Changes for page Sunset bhat Aff
Summary
-
Objects (1 modified, 3 added, 2 removed)
Details
- Caselist.CitesClass[22]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,4 +1,0 @@ 1 -The role of the judge is to evaluate critical discussion above fiated policy-making analysis – Debate should focus on creating a new generation of citizens that are critical thinkers educated about social problems—that’s key to equality. 2 -The role of the ballot is to vote for the debater who best uses counter-narratives to demystify the power of the state hierarchies—it’s the hope that we have for meaningful change that spills over this debate round. The judge as a critical educator has an obligation to question state biopolitical power. 3 -Gündoğdu ‘11: Ayten Gündoğdu writes in “Potentialities of human rights: Agamben and the narrative of fated necessity” on 19 July 2011. Contemporary Political Theory February 2012, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp 2–22. http://link.springer.com/article/10.10572Fcpt.2010.45; AB 4 -In his analysis of biopolitical sovereignty, Agamben provides us with what might be called a counternarrative of Western politics with the explicitly stated goal of ‘unveiling’ or ‘unmasking’ what has become mystified, hidden, secret or invisible, particularly with the prevalence of contractarian accounts of political power (1998, p. 8; 2005, p. 88). Agamben describes this critical task in terms of ‘disenchantment’, or the ‘patient work’ of unmasking the fiction or myth that covers up and sustains the violence of sovereignty (2005, p. 88). What underlies this urge to demystify and unveils is a particular understanding of myth as a deceptive narrative naturalizing and legitimizing violence in the name of the preservation of life. I use the term ‘counternarrative’ to call attention to what Agamben's account aims to do6: This is a critical analysis, as Agamben himself insists, that does not offer ‘historiographical theses or reconstructions’ but instead treats some historical phenomena as ‘paradigms’ so as to ‘make intelligible a broader historical-problematic context;’ to do this, it proceeds at ‘a historico-philosophical level’ (1998, p. 11; 2009, p. 9). In that sense, it is not an account that claims historical accuracy or factual verifiability. This is a crucial point that is sometimes overlooked by Agamben's critics who call into question his inaccurate treatment of historical phenomena such as the concentration camps.7 In addition, ‘counternarrative’ draws our attention to the inventive dimensions of Agamben's endeavor; as one of his critics aptly (though disapprovingly) puts it, ‘Agamben does not discover a concealed biopolitical paradigm stretching back to fourth-century Athens; rather he invents one’ (Finlayson, 2010, p. 116). The invention of a counternarrative of Western politics involves literary devices (e.g. hyperbole), which aim to provoke the readers and persuade them to abandon any politics centered on modern concepts such as sovereignty, rights and citizenship (LaCapra, 2007; cf. de la Durantaye, 2009). In analyzing Agamben's account as a ‘counternarrative’, I aim to attend to the goals that it sets for itself. It is these goals – particularly the goal of freeing human potentialities from myths that render the contingent necessary and mask other possibilities – that provide the starting point for my critical engagement with Agamben. Instead of resorting to an ‘outside’ – whether this be an alternative historical account or another theoretical tradition – I aim to read Agamben on his own terms, and suggest that as he tries to free human potentialities from contractarian myths, he might be entrapping them in another myth that ends up casting the contingent as necessary. Agamben's counternarrative of Western politics aims to uncover what has become hidden or invisible with ‘our modern habit of representing the political realm in terms of citizens’ rights, free will, and social contracts’ (1998, p. 106). Its main target is the contractarian accounts of sovereign power. As he identifies the production of bare life as the originary or foundational activity grounding sovereign power (1998, pp. 6, 83), he particularly aims to question the social contractarian ‘myth’ that covers up sovereign violence (1998, p. 109). After unveiling the foundational myths of Western politics, Agamben concludes that we cannot effectively respond to ‘the bloody mystification of a new planetary order’ if we let these myths continue to obstruct our political imagination (1998, p. 12). With his counternarrative presenting a catastrophic view of the historical present – a view that emphasizes how exception has become the rule, camp has become the paradigmatic structure organizing political space, and we have all virtually become homines sacri (1998, pp. 38, 176, 111) – Agamben aims to convince his readers of the need to think of a ‘nonstatal and nonjuridical politics and human life’ (2000, p. 112). This new politics requires the renunciation of concepts associated with sovereignty – for example, state, rights, citizenship. The contemporary predicament cannot be remedied by a return to conventional political categories and institutions, Agamben suggests, since these are deeply involved in the creation of this catastrophe in the first place. Almost anticipating his critics who would be puzzled by his renunciation of rights and rule of law at a time when the problem of legal dispossession increasingly threatens populations around the world, he explicitly states that the response to the current permanent state of exception cannot consist in confining it within constitutional boundaries and reaffirming the primacy of legal norms and rights (2005, p. 87).8 As legal norms and rights are ultimately grounded in the originary violence of separating a bare life, legal dispossession is already inscribed in them as an inescapable condition. Neither the liberal remedy of reasserting the rule of law, nor the Derridean strategy of ‘infinite negotiations’ with a law that is in force without any significance, are viable options (2005, p. 87; 1998, p. 54). Both are futile, if not lethally dangerous, endeavors.9 The only politically tenable option, Agamben contends, is to move out of sovereignty with ‘a complicated and patient strategy’ of getting the ‘door of the Law closed forever’ (1998, pp. 54, 55). - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -2017-03-28 00:15:05.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -x - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -x - ParentRound
