Last modified by Administrator on 2017/08/29 03:41

From version 1.1 >
edited by Trent Gilbert
on 2016/09/02 16:31
To version < 47.1
edited by Administrator
on 2017/08/29 03:41
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Author
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -XWiki.gosuns07@gmailcom
1 +xwiki:XWiki.Admin
Caselist.CitesClass[0]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,121 @@
1 +Agamben, 2000 (Giorgio Agamben, professor of philosophy at the European Graduate School; “Means Without End,” Univ. Minnesota Press, 2000, pg. 133)
2 +Akuno, Kali. Operation Ghetto Storm: 2012 Annual Report on the Extrajudicial Killing of 313 Black People. April 7, 2013.
3 +Allen 2011 Jafari S., Assistant Professor of African American Studies and Anthropology at Yale University, ¡Venceremos?: The Erotics of Black Self-making in Cuba, p. 82-83
4 +Armacost, Barbara. “Qualified immunity: ignorance excused.” Vanderbilt Law Review, vol. 51, no. 583, 1998.
5 +Bedke, M.S. Dept of Philosophy, University of Arizona “Moral judgment purposivism: saving internalism from amoralism.” Philosophical Studies, 144: 189-209, 2009.
6 +Bergman, By Paul. "Formal Discovery: Gathering Evidence for Your Lawsuit." Nolo.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Nov. 2016.
7 +Boardman, William S. “Coordination and the moral obligation to obey the law.” Ethics, vol. 97, no. 3, April 1987, pp. 546-557.
8 +Boersma, 5 (Jess Boersma teaches courses in Peninsular literatures, critical thought, and Spanish language at U of NC, “What About Schmitt? Translating Carl: Schmitt’s Theory of Sovereignty as Literary Concept”, published in Discourse, 27.2and3, Spring and Fall 2005, pp. 215-227 (Article), accessed 7/16/13, projectMUSE)
9 +Boys, Jos. “challenging the 'normal': towards new conceptual frameworks”, http://sowhatisnormal.co.uk.contentcurator.net/challenging
10 +Bradshaw, Tansy. “Frankenstein and the Social Model of Disability.” TansyBradshaw. February 21, 2015. Web.
11 +Brain VanDeMark, November, United States Naval Academy, 578 Annals 186 lexis)
12 +Brenner, Susan. Police Administration, Structures, Processes, and Behavior. CTI Reviews, 2016.
13 +Brooke, David. QandA Jurisprudence. New York: Routledge, 2015.
14 +Brown 9, Prof. of History and African and African-American Studies @ Harvard Univ., December 2009, "Social Death and Political Life in the Study of Slavery," American Historical Review, p. 1231-1249
15 +Butler 98 Judith. “Merely Cultural”. New Left Review Issue 227. Pg 36-7
16 +Canavan, 2011 – Assistant Professor @ Marquette University (Gerry; “Fighting a war you've already lost: Zombies and zombis in Firefly/Serenity and Dollhouse”; Science Fiction Film and Television Volume 4, Issue 2, Autumn 2011; Pg. 175-176; DOA: 7/19/15, ProjectMUSE || NDW)
17 +Catherine Mills is currently an ARC Future Fellow and Associate Professor of Bioethics in the Centre for Human Bioethics at Monash University. I was previously employed at University of Sydney, Australia, and have been Lecturer in Philosophy at University of New South Wales, and the Australian National University. I completed a PhD in Philosophy at the Australian National University. My main research interests lie in the areas of biopolitics and bioethics. “Playing with Law: Agamben and Derrida on Postjuridical Justice”, The Agamben Effect p. 23-24)/CW
18 +Catherine Mills, Professor in the Department of Philosophy at University of New South Wales, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy- Giorgio Agamben: Language and Metaphysics)http://www.iep.utm.edu/agamben/#H1 || LB
19 +Coburn, Robert C. Quals “A defense of ethical noncognitivism.” Philosophical Studies, vol. 62, no. 1, April 1991, pp. 67-80.
20 +David Mariott, “Black Cultural Studies”, Years Work Crit Cult Theory (2012) 20 (1): 37-66
21 +David N. Dorfman, Proving the Lie: Litigating Police Credibility, 26 Am. J. Crim. L. 455 (1999)
22 +Deleuze 2004 – (Gilles, thinker, Desert Islands and Other Texts 1953-1974, pg. 274-280 Originally published in Italian. "Relazione di Gilles Deleuze" and discussions in Armando Verdiglione, ed., Psicanalisi e Politica; Atti del Comvegno di studi tenuto a Milano l'8-9 Maggio 1973. Milan: Feltrinelli, 19-3, pp. 7-11, 17-21, 37-40, 44-45, 169-172. Abridged and edited.)
23 +Dowd, Joseph (Graduate Student of Philosophy at the University of California, Irvine). "Hoc aliquid: What makes an ought a moral ought?" 06 May 2011
24 +Dr. Dominic Corva, Professor in Department of Geography at University of Washington, Biopower and the Militarization of the Police Function”) https://www.academia.edu/298029/Biopower_and_the_Militarization_of_the_Police_Function || LB
25 +Educating Unruly Bodies: Critical Pedagogy, Disability Studies, and the Politics of Schooling, Nirmala Ervelles Educational Foundations, Leadership, and Technology Auburn University 2000
26 +Eisenberg, Theodore and Lanvers, Charlotte, "Summary Judgment Rates Over time, Across Case Categories, and Across Districts: An Empirical Study of Three Large Federal Districts" (2008). Cornell Law Faculty Publications. Paper 108.
27 +Emden 2009 J. Emden, Department of German Studies, Rice University. How to Fall into Carl Schmitt's Trap. July.
28 +Endres, Danielle. “The rhetoric of nuclear colonialism: rhetorical exclusion of American Indian arguments in the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste siting decision.” Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, vol. 6, No. 1, March 2009.
29 +Epstein, 93 (Mikhail, 1993, “A Draft Essay on Russian and Western Postmodernism,” Postmodern Culture, S. C. Dobbs Professor of Cultural Theory and Russian Literature at Emory University, Professor of Russian and Cultural Theory at Durham University, UK, http://muse.jhu.edu.ezp2.lib.umn.edu/journals/postmodern_culture/v003/3.2epstein.html)
30 +Evan Bernick, 5-6-2015, "Why Do Police Get Immunity?,") https://fee.org/articles/to-hold-police-accountable-dont-give-them-immunity/ || LB
31 +Evan, With Friends Like These...Carl Schmitt, Political Ontology, and National Socialism, PhD Student in Political Science, University of Virginia Graduate Student Conference, http://www.virginia.edu/politics/grad_program/print/Farr_gradconference09.pdf
32 +Ewa Plonowska Ziarek, Edited by Henry Sussman, 10-25-2012, "Impasses of the Post-Global: Theory in the Era of Climate Change, Vol. 2”) http://quod.lib.umich.edu/o/ohp/10803281.0001.001/1:11/~-~-impasses-of-the-post-global-theory-in-the-era-of-climate?rgn=div1;view=fulltext || LB
33 +Farr 9 Evan, PhD Student in Political Science. With Friends Like These...Carl Schmitt, Political Ontology, and National Socialism
34 +Farr, 9
35 +Feagin, Fmr President-American Sociological Association, (Systemic Racism: A Theory of Oppression, P. 9)
36 +Fiona Anne Kumari Campbell, The Great Divide: Ableism and Technologies of Disability Production, 2003
37 +Frank Jackson and Robert Pargetter, “Oughts, Options, and Actualism”, Philosophical Review, 1986
38 +Frank Jackson and Robert Pargetter, “Oughts, Options, and Actualism”, Philosophical Review, 1986
39 +Freeman, M. “Anthropology and the democratization of human rights.” The International Journal of Human Rights, vol. 6 no. 3, pp. 37-54, 2002.
40 +Galloway 12 - Phd in Literature, Associate professor in the Department of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University (Alexander, http://itself.wordpress.com/2012/06/03/a-response-to-graham-harmans-marginalia-on-radical-thinking/, A response to Graham Harman’s “Marginalia on Radical Thinking”, June 3rd 2012)
41 +Gary L. Drescher (Visiting Fellow at the Center for Cognitive Studies at Tufts University, PhD in Computer Science from MIT). “Good and Real: Demystifying Paradoxes from Physics to Ethics.” Bradford Books. 5 May 2006.
42 +George, Yale Law Graduate, And Holds a B.A. in Philosophy from Emory. “Become What You Are”)
43 +Gibson 96 (Katharine, Julie, , human geography @ Australian National University, and Graham, geography @ U of Massachussets, 96 The End of Capitalism (As We Know It), p. 263-64, JT)
44 +Giorgio Agamben, professor of aesthetics at the University of Verona and author of ten books, titled: State Of Exception, pages 14-16
45 +Giorgio Agamben, Professor of Philosophy at the College International de Philosophie in Paris, “The State of Exception”, pg. 63 2005)roetlin
46 +Giorgio Agamben, smart dude; too smart for credentials; trust meh, “Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life” 2004) || LB
47 +Giorgio, PhD in philosophy and professor of philosophy at the European Graduate School, University of Minnesota Press, “Means without End: Notes on Politics”, Theory out of Bounds Volume 20 p.42-43, 1996, http://monoskop.org/images/3/3c/Agamben_Giorgio_Means_without_end_notes_on_politics_2000.pdf, 7/19/15
48 +Glaude 07 (Eddie is a William S. Tod Professor of Religion and African American Studies, Department of Religion, and Chair, Center for African American Studies at Princeton, “In a Shade of Blue: Pragmatism and the Politics of Black America,” p. x-xii)cc
49 +Gonick, Lev and Isaac Prilleltensky. “Polities change, oppression remains: on the psychology and politics of oppression.” Political Psychology, vol. 17, no. 1, March 1996, pp. 127-148.
50 +Halewood, Peter. “White men can’t jump: critical epistemologies, embodiment, and the praxis of legal scholarship.” Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, vol. 7, No. 1, 1995.
51 +Harvey, Kathryn. "Democratic Agonism: Conflict and Contestation in Divided Societies." EInternational Relations. School of Oriental and African Studies, 20 Oct. 2012. Web. 21 July 2016.
52 +Hassel, Diana. "Living a Lie: The Cost of Qualified Immunity." Mo. L. Rev 64 (1999): 123.
53 +Hatab, Louis I. Jaffe Professor of Philosophy and University Professor at Old Dominion University, 02 (Lawrence J., Prospects for a Democratic Agon: Why We Can Still Be Nietzscheans, The Journal of Nietzsche Studies, Issue 24, Fall, p. 132-147, CAF)
54 +Hawthorne, John (Prof of Phil @ Oxford) and Jason Stanley (Prof of Phil @ Rutgers). “Knowledge and Action.” The Journal of Philosophy 105.10 (2008).
55 +Henson, Clifford and Paul Dorasil. “Judging bias in competitive academic debate: the effects of region, side, and sex.” Contemporary Economic Policy, July 4, 2013.
56 +Hoppe, Hans-Hermann. The Economics and Ethics of Private Property, p. 334.
57 +http://countercurrentnews.com/2015/07/no-one-talking-about-the-real-reason-sandra-bland-was-arrested/
58 +https://fee.org/articles/to-hold-police-accountable-dont-give-them-immunity/
59 +https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/06/i-was-a-st-louis-cop-my-peers-were-racist-and-violent-and-theres-only-one-fix/?utm_term=.268f915e8907
60 +Hudson 13, Political Studies Department, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg , South Africa, has been on the editorial board of the Africa Perspective: The South African Journal of Sociology and Theoria: A Journal of Political and Social Theory and Transformation, and is a member of the Johannesburg Workshop in Theory and Criticism, The state and the colonial unconscious, Social Dynamics: A journal of African studies, 2013
61 +Iréne Matthis, '4 (Associate Duke Prof, “Dialogues on Sexuality, Gender, and Psychoanalysis”, p. 108-109)roetlin
62 +J.K. Gibson-Graham, feminist economist, 1996, End of Capitalism
63 +JasonsConnections. “The Frankenstein Effect – Society is creating its own Monsters.” Jasonsconnection. Web. June 26, 2014.
64 +Joanna C. Schwartz. Acting Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law. "WHAT POLICE LEARN FROM LAWSUITS" 33 CARDOZO L. REV. (2010).
65 +John Larrivee ’10, Economist at Mount St. Mary’s University, Masters from the Harvard Kennedy school, PhD in economics from Wisconsin, 10 John, “A Framework For The Moral Analysis Of Markets,” 10/1, http://www.teacheconomicfreedom.org/files/larrivee-paper-1.pdf
66 +Jon Swaine, Oliver Laughland, Jamiles Lartey and Ciara McCarthy. “The counted police killings 2015 young black men.” The Guardian. 31 Dec 15.
67 +Joseph Barndt, Co-Director, Crossroads, DISMANTLING RACISM, 1991, p. 155-156
68 +Joshua Greene and Jonathan Cohen – 2004 Department of Psychology, Center for the Study of Brain, Mind, and Behavior, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA, “For the law, neuroscience changes nothing and everything,” Phil. Trans. R. Soc.Lond. B, November 2004. The Royal Society.
69 +Kade Crockford, "Militarization of Police and Racial Justice Gone Wrong: The Eurie Stamps Tragedy", ACLU, Speak Freely, 09/29/2015
70 +Katsafanas, Paul. “Deriving ethics from action: a nietzschean version of constitutivism.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 83:3, pp. 620-660, November 2011.
71 +Kelly ’03 ~-~- Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies at UCONN. (Kristin A., Domestic Violence and the Politics of Privacy, ed. By K. Kelly. P. 55-56)FM
72 +Kelly, Kimbriell and Kimberly Kindy. “Thousands dead, few prosecuted.” The Washington Post, April 11, 2015.
73 +Kimoga, Joseph. “Conceptualizing ‘preoccupation’: evidence from attention-seeker questioning.” Journal of Curriculum Studies, vol. 42, no. 4, 2010.
74 +Kinports, Kit. “The Supreme Court’s quiet expansion of qualified immunity.” Minnesota Law Review Headnotes, 100:62, 2016.
