| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,11 @@ |
|
1 |
+**The affirmative claims that the state can follow the law and stops there, but this normative exercise of the law as a guide to action absent any deeper analysis of what a proper exercise of the law looks like recreates violence and justifies detached exercises of the law. According to the 1ac, the only normative question is whether we can abide to the law, but that proactively prevents us from questioning the legitimacy of the law. SCHLAG '90:** |
|
2 |
+Schlag 90 (Pierre, Professor of Law, University of Colorado, “NORMATIVE AND NOWHERE TO GO”, Stanford Law Review (November 1990), http://lawweb.colorado.edu/profiles/pubpdfs/schlag/SchlagSLR.pdf) |
|
3 |
+It is at...academic and otherwise. FN60 |
|
4 |
+ |
|
5 |
+**The alternative is to understand bureaucratic apparatus as a metric for change, rather than accepting law as normative, we advocate that you vote neg to brek out from a normative understanding of the state and exercise change of the law. NEWMAN '11:** |
|
6 |
+Newman 11 (Saul, associate professor in the Department of Government in the School of Public Affairs at American University in Washington, DC, “Postanarchism: a politics of anti-politics” (October 2011), Journal of Political Ideologies, vol. 16 no. 3) |
|
7 |
+At the same...of power relations. |
|
8 |
+ |
|
9 |
+**The ROB is to provide active criticism of the legal system—vote neg to shake the rug out from under the legal system – we need to free ourselves from the shackles of legal tradition. SINGER 84:** |
|
10 |
+Singer, Joseph William. "The player and the cards: nihilism and legal theory." Yale Law Journal (1984): 1-70. |
|
11 |
+What shall we...that question ourselves. |