Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.CitesClass[71]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[72]

Details

Caselist.CitesClass[71]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2017-02-23 19:45:02.278
	1	+2017-02-23 19:45:02.0

Caselist.CitesClass[72]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,27 @@
	1	+God is dead but we have yet to vanquish his shadow- AC prostrates themselves before the altar of debate contributing to an economy of confession. The judge in the back of the room who listens and says nothing mirrors the priest during confession who hears and says nothing but yet who also imparts the will of God. And like those who are guilty of sin begging for forgiveness, they purge their souls of their identity for a ballot. Just look at how they speak the TRUTH of Asian experience in the American university in their speeches, and to have their voices recorded and commented on through a meaningless piece of paper are all ways in which the inquisition of debate silences debaters with the illusion of control, of having our eternal souls saved and our physical bodies disposed. You link with the wording of your rob- you literally demand performance. You supercharge the link through your personal components of your performance- I can’t engage without confessing my own experience.
	2	+
	3	+Foucault 76 (Michel, yeah, your authors probably wouldn’t exist without him, History of Sexuality, Scientia Sexulias//cheung)
	4	+
	5	+The confession is a ritual of discourse in which the speaking subject is also the subject of the statement; it is also a ritual that unfolds within a power relationship, for one does not confess without the presence (or virtual presence) of a partner who is not simply the interlocutor but the authority who requires the confession, prescribes and appreciates it, and intervenes in order to judge, punish, forgive, console, and reconcile; a ritual in which the truth is corroborated by the obstacles and resistances it has had to surmount in order to be formulated; and finally, a ritual in which the expression alone, independently of its external consequences, produces intrinsic modifications in the person who articulates it: it exonerates, redeems, and purifies him; it unburdens him of his wrongs, liberates Them, and promises him salvation. For centuries, the truth of sex was, at least for the most part, caught up in this discursive form. Moreover, this form was not the same as that of education (sexual education confined itself to general principles and rules of prudence); nor was it that of initiation (which remained essentially a silent practice, which the act of sexual enlightenment or deflowering merely rendered laughable or violent). As we have seen, it is a form that is far removed from the one governing the "erotic art." By virtue of the power structure immanent in it, the confessional discourse cannot come from above, as in the ars erotica, through the sovereign will of a master, but rather from below, as an obligatory act of speech which, under some imperious compulsion, breaks the bonds of discretion or forgetfulness. What secrecy it presupposes is not owing to the high price of what it has to say and the small number of those who are worthy of its benefits, but to its obscure familiarity and it§ general baseness. Its veracity is not guaranteed by the lofty authority of the magistery, nor by the tradition it transmits, but by the bond, the basic intimacy in discourse, between the one who speaks and what s/he is speaking about. On the other hand, the agency of domination does not reside in the one who speaks (for it is he who is constrained), but in the one who listens and says nothing; not in the one who knows and answers, but in the one who questions and is not supposed to know. And this discourse of truth finally takes effect, not in the one who receives it, but in the one from whom it is wrested. With these confessed truths, we are a long way from the learned initiations into pleasure, with their technique and their mystery. On the other hand, we belong to a society which has ordered sex's difficult knowledge, not according to the transmission of secrets, but around the slow surfacing of confidential statements. The confession was, and still remains, the general standard governing the production of the true discourse on sex. It has undergone a considerable transformation, however. For a long time, it remained firmly entrenched in the practice of penance. But with the rise of Protestantism, the Counter Reformation, eighteenth-century pedagogy, and nineteenthcentury medicine, it gradually lost its ritualistic and exclusive localization; it spread; it has been employed in a whole series of relationships: children and parents, students and educators, patients and psychiatrists, delinquents and experts. The motivations and effects it is expected to produce have varied, as have the forms it has taken: interrogations, consultations, autobiographical narratives, letters; they have been recorded, transcribed, assembled into dossiers, published, and commented on. But more important, the confession lends itself, if not to other domains, at least to new ways of exploring the existing ones. It is no longer a question simply of saying what was done-the sexual act-and how it was done; but of reconstructing,
	6	+
	7	+That’s that the shit I don’t like – vote neg on presumption – the 1ac doesn’t exist. Their inscription into the confessional economy of debate subjugates agency around the external-validation of a governing body, the “USFG”, the judge, or the authority of evidence which in turn erases who they are as debaters.
	8	+
	9	+Deleuze and Guattari 80 (Gilles, and Felix professors somewhere I am sure, maybe not so sure, ATP pg 129-130)
	10	+
	11	+. The various forms of education or "normalization" imposed upon an individual consist in making him or her them change points of subjectification, always moving toward a higher, nobler one in closer conformity with the supposed ideal. Then from the point of subjectification issues a subject of enunciation, as a function of a mental reality determined by that point. Then from the subject of enunciation issues a subject of the statement, in other words, a subject bound to statements in conformity with a dominant reality (of which the mental reality just mentioned is a part, even when it seems to oppose it). What is important, what makes the post signifying passional line a line of subjectification or subjection, is the constitution, the doubling of the two subjects, and the recoiling of one into the other, of the subject of enunciation into the subject of the statement (the linguists acknowledge this when they speak of the "imprint of the process of enunciation in the statement"). Signifiance brought about uniformity in the substance of enunciation; now subjectivity effects an individuation, collective or particular. Substance has become subject, as they say. The subject of enunciation recoils into the subject of the statement, to the point that the subject of the statement resupplies subject of enunciation for another proceeding. The subject of the statement has become the "respondent" or guarantor of the subject of enunciation, through a kind of reductive echolalia, in a biunivocal relation. This relation, this recoiling, is also that of mental reality into the dominant reality. There is always an appeal to a dominant reality that functions from within (already in the Old Testament, and during the Reformation, with trade and capitalism). There is no longer even a need for a transcendent center of power; power is instead immanent
