Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.CitesClass[28]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[29]

Details

Caselist.CitesClass[28]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-09-16 17:29:08.653
	1	+2016-09-16 17:29:08.0

Caselist.CitesClass[29]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,11 @@
	1	+I champion that countries prohibit the production of nuclear power to turn nuclear power plants into gardens.
	2	+
	3	+“Advocate” is a euphemism for “lobbying” – “champion” is a better alternative and mobilizes public action
	4	+Mills 14
	5	+(Mills, Erica. Lecturer at the University of Washington and the University of Chicago. Adjunct Professor at the Institute for Public Service at Seattle University. She is the author of Pitchfalls: Why bad pitches happen to good people, and the creator of the Claxon Method, a research-based approach to marketing that anyone can learn. Master of Public Administration from the University of Washington. " Use These Words With Caution," Claxon Marketing. 02-27-2014. http://www.claxonmarketing.com/2014/02/27/use-these-words-with-caution-advocate-wordsthatwow///ghs-kw)
	6	+When you use the word advocate, you likely want your listener to conjure up images of someone taking action and speaking up. It feels energetic and on the right side of justice. The problem is, advocate–as a word–doesn’t really do that much for you. Advocate (the verb) means to “plead the case of another”. An advocate, therefore, is someone who pleads the case of another. Setting aside the fact that some people may interpret advocate as a euphemism for lobbying, which nonprofits know potentially gets you into sketchy territory, pleading just isn’t that compelling. To those not immersed in the world of advocacy, advocating sounds, well, kinda dull. Instead of being an advocate who advocates, be a champion who champions. It sounds fresh and new because it hasn’t been overused. And that’s really what we’re going for here. To get your cause noticed, you don’t want to talk about it in the same way that everyone else is, right? Right. If ‘champion’ feels too “I just won an Olympic gold medal”, remember this: it’s always better to show what you are doing than to say that you are doing it. For instance, “We advocate for homeless populations” is not as powerful or descriptive as “We’re fixing the fact that more than 1,000 kids have to sleep on the street every night”. If you only have a few words to tell people what you do, don’t plead. Say something that will compel them to action.
	7	+
	8	+Their use of euphemisms perpetuates a regime of sanitized language that actively conceals the horror of totalitarianism – by insulating people from understanding the situations’ full meaning, they become detached from any sense of ethical responsibility
	9	+Davidsson 3
	10	+Elias Davidsson, Centre for Research on Globalization, 3 (http://www.aldeilis.net/jus/econsanc/debate.pdf)
	11	+In order to effectively describe a complex and highly politicized phenomenon, such as economic sanctions, the utmost care in the choice of terminology is necessary. Among the tools of politicians figure their creative use of language, including the invention of euphemisms and obfuscatory expressions. Discussing the role of euphemisms in political discourse, Stanley Cohen writes: The most familiar form of reinterpretation is the use of euphemistic labels and jargon. These are everyday devices for masking, sanitising, and conferring respectability by using palliative terms that deny or misrepresent cruelty or harm, giving them neutral or respectable status. Orwell's original account of the anaesthetic function of political language - how words insulate their users and listeners from experiencing fully the meaning of what they are doing - remains the classic source on the subject 28. Judge Weeramantry, in his Separate Dissenting Opinion on The legality of nuclear weapons (International Court of Justice (Advisory Opinion) (1996)), castigates ... the use of euphemistic language - the disembodied language of military operations and the polite language of diplomacy. They conceal the horror of nuclear war, diverting attention to intellectual concepts such as self-defence, reprisals, and proportionate damage which can have little relevance to a situation of total destruction. Horrendous damage to civilians and neutrals is described as collateral damage, because it was not directly intended; incineration of cities becomes "considerable thermal damage". One speaks of "acceptable levels of casualties", even if megadeaths are involved. Maintaining the balance of terror is described as "nuclear preparedness"; assured destruction as "deterrence", total devastation of the environment as "environmental damage". Clinically detached from their human context, such expressions bypass the world of human suffering, out of which humanitarian law has sprung.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-09-16 17:29:08.957

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Fakorede, Paramo

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Montgomery WP

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+10

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+5

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+La Canada Zhao Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+SEPOCT - CP - Champion PIC

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Greenhill RR