent him an email asking about his views on BDS. The scholar, who has often criticized BDS while he calls for sanctions against Israel, answered:¶ “ It would take a long time to dissect the reasons for BDS's popularity. Among them, I would include these:¶ ¶ (1) Seeing the Israel-Palestine conflict through the prism of the struggle against South African apartheid, which was the last great battle of the global left;¶ ¶ (2) It provides a practical program of action that goes beyond lectures and demonstrations;¶ ¶ (3) Because there is a leadership void among the Palestinians, any Palestinian can claim to represent the Palestinians (or "Palestinian civil society"), while the global left has historically genuflected before so-called Leaders of the Oppressed (even when they are transparent hucksters and charlatans).¶ ¶ The goal of eliminating Israel arises from #1 above, and also the fact that many Arab nationalists still subscribe to the notion that Israel is "Arab" land, and Jews have no right to be there. This includes everyone from Shaykh Nasrallah (whom I respect) to Omar Barghouti.”1 ¶ Elsewhere Finkelstein has added that the movement's priority of not wanting any compromise on a two state solution, unwilling to settle for anything but the disappearance of a specifically Israeli discriminatory and ethnic state, even if it means ignoring chances for a Palestinian victory on the terms stipulated in UN proposition 242, can only mean that anti-Semitism is one magnet for attracting a form of consumer activist to BDS.¶ I propose here a new paradigm: Israeli state militarism resembles Turkish state nationalism, with its occupations and ethnic cleansing against Kurds, its destruction since the mid-1980s of at least 4000 Kurdish villages, and its origins in the violent programs of Turkification that nonetheless sought to build a state that would provide refuge and a secular identity to all Turkic nations of the world, from the diaspora of the Turks of Crimea in the Ukraine to the Uyghurs of China who still persecuted today by the Chinese government. Attaturkism justified its ethnic cleansing and military state with the project of unifying and westernizing the Turkic diaspora. For this reason, Ben Gurion, who studied law in Istanbul (then a Mecca for Jews fleeing Europe) later modeled himself on the leader of Turkish modernization, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.¶ The Boycott Divestment Sanctions movement would not welcome the comparison—it prefers to see the Israel-Palestine conflict through the prism of today's simplified and Manichean colour and gender identity politics, the Israelis have to be presented as ''white'' and the Palestinians as the equivalent of South African blacks. This is complicated as not only is the oppression of Palestinians more extreme than South African Apartheid, but the Israeli majority cannot be defined as ''white'' when more than half descend from the Arab Jewish immigrations to Israel that began during the 1950s and which Ben Gurion and other Ashkenazi, Polish and Russian-born Zionists lamented and criticized at the time as the ''Levantinization'' of Israel.¶ This leftist criticism has overlooked the internal politics of both Palestine and Israel: the extremist positions of the Israeli majority stemming from how they have been moved to the right by the racism, classism and exclusion of a refined Ashkenazi elite. It was right wing politicians like Menachem Begin who found the wounds in the identity and grievances of the Arab Jews, listened to them and gave them a promise both of revenge and inclusion in the Israeli establishment, when the Zionist left wing ignored them and the global left outside of Israel, supporting Palestinian Jews, generalized all Israelis as being nothing more than sabras and European colonists. A cultural boycott only further expresses the desire not to learn anything more about the occupier's society, despite the fact that such knowledge must be of interest to those who want to end the Israeli domination over Palestinians.
	16	+
	17	+Cap is the root cause of Palestinian oppression, focus on Zionism through BDS obscures solutions to the conflict. IPS 80
	18	+“Capitalism, Not Zionism, Is the Problem.” Journal of Palestine Studies, vol. 9, no. 2, 1980, pp. 154–157. Institute for Palestine Studies (IPS). www.jstor.org/stable/2536358.