	12	+
	13	+
	14	+The alternative is to refuse the call of the affirmative and negate ritualistic confession with the possibility of becoming secret.
	15	+Gilles Deleuze, Claire Parnet 77 (Gilles Deleuze is an ex-professor of philosophy @ the University of Vincennes, Claire Parnet is a French philosopher and journalist, Co-Authors, Translation by Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam, Dialogues, p. 46-9//Aaron)
	16	+
	17	+There we no longer have any secrets, we no longer have anything to hide. It is we who have become a secret, it is we who are hidden, even though we do all openly, in broad daylight. This is the opposite of the romanticism of the ‘damned’.11* We have painted ourselves in the colours of the world. Lawrence condemned the craze for ‘the dirty little secret’, which he saw as running through all French literature. The characters and the authors always have a little secret, on which the craze for interpretation feeds. Something must always remind us of something else, make us think of something else. We remember Oedipus’ dirty little secret, not the Oedipus of Colonnus, on his line of flight, who has become imperceptible, identical to the great living secret. The great secret is when you no longer have anything to hide, and thus when no one can grasp you. A secret everywhere, no more to be said. Since the ‘signifier’ has been invented, things have not fallen into place. Instead of language being interpreted by us, it has set about interpreting us, and interpreting itself. Significance and interpretosis are the two diseases of the earth, the pair of despot and priest. The signifier is always the little secret which has never stopped hanging around mummy and daddy. We blackmail ourselves, we make ourselves out to be mysterious, discreet, we move with the air of saying ‘See how I am weighed down by a secret.’ The thorn in the flesh. The little secret is generally reducible to a sad narcissistic and pious masturbation: the phantasm! ‘Transgression’, a concept too good for seminarists under the law of a Pope or a priest, the tricksters. Georges Bataille is a very French author. He made the little secret the essence of literature, with a mother within, a priest beneath, an eye above. It is impossible to overemphasize the harm that the phantasm has done to writing (it has been invaded by the cinema) in sustaining the signifier, and the interpretation of one by the other, of one with the other. ‘The world of phantasms is a world of the past’, a theatre of resentment and guilt. You see many people today one after another proclaiming ‘Long live castration, for it is the home, the Origin and the End of desire!’ What is in the middle is forgotten. New races of priests are always being invented for the dirty little secret, which has no other object than to get itself recognized, to put us back into a very black hole, to bounce us off the very white wall, Your secret can always be seen on your face and in your eyes. Lose your face. Become capable of loving without remembering, without phantasm and without interpretation, without taking stock. Let there just be fluxes, which sometimes dry up, freeze or overflow, which sometimes combine or diverge. A man and a woman are fluxes. All the becomings which there are in making love, all the sexes, the n sexes in a single one, or in two, which have nothing to do with castration. On lines of flight there can no longer be but one thing, life-experimentation. One never knows in advance, since one no longer has either future or past. ‘See me as I am’: all that stuff is over.
	18	+
	19	+
	20	+
	21	+
	22	+
	23	+AND-The Role of the Ballot is to reject meaning through negation – attempts to presence the political in the classroom merely plays into the systems hands. Your ballot interrogates the confessional dispotiff of educational practices- we are a prerequisite to avoiding social death- we hijack your ROB and provide a competitive method
	24	+
	25	+Occupied UC Berkeley 09 (The Necroscial: Civic Life, Social Death, and the UC; http://anticapitalprojects.wordpress.com/2009/11/19/the-necrosocial/, 11/19)//Cheung
	26	+
	27	+In this crisis the Chancellors and Presidents, the Regents and the British Petroleums, the politicians and the managers, they all intend to be true to their values and capitalize on the university economically and socially—which is to say, nothing has changed, it is only an escalation, a provocation.  Their most recent attempt to reorganize wealth and capital is called a crisis so that we are more willing to accept their new terms as well as what was always dead in the university, to see just how dead we are willing to play, how non-existent, how compliant, how desirous. Every institution has of course our best interest in mind, so much so that we’re willing to pay, to enter debt contracts, to strike a submissive pose in the classroom, in the lab, in the seminar, in the dorm, and eventually or simultaneously in the workplace to pay back those debts.  Each bulging institutional value longing to become more than its sentiment through us, each of our empty gestures of feigned-anxiety to appear under pressure, or of cool-ambivalence to appear accustomed to horror, every moment of student life, is the management of our consent to social death.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2017-02-23 19:45:03.344

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Vincent, Wang, Jorma

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+David Moon

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+61

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Triples

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+North Crowley Reed Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+1- Confessions K

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Harvard