75 +Knight . Society As, xx-xx-xxxx, "Mary Shelley’s Dehumanization of the Disabled," No Publication, http://eng181.dillon181.com/blog/frankenstein-tobin-siebers/mary-shelleys-dehumanization-of-the-disabled/
76 +Krishna ‘93 Sankaran (Professor of Political Science at the University of Hawaii); Alternatives; v. 18, p. 400-401 nick
77 +Laura S. Harper Lawyer in Texas, Dallas "Battered Women Suing Police for Failure to Intervene: Viable Legal Avenues After Deshaney v. Winnibago County Department of Social Services." Cornell Law Review volume 75 issue 6 September 1990.
78 +Leong, Nancy. “The Saucier qualified immunity experiment: an empirical analysis.” Pepperdine Law Review, vol. 36:667, 2009.
79 +Lewis ’14 (Tyson Lewis, PhD in Educational Philosophy from UCLA, “Education as Free Use: Giorgio Agamben on Studious Play, Toys, and the Inoperative Schoolhouse”, May 7th, wcp)
80 +Lindeman, Kathryn M. AB, Mount Holyoke College, 2005; PhD in philosophy, University of Pittsburgh, 2014 “Grounding constitutivism.” Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Kenneth P. Dietrich School of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh, 2014.
81 +Logan, Wayne. “Police mistakes of law.” Emory Law Journal, vol. 61, no. 69, 2011.
82 +Losey, Ralph. "There Can Be No Justice Without Truth, And No Truth Without Search." E-Discovery Team. N.p., 31 Mar. 2013. Web. 1 Nov. 2016.
83 +Luen, Tan. “Knowledge management in the public sector: principles and practices in police work.” Journal of Information Science, vol. 27, no. 5, 2001.
84 +Massa 14- speaking of Frank Wilderson “Implications of Wilderson’s Afro-Pessimism” http://thehistoricalnerds.com/2014/12/16/implications-of-wildersons-afro-pessimism/#comments
85 +Mendieta, 4/25/2002 – associate professor of Philosophy at Stony Brook University (Eduardo, “‘To make live and to let die’ –Foucault on Racism”, American Psychological Association Central Division Meeting, p. 3-4)roetlin
86 +Michel, Society Must be Defended: Lectures at the College de France, 1975-1976, p. 254-257 Trans. David Macey
87 +Milchman teaches in the department of Political Science of Queens College of the City University of New York. He has published on Marxism, modern genocide, Max Weber, Heidegger, Foucault, and postmodernism. He has co-edited Postmodernism and the Holocaust, with Alan Rosenberg (Rodopi, 1998) and Martin Heidegger and the Holocaust, with Alan Rosenberg (Humanities Press, 1996), Alan is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Queens College of the City University of New York. He has published widely on psychoanalysis, the Holocaust, and the philosophies of Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Foucault. Among the books that he has co-edited are Foucault and Heidegger: Critical Encounters, with Alan Milchman (University of Minnesota Press, forthcoming); Contemporary Portrayals of Auschwitz: Philosophical Challenges, with James Watson and Detlef B. Linke (Humanity Books); Psychoanalytic Versions of the Human Condition, with Paul Marcus (NYU press, 1998); Healing Their Wounds: Psychotherapy with Holocaust Survivors and Their Families, with Paul Marcus (Praeger, 1989); and Echoes from the Holocaust: Philosophical Reflections on a Dark Time, with Gerald Myers (Temple University Press, 1988). “A Foucauldian Analysis of Psychoanalysis: A Discipline that ‘Disciplines’” Academy for the Study of the Psychoanalytic Arts, http://www.academyanalyticarts.org/milchandrosen.htm/
88 +Millgram, Elijah, "Practical Reason and the Structure of Actions", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2012/entries/practical-reason-action/.
89 +Mouffe, Chantal, Elke Wagner, and Chantal Mouffe. Agonistics: Thinking the World Politically. New York: Verso, 2013.
90 +Nardin, Terry Nardin, “International Ethics and International Law”. Review of International Studies, Vol. 18, No. 1 (Jan., 1992), pp. 19-30, published by Cambridge University Press.
91 +Newman, Jon O. "Here's a Better Way to Punish the Police: Sue Them for Money." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 23 June 2016. Web. 16 Oct. 2016.
92 +Nick Bostrom, 2001 prof of Philosophy, Oxford University Journal of Evolution and Technology, Vol. 9, March 2002. First version: 2001 March, JStor
93 +Pallitto and Heyman 8 – Political Science, Seton Hall University; Department of Sociology and Anthropology, The University of Texas at El Paso (Robert and Josiah, “Theorizing Cross-Border Mobility: Surveillance, Security and Identity”, 2008, http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/surveillance-and-society/article/viewFile/3426/3389) KW
94 +Pellegrino, Edmund. Georgetown University. “The internal morality of clinical medicine: a paradigm for the ethics of the helping and healing professions.” Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, vol. 26, no. 6, 2001.
95 +Precaido 13 Interview between Ricky Tucker and Beatriz Preciado, professor of Political History of the Body, Gender Theory, and History of Performance at Paris VIII, “Pharmacopornography: An Interview with Beatriz Preciado,” December 4, 2013, The Paris Review
96 +Rahel Jaeggi (August 2014). “Alienation.” Columbia University Press. Translated by Frederick Neuhouser and Alan E. Smith. Edited by Frederick Neuhouser. Rahel Jaeggi is professor of social and political philosophy at the Humboldt University in Berlin. Her research focuses on ethics, social philosophy, political philosophy, philosophical anthropology, social ontology, and critical theory.
97 +Rawls, John. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003.
98 +Rée 12 -~~-~- writer, philosopher and historian (Jonathan, “Less Than Nothing by Slavoj Žižek – review”, http://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/jun/27/less-than-nothing-slavoj-zizek-review?newsfeed=true)//trepka
99 +RHIZOMATICK 2012 (I am a Belgian philosophy student from Leuven university, “A POLITICS OF THE DEATH DRIVE,” Sep 22, http://rhizomatick.wordpress.com/2012/09/22/a-politics-of-the-death-drive/)
100 +Robert Barsky, Professor of English and Comparative Literature at Vanderbilt University, “Safe Spaces in an Era of Gated Communities and Disproportionate Punishments,” 2008, wcp)
101 +Robinson 5 -~~-~- PhD in political theory at the University of Nottingham (Andrew, “The Political Theory of Constitutive Lack: A Critique”, Project Muse)trepka
102 +Rudovsky, David. “The qualified immunity doctrine in the Supreme Court: judicial activism and the restriction of constitutional rights.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review, vol. 138, no. 23, 1989.
103 +Russell, Bertrand. The Conquest of Happiness. New York: H. Liveright, 1930. Print. LB
104 +Senkel, Tara. Attorney in New York Civilians Often Need Protection From the Police: Let's Handcuff Police Brutality 15 N.Y.L. Sch. J. Hum. Rts. 385 (1998-1999).
105 +Simonds, Lord Gavin. Bedder v. Director of Public Prosecutions, HL 1954.
106 +Singer
107 +Sinhababu
108 +Slattery, Elizabeth. “A victory against judicial activism.” The Daily Signal, January 25, 2013.
109 +The People's Law Dictionary. "Legal Dictionary - Law.com." Law.com Legal Dictionary. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Nov. 2016.
110 +Thomassen, Department of Government, University of Essex, 4 (Dr Lasse, “LACANIAN POLITICAL THEORY: A REPLY TO ROBINSON”, BJPIR: 2004 VOL 6, P558-561)trepka
111 +Tubert, Ariela. “Constitutive arguments.” Philosophy Compass, 5/8, 2010, pp. 656-666.
112 +U.S. Department of Justice. “Principles of good policing: avoiding violence between police and citizens.” 2003. Web.
113 +US Department of Justice. "Importance of Police-Community Relationships." N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2016.
114 +Van Roojen, Mark. “Humean and anti-Humean internalism about moral judgements.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 65, no. 1, July 2002, pp. 26-49.
115 +Wallace, Jay. Prof of Phil, UC Berkeley Responsibility and the Moral Sentiments, 1994, p. 52.
116 +Ward 95 – professor of Law and of graduate of Yale law school and BA from Wellesley college (Cynthia Ward, “The Radical Feminist defense of Individualism,” 884, 885, 1995, http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1102andcontext=facpubs)//EM
117 +Wedgwood, Ralph (Professor of Philosopy at USC). "The aim of belief." Nous 36 (October 2002): p. 267-297.
118 +William Grey, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Queensland, 1993 (“Anthropocentrism and Deep Ecology,” Australiasian Journal of Philosophy, Volume 71, Number 4, Available Online at http://www.uq.edu.au/~pdwgrey/pubs/anthropocentrism.html, Accessed 07-27-2011)
119 +Winter, Deborah, and Leighton, Dana. “Structural violence.” In D. J. Christie, R. V. Wagner, and D. D. Winter (Eds.), Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology in the 21st century. New York: Prentice-Hall, 2001.
120 +Wright, 2015 (Journalist and PHD in Law. "Want to Fight Police Misconduct? Reform Qualified Immunity."
121 +Wright, Sam, Source: Thomson Reuters, Source: My Shingle, Source: Law Sites Blog, and Source: Above The Law. "Want to Fight Police Misconduct? Reform Qualified Immunity." Above the Law. N.p., 3 Nov. 2015. Web. 13 Oct. 2016.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-12-05 15:54:14.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +ALL
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +ALL
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +0
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Nov Dec Aff Citations
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +NOV DEC
Caselist.CitesClass[1]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,17 @@
1 +Kemerer, Frank. “Free speech and privacy dimensions of student misuse of their own electronic communication devices in elementary and secondary schools.” School of Law and School of Leadership and Education Sciences, University of San Diego, March 2012.
2 +
3 +Millgram, Elijah, "Practical Reason and the Structure of Actions", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2012/entries/practical-reason-action/.
4 +
5 +Schapiro, Tamar (Professor of Philosophy at Stanford University). “Three Conceptions of Action in Moral Theory.” Nous 35.1 (2001): 93-117.
6 +
7 +Clark, David and Tugrul Ansay. Introduction to the Law of the United States. Kluwer Law International, 2002.
8 +
9 +Streumer, Bart (Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Reading, UK). "Reasons and Impossibility." Philosophical Studies 136 (2007): p. 351-384
10 +
11 +Foundation for Individual Rights in Educaiton (FIRE). “Freedom of expression at public universities.” State of the Law: Speech Codes. Copyright 2016. Web. https://www.thefire.org/in-court/state-of-the-law-speech-codes/
12 +
13 +Ross, Kathleen and Philip Faccenda. “Constitutional and statutory regulation of private colleges and universities.” Valparaiso University Law Review, vol. 9, number 3, 1975.
14 +
15 +Buchter, Jonathan. “Contract law and the student-university relationship.” Indiana Law Journal, vol. 48, issue. 2, article 5, Winter 1973.
16 +
17 +O’Neill, Robert. Academic Freedom in the Wired World: Political Extremism, Corporate Power, and the University. Harvard University Press, July 1, 2009.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-12-17 21:20:42.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Trevor Martinez
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Poly Prep Country Day
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Blake Round 2 AC
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Blake
Caselist.CitesClass[2]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,13 @@
1 +Lacan, Jacques (French psychoanalyst and philosopher). "Kant with Sade." Translated by James Swenson. October 51 (Winter 1989): p. 55-75.
2 +
3 +Kant, Immanuel (was a real pissant who was very rarely stable). "Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals." Translated by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott. Originally published in 1785, released online into the public domain in May 2004 via Project Gutenberg.
4 +
5 +Wallace, R. Jay (Professor of Philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley). Responsibility and the Moral Sentiments. (1994): p. 52.
6 +
7 +Nagel, Thomas (Distinguished Prof of Philosophy, NYU). “Moral Luck” in Mortal Questions (1979).
8 +
9 +J. David Velleman (Prof of Phil, NYU), Self to Self, 2006.
10 +
11 +Denis, Lara, "Kant and Hume on Morality", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/kant-hume-morality/.
12 +
13 +Engstrom, Stephen (Prof of Phil, University of Pittsburgh), “Universal Legislation as the Form of Practical Knowledge”
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-12-17 21:23:01.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Nick Smith
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Oakwood
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +4
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Blake Round 4 AC
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Blake
Caselist.CitesClass[3]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,27 @@
1 +Only through the state can truth and thus, agency be actualized
2 +(Angelica Nuzzo, Graduate Center and Brooklyn College, CUNY, anuzzo@gc.cuny.edu) 2013. “The Social Dimension of Dialectical Truth: Hegel’s Idea of Objective Spirit.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 2 (8): 10-25. NP 4/2/16.
3 +"In a recent ... 2012 chapters 2-3"
4 +
5 +Mutual recognition of the spirit of others within a social order is necessary to reconcile conflicting conceptions of the self to form an identity.
6 +Allen W. Hegel’s Ethical Thought. Cambridge University Press. 1990. NP 3/31/16.
7 +"Hegel holds that ... realm of nature"
8 +
9 +If I were to close a door, I would not know if it had made a noise unless others reacted as well.
10 +Frederick Neuhouser: Introduction to Foundations of Natural Right by Johann Fichte. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
11 +"The character of ... from his essay"
12 +
13 +Actualization of individuals can only occur by placing them within society – the person alone is an incomplete picture of the subject
14 +Allen W. Hegel’s Ethical Thought. Cambridge University Press. 1990. NP 3/29/16.
15 +"Hegel holds that ... realm of nature"
16 +
17 +I contend that unrestricted public expression of unfiltered opinion is prereq to the establishment of an ethical community.
18 +(Daniel Griffin, PhD in Philosophy at University of Guelph MA in Philosophy from Georgia State University, no date, “Can Hegel aid our understanding of freedom of expression”, academia.edu) http://www.academia.edu/24661342/Can_Hegel_aid_our_understanding_of_freedom_of_expression
19 +"Discussions of human ... declaration human rights"
20 +
21 +Aff solves best.
22 +(Adam Lamparello, B.A from University of Southern California. J.D. in law from Ohio State University College of Law. Master of Laws, Concentration in Criminal and Constitutional Law from NYU of Law. Currently assistant professor of Law at Loyola University, 09-02-16, “Promoting Inclusion Through Exclusion: Higher Education’s Assault on the First Amendment” University of Pennsylvania Law) http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1017andcontext=jcl_online
23 +"Free speech and ... pursuit of knowledge"
24 +
25 +Destroying identity construction in the community.
