Changes for page Hunter College Potischman Aff
Last modified by Administrator on 2017/08/29 03:36
Change comment:
There is no comment for this version
Summary
-
Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
Details
- Caselist.RoundClass[12]
-
- EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@ 1 -2017-01-14 18:12:04. 4441 +2017-01-14 18:12:04.0
- Caselist.CitesClass[10]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,116 @@ 1 +====Individuals have an innate right to independence, which guarantees that their ability to pursue an end is not contingent on the will of others. ==== 2 +**Ripstein**, Arthur. Force and Freedom: Kant’s Legal and Political Philosophy. Harvard University Press, 2009. 3 +This right to 4 +AND 5 +of personal freedom." 6 + 7 + 8 +====Thus, the standard is consistency with republican freedom as non-domination, which means adopting social and political institutions that eliminate the capacities for arbitrary interference. ==== 9 + 10 + 11 +====Impact Calc: A) The standard is not a question of maximizing non-interference, but pursuing structural conditions that make arbitrary political interference inaccessible. A roman slave with a benevolent master, is well off, but not free, since their freedom remains contingent on their master’s arbitrary whim. ==== 12 +**Pettit 1**, Philip. Republicanism: a theory of freedom and government. OUP Oxford, 1997. DL 1.7.2017 13 +The republican view 14 +AND 15 +among the citizenry. 16 + 17 + 18 +====B) The relationship between the state and non-domination is constitutive, not causal. ==== 19 +**Pettit 2**, Philip. Republicanism: a theory of freedom and government. OUP Oxford, 1997. DL 1.7.2017 20 +But though the 21 +AND 22 +of that term. 23 + 24 + 25 +====Prefer additionally:==== 26 + 27 + 28 +====A negative conception of freedom as non-interference can never explain the legitimacy of the state since state coercion could never cohere with freedom. ==== 29 +**Pettit 3.** Philip Pettit, ‘Legitimacy and Justice in Republican Perspective’, Inaugural Quain Lecture in Jurisprudence, 2012, in Current Legal Problems, Vol 65, 2012, 59-82; doi: 10.1093/clp/cus016. DL 1.7.16. 30 +One of the 31 +AND 32 +despotism or chaos’.31 33 + 34 + 35 +====This requires revising our conception of freedom; only the republican conception of freedom as non-domination, which targets arbitrary interference as opposed to all interference, satisfies the question of legitimacy. ==== 36 +**Pettit 4,** Philip Pettit, ‘Legitimacy and Justice in Republican Perspective’, Inaugural Quain Lecture in Jurisprudence, 2012, in Current Legal Problems, Vol 65, 2012, 59-82; doi: 10.1093/clp/cus016. DL 1.7.16. 37 +But while the 38 +AND 39 +than non-interference. 40 + 41 + 42 +====Freedom as non-domination is a primary good. ==== 43 +**Pettit 5,** Pettit, Philip. Republicanism: a theory of freedom and government. OUP Oxford, 1997. DL 1.7.2017 44 +The considerations rehearsed 45 +AND 46 +a primary good. 47 + 48 + 49 +==Contention 1: The Right to Free Speech == 50 + 51 + 52 +====Freedom to say what one wants is essential to be your own person and live your own life. ==== 53 +**Pettit 6,** Philip. Republicanism: a theory of freedom and government. OUP Oxford, 1997. DL 1.7.2017 54 +But the primary‐good 55 +AND 56 +a primary good. 57 + 58 + 59 +====Thus, giving the state the power to restrict speech content makes one’s freedom contingent on the government. Speech codes on campus institutionally create the possibility of arbitrary interference of free speech – past cases prove it’s possible. ==== 60 +**ACLU 16,** ACLU. 2016 "Hate Speech on Campus" https://www.aclu.org/other/hate-speech-campus 61 +Historically, defamation laws 62 +AND 63 +we'll be next." 64 + 65 + 66 +====Takes out hate speech PICs: a) speech codes directed at reducing domination are illegitimate since they create new institutions of arbitrary state domination; b) turns the PIC: hate speech restrictions are used by school administrators to target student activists and minorities – not racists; c) outweighs – free speech on campus makes state domination inaccessible, but speech codes do nothing to reduce the structural capacity for racist interference. ==== 67 +**ACLU ~~2~~,** ACLU. 2016 "Hate Speech on Campus" https://www.aclu.org/other/hate-speech-campus 68 +Bigoted speech is 69 +AND 70 +of racist ideas. 71 + 72 + 73 +==Contention 2 Deliberation== 74 + 75 + 76 +====Arbitrary interference occurs without reference to an agent’s input or avowed interests.==== 77 +**Laborde and Maynor summarize Pettit**, Laborde, Cécile, and John Maynor, eds. Republicanism and political theory. John Wiley and Sons, 2009. Bracketted for gendered language. 78 +In his chapter, 79 +AND 80 +compromise republican freedom. 81 + 82 + 83 +====Thus, the self-governance required by non-domination depends on open deliberation. ==== 84 +**Febres summarizes Meiklejohn:** Power Febres, C. Liberalism, feminism and republicanism on freedom of speech: the cases of pornography and racist hate speech. Dissertation. UCL (University College London), 2011. APA. DL 1.7.17 85 +The republican conception 86 +AND 87 +the political process. 88 + 89 + 90 +====Free deliberation and dissent means speech restrictions are impermissible.==== 91 +**Sunstein 09,** Sunstein, Cass R. ~~Cass R. Sunstein is currently the Robert Walmsley University Professor at Harvard. From 2009 to 2012, he was Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. He is the founder and director of the Program on Behavioral Economics and Public Policy at Harvard Law School.~~ Republic. com 2.0. Princeton University Press, 2009. DL 1.6.17. 92 +First, an insistence 93 +AND 94 +for political legitimacy. 95 + 96 + 97 +====Hate speech may contribute to social deliberation – under a republican theory, it can’t be restricted. ==== 98 +**Febres summarizes Meiklejohn 2:** Power Febres, C. Liberalism, feminism and republicanism on freedom of speech: the cases of pornography and racist hate speech. Dissertation. UCL (University College London), 2011. APA. DL 1.7.17 99 +The case of 100 +AND 101 +vigorous political system. 102 + 103 + 104 +====c) The legitimacy of civil rights laws that protect minority groups depends on the protection of hate speech – otherwise they would constitute arbitrary interference. Dworkin 06,^^ ^^==== 105 +So in a 106 +AND 107 +makes democracy possible. 108 + 109 + 110 +=Underview= 111 + 112 +====Allowing limitations on free speech because its "offensive" creates emotional trauma and more violence in the real world.==== 113 +**Lukianoff and Haidt 15** Jonathan Haidt (social psychologist and professor of ethical leadership at the NYU-Stern School of Business) and Greg Lukianoff (president and CEO of the Foundatino of Individual Rights in Education) "The Coddling of the American Mind" The Atlantic September 2015 http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/ 114 +Cognitive behavioral therapy 115 +AND 116 +aspects of our history." - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2017-01-14 18:12:07.837 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Paloma OConnor - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Acton Boxborough AW - ParentRound
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +12 - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2 - Team
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Hunter College Potischman Aff - Title
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +JAN FEB AC Civic Republicanism - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Lexington