Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[64]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[76]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[64]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2017-03-11 15:04:05.182
	1	+2017-03-11 15:04:05.0

Caselist.CitesClass[76]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,26 @@
	1	+neolib
	2	+Giving people houses is just an extension of the capital of the state and civil society- giving poor people property doesn’t make private property go away. This is especially bad because you give sedentary property in land ownership, which makes you an active participant in civilization, leading to the total neoliberal commodification of the natural world
	3	+Black and Green Press no date, What is Green Anarchy?, http://www.blackandgreenpress.org/p/what-is-green-anarchy.html
	4	+This has given the leftists reason to criticize green anarchists for not being 'organized' and having only loose visions. However, we feel that this is an important step if we are to again be full beings. Anarchy is NOT Democracy Despite the efforts on behalf of aspiring populists to prove otherwise, anarchy is, by definition, not democracy (whether one calls it direct or social democracy). Needing to point towards this seems rather petty, but it’s hard to look at the huge amounts of anarchist literature without seeing the bulk of it as any more than ‘radical democracy,’ dressed up in anarchist rhetoric. Let’s look at the word anarchy, stemming from the Greek an-, meaning without, and arkhos, meaning ruler. Put them together and you have without ruler, or more commonly, absence of any form of political authority. Democracy, believe it or not, is a form of government. The suffix, –cracy, following the Latin –cratia, to the Greek –kratia meaning strength, power, translated to government, or rule (Greek: demokratia meaning people + government dictatorship of the people or dictatorship of the proletariat for Marx). And to step down one more notch here, a government is a governing organization, or the mediator of all social, economic, and political activities of a certain people. So, as we can see, anarchy, by definition, is not democracy. Anarchists are for a complete rejection of all authoritarian institutions/structures on principle. All governments impose themselves on the Earth and all life on it. So long as they exist, autonomy cannot. This being established, we can move on. Green Anarchies? There is no single strand of 'green anarchy' and there are surely as many divisions between ourselves as there are in anything. The unifying principle between green anarchists is an ecologically oriented understanding of power relations. Differences primarily arise from the extents to which we feel the initial terms this domestication can, or should, be overturned. We lack the capabilities and want to list all different strands of 'green anarchism'. We want to emphasize that these categories are given not of want, but of simplicity. We have no interest in ideological restrictions and have no absolute faith in such abstracts. The distinctions point to specific critiques and are used for conventional reasons only!! Here are some of the primary strands; Anarcho-Primitivism: This critique looks to the millions of years of human wild co-existence within the community of life as a look at 'human nature' and capability. What is gathered from this is that contrary to the myths of the civilized, humans, given the chance, are not evil, although we feel that power corrupts absolutely. The critique looks to domestication as the beginning of a process that has brought us to where we lie now. Our understanding is that not only are capitalist relations oppresive, but that sedentary, agriculture gave way to property and thus power. This point shows the beginning of the process of removing ourselves from the 'other' into an 'thingified' relation to the world, where all things are seen as objects for our use/manipulation. Some major points of contention as far as this critique lie in its implications. John Zerzan contends that to overturn civilization would require abolition of symbolic thought, whereas others would say that symbolic culture is a bigger and more realizable issue. Both agree on the need to turning back from agricultural sedentism. Anti-Civilization: This critique is similar in it's understanding to anarcho-primitivism, but it's constituents tend to feel that anarcho-primitivism over idealizes a certain peoples/time. The convention of this strand is to remove itself from the baggage that anarcho-primitivists tend to carry. Green Anarchism: This is used as a general term for those who don't use either of the above categories and this definately has no pure consistency, and the broad title is not intended to group these folks entirely. Distinctions within this category lie primarily in questions of how far back to look for understanding the destructiveness of civilization. Some would