26 +(Rodney G.S. Carter, the Archivist of the St. Joseph Region of the Religious Hospitallers of St. Joseph, based in Kingston, Ontario. He received an Honours B.A. in Art History from Queen’s University in 2002 and a Masters of Information Studies, Archival Stream, from the University of Toronto in 2005. His Masters thesis was entitled “Other Archives: The Archival Value of Photographs of Anonymous People.” He was a member of the ACA Membership Committee’s sub-committee on the formation of student chapters in 2002–2003 and has been recently named the Chair of the ACA Religious Archives Special Interest Section., 2006, “Of Things Said and Unsaid: Power, Archival Silences, and Power in Silence” Archivia) http://archivaria.ca/index.php/archivaria/article/viewFile/12541/13687
27 +"Resume ce texte ... their own silence"
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 01:47:19.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Big Moat Foley
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Trent Gilbert
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +5
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +JAN-FEB AC 1
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +TOC
Caselist.CitesClass[4]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,7 @@
1 +Evidence from physics shows that the past is determined from the present—even if the past has merit the present comes first.
2 +Lanza, Robert. "Does the Past Exist Yet? Evidence Suggests Your Past Isn't Set in Stone." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 18 Aug. 2010. Web. 15 Sept. 2014.
3 +"Recent discoveries require ... theory of everything"
4 +
5 +Our knowledge of the world assumes the reliability of sense data, but reasoning from sense data to the external world begs the question of the reliability of our senses.
6 +Chatalain, George. “Induction and the problem of the external world.” The Journal of Philosophy, vol. 49, no. 19, September 11, 1952, pp. 601-607.
7 +"First three last three unavailable for this selection"
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 01:47:19.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Big Moat Foley
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Trent Gilbert
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +5
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +JAN-FEB AC 2
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +TOC
Caselist.CitesClass[5]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,27 @@
1 +Ought only implies obligation, since there are multiple sources of normativity.
2 +Dowd, Joseph (Graduate Student of Philosophy at the University of California, Irvine). "Hoc aliquid: What makes an ought a moral ought?" 06 May 2011
3 +"Therefore we try ... else being equal"
4 +
5 +The language in Tinker v. Des Moines clarifies that “protected speech” loses its protection when circumstances arise that subject it to restriction.
6 +Kemerer, Frank. “Free speech and privacy dimensions of student misuse of their own electronic communication devices in elementary and secondary schools.” School of Law and School of Leadership and Education Sciences, University of San Diego, March 2012.
7 +"This study was ... and school personnel"
8 +
9 +Only their own internal evaluation of what the cede as epistemically true can do anything.
10 +Nobis, Nathan M. "Truth in Ethics and Epistemology: A Defense of Normative Realism." University of Rochester, 2004. Web. 5 Apr. 2017.
11 +"In this work ... evaluationism of non-factualism"
12 +
13 +No impact turns
14 +"Hate Speech On Campus". American Civil Liberties Union. N. p., 2016. Web. 4 Dec. 2016.
15 +"In recent years ... and start teaching"
16 +
17 +Outweigh.
18 +Harnish, Robert. "Internalism and externalism in speech act theory." Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 5.1 (2009): 9-31.
19 +"Internalism and Externalism ... Moods and Performances"
20 +
21 +Linguistic relativity and linguistic determinism determines a key sphere of languages’ functionality.
22 +Whorf, B.L. "Linguistic Society of America." Language and Thought | Linguistic Society of America. Linguistic Society of America, 2012. Web. 01 Dec. 2016.
23 +"No one would ... Gumperz and Levinson"
24 +
25 +Further, silencing of some language excludes the capacity of some individuals to form an identity and seek truths themselves.
26 +(Rodney G.S. Carter, the Archivist of the St. Joseph Region of the Religious Hospitallers of St. Joseph, based in Kingston, Ontario. He received an Honours B.A. in Art History from Queen’s University in 2002 and a Masters of Information Studies, Archival Stream, from the University of Toronto in 2005. His Masters thesis was entitled “Other Archives: The Archival Value of Photographs of Anonymous People.” He was a member of the ACA Membership Committee’s sub-committee on the formation of student chapters in 2002–2003 and has been recently named the Chair of the ACA Religious Archives Special Interest Section., 2006, “Of Things Said and Unsaid: Power, Archival Silences, and Power in Silence” Archivia)
27 +"Resume ce texte ... their own silence"
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 01:47:20.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Big Moat Foley
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Trent Gilbert
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +5
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +JAN-FEB AC 3
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +TOC
Caselist.CitesClass[6]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,31 @@
1 +Only internal motivations have the conceptual capacity to motivate action, which is a prerequisite for moral considerations.
2 +Katsafanas, Paul. “Deriving ethics from action: a nietzschean version of constitutivism.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 83:3, pp. 620-660, November 2011.
3 +While externalism captures…decidedly odd property.
4 +
5 +Thus, morality is a system of reasons we can all accept—mutual justifiability is the only way to solve the subjectivity of abstract moral theories.
6 +Scanlon, Thomas. What We Owe to Each Other. Cambridge, MA: Belknap of Harvard UP, 2000. Print.
7 +Contractualism can also … in certain contexts.
8 +Moral principles are adopted only if they can be justified on the basis of agent specific reasonable rejection.
9 +Nagel, Thomas. "One-to-One’." London Review of Books 4 (1999).
10 +The nerve of Scanlon’s … of any individual.
11 +Contractualism forms the basis for a moral community. If the purpose of moral norms is to facilitate life and communal interactions in a society, then a contractualist account of reasons comes first.
12 +Scanlon, Thomas. What We Owe to Each Other. Cambridge, MA: Belknap of Harvard UP, 2000. Print.
13 +According to contractualism, … these principles require.
14 +
15 +Contractual obligations are agent relative—reasonable rejection of principles can only come between two rational agents. This means we evaluate every moral consideration on a 1-1 ratio, not whether the aggregate of everyone following the principle would have a positive net effect. James:
16 +James, Aaron. "Contractualism's (not so) slippery slope." Legal Theory 18.03 (2012): 263-292.
17 +According to contractualism, …reasonably object to the imposition.
18 +
19 +Thus the standard is consistency with the agent relative principle of reasonable rejection.
20 +
21 +Students cannot accept restrictions relative to the college because the basis of public universities and colleges is the constitution, which the protection of speech. Buchter:
22 +Buchter, Jonathan. “Contract law and the student-university relationship.” Indiana Law Journal, vol. 48, issue. 2, article 5, Winter 1973.
23 +This theoretical mixture …these constitutional rights.
24 +
25 +Metaethical actualism means no fiat for counteradvocacies. Jackson and Pargetter:
26 +Frank Jackson and Robert Pargetter, “Oughts, Options, and Actualism”, Philosophical Review, 1986
27 +There are four considerations … referred to at the beginning.”
28 +
29 +And, contracts will always be made based on subjective emotions because that contributes to agent relative rejection.
30 +Spranca, Mark, Elisa Minsk, and Jonathan Baron. "Omission and commission in judgment and choice." Journal of experimental social psychology 27.1 (1991): 76-105.
31 +Subjects read scenarios …ignorant of the effects of not acting.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 01:47:20.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Big Moat Foley
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Trent Gilbert
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +5
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +JAN-FEB AC 4
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +TOC
Caselist.CitesClass[7]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,26 @@
1 +Equality is necessary to include all voices in moral deliberation and avoid unjustly imposing values on others. This is the central message of egalitarian social movements. Anderson:
2 + “There must be… their claim heard”
3 +Anderson, Elizabeth Distinguished University Professor of Philosophy, University of Michigan. “What is the Point of Equality?” Ethics 109.2 (1999).
4 +
5 +The standard is consistency with basic capability equality. Only this provides the true value of equality – not concerned with goods or happiness, but what people can do. Sen:
6 +“It is arguable… basic capability equality”
7 + Sen, Amartya Professor of Economics and Philosophy, Harvard University. “Equality of What?” Tanner Lectures on Human Values (1979).
8 +
9 +A focus on capabilities allows the maintenance of intuitions about fundamental human rights without requiring people to fulfill them. It creates consensus among conceptions of the good. Nussbaum:
10 +Nussbaum, Martha Professor of Law and Philosophy, University of Chicago. “Capabilities as Fundamental Entitlements: Sen and Social Justice.” Feminist Economics 9 (2003): 33-59.
11 +
12 +Only it allows dialogue between the oppressed, philosophers, and policymakers on equal comprehensible terms. Glass
13 +“Can liberalism provide... proper discussion possible”
14 +Glass, Arthur Professor of Law, University of New South Wales. “A Review of Postcolonial Liberalism by Duncan Iverson.” Australian Humanities Review 30 (2003).
15 +
16 +The capabilities approach best captures the value of rights – rights are not valuable as abstract rules, but are only fulfilled when people have the ability to exercise them. For example, someone who cannot walk lacks the full value of the freedom of movement without extra resources. Nussbaum 2
17 +“Regarding fundamental rights... right to someone.”
18 +Nussbaum, Martha Professor of Law and Philosophy, University of Chicago. “Capabilities as Fundamental Entitlements: Sen and Social Justice.” Feminist Economics 9 (2003): 33-59. Bracketed for Grammar
19 +
20 +Capabilities can be interpreted in different ways in different societies – that is the point of pluralism. Nussbaum 3
21 +“I also insist… the two nations.”
22 +Nussbaum, Martha Professor of Law and Philosophy, University of Chicago. “Capabilities as Fundamental Entitlements: Sen and Social Justice.” Feminist Economics 9 (2003): 33-59. Bracketed for Grammar
23 +
24 +No agent has greater epistemic access to moral truths because morals aren’t verifiable with empirical fact. Markovitz
25 +“Relatedly, internalism about… some of us are”
26 + Markovits, Julia. Moral reason. Oxford University Press, 2014.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 01:47:20.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Big Moat Foley
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Trent Gilbert
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +5
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +JAN-FEB AC 5
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +TOC
Caselist.CitesClass[8]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,37 @@
1 +Moral obligations arise from individuals’ internal consideration of right conduct. Bedke:
2 +“If John Doe… motivation to X”
3 +Bedke, M.S. Dept of Philosophy, University of Arizona “Moral judgment purposivism: saving internalism from amoralism.” Philosophical Studies, 144: 189-209, 2009.
4 +
5 +Judgments based on external considerations are not moral judgments because they arise from considerations other than right and wrong. Bedke 2:
6 +“Consider a distant… judgments in Amoralsville”
7 +Bedke, M.S. Dept of Philosophy, University of Arizona “Moral judgment purposivism: saving internalism from amoralism.” Philosophical Studies, 144: 189-209, 2009.
8 +
9 +Further, the very idea of externalist moral considerations assumes a background understanding that morality is internal. Bedke 3:
10 +“My own judgment… is not out”
11 +Bedke, M.S. Dept of Philosophy, University of Arizona “Moral judgment purposivism: saving internalism from amoralism.” Philosophical Studies, 144: 189-209, 2009.
12 +
13 +Also, externalist moral conceptions collapse into desire rather than moral consideration. Roojen:
14 +“Second, whether the..;. what is right”
15 +Van Roojen, Mark. “Humean and anti-Humean internalism about moral judgements.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 65, no. 1, July 2002, pp. 26-49.
16 +
17 +Further, internal moral reasoning is idiosyncratic to individuals. This is true because moral reasoning cannot produce objectively verifiable outcomes for all moral reasoners. Coburn:
18 +“If criteria encapsulate… such a process”
19 +Coburn, Robert C. Quals “A defense of ethical noncognitivism.” Philosophical Studies, vol. 62, no. 1, April 1991, pp. 67-80.
20 +
21 +And, objective or universalist conceptions of morality devolve to totalitarianism. Rawls:
22 +“A continuing adherence… to remain so”
23 +Rawls, John. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003.
24 +
25 +Thus, the criterion is consistency with internal moral standards.
26 +
27 +Externalist thought is embedded within the nature of restrictions in relation to speech acts.
28 +Harnish:
29 +“Summarizing, internalists hold… offered mixed analyses.”
30 +Harnish, Robert. "Internalism and externalism in speech act theory." Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 5.1 (2009): 9-31.
31 +
32 +Restrictions establish conditions of which speech is acceptable which is externalist by virtue as it requires an externalist declaration of which speech applies. ACLU:
33 +“Because the ultimate… we'll be next”
34 +"Hate Speech On Campus". American Civil Liberties Union. N. p., 2016. Web. 4 Dec. 2016.
35 +
36 +presume aff because there is an 11 side bias towards the neg
37 +Henson, Clifford and Paul Dorasil. “Judging bias in competitive academic debate: the effects of region, side, and sex.” Contemporary Economic Policy, July 4, 2013
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 01:47:20.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Big Moat Foley
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Trent Gilbert
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +5
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +JAN-FEB AC 6
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +TOC
Caselist.CitesClass[9]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,34 @@
1 +To question the binding nature of moral obligations implicitly concedes the significance of inclusion in normative conclusions because all objections would be made in the context of shared rules. Apel:
2 +“It is mistaken… a communication community.”
3 +Apel, Karl-Otto. Reprinted in Justification and Application: Remarks on Discourse Ethics by Jürgen
4 +
5 +Inclusion of all agents in the construction of truth is an ontological prerequisite to morality. Haste:
6 +“Communitarian thinkers start… and historical context”
7 +Haste, Helen. "Communitarianism and the social construction of morality." Journal of Moral Education 25.1 (1996): 47-55.
8 +
9 +No agent has greater epistemic access to moral truths because morals aren’t verifiable with empirical fact. Markovitz:
10 +“Relatedly, internalism about… of us are).”
11 +Markovits, Julia. Moral reason. Oxford University Press, 2014.
12 +
13 +Thus the standard is consistency with the maxim of including individuals in the construction of moral truths.
14 +
15 +Additionally, only the analysis of intent of an action includes all perceptions into the construction of truths. Tannenbaum:
16 +“When it comes… had occurred unintentionally.”
17 +Tannenbaum, Melanie. ""But I Didn't Mean It!" Why It's so Hard to Prioritize Impacts over Intents." Scientific American Global RSS. N.p., 14 Oct. 2013. Web. 08 Sept. 2015.
18 +
19 +Speech codes entrench a massive divide within society and push society to manifest into one in which nobody is included in the manifestation of truth— historically proven. Haiman:
20 +“Placing limitations on… increased its circulation.”
21 +Haiman, Franklyn. “The Remedy is More Speech.” The American Prospect. Summer 1991.