	19	+ “Thus, Zionism, ironically in view of¶ its roots, comes to generate a mirror¶ image of itself. Terrorism? The life of the¶ prime minister of Israel is the greatest¶ success story of terrorism in modern¶ history. It is this terrorism which Palestinian terrorism mirrors. And with¶ uncanny accuracy. The two facets of¶ Begin’s terrorist heritage, IRA-type terror¶ against the foreign oppressor (the bombing of the King David hotel) and its more¶ grisly acts against an indigenous civilian¶ population (the infamous Deir Yassin¶ massacre)-are faithfully reproduced in¶ Palestinian terrorism, with its romantic¶ commando-suicide raids, and its very¶ different acts of individual protest and¶ desperation by a people living under¶ military occupation, as when an anonymous Arab workman throws a grenade¶ into a bus full of people on the West¶ Bank.¶ “Collective identity? The glorious¶ reaffirmation of an authentically Jewish¶ and Zionist identity spells out in advance¶ all the dynamics that the reawakening of¶ properly Palestinian identity will undergo¶ in the years after 1967: Mystique of the¶ homeland; mirage of a history of past¶ grandeur; the financial tithes of a wealthy¶ diaspora, as well as the virtually inaliena-¶ ble political backing of powerful foreign¶ states (in the one case, the United States; in the other, the Arab bloc); virtual¶ unanimity of internal public opinion¶ against the enemy; the (sometimes¶ doubtful) ideological strength of a unique¶ religious orthodoxy; the authority of¶ inealeulable colleCtive suffering; the liSt¶ could be indefinitely extended. It should¶ not be taken as fuel for more endless,¶ undecidable. and Sterile judgments as to¶ what came first and who bears the¶ ‘ultimate’ responsibility. Rather, it should¶ mean something quite different: That¶ those who have been able to grasP and to¶ feel profound sympathy for the sufferings¶ and struggles of the jewish people are¶ paradoxically also in the very best posi-¶ tion of all to understand the sufferings¶ and the Struggles of the Palestinians.¶ “Indeed, once the objective situation¶ which has generated anti-Zionism is¶ graSped. it's clear that what is at stake is¶ far from a matter of anti-Jewish racism.¶ just as ‘diplomatic’ solutions must¶ inevitably dead-end in the Middle East, so¶ too muSt those which overemphasize the¶ ‘psychologieal’-pitting Palestinian¶ ‘identity’ againSt Jewish ‘identity.’ The¶ problem can only be solved by considering the social relations in which the anti-¶ Zionism of the PLO is rooted.¶ “Israel-this lush and beautiful place,¶ the California of the Middle But. with its¶ glittering hotels along the gorgeous¶ beaches of Tel Aviv, its fertile and pros-¶ perous kibbutzim. its fruit farms and¶ extraordinary light, the Iiveliness of its¶ citizens and the well-nigh Tuscan beauty¶ of the ancient city of Jerusalem-Israel¶ lives an anxiety deeper than that of¶ foreign intervention by inefficient Arab¶ armies or insignificant handfuls of Palestinian freedom-fighters. It lives the¶ anxiety from within: the anxiety of class¶ conflict—fear, not of external enemies,¶ but of the sullen and menacing presence¶ of a Palestinian underclass in its own¶ midst. a class socially manageable only¶ because so many of its numbers have¶ been driven out into the refugee camps beyond the border. The Palestinians are¶ the Blacks and Chicanos of the Israeli¶ capitalist system. ‘What do these people¶ want? ’ the Israelis ask themselves. ‘Do¶ they want to come into our luxury hotels¶ or be able to buy posh houses in our¶ neighbourhoods or maybe even to take¶ over our own houses for themselves?¶ “The problem's real name, in other¶ words, is not Zionism. but capitalism. For¶ a genuine solution to the Middle East¶ ‘problem' to be thinkable. the possibility¶ of radical social transformation within¶ Israeli society- would have to become a¶ real one. This is the sense in which the¶ familiar slogan-anti-Zionism means anti-¶ Semitism-is to be rejected. Anti-Zionism¶ in this sense is rather to be understood as¶ opposition to a whole unjust social¶ system, that of the United States fully as¶ much as that of lsrael. it means, not¶ hostility to a people or a religion, but¶ resistance to racism, Oppressive social¶ relations. imperialism. monopolies,¶ consumerism-resistance, in short, to an¶ enemy that the American Left has long¶ since identified here at home."