say that domestication and agriculture can be ecologically 'sustainable' and preferrable. Others would contend that technology itself is not an inherent problem. The unifying principle lies in an ecological basis and understanding of the megatechnological State as destructive. The above mentioned philosophical strands tend to be accompanied by another factor (although not necessarily as divisive or particular). That lies in; Revolutionary Green Anarchists: Those seeking a mass movement and revolution as means to an anarchistic world. and, Insurrectionary Green Anarchists: Those who seek revolt here and now as a means to abolish the system on a more individual basis. There is rarely a genuine split here, but the distinction tends to have a larger impact on the approaches one takes to destroying the totality of civilized existence. A large contention remains that the two are not inseparable and that any act of revolt strikes a blow to the civilized order. Some would point that insurrection is the breeding ground of revolution. For an example of debate between the two strands, see Ted Kaczynski's 'Hit Where it Hurts' (Green Anarchy #8) and Primal Rage's 'Hit Where it Hurts, but in the Meantime' (Green Anarchy #9). A Note on Social Ecology Social ecology, generally related to Murray Bookchin and his Institute for Social Ecology has typically been held as one constituent within green anarchy. The Black and Green Network, Coalition Against Civilization, 'Bring on the Ruckus' Society, and Green Anarchy magazine have both publically denounced that this strand has no relation to anarchy. Bob Black's Anarchy After Leftism (Columbia: C.A.L., 1998) further draws on the authoritarian principles that underlie this strand. Social ecology, or libertarian municipalities, are inherently authoritarian, democractic utopias that seek only to make a green civilization. We have no interest in relations with those who actively seek to reform and carry on such a mundane, destructive reality. ******* The following sections are from the Black and Green/Green Anarchy "Back to Basics" Primer from Green Anarchy No. 9 (2002) CIVILIZATION We’re now seeing the end-point of civilization: for one thing, the complete domination-and soon to be destruction-of nature. And, as Freud predicted, a
	5	+
	6	+
	7	+Discursive link-your call to end homelessness in certain areas literally forces homeless people into the neoliberal system an denies choice
	8	+
	9	+The “right to housing” and it’s establishment has led to demolition of previously functional public housing in favor of profitable, minimum effort communities. We are isolating a gentrification link, individualism link, market link and a state link- this also turns case because the housing is net worse which causes more death during a disaster
	10	+Edward Goetz, 2011 (“Gentrification in Black and White: The Racial Impact of Public Housing Demolition in American Cities”, http://usj.sagepub.com/content/48/8/1581.full.pdf)
	11	+In the US, the centrepiece of state-led efforts to deconcentrate poverty and transform inner-city neighbourhoods is the HOPE 6 programme. This programme has been used in dozens of cities to demolish public housing developments and to create new mixed-income communities in their place. The programme thus redefines public housing policy and serves as the main vehicle through which the state has triggered innercity revitalisation (Newman, 2004; Wyly and Hammel, 1999). The major transformation of public housing, in fact, reflects several dimensions of neo-liberal urban policy in the US over the past 20 years. While the elimination of the physical structures of public housing eliminates visual references to New Deal and welfare state policies no longer dominant, the removal of concentrations of very-low income people of colour allows a reimaging of urban spaces critical to the national and international competition for private investment (Newman and Ashton, 2004). Further, the policy prescriptions imposed upon former public housing residents, both relocation to private-sector housing through the use of Housing Choice Vouchers and the increased behavioural monitoring and screening techniques employed at the mixed-income communities, reflect newfound emphases on choice, individualism and market discipline that are central to the neo-liberal governance paradigm
	12	+
	13	+
	14	+
	15	+This specific type of rational economic science has created a bloodthirsty form of capitalism which attempts to erase affect and makes violence inevitable by erasing where bodies can and cannot exist. Neoliberalism constantly produces crisis to demonstrate its capacity for control. While this system focuses on total peace, its hatred of uncertainty makes the destruction of all life immanent- this outweighs on magnitude
	16	+Wiltgen 2k5 james, professor at cal, b.a. in political science from the u of iowa, doctorate at ucla, ‘sadomonetarism or saint fond saint ford’, article in consumption in the age of information by cohen and rutsky, pg at bottom