22 +
23 +And, even when speech codes do target those with oppressive ideology, they are coopted and used as a tool of exclusion. Cammaerts
24 +“However, in a… causes of it.”
25 +Bart Cammaerts ‘9, London School of Economics and Political Science, England, 11-2009, "Radical pluralism and free speech in online public spaces," International Journal of Cultural Studies
26 +
27 +Further, the neg embraces an overall maxim in which individuals are excluded from moral projects- means only the affirmative has a risk of epistemic validity. Greenawalt:
28 +“Mill says that… to be tolerated.”
29 +Greenawalt, Kent. "Free speech justifications." Columbia Law Review 89.1 (1989): 119-155.
30 +"Hate Speech On Campus". American Civil Liberties Union. N. p., 2016. Web. 4 Dec. 2016.
31 +
32 +Restrictions establish conditions of which speech is acceptable which is exclusionary by virtue as it requires a declaration by one agent of which speech applies. ACLU:
33 +“Because the ultimate… we'll be next”
34 +"Hate Speech On Campus". American Civil Liberties Union. N. p., 2016. Web. 4 Dec. 2016.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 01:47:21.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Big Moat Foley
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Trent Gilbert
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +5
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +JAN-FEB AC 7
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +TOC
Caselist.CitesClass[10]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,46 @@
1 +Moral obligations arise from individuals’ internal consideration of right conduct. Bedke:
2 +“If John Doe… motivation to X”
3 +Bedke, M.S. Dept of Philosophy, University of Arizona “Moral judgment purposivism: saving internalism from amoralism.” Philosophical Studies, 144: 189-209, 2009.
4 +
5 +Judgments based on external considerations are not moral judgments because they arise from considerations other than right and wrong. Bedke 2:
6 +“Consider a distant… judgments in Amoralsville”
7 +Bedke, M.S. Dept of Philosophy, University of Arizona “Moral judgment purposivism: saving internalism from amoralism.” Philosophical Studies, 144: 189-209, 2009.
8 +
9 +Further, the very idea of externalist moral considerations assumes a background understanding that morality is internal. Bedke 3:
10 +“My own judgment… is not out”
11 +Bedke, M.S. Dept of Philosophy, University of Arizona “Moral judgment purposivism: saving internalism from amoralism.” Philosophical Studies, 144: 189-209, 2009.
12 +
13 +Also, externalist moral conceptions collapse into desire rather than moral consideration. Roojen:
14 +“Second, whether the..;. what is right”
15 +Van Roojen, Mark. “Humean and anti-Humean internalism about moral judgements.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 65, no. 1, July 2002, pp. 26-49.
16 +
17 +Further, internal moral reasoning is idiosyncratic to individuals. This is true because moral reasoning cannot produce objectively verifiable outcomes for all moral reasoners. Coburn:
18 +“If criteria encapsulate… such a process”
19 +Coburn, Robert C. Quals “A defense of ethical noncognitivism.” Philosophical Studies, vol. 62, no. 1, April 1991, pp. 67-80.
20 +
21 +And, objective or universalist conceptions of morality devolve to totalitarianism. Rawls:
22 +“A continuing adherence… to remain so”
23 +Rawls, John. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003.
24 +
25 +Thus, the criterion is consistency with internal moral standards.
26 +
27 +Externalist thought is embedded within the nature of restrictions in relation to speech acts.
28 +Harnish:
29 +“Summarizing, internalists hold… offered mixed analyses.”
30 +Harnish, Robert. "Internalism and externalism in speech act theory." Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 5.1 (2009): 9-31.
31 +
32 +And, the affirmatives method of engagement with speech uniquely weeds out oppressive ideologies from prevalent ideas— prevents active imposition of moral values. Moosa:
33 +“Thus, if we… entity once existed.”
34 +
35 +Moosa, T. (2012). John Stuart Mill And The Dangers Of Silencing. Big Think. Retrieved 19 February 2017, from http://bigthink.com/against-the-new-taboo/john-stuart-mill-and-the-dangers-of-silencing
36 +
37 +The neg actively excludes voices from moral projects- means only the affirmative has a risk of epistemic validity. Greenawalt:
38 +“Mill says that… to be tolerated.”
39 +Greenawalt, Kent. "Free speech justifications." Columbia Law Review 89.1 (1989): 119-155.
40 +
41 +Restrictions establish conditions of which speech is acceptable which is externalist by virtue as it requires an externalist declaration of which speech applies. ACLU:
42 +“Because the ultimate… we'll be next”
43 +"Hate Speech On Campus". American Civil Liberties Union. N. p., 2016. Web. 4 Dec. 2016.
44 +
45 +Presume aff because there is an 11 side bias towards the neg
46 +Henson, Clifford and Paul Dorasil. “Judging bias in competitive academic debate: the effects of region, side, and sex.” Contemporary Economic Policy, July 4, 2013.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 01:47:21.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Big Moat Foley
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Trent Gilbert
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +5
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +JAN-FEB AC 8
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +TOC
Caselist.CitesClass[11]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,25 @@
1 +The standard is consistency with the right to self-ownership.
2 +
3 +Self-ownership if a commitment of all discursive exchange. Hoppe
4 +“Argumentation does not… he was disputing”
5 +Hans-Hermann Hoppe, The Economics and Ethics of Private Property, p. 334
6 +
7 +My framework is most specific to the topical state agent and the only one that explains the origins of legitimate state authority. Simmons
8 +“The motivation for… The motivation for”
9 +A. John Simmons (Prof. of Philosophy, University of Virginia). “Locke and the Right to Punish.” Philosophy and Public Affairs Reader on Punishment. 1995. http://books.google.com/books?id=-twJwC8asWgCandlpg=PA221andots=aQsfipB9nranddq=22by20some20voluntary20undertaking22andpg=PA221#v=onepageandqandf=false
10 +
11 +The right to autonomous control of one’s aims and identity is foundational to other liberal rights, hence precludes and constrains rights like free speech. Christman
12 +“The conception of… goal of justice.”
13 +John Christman, “Autonomy in Moral and Political Philosophy,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, online, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/autonomy-moral/, 2003
14 +
15 +The right to free speech is embedded within self ownership intrinsically- means the neg is by definition inconsistent with self ownership. Curtman:
16 +“It is important… upon my liberty”
17 +Curtman, Paul "Private Property And The Principles Of Self-Ownership". Paul Curtman. N. p., 2017. Web. 2 Feb. 2017.
18 +
19 +Self-ownership requires that agents have the ability to regulate access to the self- means one needs to be able to freely express oneself via free speech in the context of identity construction. Kupfer:
20 +“Because the ultimate… we'll be next."
21 +Kupfer, Joseph. “Privacy, autonomy and self-concept.” American Philosophical Quarterly, vol. 24, Number 1, January 1987.
22 +
23 +And, the aff props up self ownership while simultaneously ensuring people do not become complacent in driving hate speech underground- restricting it via speech restrictions causes more backlash and drive racism underground-historically proven. Haiman
24 +“Placing limitations on… increased its circulation.”
25 +Haiman, Franklyn. “The Remedy is More Speech.” The American Prospect. Summer 1991
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 01:47:21.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Big Moat Foley
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Trent Gilbert
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +5
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +JAN-FEB AC 9
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +TOC
Caselist.CitesClass[12]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,39 @@
1 +The language in Tinker v. Des Moines clarifies that “protected speech” loses its protection when circumstances arise that subject it to restriction.
2 +Kemerer, Frank. “Free speech and privacy dimensions of student misuse of their own electronic communication devices in elementary and secondary schools.” School of Law and School of Leadership and Education Sciences, University of San Diego, March 2012.
3 +"This study was ... and school personnel"
4 +
5 +Actions are either steps toward an end or random motions.
6 +Millgram, Elijah, "Practical Reason and the Structure of Actions", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2012/entries/practical-reason-action/.
7 +"A wave of ... modes of argument"
8 +
9 +The ends of particular action classes are determined by the practices within which those practices take place.
10 +Schapiro, Tamar (Professor of Philosophy at Stanford University). “Three Conceptions of Action in Moral Theory.” Nous 35.1 (2001): 93-117.
11 +"Philosophers have long ... I call action"
12 +
13 +A state is a creature of its constitution, and it is literally impossible for a state to act outside the constraints of its constituting documents because when state agents do so they are not, by law, acting as the state.
14 +Clark, David and Tugrul Ansay. Introduction to the Law of the United States. Kluwer Law International, 2002.
15 +"The United States ... U.N. Charter art."
16 +
17 +The U.S. Constitution is nearly unique in the degree and duration of universal acceptance among those under its jurisdiction.
18 +Rosenn, Keith. “The success of constitutionalism in the United States and its failure in Latin America: an explanation.” University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, Fall 1990.
19 +"Constitutionalism is the ... authoritarianism is resolved"
20 +
21 +Since ethical obligation is a judgment of choice, adjudicating as unethical the failure to make a choice one is incapable of making renders ethical judgment meaningless.
22 +Streumer, Bart (Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Reading, UK). "Reasons and Impossibility." Philosophical Studies 136 (2007): p. 351-384
23 +"Many philosophers claim ......"
24 +
25 +Agents of the U.S. government are literally incapable of enacting enduring policies in violation of settled constitutional law because the structure of the legislative and judicial branches prevents it.
26 +Foundation for Individual Rights in Educaiton (FIRE). “Freedom of expression at public universities.” State of the Law: Speech Codes. Copyright 2016. Web. https://www.thefire.org/in-court/state-of-the-law-speech-codes/
27 +"That the first ... ideas on campus"
28 +
29 +Constitutional jurisprudence implicitly recognizes that public college and university employees are agents of the state.
30 +Ross, Kathleen and Philip Faccenda. “Constitutional and statutory regulation of private colleges and universities.” Valparaiso University Law Review, vol. 9, number 3, 1975.
31 +"In March of ... by the authors"
32 +
33 +The Supreme Court has ruled explicitly that this is the case.
34 +Buchter, Jonathan. “Contract law and the student-university relationship.” Indiana Law Journal, vol. 48, issue. 2, article 5, Winter 1973.
35 +"The relationship between ... intended to do"
36 +
37 +The status of public employees as agents of the state subject to constitutioanl requirements is demonstrated by the susceptability of their work communications to federal and state FOIA inquiries.
38 +O’Neill, Robert. Academic Freedom in the Wired World: Political Extremism, Corporate Power, and the University. Harvard University Press, July 1, 2009.
39 +"In this passionately ......"
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 01:47:22.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Big Moat Foley
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Trent Gilbert
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +5
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +JAN-FEB AC 10
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +TOC
Caselist.CitesClass[13]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,108 @@
1 +I affirm
2 +
3 +Overview: If one a priori is turned, it must be weighed against every other a priori or explained as to why it comes BEFORE said a prioris. Additionally, any a priori under my framework auto-precludes because only my framework provides normative motivation, other a prioris don’t give any reason to believe the falsity of the res.
4 +
5 +A corporation is defined as: “a company or group of people authorized to act as a single entity (legally a person) and recognized as such in law.”
6 +
7 +To affirm means “to express dedication” (Merriam Webster) so affirmation doesn’t require proving a truth claim however negate means “to deny the truth of” (Merriam Webster) so negating requires truth. Thus, always vote aff.
8 +
9 +The resolution is already resolved which means that you must always affirm.
10 +
11 +Ethical obligations derive from interactions among moral agents. Korsgard:
12 +“The relations of reciprocity are relations that obtains between free and equal persons. As such, they call for mutual responsibility for two important reasons. In order to make the ends and reasons of another your own, you must regard her as a source of value, someone whose choices confer worth upon their objects, and who has the right to decide on her own actions. In order to entrust your own ends and reasons to another’s care, you must suppose that she regards you that way, and is prepared to act accordingly. People who enter into relations of reciprocity must be prepared to share their ends and reasons; and to hold them jointly; and to act together. Reciprocity is the sharing of reasons, and you will enter into reciprocity it only with someone you expect to deal with reasons in a rational way. In this sense, reciprocity requires that you hold the other responsible.”
13 +Korsgard, Christine. “Creating the kingdom of ends: reciprocity and responsibility in personal relations.” Philosophical Perspectives, vol. 6, 1992, pp. 305-332.
14 +
15 +Thus our ethical duties arise from mutually voluntary relations of reciprocity, and these agreements uniquely generate moral obligations. Gauthier:
16 +“A contractarian theory of morals, developed as part of the theory of rational choice, has evident strengths. It enables us to demonstrate the rationality of impartial constraints on the pursuit of individual interest to persons who may take no interest in others' interests. Morality is thus given a sure grounding in a weak and widely accepted conception of practical rationality. No alternative account of morality accomplishes this. Those who claim that moral principles are objects of rational choice in special circumstances fail to establish the rationality of actual compliance with these principles. Those who claim to establish the rationality of such compliance appeal to a strong and controversial conception of reason that seems to incorporate prior moral suppositions. No alternative account generates morals, as a rational constraint on choice and action, from a non-moral, or morally neutral, base.”
17 +Gauthier, David (Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the University of Pittsburgh). Morals by Agreement. (1986).
18 +
19 +Thus the standard is consistency with contractual obligation.
20 +
21 +Contention
22 +
23 +A. Under contractualism the only obligation of both individuals is to uphold their side of the contract, whatever it may be, which is the ONLY source of morality, and thus you affirm on face. Precludes other a prioris because they assume an a priori source of morals, but those do not exist. Macintyre:
24 +“The most influential account of moral reasoning that emerged in response to this critique of emotivism was one according to which an agent can only justify a particular judgment by referring to some universal rule from which it may be logically derived, and can only justify that rule in turn by deriving it from some more general rule or principle; but on this view Since every chain of reasoning must be finite, such a process of justificatory reasoning must always terminates with the assertion of some rule or principle for which no further reason can be given. ‘Thus a complete justification of a decision would consist of a complete account of its effects together with a complete account of the principles which it observed, and the effect of observing those principles. If I the enquirer still goes on ask ing ‘But why should I live like that?’ then there is no further answer to give him, because we have already, ex hypothesi, we have already said everything that could be included in the further answer.’ (Hare 1952, p. 69). The terminus of justification is thus always, on this view, a not further to be justified choice, a choice unguided by criteria. Each individual implicitly or explicitly has to adopt his or her own first principles on the basis of such a choice. The utterance of any universal principle is in the end an expression of the preferences of an individual will and for that will its principles have and can have only such authority as it chooses to confer upon them by adopting them.