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -28 - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -Semis - Team
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -Sunset bhat Aff - Title
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -000 - Agamben ROB and ROJ - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -Early Disclosure - NDCA and TOC
- Caselist.RoundClass[23]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -18 - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -2017-03-22 17:03:42.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -x - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -x - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -1 - RoundReport
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -x - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -Early Disclosure - NDCA
- Caselist.RoundClass[29]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +23 - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@ 1 -2017-03-28 00:15:45. 9571 +2017-03-28 00:15:45.0
- Caselist.CitesClass[23]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,6 @@ 1 +I isolated the role of the ballot for you. Don't tell me that you couldn't predict the ROB or how to interact with it. I think it's pretty clear and delineates how to link in. 2 + 3 +The role of the ballot is to reject traditional forms of scholarship in favor of voting for the debater with the best kritikal methodology. This means rejecting role-playing, state-good, policy-making scholarship, and other postmodern constructs which plague modern academia. Kritikal methodology refers to pre-fiat discursive literature and scholarship. It’s a means-based role of the judge. You can link back offense with a counter methodology. The 1AC comes before theory/T. 4 +Blind adherence to fiat has drained debate of meaning. The hegemonic structure you call fiat is a tactic of marginalization to prevent institutional subversion – LINK TURNS your T/theory standards – deliberation is useless without critical literature. 5 +Gunder ‘9: senior planning lecturer at the Aukland University Michael. “Planning in Ten Words or Less: A Lacanian Entanglement with Spatial Planning”. Pg. 11-12.; AB 6 +The hegemonic network, or bloc, initially shapes the debates and draws on appropriate policies of desired success, such as the needs of bohemians, knowledge clusters, or talented knowledge workers, as to what constitutes their desired enjoyment (cobblestones, chrome and cappuccinos at sidewalk cafes) and what is therefore lacking in local competitiveness. In tum, this defines what is blighted and dysfunctional and in need of economic, spatial planning, or other, remedy. Such an argument is predicated on a logic, or more accurately a rhetoric, that a lack of a particular defined type of enjoyment, or competitiveness (for surely they are one and the same) is inherently unhealthy for the aggregate social body. Lack and its resolution are generally presented as technical, rather than political issues. Consequently, technocrats in partnership with their "˜dominant stakeholders` can ensure the impression of rationally seeking to produce happiness for the many whilst, of course, achieving their stakeholders’ specific interests (Gunder and Hillier 2007a, 469). The current post-democratic` milieu facilitates the above through avoidance of critical policy debate challenging favored orthodox positions and policy approaches. Consideration of policy deficiencies, or alternative solutions, are eradicated from political debate so that while token institutions of liberal democracy’ are retained conflicting positions and arguments are negated (Stavrakakis 2003, 59). Consequently, the safe names in the field who feed the policy orthodoxy are repeatedly used or their work drawn upon by different stakeholders, while more critical voices are silenced by their inability to shape policy debates’ (Boland 2007, 1032). The economic development or spatial planning policy analyst thus continues to partition reality ideologically by deploying only the orthodox "successful” or "best practice” economic development or spatial planning responses. This further maintains the dominant, or hegemonic, status quo while providing "˜a cover and shield against critical thought by acting in the manner of a "buffer" isolating the political held from any research that is independent and radical in its conception as in its implications for public policy’ (Wacquant 2004, 99). At the same time, adoption of the hegemonic orthodoxy tends to generate similar policy responses for every competing local area or city-region, largely resulting in a zero-sum game (Blair and Kumar 1997). - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2017-03-28 00:15:50.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +x - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +x - ParentRound
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +29 - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +1 - Team
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Sunset bhat Aff - Title
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +000 - Anarchy of Becoming V4 ROB - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Early Disclosure - NDCA and TOC
- Caselist.CitesClass[24]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +I read Anarchy of Becoming V4. Agamben's an old AC. - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2017-04-08 04:55:37.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +x - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +x - ParentRound
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +30 - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Triples - Team
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Sunset bhat Aff - Title
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +00 - NOTE FOR NDCA AND TOC - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Misc
- Caselist.RoundClass[30]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +24 - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2017-04-08 04:55:34.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +x - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +x - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Triples - RoundReport
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +x - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Misc