	17	+How does digital capitalism intertwine with the concept of uncertainty? What key changes have taken place in the structuring of the world, via the digital and the biotechnological, what forces have emerged or coalesced, and finally, how do they affect the realm of subjectivity and consumption? Here, Arthur Kroker has transposed McLuhan into the twenty-first century, performing an interrogation of what he calls the "digital nerve," basically the exteriorization of the human sensorium into the digital circuitry of contemporary capitalism (Kroker, 2004:8I).This (in)formation, "streamed capitalism," rests not exclusively on exchange value, nor material goods, but something much more immaterial, — a postmarket, postbiological, postimage society where the driving force, the "will to will," has ushered in a world measured by probability. In other words, this variant of capitalism seeks to bind chaos by ever-increasing strictures, utilizing an axiomatic based on capture and control, with vast circuits of circulation as the primary digital architecture. This system runs on a densely articulated composition, similar to the earlier addressed concept of sado-monetarism, based upon extensive feedback loops running between exchange value and abuse value. This assemblage, however, has multiple levels, and not all are connected to the grid at the same speeds; a number of different times exist within this formation, including digital time, urban time, quotidian time, transversal time, etc. Spatially, the structure relies not on geography but "strategic digital nodes" for the core of the system, and connectivity radiates out from these nodal points (Kroker, 2004: 125). For example, a key site for these points would be the Net corporation, defined as "as a self-regulating, self-reflexive platform of software intelligence providing a privileged portal into the digital universe" (Kroker, 2004: 140). Indeed, his mapping of digital capitalism has clear parallels with the shifts Katherine Hayles analyzes, in particular the underlying, driving mechanism whereby information severs itself from embodiment. Boredom and acquisitiveness become the principle markers of this new form of capitalism, which provides a rationale, or a new value set for the perpetual oscillation between the two poles, producing an insatiable desire for both objects and a continuing stream of fresh and intense experience. Perhaps the most densely argued assessment of capitalism, whose obvious parallel would be Marx's Capital, is the two volumes by Deleuze and Guattari, Anti-Oedipus and A Thousand Plateaus, With all the concern over the theoretical concepts developed in these books, it remains extremely important to understand the analysis as possessing a fundamental focus on the question of political economy. Capitalism forms, via its structural and affective matrix, a system capable of unparalleled cruelty and terror, and even though certain indices of well-being have increased, "exploitation grows constantly harsher, (and) lack is arranged in the most scientific ways" (Deleuze and Guattari, 1983: 373). Their framework for analysis targets the global, where the deepest law of capitalism sets limits and then repels those limits, a process well known as the concept of deterrorialization. Capitalism functions, then, by incessantly increasing the portion of constant capital, a deceptively concise formulation that has tremendous resonance for the organization of the planet—resources continually pour into the technological and machinic apparatus of capture and control, to the increased exclusion of the human component (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987: 466—7). In other words, it not only thrives on crisis but one of the principle definitions of capitalism would be to continually induce crisis; nostalgia for a "los time" only drives these processes. The planet confronts the fourth danger, the most violent and destructive of tendencies, characterized as a turning to destruction, abolition pure and simple, the passion of abolition (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987: 229). Deleuze and Guattari make clear this fourth danger does not translate as a death drive, because for them desire is "always assembled," a creation and a composition; here the task of thinking becomes to address the processes of composition. The current assemblage, then, has mutated from its original organization of total war, which has been surpassed "toward a form of peace more terrifying still," the "peace of Terror or Survival" (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987: 433). Accordingly, the worldwide war machine has entered a postfascist phase, where Clauscwitz has been dislocated, and this war machine now targets the entire world, its peoples and economies. - An "unspecified enemy" becomes the continual feedback loop for this war machine, which had been originally constituted by