25 + Alasdair Macintyre, After Virtue, 1981
26 +
27 +B. Corporations are legally considered a person, which means that they are by definition held to the same moral standards as any individual
28 +
29 +C. The non-legal basis of a corporation is a conglomerate of individuals, and only one individual within the corporation at a time, namely the CEO, makes final decisions, and thus they are by definition held to the same moral standards because they ARE an individual
30 +
31 +D. All persons are of the same species, which means that they at base can only have the same moral standards
32 +
33 +E. Determinism means that every person is held to the same moral standards because every persons’ moral standing is pre-determined and randomized – meaning that no one can make certain individuals have different moral standards.
34 +
35 +F. Moral responsibility is separate from legal responsibility and determined by moral standards. Abun:
36 +Now, what happen if a certain corporation commitsted a crime? Who is the one taking the blame? Let us be clear that morality and law are two different things, in a sense that what is legal may not be always moral and what is moral may not be always legal. The issue on hand is moral issue and as a moral issue, there are simple requirements to be met if certain act is moral or immoral. In this regard, there must be criteria or requirements to be fulfilled for one or a group to be morally responsible, and thus we need to know when the person is morally responsible and when they are not. In order to determine moral responsibility, we need to know what makes an act right or wrong morally. This is important criteria to determine on which we can base our judgment and moral theories will help us in determining the extent of moral responsibility.  In order to determine moral responsibility of corporation, first, we need to know the nature of corporation. Proper understanding is needed for us to determine if a corporation is morally responsible for their actions. This is due to the fact that corporation is not human, it is a legal entity created by law but what qualifies it to be like human and therefore be responsible morally. It is commonly known that a business entity is an entity that is a group of people organized for some profitable or charitable purpose. Business entities include organizations such as corporations, partnerships, charities, trusts, and other forms of organization. Generally speaking, entrepreneurs incorporate their business in the state where they conduct their business (Perez, 2015). After incorporation, then the business is considered legal and it is now recognized as a legal business entity. It has a legal personality and now can legally pursue its business objectives as prescribed in their constitution and bylaws as approved by the Security of Exchange Commission. Thus and the treatment to a corporation is now the same treatment to a person. Business entities, just like individual persons, are subject to taxation and must file a tax return. Some business entities are exempt from federal income tax. These include non-profit charities, non- profit corporations. Business entities may be subjected to state income tax, depending on the laws of the state or states where they conduct business.
37 +Abun, Damianus. "Moral Standards and Corporation’s Moral Responsibility: Who Is Taking the Blame?" Ethical Issues and Arguments. Blogspot, 27 Aug. 2015. Web. 7 Mar. 2017.
38 +
39 +G. Corporations receive benefits from the state through taxes just as individuals, and thus have the same obligation contractually to moral standards set up in law.
40 +
41 +H. When assigning punishment, the first thing considered is the action, not the agent who takes the action – thus all actions are applied the same moral standards on face, and are only subsequently changed in terms of punishment based on the actor. Reuters:
42 +In a criminal trial, a the jury examines the evidence to decide whether, "beyond a reasonable doubt," the defendant committed the crime in question. A trial is the government's opportunity to argue its case, in the hope of obtaining a "guilty" verdict and a conviction of the defendant.
43 +Reuters, Thomson. "Criminal Trial Overview." FindLaw. Webby Awards, 2013. Web. 7 Mar. 2017.
44 +
45 +I. Ascribing power is ascribing an equivalent responsibility – and all agents are given the same ratio of responsibility to power through contract. Risser:
46 +The work of William Connolly (1974) and Steven Lukes (1974, 2005) in the field of political theory has made some influential contributions to understanding organizations from a moral perspective.  Without being at all preoccupied with the metaphysical disputes dominant in philosophy, they have investigated the relationship between power and responsibility.  Lukes claims that the identification of an exercise of power by either an individual or an organization is at the same time an ascription of responsibility.  For Lukes: The point, in other words, of locating power is to fix responsibility for consequences held to flow from the action, or inaction, of certain specifiable agents. ...C Wright Mills perceived the relations I have argued for between these concepts in his distinction between fate and power (Lukes 1974, p. 56). William Connolly (1974) explains that conceptual disputes over notions, such as political power, are in part disputes over what is worth trying to control in society.  Engaging in disagreements of this sort is to engage in politics itself.  He adds: Moreover, since our ideas about power and responsibility are so intimately related, disagreements about the appropriate criteria for holding collectives responsible for consequences will be reflected in disputes about the meaning of 'power' (Connolly 1974, p.128).
47 +Risser, David T. "Collective Moral Responsibility." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Penn State University, n.d. Web. 7 Mar. 2017.
48 +
49 +J. A corporation is a web of contracts in which individuals simply act for their own self-interest in fulfilling said contracts. Risser 2:
50 +Ross Grantham's (1998) claim that a corporation is little more than “a collective noun for the web of contracts that link the various participants” is an example of this sort of analysis.  Manuel Velasquez (1983) takes the position that in spite of its organizational complexity, a corporation and is ultimately a group of humans who are engaged among themselves in a variety of specific occupational and professional relationships which each believes to be in his or her their self-interest.  Corporate actions are the result of procedures and policies intentionally designed by members of the corporation to achieve specific goals.  If harm is caused or wrongdoing occurs, moral responsibility is borne by individuals to the extent that each one participated in policy formulation, implementation, or oversight.  Velasquez does support the and vicarious liability of the corporation itself in cases where there is an absence of punishable individual members or to compensate victims of corporate harm. Another version of the individualistic conception of corporate identity is Michael Keeley's (1981) agency theory which has its roots in classical Lockean liberalism and F.A. Hayek's economic theories.  For Keeley, a corporation is a contractual nexus representing mutually self-interested human contractors.  A central aspect of this nexus is the hiring of managers and directors to maximize their financial investments.  These 'agents' hired by the shareholders are also motivated by financial gain themselves.  For Keeley, the only intentions are individual human ones.  The goals that guide corporate actions and give direction to the activities of its members are an inseparable admixture of overlapping individual goals.
51 +Risser, David T. "Collective Moral Responsibility." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Penn State University, n.d. Web. 7 Mar. 2017.
52 +
53 +K. If there are no moral standards, then you affirm because both corporations and individuals are held to the same moral standards, e.g. no moral standards
54 +
55 +L. Corporations enter into the same social contract as individuals, and are thus definitionally held to the same moral standards
56 +
57 +M. If contractarian morals are false then we assume a priori moral truth, which means that everyone can ONLY be held to the same moral standards. Kastafanas:
58 +Enter a third theory, which attempts to do just that: constitutivism. According to constitutivism, there is an element of truth in both the internalist and the externalist positions. For the constitutivist agrees with the internalist that the truth of a normative claim depends on the agent’s aims, in the sense that the agent must possess a certain aim in order for the normative claim to be true. But the constitutivist constitutivism traces the authority of norms to an aim that has a special status, an aim that is constitutive of being an agent. This constitutive aim is not optional; if you lack the aim, you are not an agent at all. So the constitutivist agrees with the internalist that practical reasons derive from the agent’s aims; but the constitutivist holds that the relevant aim is one that is intrinsic to being an agent. Accordingly, the constitutivist gets the conclusion that the externalist wanted: there are non-optional reasons for acting. Put differently, there are reasons for action that arise merely from the fact that one is an agent.
59 +Katsafanas, Paul. “Deriving Ethics from Action: A Nietzchean Version of Constitutivism.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, LLC. Boston University: 2011.
60 +
61 +N. Systems of collaboration via contract create their own transmittable morals – inconsistency fails. Mayer:
62 +Yet, what possible difference can MNCs make? Two potential contributions may be noted: First, as argued in the previous Part, MNCorporations can - and morally, should - use their increasingly potent political speech and influence to advocate domestic and global legal systems that are fair, transparent, ecologically sensible, and allow competition in accord with the best economic and ecological thinking available. To some extent, this is already taking place; corporate advocacy for generalized rules against bribery, or collaboration in transnational systems such as ISO 14000, set standards and practices that are not merely local. Second, U.S. and EU-based MNCs can realize that they share, relative to much of the world, a common culture and civilization; they may strive to be borderless, but are not valueless. Given that MNCs will and invariably transmit ideas, values, and ways of life that are alien to many cultures, they must own up to their values and must hold them consistently.
63 +Donald Mayer, Professor of Management at Oakland University, 2002 (Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, “GOVERNANCE, STAKEHOLDER ACCOUNTABILITY, AND SUSTAINABLE PEACE: Corporate Governance in the Cause of Peace: An Environmental Perspective”, March)
64 +
65 +O. Detachment leads to demoralization – means that corporations can inconsequentially violate contracts, which is impermissible. Nesteruk:
66 +But the possibility of individual moral development outside the political process deserves a place within corporate theory. To illustrate what I mean, I would like to draw on a classic article by Art Wolfe in which he proposed a mechanism for developing the moral sensibilities of key individuals within the corporation. Wolfe called the mechanism he proposed the "corporate apology." Under his proposal, corporate harms would result in more than a legal judgment requiring financial compensation to persons injured by a corporate action. In appropriate cases the law also would require key individual decision makers within the corporation to meet face-to-face with the individual harmed by their decisions and to offer a personal apology. While Wolfe's proposal may well have practical obstacles, my concern here is with the theoretical framework from which it proceeds. Its assumption is that individual moral development is possible, even outside the realm of political deliberation. Individual moral development, in Wolfe's view, occurs when our moral sensibilities are engaged in unmediated and concrete ways, such as when we must face directly the harm we have caused others. "Philosophers and psychologists," Wolfe notes, "have pointed out the chief moral constraint on humans is not in the formalized law, but in our everyday activity; it is our ability to see ourselves as the recipients of our own actions." He underscores the need to make business decisions "need be compellingly human by making business managers literally feel the impact of their decisions." For Wolfe, the "compellingly human" nature of business decisions is obscured when decision makers are a considerable distance from the consequences of their choices. Yet such a distance is often a fact of life in the complex, commercial society in which we live. "Our business environment," writes Wolfe, "is dominated by very large corporations where thousands of employees and managers interact and make decisions that affect us all. . . . The high-level decision makers in these institutions are far removed from the impact of their decisions."
67 +Jeffrey Nesteruk, Professor of Legal Studies at Franklin-Marshall College, 2005 (Winter/Spring, American Business Law Journal, “Response Enriching Corporate Theory”)
68 +
69 +P. The resolution doesn’t specify an agent of action, which means that it is a priori true as every individual holds each subject to their own individual moral standards
70 +
71 +Q. Presume aff because 11 side bias
72 +
73 +R. An action is defined as a “legal process; a lawsuit.”, and because everyone follows the same law, the res is automatically true.
74 +
75 +S. Corporations are held to international law, which is a universal contract de facto, and thus are held to the same overall moral standards, even if subsequent moral standards can fluctuate in local government. Alvárez:
76 +The international investment regime consists of nearly 3000 bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and regional free trade agreements with investment chapters (FTAs, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)) around the world. This treaty network provides foreign investors of the respective treaty parties fair and equitable treatment, full protection and security, and other protections under customary international law such as the guarantees of the international minimum standard. Most of these investment treaties also include protections from violations of investors’ investment contracts with hosts states, national and most favored nation treatment, prompt, adequate and effective compensation upon expropriation, and other rights.
77 +Alvárez, Jose E. "Are Corporations “Subjects” Of International Law?" Law NYU. New York University, 12 Mar. 2012. Web. 8 Mar. 2017.
78 +
79 +T. Roses are red
80 +Violets are blue
81 +Corporations are people
82 +And use their morals too
83 +
84 +U. Game over issue. MTD:
85 +Corporations are a special kind of entity.  Although they are not persons, they have the same legal rights as persons in the United States, and these rights are protected under the 14th Amendment.  This fact is uncontroversial.  There is, however, some controversy and disagreement as to what follows from this peculiar legal arrangement – particularly with respect to ethical considerations such as moral responsibility. “Morality governs the actions of rational beings insofar as they affect other rational beings.  Formal organizations – for instance, corporations – act. Ford Motor Company produces cars; it also builds factories, hires and fires people, pays them wages, pays taxes, recalls defective models, and so on. Not only do businesses act, they also act rationally according to a rational decision-making procedure. Because their rational actions affect people, these actions can be evaluated from a moral point of view. If it is immoral for an individual to discriminate, it is also immoral for a corporation to discriminate.  If it is praiseworthy for an individual to give to charity, it is praiseworthy for a business to give to charity…Actions can be morally evaluated whether done by an individual or by an entity such as a company, corporation, or a nation.”1
86 +Moral Terms Dictionary. "Moral Status of Corporations." Seven Pillars Institute. Prospect Think Tank, 3 Oct. 2010. Web. 8 Mar. 2017.
87 +
88 +V. Reason for action depends on the actual alternative. Suppose PP is asked to write a review that he’s best qualified to write, but knows that if he says yes he’ll never actually complete the review, he ought to say no since this is better than the actual alternative. Jackson and Pargetter:
89 +There are four considerations which support Actualism's answer that Procrastinate ought to say no, and we will note that each might with suitable modifications be applied to the Jones case to give the answer that Jones ought to accelerate. (i) Possibilism is arbitrary. It is true that saying yes is an essential part of the best extended course of action open to Procrastinate, namely, saying yes and later writing. This fact is the basis of Possibilism's declaration that Procrastinate ought to say yes. But it is equally true that saying yes is an essential part of the worst extended course of action open to him, namely, saying yes but failing to write the review. Surely then there must be more to say before the question of what Procrastinate ought to do is settled. In themselves the fact that saying yes is part of the best, and the fact that it is part of the worst shows nothing. The first points to the answer that Procrastinate ought to say yes, the second equally to that he ought to say no. Possibilism errs in allowsing the first fact to settle the matter. By contrast, Actualism holds that we arbitrates between the two by reference to what Procrastinate PP would do were he to say yes, and would do were he to say no; and as in our case what would be the case were he to say yes would be worse, he ought not say yes and ought to say no. … Similarly, Jones ought to accelerate; for she ought to given she is going to change lanes, and she is going to change lanes. (iv) If anything is clear about the case of ProcrastinatePP, it is that he ought not unduly delay the reviewing of the book. That is the basis for judging that his saying yes but failing to review would be the worst result. But what is unduly delaying the reviewing? Doing something which causes (in right way) the undue delaying of the reviewing of the book. But ex hypothesi Procrastinate’s saying yes would be doing something which causes the undue delaying of the reviewing of the book, hence, would be his unduly delaying the reviewing of the book. Thus, as his unduly delaying the review is something he ought not do, so is his saying yes. ‘They’ are one and the same, and Possibilism's answer that he ought to say yes is wrong. Similarly, unduly disrupting the traffic in the lane she is going to change into is something Jones ought not do; but it is the same action in the case as described as not accelerating; hence, not accelerating is not, and accelerating is, what Jones ought to do. We have labored the case for Actualism, more particularly for its answers that Procrastinate ought to say no, and that Jones ought to accelerate, because Actualism has a consequence which is prima facie untoward. We hope to have motivated you to follow us in seeing how on examination it is not untoward but rather leads us to an appreciation of the second problem referred to at the beginning.”