	20	+
	21	+Our critique independently outweighs the case - neoliberalism causes extinction and massive social inequalities – the affs single issue legalistic solution is the exact kind of politics neolib wants us to engage in so the root cause to go unquestioned. Farbod 15
	22	+ ( Faramarz Farbod , PhD Candidate @ Rutgers, Prof @ Moravian College, Monthly Review, http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2015/farbod020615.html, 6-2)
	23	+Global capitalism is the 800-pound gorilla. The twin ecological and economic crises, militarism, the rise of the surveillance state, and a dysfunctional political system can all be traced to its normal operations. We need a transformative politics from below that can challenge the fundamentals of capitalism instead of today's politics that is content to treat its symptoms. The problems we face are linked to each other and to the way a capitalist society operates. We must make an effort to understand its real character. The fundamental question of our time is whether we can go beyond a system that is ravaging the Earth and secure a future with dignity for life and respect for the planet. What has capitalism done to us lately? The best science tells us that this is a do-or-die moment. We are now in the midst of the 6th mass extinction in the planetary history with 150 to 200 species going extinct every day, a pace 1,000 times greater than the 'natural' extinction rate.1 The Earth has been warming rapidly since the 1970s with the 10 warmest years on record all occurring since 1998.2 The planet has already warmed by 0.85 degree Celsius since the industrial revolution 150 years ago. An increase of 2° Celsius is the limit of what the planet can take before major catastrophic consequences. Limiting global warming to 2°C requires reducing global emissions by 6 per year. However, global carbon emissions from fossil fuels increased by about 1.5 times between 1990 and 2008.3 Capitalism has also led to explosive social inequalities. The global economic landscape is littered with rising concentration of wealth, debt, distress, and immiseration caused by the austerity-pushing elites. Take the US. The richest 20 persons have as much wealth as the bottom 150 million.4 Since 1973, the hourly wages of workers have lagged behind worker productivity rates by more than 800.5 It now takes the average family 47 years to make what a hedge fund manager makes in one hour.6 Just about a quarter of children under the age of 5 live in poverty.7 A majority of public school students are low-income.8 85 of workers feel stress on the job.9 Soon the only thing left of the American Dream will be a culture of hustling to survive. Take the global society. The world's billionaires control $7 trillion, a sum 77 times the debt owed by Greece to the European banks.10 The richest 80 possess more than the combined wealth of the bottom 50 of the global population (3.5 billion people).11 By 2016 the richest 1 will own a greater share of the global wealth than the rest of us combined.12 The top 200 global corporations wield twice the economic power of the bottom 80 of the global population.13 Instead of a global society capitalism is creating a global apartheid. What's the nature of the beast? Firstly, the "egotistical calculation" of commerce wins the day every time. Capital seeks maximum profitability as a matter of first priority. Evermore "accumulation of capital" is the system's bill of health; it is slowdowns or reversals that usher in crises and set off panic. Cancer-like hunger for endless growth is in the system's DNA and is what has set it on a tragic collision course with Nature, a finite category. Secondly, capitalism treats human labor as a cost. It therefore opposes labor capturing a fair share of the total economic value that it creates. Since labor stands for the majority and capital for a tiny minority, it follows that classism and class warfare are built into its DNA, which explains why the "middle class" is shrinking and its gains are never secure. Thirdly, private interests determine massive investments and make key decisions at the point of production guided by maximization of profits. That's why in the US the truck freight replaced the railroad freight, chemicals were used extensively in agriculture, public transport was gutted in favor of private cars, and big cars replaced small ones. What should political action aim for today? The political class has no good ideas about how to address the crises. One may even wonder whether it has a serious understanding of the system, or at least of ways to ameliorate its consequences. The range of solutions offered tends to be of a technical, legislative, or regulatory nature, promising at best temporary management of the deepening crises. The trajectory of the system, at any rate, precludes a return to its post-WWII regulatory phase. It's left to us as a society to think about what the real character of the system is, where we are going, and how we are going to deal with the trajectory of the system ~-~- and act accordingly. The critical task ahead is to build a transformative politics capable of steering the system away from its destructive path. Given the system's DNA, such a politics from below must include efforts to challenge the system's fundamentals, namely, its private mode of decision-making about investments and about what and how to produce. Furthermore, it behooves us to heed the late environmentalist Barry Commoner's insistence on the efficacy of a strategy of prevention over a failed one of control or capture of pollutants. At a lecture in 1991, Commoner remarked: "Environmental pollution is an incurable disease; it can only be prevented"; and he proceeded to refer to "a law," namely: "if you don't put a pollutant in the environment it won't be there." What is nearly certain now is that without democratic control of wealth and social governance of the means of production, we will all be condemned to the labor of Sisyphus. Only we won't have to suffer for all eternity, as the degradation of life-enhancing natural and social systems will soon reach a point of no return.
	24	+
	25	+The alternative is a relentless class-based politics that works against the university’s economic underpinnings – only engaging in a critique that focuses on the economic forces at play in public universities can we resolve capitalism. Oparah 14
	26	+Oparah, Julia. Professor and Chair of Ethnic Studies at Mills College and a founding member of Black Women Birthing Justice "Challenging Complicity: The Neoliberal University and the Prison–Industrial Complex." The Imperial University: Academic Repression and Scholarly Dissent (2014).