states, but which has now shifted into a planetary, and perhaps interstellar mode, with a seemingly insatiable drive to organize insecurity, increase machinic enslavement, and produce a "peace that technologically frees the unlimited material process of total war" (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987: 467).7 Deleuze has analyzed these tendencies extensively in his own work, in particular with his dissection of active and reactive forces in his book on Nietzsche but also in his work on Sade and Masoch, where he points to a type of sadism that seems capable of attempting a "perpetually effective crime" to not only destroy (pro)creation but to prevent it from ever happening again, a total and perpetual destruction, one produced by a pervasive odium fati, a hatred of fate that seeks absolute revenge in destroying life and any possible recurrence. (Deleuze, 1989: 37). This tendency far outstrips what Robert Jay Lifton has described as the "Armageddonists," in their more commonly analyzed religious variant and in what he calls the secular type, both of which see the possibility of a "world cleansing," preparing the way for a new world order, be it religious or otherwise (Lifton, 1987: 5—9). Embedded within the immanence of capitalism, then, one can find forces which would make fascism seem like "child precursors," and Hitler's infamous Telegram 71 would be applied to all of existence, perpetually. (Deleuze and Guattari, 1987:467). One final complication in terms of currently emerging subjectivities, the well-known analysis in Anti-Oedipus where capitalism, as basically driven by a certain fundamental insanity, oscillates between "two poles of delirium, one as the molecular schizophrenic line of escape, and the other as paranoiac molar investment" (Deleuze and Guattari, 1983: 3I5).8 These two markers offer dramatically different possibilities for the issues of subjectivities and agency, and questions of consumption and the political can be posed within their dense and complex oscillations.
	18	+
	19	+Systematic economic flaws drive environmental degradation- highest rate in the past 10,000 years.  Controls the internal link to the aff and the alt solves
	20	+Milman ’15 (Oliver, environmental reporter, The Guardian. Rate of environmental degradation puts life on Earth at risk, say scientists.” January 15, 2015. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jan/15/rate-of-environmental-degradation-puts-life-on-earth-at-risk-say-scientists)
	21	+Humans are “eating away at our own life support systems” at a rate unseen in the past 10,000 years by degrading land and freshwater systems, emitting greenhouse gases and releasing vast amounts of agricultural chemicals into the environment, new research has found. Two major new studies by an international team of researchers have pinpointed the key factors that ensure a livable planet for humans, with stark results. Of nine worldwide processes that underpin life on Earth, four have exceeded “safe” levels – human-driven climate change, loss of biosphere integrity, land system change and the high level of phosphorus and nitrogen flowing into the oceans due to fertiliser use. They found that the changes of the last 60 years are unprecedented in the previous 10,000 years, a period in which the world has had a relatively stable climate and human civilisation has advanced significantly. Carbon dioxide levels, at 395.5 parts per million, are at historic highs, while loss of biosphere integrity is resulting in species becoming extinct at a rate more than 100 times faster than the previous norm. Since 1950 urban populations have increased seven-fold, primary energy use has soared by a factor of five, while the amount of fertiliser used is now eight times higher. The amount of nitrogen entering the oceans has quadrupled. All of these changes are shifting Earth into a “new state” that is becoming less hospitable to human life, researchers said. “These indicators have shot up since 1950 and there are no signs they are slowing down,” said Prof Will Steffen of the Australian National University and the Stockholm Resilience Centre. Steffen is the lead author on both of the studies. “When economic systems went into overdrive, there was a massive increase in resource use and pollution. It used to be confined to local and regional areas but we’re now seeing this occurring on a global scale. These changes are down to human activity, not natural variability. Steffen said direct human influence upon the land was contributing to a loss in pollination and a disruption in the provision of nutrients and fresh water. “We are clearing land, we are degrading land, we introduce feral animals and take the top predators out, we change the marine ecosystem by overfishing – it’s a death by a thousand cuts,” he said. “That direct impact upon the land is the most important factor right now, even more than climate change.” “It’s fairly safe to say that we haven’t seen conditions in the past