90 +Frank Jackson and Robert Pargetter, “Oughts, Options, and Actualism”, Philosophical Review, 1986
91 +That means to defend a CP the neg must prove the counterfactual of the aff, rather than proving the neg preferable
92 +
93 +W. Counterplans are non-functional because there is no agent of action or action.
94 +
95 +X. The X point is the Y point
96 +
97 +Y. The Y point is the X point
98 +
99 +Z. Thus I affirm
100 +
101 +Underview:
102 +The following skews exist against the aff
103 +A. Time skew becomes 6-1 in the 2NR since I cover multiple layers, makes it impossible to win.
104 +B. 1 minute is 1/4 of the 1AR versus 1/7 of the NC, means that the neg reading arguments on permissibility is skewed.
105 +C. The neg won 8 percent1 more rounds at octas and quarters bids last year.
106 +1 Vbriefly. “LD Side Bias.” Includes every round from an octas or quarters bid during the 2014-2015 season. 3177 aff wins, 3737 neg wins.
107 +D. The aff goes into the round blind, where the neg can adapt their intitial rebuttal to the affirmative speech. Outweighs framing power because the neg can make the intitial uplayering, where the aff loses that chance in the 2AR. This means the neg has a larger opportunity to uplayer - 7 minutes to 4.
108 +E. The aff has more chances to make mistakes - as they have A) more speeches and B) more times necessary to extend the position to win
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 20:34:28.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +The 9th Edition of Trent Gilberts Encyclopedia
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +God
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +7
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +9
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +ABC, as easy as 123, ABC, 123 Bruddy you and me Moat
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Garage Sale May 6th
Caselist.CitesClass[14]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,51 @@
1 +Resolved: capitalism is superior to socialism as a means of achieving social justice.
2 +
3 +I affirm
4 +
5 +“Social justice” is defined as: justice in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society.
6 +Prefer because 1) Comes directly from the first page on google and is highlighted in large text in a box at the top, thus controls the internal link to common usage and 2) Defines in terms of justice, and thus has the strongest resolutional context
7 +
8 +Thus the value premise is Justice defined by Aristotle as “giving each their due”
9 +First, prefer Aristotle’s definition b 1) Aristotle is the founder of justice theory, thus his writing has the largest basis for argument and 2) This line is in a large majority of our novice cases – common usage comes first because it defines how a term is actually used in the real world.
10 +Second, this has 2 implications, A) One can only be given what they are due, which is defined by the effort they put in, B) Assumptions cannot be made about what someone is due de-facto, and C) We cannot weigh considerations that cannot exist as in those instances we do not truly know what people are due.
11 +
12 +The standard is contractual obligation
13 +
14 +Ethical duty arises from mutual relations of reciprocity and uniquely generates moral obligations. Gauthier:
15 +“A contractarian theory of morals, developed as part of the theory of rational choice, has evident strengths. It enables us to demonstrate the rationality of impartial constraints on the pursuit of individual interest to persons who may take no interest in others' interests. Morality is thus given a sure grounding in a weak and widely accepted conception of practical rationality. No alternative account of morality accomplishes this. Those who claim that moral principles are objects of rational choice in special circumstances fail to establish the rationality of actual compliance with these principles. Those who claim to establish the rationality of such compliance appeal to a strong and controversial conception of reason that seems to incorporate prior moral suppositions. No alternative account generates morals, as a rational constraint on choice and action, from a non-moral, or morally neutral, base.”
16 +Gauthier, David (Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the University of Pittsburgh). Morals by Agreement. (1986).
17 +This precludes because only contracts can even define how we achieve what we consider social justice, as the distribution of wealth opportunity is entirely contingent on contractual agreement – one cannot expect a surplus of opportunity absent some contractual agreement, as there is no obligation for any actor to grant them this opportunity.
18 +
19 +Thus the standard is consistency with contractual obligation.
20 +
21 +I contend that only a capitalist system of economics sufficiently provides each their due of wealth opportunities in a social setting.
22 +
23 +First is the inner-workings of capitalism – and its innate superiority. Layton:
24 +In Smith's model, there capitalism is an natural economic order that produces the greatest good. Government interference interrupts this natural order. His theory of capitalism plays out like this: There is an owner class: The means of production (capital) are ownsed only by the few people (capitalists) who can pay for them. Modern means of production are things like machines, factories and land. There is a working class: The people (laborers) who use capital to produce goods and have no ownership of that capital. Capitalists pay the laborers with wages (and are paid money), not with the products the laborers produce. The laborers and use that money to purchase the goods they want. In this way, no one who purchases goods (the consumer) has any real connection to those goods. Rational calculation for profit guides production: The capitalists try to judge the market and adjust production accordingly in order to realize the greatest possible profit. Society is made up of consumers: Because people are disconnected from the goods they produce, the process of buying things, not of creating things, becomes is the primary way in which people define themselves. The more profit the capitalists bring in, the more goods they produce. The more goods the capitalists produce, the lower the price of those goods. The lower the price of goods, the more people can afford to buy, and the higher the standard of living throughout society. The government's only real role in capitalism is to maintain peace and order so the economy can work without interruption. This laissez-faire (anti-interference) system of economics relies on interconnected, self-regulating networks of producers, consumers and markets that operate on the principles of supply and demand.
25 +Layton, Julia. "How Capitalism Works." HowStuffWorks. How Stuff Works, 11 Mar. 2008. Web. 22 Mar. 2017.
26 +
27 +Second is the practical impossibility of socialism. Tyranny, lack of individualism and innovation, historical context on failure, and more impacts in the next card! – Fair warning this evidence is super long and has tons of arguments so pay attention – Ebeling:
28 +First, they warned that under a regime of comprehensive socialism the ordinary citizens would be confronted with the worst of all imaginable tyrannyies. In a world in which all the means of production were concentrated in the hands of the government, the individual would be totally and inescapably dependent on the political authority for his very existence. The socialist state would be the single monopoly provider of employment and all the essentials of life. Dissent from or disobedience to such an all-powerful state could means material destitution for the critic or opponent of those in political authority. Furthermore, that same centralized control would mean and the end to all independent intellectual and cultural pursuits. What would be printed and published, what forms of art and scientific research permitted would be completely at the discretion of those with the power to determine the allocation of society’s resources. Man’s mind and material well-being would be enslaved to the control and caprice of the central planners of the socialist state.1 Second, these nineteenth-century anti-socialists argued that the socialization of the means of production would undermine and fundamentally weaken the close connection between work and reward that necessarily exists under capitalism a system of private property. What There is no incentive does a man have to clear the held, plant the seed, and tend the ground until harvest time if one he knows or fears that the products to which he devotes his mental and physical labor may be stolen from him at any time?2 Similarly, under socialism man would no longer see any direct and no benefit from greater effort, since what would be apportioned to him as his “fair share” by the state would not be related to his exertion, unlike the rewards in a market economy. Laziness and lack of interest would envelop the “new man” in the socialist society to come. Productivity, innovation, and creativity would be dramatically reduced in the future collectivist utopia.3 The twentieth-century experiences with socialism, beginning with the communist revolution in Russia in 1917, proved these critics right. Personal freedom and virtually all traditional civil liberties were crushed under the centralized power of the Total State. Furthermore, the work ethic of man under socialism was captured in a phrase that became notoriously common throughout in the Soviet Union: “They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work.” The defenders of socialism responded by argueing that Lenin’s and Stalin’s Russia, Hitler’s National Socialist Germany, and Mao’s China were not “true” socialism. A true socialist society would mean more freedom not less, so it was unfair to judge socialism by these supposedly twisted experiments in creating a workers’ paradise. Furthermore, under a true socialism, human nature would change and men would no longer be motivated by self-interest, but by a desire to selflessly advance the common good. In the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s, the Austrian economists, most notably Ludwig von Mises4 and Friedrich A. Hayek,5 advanced a uniquely different argument against a socialist society. They, Mises in particular, accepted for the sake of argument that the socialist society would be led by men who had no wish to abuse their power and crush or abrogate freedom, and further, that the same motives for work would prevail under socialism as under private property in the market economy. Even with these assumptions, Mises and Hayek devastatingly demonstrated that comprehensive socialist central planning would create economic chaos.6 Well into the twentieth century, socialism had always meant the abolition of private property in the means of production, the end of market competition by private entrepreneurs for land, capital, and labor, and therefore the elimination of market-generated prices for finished goods and the factors of production, including the wages of labor. Yet without such a competitively generated system of market prices, Mises argued, there would mean be no method for rational economic calculation to determine the least-cost methods of production, or the relative profitability of producing alternative goods and services to best satisfy the wants of the consuming public. It may be possible to determine the technologically most efficient way to produce some good, but this does not tell us whether that particular method of production is the most economically efficient … But under comprehensive socialist central planning, there would be no institutional mechanism to discover these values and opportunity costs. With the abolition of private ownership in the means of production, no resources could be purchased or hired. There would be no bids and offers expressing what the members of society thought the resources were worth in their alternative employments. And without bids and offers, there would be no exchanges, out of which emerges the market structure of relative prices. Thus socialist planning meant the end of all economic rationality, Mises said—if by rationality we mean an economically efficient use of the means of production to produce the goods and services desired by the members of society. Given that nothing ever stands still—that consumer demand, the supply of resources and labor, and technological knowledge are continually changing—a socialist planned economy would be left without the rudder of economic calculation to determine whether what was being produced and how was most cost-effective and profitable. Neither Mises nor Hayek ever denied that a socialist society could exist or even survive for an extended period of time. Indeed, Mises emphasized that in a world that was only partly socialist, the central planners would have a price system to rely on by proxy, that is, by copying the market prices in countries where competitive capitalism still prevailed.7 But even this would only be of approximate value, since the supply-and-demand conditions in a socialist society would not be a one-to-one replica of the market conditions in a neighboring capitalist society. Socialist and even some pro-market critics of Mises have sometimes ridiculed his supposed extreme language that socialism is “impossible.”8 But by “impossible” Mises simply meant to refute the socialist claim in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries that a comprehensive centrally planned economy would not merely generate the same quantity and quality of goods and services as a competitive market economy, but would far exceed it. Socialism could not create the material paradise on earth the socialists had promised. The institutional means (central planning) that they proposed to achieve their stated ends (a greater material prosperity than under capitalism) would instead lead to an outcome radically opposite to what they said they wanted to achieve. Mises emphasized that a socialist society also would lack the consumer-oriented activities of private entrepreneurs. In the market economy, profits can be earned only if the means of production are used to serve consumers. Thus in their own self-interest, private entrepreneurs are driven to apply their knowledge, ability, and “reading” of the market’s direction in the most effective way, in comparison to their rivals who are also trying to capture the business of the buying public. Certainly incentives motivate the private entrepreneur. If he fails to do better than his rivals, his income will diminish and he may eventually go out of business. But the private entrepreneur, as much as the central planner, would be “flying blind” if he could not function within a market order with its network of competitive prices. Thus for Austrian economists like Mises, economic calculation is the benchmark by which to judge whether socialist central planning is a viable alternative to the free-market economy. Without market prices there can be neither economic calculation nor the social coordination of multitudes of individual consumers and producers with their diverse demands, localized knowledge, and appraisements of their individual circumstances. The pricing system is what gives rationality—an efficient use of resources—and direction to society’s activities in the division of labor, so that the means at people’s disposal may be successfully applied to their various ends. Central planning means the end to rational planning by both the central planners and the members of society, since the abolition of a market price system leaves them without the compass of economic calculation to guide them along their way. In the Soviet Union, for example, the older criticisms of collectivism were verified. The Total State did create a cruel, brutal, and murderous tyranny. And the abolition of private property resulted in weakened and often perverse incentives, in which individual access to wealth, position, and power came through membership in the Communist Party and status within the bureaucratic hierarchy. In reality, the rulers of the communist countries had other ends than that of the material and cultural improvement of those over whom they ruled. They pursued personal power and privilege, as well as various ideologically motivated goals. They artificially set prices for both consumer goods and resources at levels that had no relationship to their actual demand or scarcity. As a consequence, the degree of misuse of resources was such that virtually all manufacturing or industrial projects in the Soviet Union used up far more raw materials and labor hours per unit of output than anything comparable in the more market-oriented Western economies. The chaos of the Soviet economy was centered in the lack of a real price system and therefore a method of economic calculation. There could not be a real price system in the Soviet Union because it would have required the reversal of the very rationale for the socialist system, on which the Soviet rulers’ power was based—government control and central planning of production.
29 +Ebeling, Richard M. "Why Socialism Is Impossible | Richard M. Ebeling." FEE. Foundation for Economic Education, 01 Oct. 2004. Web. 22 Mar. 2017.
