Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[47]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[63]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[47]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2017-03-12 02:14:50.903
	1	+2017-03-12 02:14:50.0

Caselist.CitesClass[63]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,44 @@
	1	+==Framework==
	2	+
	3	+
	4	+====Interpersonal recognition constructs identity which is arbitrarily constituted by social consensus and reinforced by repetition of accepted norms. Ethics therefore requires incongruence and exclusion as subjects cannot constitute their own identity separate from others perspectives.====
	5	+Judith **Butler,** 20**01**
	6	+"Giving an Account of Oneself" (Article), Diacritics, Vol. 31, No 4
	7	+The notion of singularity is very often bound up with existential romanticism and with a
	8	+AND
	9	+of no single one can I say with certainty that it is true.
	10	+
	11	+
	12	+====Therefore, the state must be an absolute singularity which enforces authority. Only a sovereign entity can command the unity of the consensus of the people, necessitating sacrifice of personal belief for the larger whole, without collapsing to interpersonal relativism. Reduction of the state to an instrumental usage and secondary figure disenables the possibility of democratic ethics which enable interpersonal deliberation of identity.====
	13	+Chantal **Mouffe explains Schmitt,** 1997
	14	+"Carl Schmitt and the Paradox of Liberal Democracy"
	15	+In The Concept of the Political, taking as his target the kind of pluralism
	16	+AND
	17	+the ethic that can be reduced to the slogan: Pacta sunt servanda."
	18	+
	19	+
	20	+====And, ethics must be constrained by the law of non-contradiction. ====
	21	+
	22	+====Therefore, the standard is consistency with sovereign authority. ====
	23	+
	24	+
	25	+==Contention==
	26	+
	27	+
	28	+====First, deliberative democracy predicated around ideal free speech is incoherent - democracy mandates inclusion/exclusion along lines of us/them, which requires the limitation of speech in order to formulate consensus. Only an exclusive understanding of speech can enable the necessary deliberation of what should be included and excluded.====
	29	+Chantal **Mouffe,** 19**97**
	30	+"Carl Schmitt and the Paradox of Liberal Democracy"
	31	+Let us examine this model of deliberative democracy closely. In their attempt to ground
	32	+AND
	33	+people by reducing it to one of its many possible forms of identification.
	34	+
	35	+
	36	+====Second, as public entities that are subject to governmental influence colleges and universities have a right to limit speech and exert their authority. Absent an ability for universities to exert influence and formulate consensus and strict rules the system would fall apart and they would have no claim to legitimate authority over their institution resulting in collapse of social institutions.====
	37	+
	38	+
	39	+====Third, free speech on campuses promotes unproductive discursive resistance rather than political consensus. ====
	40	+Tanay **Kothari, **20**13**
	41	+"Finding Free Speech in the Wrong Places" The Daily Californian
	42	+Our campus
	43	+AND
	44	+campus advocacy in the past, it will have done a great service.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2017-03-12 02:14:52.727

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Jackson Slechta

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Lincoln Southwest RG

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+47

Round

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

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Millard North Brown Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+3 - NC - Sovereign Authority

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Lincoln East