similar to ones we see today and there is strong evidence that there are tipping points we don’t want to cross,” Steffen said. “If the Earth is going to move to a warmer state, 5-6C warmer, with no ice caps, it will do so and that won’t be good for large mammals like us. People say the world is robust and that’s true, there will be life on Earth, but the Earth won’t be robust for us. “Some people say we can adapt due to technology, but that’s a belief system, it’s not based on fact. There is no convincing evidence that a large mammal, with a core body temperature of 37C, will be able to evolve that quickly. Insects can, but humans can’t and that’s a problem.” Steffen said the research showed the economic system was “fundamentally flawed” as it ignored critically important life support systems. “It’s clear the economic system is driving us towards an unsustainable future and people of my daughter’s generation will find it increasingly hard to survive,” he said. “History has shown that civilisations have risen, stuck to their core values and then collapsed because they didn’t change. That’s where we are today.”
	22	+
	23	+Instead, we affirm the anarcho-primitivist model of decentralized communities.
	24	+This is the best method to solve both cap and neolib- their reformism fails and recreates our impacts, its an independent link, even if it reduces violence, our argument is that civilization itself needs to be broken. Also, we solve water pollution which controls the internal link into water access which controlls the IL into aff solvency. Idenpendently, our world is able to solve for pollution which causes your impacts
	25	+Black and Green Press no date, What is Green Anarchy?, http://www.blackandgreenpress.org/p/what-is-green-anarchy.html
	26	+ The tragic irony of revolutions is that many of the “successful” ones in modern times have actually reduced the level of freedom and authenticity in society. This is the case when the root causes of oppression and estrangement are not addressed, when the god of progress/development/domination of nature is perhaps ever more fully obeyed than before the Revolution. For revolution to have meaning, substance - to be liberatory - certain hitherto unquestioned institutions must be undone. Civilization is the fountainhead of all dominations: patriarchy, division of labor, domestication of life, warfare, on down the line to its present ghastly fullness. The “revolutionaries” who fail to indict and move against these fundamentals, who only wish to re-arrange or reform the ensemble of technology and capital, offer only a prolonging of what is so deeply objectionable. For us, if the word has any meaning it entails the dismantling of the whole thing. LEFTISM AND LIBERALISM The two main failed and exhausted means or approaches towards change in recent times have been liberalism and leftism. What really remains to be said about the liberal or reform outlook? It’s an endless masochism, time and energy wasted in pursuit of negligible crumbs, while society and the biosphere become evermore impoverished and ruined. Liberals of all parties, and including virtually every pacifist, continue in denial as to the deepening crisis everywhere. Some of them will apparently never wake up to the depth and scope of what is wrong. Faithful voters and recyclers, they cling to the palpably false claim that an all- destructive system can somehow be redeemed, can somehow serve life. As for the Left, where it can be distinguished from liberalism, we find it hard to imagine a more discredited, dead-end. It has failed universally in terms of the individual and in terms of nature. It is an albatross to be thrown off. Basically it appears in two forms. The first is the more overtly reformist, in which more “radical” goals are hidden from the “masses” it seeks to attract. Manipulation and lack of transparency (e.g. the Green Party) define this brand of Leftism. The overtly “radical” form is straight- up authoritarianism and has proven so in every instance in history. The so- called “small c” communists will never escape this baggage, rejected everywhere. Leftism approaches extinction, the sooner the better. Insofar as anarchists cling to the left and define themselves in its terms (e.g. anarcho-syndicalists) they will go nowhere. Technology, production, hierarchy, government, ecological destruction, and ideas like “progress” continue to go unquestioned by most who would identify with the left.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2017-03-11 15:04:21.658

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Timmons, Kris, Castillo

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Jugal

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+64

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Doubles

Team

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

Title

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

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+TFA State