30 +
31 +Third are reasons to capitalism comes first:
32 +
33 +No one is ever given their due in the evolution of socialism, nor are mutual relations respected. This reason and more are summed up by Young:
34 +Our system of regulated market capitalism is built upon mutually beneficial exchange: reciprocity. Humans realize their ambitions for dominance and hierarchical status through competition, satisfy their desire (envy) for material reward and comfort, and receive recognition and esteem from others through achievement. Capitalism captures the motivation to self-interest and channels it in a way that encourages human cooperation and betterment. … Both economic and cultural Marxism, seeking social justice through communal sharing by group, dominate the beliefs of the American academic left. History is a series of clashes between exploited and exploiting groups. In postmodern multiculturalism, diversity defines individuals as members of groups. Hierarchies that drive capitalism are seen to be oppressive to identity groups and based on unjust privilege. Evolutionary psychology has shown that such group-based approaches are naturally divisive. … Such misguided moralism is the fruit of long years of schooling in “socialism justice.” But capitalism~-~-serving each party’s mutual self-interest as well as the societal interest—is a superior moral system. Ironically, the beliefs ingrained by socialism justice undermine the ability of both capitalism and students to thrive in the real world. “Teaching for social justice” in public schools has yielded graduates lacking the skills required to earn a wage sufficient to support a family. Meanwhile, jobs requiring such skills go begging. Too often in the academy, study of identity subjects produces inflated grades for little effort, aimed at raising the self-esteem of members of oppressed groups, rather than imparting the hard knowledge necessary to succeed in most job situations. Recognition comes from preferences and group rights rather than competition and performance. Group sharing replaces individual responsibility. Fairness replaces differential achievement. Entitlement replaces reciprocity. Hierarchy of diversity replaces hierarchy of merit. Worst of all, equality—inclusive excellence—replaces excellence as the objective of education. Many of the products of American education have been imbued with the enervating tenets of social justice. They have not been prepared for the demands and rigors of the economic constituent of the social order that operates based on the different tenets of capitalism. The resulting combination of ignorance of the functioning of the capitalist order and its requirements, the continued hostility of the intellectual class to that order, and the turn of the academy and the state ever more toward social justice does not bode well for a prosperous future—for either individuals or society.
35 +Young, William H. "Social Justice and Capitalism."  National Association of Scholars. National Association of Scholars, 21 Feb. 2013. Web. 22 Mar. 2017.
36 +
37 +UNDERVIEW:
38 +
39 +Here are some NIB-esq arguments:
40 +
41 +1) I’ve already proved capitalism is best for my framework, but if my framework is false – we assume evaluating the resolutions truth based on the definition of superior as “further above or out; higher in position.” Thus, because the tallest reaching building in the world is the Burj Khalifa in the United Arab Emirates, a capitalist state, then you auto affirm.
42 +
43 +2) Surprise surprise, everyone’s made this argument so far – let’s keep the streak. The resolution is already resolved which means it’s automatically a statement of truth and you affirm
44 +
45 +3) Socialism is defined as “a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.”, this means that a side constraint on the neg is proving the possibility to overthrow capitalism, and because there is no specific country specified the neg must prove that all capitalism can be overthrown.
46 +
47 +4) The neg commits a performative contradiction – they have tons of objects in their possession purchased in a capitalist system – they concede before the round that they bought their laptop for 100$. Thus err aff on all arguments.
48 +
49 +5) At best, social inequity is non-unique, and socialism reverts to capitalism anyway – means the neg devolves to the aff and you auto affirm. Callinicos
50 +It should be noted first that market socialism would not remove all the sources of injustice, since individuals would continue to benefit or suffer because of factors for which they could not be held responsible – the distribution of natural talents would, for example, give some economic actors greater market power than others.' Of more immediate concern: could market socialism constitute a stable alternative to capitalism? It seems doubtful. In a competitive process economic actors seek to gain an advantage over their rivals – for example, by making cost-cutting innovations – that allows them to make higher than average profits. These advantages are often cumulative: the surplus-profit allows the innovator to maintain investment in continuous innovations that widen the gap that separates him from his rivals. Competition can thus increase inequalities across the economy rather than smoothing them out. At the same time, the pressure of competition can also generate inequalities within individual enterprises: the effort to raise productivity and cut costs may encourage the development of managerial hierarchies that undercut the supposedly cooperative character of production. In other words, market socialism is permanently liable to collapse back into market capitalism. To the extent that schemes for market socialism propose institutional safeguards against such tendencies they move away from anything resembling a market economy in Polanyi's sense.
51 +Callinicos – Professor of European Studies – 2003 (Alex, “An Anti-Capitalist Manifesto”)
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 20:35:47.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Tomorrow
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Yesterday
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +8
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Quads
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +I want to buy things, but is that bad
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Rolling in the DEEEEEEEEEEEEEP
Caselist.CitesClass[15]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,75 @@
1 +I defend a minarchist framework in which states may only prevent physical aggression and enforce contracts between citizens – implying we cut all taxes to 0
2 +
3 + First, only minarchy respects the separateness of persons. Letting the state interfere with a’s choices for the benefit of b treats their interests as commensurable in terms of a social aggregate. But this misconceives of value since values are agent-relative, i.e. their logic requires that they be objects of valuation for some agent, so the notion of impersonal or aggregate value which could justify using one against her will for the benefit of others is incoherent.
4 +
5 + Second, only minarchy treats people as moral agents. Any non-minimal state imposes some theory of the good on its people. This can only be justified on the assumption that their choices won’t accurately track moral reasons, e.g. that even though we should give money to the poor, we won’t unless we’re forced to. But (a) this undercuts the foundation of any moral theory since if human behavior doesn’t naturally respond to moral reasons, then we’re not moral agents and not subject to moral prescription, and (b) it entails a contradiction since if single persons won’t do the right thing given the choice, then groups won’t either since their will is just that of their members. This means any non-minarchist framework is self-undercutting and thus excluded as a matter of logic, precluding other framework warrants.
6 +
7 + Third, any non-minimal state is a potential oppressor since viewing the state as a guarantor of the common good permits any use of state power given the right empirical claims about the world, i.e. the state can claim that the common good requires any arbitrary curtailment of rights. This makes my framework a prerequisite to his/hers since it’s the only one that can guarantee.
8 +
9 + Fourth, minarchy maximizes any coherent measure of aggregate welfare, since it lets citizens form communities of choice to carry out common projects rather than forcing those projects on them. Minarchic society is meta-utopian in that it lets each person create or opt into the scheme of institutions and common projects they judge best, including social safety nets to provide goods like health care, but doesn’t force anyone to live under a particular scheme.
10 +
11 + I contend that negating violates minarchy. – Framework auto affirms because minarchy implies affirmation.
12 +
13 +The negative of the resolution implies that an agent will maintain taxes on the rich but this violates minarchy. A) taxes violate private property rights which the government does not have jurisdiction to do B) taxes do not enforce private contracts and c) it breaches the public-private distinction by rejecting the notion of property rights. And, claims about the efficacy of taxes don’t matter.
14 +
15 +Underview
16 +First, the following theoretical skews exist against the aff
17 +a. Time skew becomes 6-1 in the 2NR since I cover multiple layers, makes it impossible to win.
18 +b. 1 minute is 1/4 of the 1AR versus 1/7 of the NC, means that the neg arguments are skewed.
19 +c. The neg won 8 percent more rounds at octas and quarters bids last year.
20 +1 Vbriefly. “LD Side Bias.” Includes every round from an octas or quarters bid during the 2014-2015 season. 3177 aff wins, 3737 neg wins.
21 +d. The aff goes into the round blind, where the neg can adapt their initial rebuttal to the affirmative speech. Outweighs framing power because the neg can make the initial up layering, where the aff loses that chance in the 2AR. This means the neg has a larger opportunity to up layer - 7 minutes to 4.
22 +e. The aff has more chances to make mistakes - as they have A) more speeches and B) more times necessary to extend the position to win.
23 +f. The neg gets more responsive speech time, the aff has 7 minutes to the neg’s 13, responsive speech time is advantageous because they can gain offense while simultaneously taking away aff ground.
24 +g. The aff has to present arguments for permissibility ground where the neg can simply point out ought in the res – means the neg gets defacto 2 layers to 1
25 +h. The neg gets the first chance to introduce responsive theoretical arguments – the aff can only make pre-emptive ones that are less effective
26 +i. The neg gets to present multiple offcases in their first speech because they aren’t tied to the res, means they get access to more layers
27 +j. Braedon chose the resolution and his side, means he had most strategical advantage going into the round
28 +k. Framers intent means breadon can skew the res to whatever he wants it to mean – and consent to res doesn’t solve because even if I asked him to think of a different resolution the same skew would still apply.
29 +l. The neg gets peace of mind because they don’t have to suffer through so many speeches and are fully aware of the skews to their side – and even if they weren’t they are now
30 +And – 1) assume these arguments are articulated in the practice debate times – the impacts still apply and are magnified due to the meager 2 minute 2AR, which is even worse and 2) cross apply these arguments as justifications for every theory framing issue, as compensation is required for the theoretical skews.
31 +
32 +Second, the neg must line by line all arguments in the aff framework if it is a cohesive moral theory.
33 +Standards:
34 +A) Philosophical Education: If the neg tries to win framework through preclusion it avoids key information that is important for education. The point of debate is not to learn skimpy strategies to get out of arguing but to weigh with arguments for different moral theories. Key to education because avoiding what is a majority of literature on most topics harms education.
35 +B) Clash: Avoiding framework debate for frivolous preclusion harms clash because we never debate the actual arguments and just say our framework precludes, clash key to education -in order to gain knowledge, you must engage in a substantive debate.
36 +C) Strat Skew: Each debater expects arguments to have strategic value, when one side avoids a whole portion it makes destroys strat. It is necessary to cover all arguments on the highest layer of the debate. Key to fairness because one side having an easier time creating a strategy is definitionally unfair.
37 +
38 +Third is The neg must weigh all arguments under the aff framework and under no competing theory or weighing mechanism
39 +A) AFC is the most logical option since the 1AC starts the debate. O’Donnell:
40 +, There are several reasons why the affirmative should get to choose the framework for the debate. First, AFC preserves the value of the first affirmative constructive speech. This speech is the starting point. for the Debate. It is a function of necessity. The debate must begin somewhere if it is to begin at all. Failure to grant AFC is a denial of the service rendered by the affirmative team’s labor when they crafted this speech. Further, if the affirmative does not get to pick the starting point, the opening speech act is essentially rendered meaningless while the rest of the debate becomes a debate about what we should be debating about. History is instructive here. The brief and undistinguished life of both counter warrants and plan-plan have amply demonstrated the chaos that results when the negative refuses to engage the affirmative on its chosen starting point.
41 +O’DONNELL, “And the Twain Shall Meet: Affirmative Framework Choice and the Future of Debate”. Timothy M. O’Donnell. Director of Debate. University of Mary Washington.
42 +
43 +B) the negative can adapt to aff interpretations but the aff cannot adopt to negative interpretations since I’ve already read by case. Denying aff framework choice would moot six minutes of speech time, killing fairness by creating a structural time skew.
44 +
45 +C) AFC is the most effective way to combat side bias.
46 +Henson and Dorasil:
47 +The rounds have an advantage over those who represent the negative in only three rounds. Of course, this would do nothing to solve for potential side bias in elimination rounds.27 A final potential remedy may be the most effective remedy, but is also the most difficult to implement. If debate judges were to substantially alter their accepted norms to be more affirmative-friendly, then competitive equity could be achieved without the need to wait for policy change. For example, a norm for evaluating arguments that gave the affirmative substantial leeway regarding what constitutes addressing an argument or makes the affirmative’s interpretation for how the round should be evaluated the one a judge is accepteds by default (subject, of course, to the negative’s ability to show that this interpretation is unreasonable) may give the affirmative a competitive advantage to offset the structural disadvantage imposed by the time limits.
48 +Henson and Dorasil (Chad, J.D and Ph.D Candidate @ Illinois, debate head coach @ Illinois, Paul, Ph.D candidate @ Univ of Florida, An Empirical Analysis of Judging Bias in Competitive Academic Debate, Working Paper Series, SSRN, 2011, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1768087, AC)
49 +
50 +Fourth, Ideal theory is necessary to guide responses to injustice. Shelby:
51 +The trouble with Mills’s view is that he regards nonideal theory as independent of ideal theory, indeed as an alternative to it. But nonideal theory—the study of the principles that should guide our responses to injustice—cannot succeed without knowing what the standards of justice are (and perhaps also what justifies these standards). It is not clear how we are to develop a philosophically adequate and complete theory of how to respond to social injustice without first knowing what makes a social scheme unjust. When dealing with gross injustices, such as slavery, we may of course be able to judge correctly that a social arrangement it unjust simply by observing it or having it described to us, relying exclusively on our pre-theoretic moral convictions. We don’t need a theory for that. But with less manifest injustices, or when our political values seem to conflict, or when we’re uncertain about what justice requires, or when there is great but honest disagreement about whether a practice is unjust, we won’t know which aspects of a society should be altered in the absence of a more systematic conception of justice. Without a set of principles that enabling us to identify the injustice-making features of a social system, we could not be confident in the direction social change should take, at least not if our aim is to realize a fully just society. In light of these considerations, I have two questions about Mills’s project: If we abandon the framework for ideal theorizing, how do we determine which principles of justice should guide our reform or revolutionary efforts, and how do we justify these principles if we must rely exclusively on nonideal theory? Unless Mills is prepared to relinquish the goal of realizing a fully just society, he owes an answer to these questions.
52 +Thus, only the most theoretically ideal option matters.
53 +
54 +Fifth, historical precedent outweighs other ends-based arguments, the only verifiable evidence we have is of previous occurrences, we can have no knowledge of future possibilities, and free market proven historically best. Gilligan:
55 +Each day we participate in the most just and free market system is free in the world. The iPhone we bought to talk to friends, the Pepsi we give to that riot policeman to stop violence drank to keep us awake to study, the paycheck from work, are an integrative part of the free market.  Dinesh D’Souza, former President of The King’s College noted free market “capitalism satisfied the Christian demand for an institution that channels selfish human desire toward the betterment of society.” Author Michael Novak documents the origin of free enterprise to the Catholic’s creation of Canon Law, which led to a common market and law system by establishing “jurisdictions of empire, nation, chartered city, guild for merchants, and entrepreneurs. It also provided local and regional arbitrators, jurists, negotiators, and judges.  Now gears for windmills, harnesses for beasts of burden, ocean-going ship rudders, eyeglasses, and ironwork” were invented with the free flow of trade and ideas.  Later the “Protestant Work Ethic” would bring ferocity for free markets documented in Max Weber’s 1905 book, The Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism.  Book critic Tom Butler-Bowdon states Weber makes a compelling argument that Protestants made free markets worthy and morally just because “of the spirit of progress; the love of hard work for its own sake; the orderliness, punctuality and honesty; and the belief in a higher calling.” As history tells us, the free enterprise system has been the catalyst for the greatest strides in innovation, social mobility, and the standard of living.  In a free enterprise system, allocation of goods through trade is not an exploitation of buyers by sellers, rather a mutual agreement of value between two consenting parties.  However, many of today’s liberal-progressives argue free enterprise is unethical resulting in a mal-distribution of wealth.  They claim markets cause the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer.  However, history has shown societies prospered from free market expansion which created a better standard of living for all income classes.