	27	+¶ In my earlier work on the academic-prison-industrial complex, I suggested that activist scholars were producing and disseminating countercarceral knowledge by bringing academic research into alignment with the needs of social movements and interrogating and reorganizing relationships between prisoners and researchers in the free world.50 Given the history of epistemic and physical violence and exploitation of research subjects by the academy, such a reorganizing of relationships and accountabilities is clearly urgently needed. Yet no matter how radical and participatory our scholarship is, we ultimately fail to dismantle the academic-military-prison-industrial com- plex (academic-MPIC) if we address it only through the production of more knowledge. Since knowledge is a commodity, marketed through books, arti- cles, and conferences as well as patents and government contracts, the pro- duction of “better,” more progressive or countercarceral knowledge can also be co-opted and put to work by the academic-MPIC.¶ An abolitionist lens provides a helpful framework here. Antiprison schol- ars and activists have embraced the concept of abolition in order to draw attention to the unfinished liberation legislated by the Thirteenth Amend- ment, which abolished slavery “except as a punishment for a crime.”51 Aboli- tionists do not seek primarily to reform prisons or to improve conditions for prisoners; instead they argue that only by abolishing imprisonment will we free up the resources and imagine the possibility of more effective and less violent strategies to deal with the social problems signaled by harmful acts. While early abolitionists referred to themselves as prison abolitionists, more recently there has been a shift to prison-industrial complex abolitionism to expand the analysis of the movement to incorporate other carceral spaces— from immigrant detention centers to psychiatric hospitals—and to empha- size the role of other actors, including the police and courts, politicians, corporations, the media, and the military, in sustaining mass incarceration.52¶ How does an abolitionist lens assist us in assessing responses to the academic-MPIC? First, it draws our attention to the economic basis of the academic-MPIC and pushes us to attack the materiality of the militari- zation and prisonization of academia rather than limiting our interventions to the realm of ideas. This means that we must challenge the corporatization of our universities and colleges and question what influences and account- abilities are being introduced by our increasing collaboration with neoliberal global capital. It also means that we must dismantle those complicities and liberate the academy from its role as handmaiden to neoliberal globaliza- tion, militarism, and empire. In practice, this means interrogating our uni- versities’ and colleges’ investment decisions, demanding they divest from the military, security, and prison industries; distance themselves from military occupations in Southwest Asia and the Middle East; and invest instead in community-led sustainable economic development. It means facing allega- tions of disloyalty to our employers or alma maters as we blow the whistle on unethical investments and the creeping encroachment of corporate fund- ing, practices, and priorities. It means standing up for a vision of the liberal arts that neither slavishly serves the interests of the new global order nor returns to its elitist origins but instead is deeply embedded in progressive movements and richly informed by collaborations with insurgent and activ- ist spaces. And it means facing the challenges that arise when our divest- ment from empire has real impact on the bottom line of our university and college budgets.
	28	+
	29	+Class struggle K2 solve conflict. Moradei 14
	30	+“The proletariat and the Israeli-Palestinian question,” Hamid Moradei, 09/2014.
	31	+Although, there has never existed real balance of forces between the Israeli state and Palestinian semi-state: the former is most advanced and powerful militaristic state machinery in the Middle East. The latter is no level of confronting its rival, but it can easily provoke violent, aggressive and barbaric military escalation of force from the Israeli side. Asymmetrically both sides are economically and militarily/armistice connected and is supported by hegemony and active Imperialistic power/s of the time. If US capitalist-imperialist relation has kept the Israeli, watchdog of West, in place, the Palestinian ruling elite has had its sphere of capitalist-imperialist relations: The Russian block of cold war era, the imperialist aspirants such, Saddam Hussein’s regime 1990s, Syrian regime, Iran-Hizbollah…¶ Thus, the state machinery of both sides, in quickly adapting to capitalist crisis, is actually getting bigger over time, and this is nowhere close to class perspective of the proletarian masses to breaking the shackles. The proletarian class perspective requires unification of its fragmented body parts when it realizes the role and place of transforming itself from a divided entity, Palestinian, Israeli…, for a unified class as a whole. The unified proletarian class is a deadly Parisian arrow shooting to the Achilles’ heel of ruling class’ implanted false class consciousness.¶ As a historically objective issue, the Israeli-Palestinian question was created by the rules and needs of the capitalist – imperialist system 1920s-1940s: Therefore it demands from the proletariat, the only true anti capitalist-agent, a revolutionary resolution: A socialistic-communistic and platformic approach which is driven from the historicism of the proletarian class. Accordingly, the conduct of the proletariat during class struggle in Israel, Palestine, the Middle East… needs to tend toward universalizing its deeds and revolutionary perspective. The art of class war has to be discovered by the proletariat if he intends to resist imposed barbarism of capitalist civilization on humanity and all forms of life, in the forms of nationalism, religious… or imperialist conflicts, wars… and mass destruction tendency embedded in the core of production system; the conceptual and worldwide limits of endless capitalistic accumulation, that in turn is based on the universal and total commoditization of labor power and consequently the sphere of social reproduction.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2017-02-15 01:17:51.85

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Panel

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+West Ranch JW

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+73

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Finals

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Harvard Westlake Engel Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+JAN-FEB - K - BDS Cap

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Stanford