56 +Gilligan, Joseph. "Two Views: Is Free-market Capitalism Good and Just?" Houghton Star. N.p., 14 Dec. 2013. Web. 16 Apr. 2017.
57 +
58 +Sixth, minarchic economy is most theoretically sound. Richman:
59 +Market advocates tend to respect the intellect of their fellow human beings. You can tell by their reliance on philosophical, moral, economic, and historical arguments when trying to persuade others. But what if most people’s aversion to the market isn’t founded in philosophy, morality, economics, or history? What if their objection but is aesthetic? More and more I’ve come to think this is the case, and I believe I witnessed an example recently at a lecture I gave at St. Lawrence University. During the QandA a woman asked, in all sincerity, why society couldn’t do without money, since so many bad things are associated with it. She also suggested that cooperation is better than market competition. I replied that since money facilitates exchange and exchange is cooperation, it follows that money facilitates cooperation — a lovely thing, indeed. Government, I added, corrupts money. I also said that competition is what happens when we are free to decide with whom we will cooperate. I don’t know if my response prompted her to rethink her objections to the market, but I am confident her objection was aesthetic. For her, money and competition are ugly. Perhaps I didn’t respond on an aesthetic level; it’s something I have to work on. But I tried, and so must we all when we encounter these sorts of objections. Like that nice woman, many decent people dislike markets because they find them unattractive. And they associate markets with other things they find unattractive besides money and competition: (rugged, atomistic) individualism, selfishness, and profit. F.A. Hayek noticed this, writing in “Individualism: True and False” (PDF), “the belief that individualism approves and encourages human selfishness is one of the main reasons why so many people dislike it.” If that’s the case, philosophical, moral, economic, and historical arguments may fall on deaf ears. The objections must be met on an aesthetic level. In other words, advocates of free markets must demonstrate that markets are things of beauty. Fortunately, that is not hard to do. The freed market is a political-legal setting in which people are at liberty to peacefully pursue their chosen plans. This activity generates, unintentionally, an undesigned order that facilitates cooperation and coordination among even distant strangers, making each person’s pursuit more effective and efficient than otherwise. The price system is the primary means by which this is accomplished. To many people, the price system seems impersonal and cold, but it’s the key to the market’s beauty, for it is what gives the market its coordinative and corrective power, which, although generated by individuals’ purposive action, transcends them. The market is beautiful not because it lives up to some mathematically elegant equilibrium model — but because it does not! It’s beauty lies in its has the power to coordinate and correct errors. And it does this work without compulsion or authoritarian central direction. As a result, when truly free — no privileges, no arbitrary restrictions — the market gives all a better chance at living in any peaceful way they wish. How lovely!
60 +Richman, Sheldon. "The Free Market Is a Beautiful Thing." Reason.com. FMAFM, 14 Apr. 2013. Web. 16 Apr. 2017.
61 +
62 +Seventh, meta-ethical actualism means no fiat for counter-advocacies. Whether an agent ought to do something depends on their actual alternative. Suppose Professor Procrastinate is asked to write a review that he’s best qualified to write, but knows that if he says yes he’ll never actually complete the review, he ought to say no since this is better than the actual alternative. Jackson and Pargetter:
63 +There are four considerations which support Actualism's answer that Procrastinate ought to say no, and we will note that each might with suitable modifications be applied to the Jones case to give the answer that Jones ought to accelerate. (i) Possibilism is arbitrary. It is true that saying yes and writing is an essential part of the best extended course of action open to Procrastinate, namely, saying yes and later writing. This fact is the basis of Possibilism's declaration that Procrastinate ought to say yes. But it is equally true that saying yes and failing to is an essential part of the worst extended course of action open to him, namely, saying yes but failing to write the review. Surely then there must be more to say before the question of what Procrastinate ought to do is settled. In themselves the fact that saying yes is part of the best, and the fact that it is part of the worst shows nothing. The first points to the answer that Procrastinate ought to say yes, the second equally to that he ought to say no. Possibilism errs in allowsing the first fact to settle the matter. By contrast, Actualism holds that we arbitrates between the two by reference to what Procrastinate would do were he to say yes, and would do were he to say no; and as in our case what would be the case were he to say yes would be worse, he ought not say yes and ought to say no. … Similarly, Jones ought to accelerate; for she ought to given she is going to change lanes, and she is going to change lanes. (iv) If anything is clear about the case of Procrastinate, it is that he ought not unduly delay the reviewing of the book. That is the basis for judging that his saying yes but failing to review would be the worst result. But what is unduly delaying the reviewing? Doing something which causes (in right way) the undue delaying of the reviewing of the book. But ex hypothesi Procrastinate’s saying yes would be doing something which causes the undue delaying of the reviewing of the book, hence, would be his unduly delaying the reviewing of the book. Thus, as his unduly delaying the review is something he ought not do, so is his saying yes. ‘They’ are one and the same, and Possibilism's answer that he ought to say yes is wrong. Similarly, unduly disrupting the traffic in the lane she is going to change into is something Jones ought not do; but it is the same action in the case as described as not accelerating; hence, not accelerating is not, and accelerating is, what Jones ought to do. We have labored the case for Actualism, more particularly for its answers that Procrastinate ought to say no, and that Jones ought to accelerate, because Actualism has a consequence which is prima facie untoward. We hope to have motivated you to follow us in seeing how on examination it is not untoward but rather leads us to an appreciation of the second problem referred to at the beginning.”
64 +Frank Jackson and Robert Pargetter, “Oughts, Options, and Actualism”, Philosophical Review, 1986
65 +Thus the neg may not read a counterplan that relies on fiat.
66 +
67 +Eighth, all aff arguments outweigh because I made them in less time and because I said so.
68 +
69 +Ninth, allow new responses to neg extrapolations in the 2AR because not all implications can be made clear in the initial negative speech which allows advocacy shift and ability to mute all aff offense in the 2N with no recourse
70 +
71 +Tenth, the neg must only have one route to the ballot because the aff can only have the AC, as there are no NIBS or drop the debater theory shells allowed in practice debates
72 +
73 +Eleventh, presume aff because to affirm means “to express dedication” (Merriam Webster) so affirmation doesn’t require proving a truth claim. Negate however means “to deny the truth of” (Merriam Webster) so negating does require proving a truth claim.
74 +
75 +Twelth, give the aff permissibility ground because A) Similar to “innocent until proven guilty” you assume aff until the neg has met it’s burden of truth - thus disproving the possibility for truth of the neg is sufficient to affirm and B) Try or die for the aff because only the aff has risk to create beneficial change
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 20:37:01.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Huh
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Why
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +9
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Thomas McGinnis Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Taxes are bad amirite
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +TJs House
Caselist.RoundClass[0]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +0
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-12-05 15:54:13.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +ALL
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +ALL
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
RoundReport
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +These are citations being read on the November December topic
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +NOV DEC
Caselist.RoundClass[1]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-12-17 21:20:40.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Trevor Martinez
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Poly Prep Country Day
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Blake
Caselist.RoundClass[2]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-12-17 21:23:00.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Nick Smith
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Oakwood
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +4
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Blake
Caselist.RoundClass[3]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +3
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-12-17 21:25:12.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Dan Carlson
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Apple Valley
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Blake
Caselist.RoundClass[4]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +4
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-12-17 21:30:05.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Jim Broomfield
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Collegiate
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +3
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Blake
Caselist.RoundClass[5]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 01:47:17.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Big Moat Foley
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Trent Gilbert
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +TOC
Caselist.RoundClass[6]
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 20:32:25.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Over there
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +The one
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +9
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +That one
Caselist.RoundClass[7]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +13
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 20:34:27.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +The 9th Edition of Trent Gilberts Encyclopedia
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +God
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +9
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Valley Garage Sale May 6th
Caselist.RoundClass[8]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +14
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 20:35:45.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Tomorrow
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Yesterday
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Quads
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Rolling in the DEEEEEEEEEEEEEP
Caselist.RoundClass[9]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +15
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-04-29 20:36:59.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Huh
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Why
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +TJs House

Schools

Aberdeen Central (SD)
Acton-Boxborough (MA)
Albany (CA)
Albuquerque Academy (NM)
Alief Taylor (TX)
American Heritage Boca Delray (FL)
American Heritage Plantation (FL)
Anderson (TX)
Annie Wright (WA)
Apple Valley (MN)
Appleton East (WI)
Arbor View (NV)
Arcadia (CA)
Archbishop Mitty (CA)
Ardrey Kell (NC)
Ashland (OR)
Athens (TX)
Bainbridge (WA)
Bakersfield (CA)
Barbers Hill (TX)
Barrington (IL)
BASIS Mesa (AZ)
BASIS Scottsdale (AZ)
BASIS Silicon (CA)
Beckman (CA)
Bellarmine (CA)
Benjamin Franklin (LA)
Benjamin N Cardozo (NY)
Bentonville (AR)
Bergen County (NJ)
Bettendorf (IA)
Bingham (UT)
Blue Valley Southwest (KS)
Brentwood (CA)
Brentwood Middle (CA)
Bridgewater-Raritan (NJ)
Bronx Science (NY)
Brophy College Prep (AZ)
Brown (KY)
Byram Hills (NY)
Byron Nelson (TX)
Cabot (AR)
Calhoun Homeschool (TX)
Cambridge Rindge (MA)
Canyon Crest (CA)
Canyon Springs (NV)
Cape Fear Academy (NC)
Carmel Valley Independent (CA)
Carpe Diem (NJ)
Cedar Park (TX)
Cedar Ridge (TX)
Centennial (ID)
Centennial (TX)
Center For Talented Youth (MD)
Cerritos (CA)
Chaminade (CA)
Chandler (AZ)
Chandler Prep (AZ)
Chaparral (AZ)
Charles E Smith (MD)
Cherokee (OK)
Christ Episcopal (LA)
Christopher Columbus (FL)
Cinco Ranch (TX)
Citrus Valley (CA)
Claremont (CA)
Clark (NV)
Clark (TX)
Clear Brook (TX)
Clements (TX)
Clovis North (CA)
College Prep (CA)
Collegiate (NY)
Colleyville Heritage (TX)
Concord Carlisle (MA)
Concordia Lutheran (TX)
Connally (TX)
Coral Glades (FL)
Coral Science (NV)
Coral Springs (FL)
Coppell (TX)
Copper Hills (UT)
Corona Del Sol (AZ)
Crandall (TX)
Crossroads (CA)
Cupertino (CA)
Cy-Fair (TX)
Cypress Bay (FL)
Cypress Falls (TX)
Cypress Lakes (TX)
Cypress Ridge (TX)
Cypress Springs (TX)
Cypress Woods (TX)
Dallastown (PA)
Davis (CA)
Delbarton (NJ)
Derby (KS)
Des Moines Roosevelt (IA)
Desert Vista (AZ)
Diamond Bar (CA)
Dobson (AZ)
Dougherty Valley (CA)
Dowling Catholic (IA)
Dripping Springs (TX)
Dulles (TX)
duPont Manual (KY)
Dwyer (FL)
Eagle (ID)
Eastside Catholic (WA)
Edgemont (NY)
Edina (MN)
Edmond North (OK)
Edmond Santa Fe (OK)
El Cerrito (CA)
Elkins (TX)
Enloe (NC)
Episcopal (TX)
Evanston (IL)
Evergreen Valley (CA)
Ferris (TX)
Flintridge Sacred Heart (CA)
Flower Mound (TX)
Fordham Prep (NY)
Fort Lauderdale (FL)
Fort Walton Beach (FL)
Freehold Township (NJ)
Fremont (NE)
Frontier (MO)
Gabrielino (CA)
Garland (TX)
George Ranch (TX)
Georgetown Day (DC)
Gig Harbor (WA)
Gilmour (OH)
Glenbrook South (IL)
Gonzaga Prep (WA)
Grand Junction (CO)
Grapevine (TX)
Green Valley (NV)
Greenhill (TX)
Guyer (TX)
Hamilton (AZ)
Hamilton (MT)
Harker (CA)
Harmony (TX)
Harrison (NY)
Harvard Westlake (CA)
Hawken (OH)
Head Royce (CA)
Hebron (TX)
Heights (MD)
Hendrick Hudson (NY)
Henry Grady (GA)
Highland (UT)
Highland (ID)
Hockaday (TX)
Holy Cross (LA)
Homewood Flossmoor (IL)
Hopkins (MN)
Houston Homeschool (TX)
Hunter College (NY)
Hutchinson (KS)
Immaculate Heart (CA)
Independent (All)
Interlake (WA)
Isidore Newman (LA)
Jack C Hays (TX)
James Bowie (TX)
Jefferson City (MO)
Jersey Village (TX)
John Marshall (CA)
Juan Diego (UT)
Jupiter (FL)
Kapaun Mount Carmel (KS)
Kamiak (WA)
Katy Taylor (TX)
Keller (TX)
Kempner (TX)
Kent Denver (CO)
King (FL)
Kingwood (TX)
Kinkaid (TX)
Klein (TX)
Klein Oak (TX)
Kudos College (CA)
La Canada (CA)
La Costa Canyon (CA)
La Jolla (CA)
La Reina (CA)
Lafayette (MO)
Lake Highland (FL)
Lake Travis (TX)
Lakeville North (MN)
Lakeville South (MN)
Lamar (TX)
LAMP (AL)
Law Magnet (TX)
Langham Creek (TX)
Lansing (KS)
LaSalle College (PA)
Lawrence Free State (KS)
Layton (UT)
Leland (CA)
Leucadia Independent (CA)
Lexington (MA)
Liberty Christian (TX)
Lincoln (OR)
Lincoln (NE)
Lincoln East (NE)
Lindale (TX)
Livingston (NJ)
Logan (UT)
Lone Peak (UT)
Los Altos (CA)
Los Osos (CA)
Lovejoy (TX)
Loyola (CA)
Loyola Blakefield (MA)
Lynbrook (CA)
Maeser Prep (UT)
Mannford (OK)
Marcus (TX)
Marlborough (CA)
McClintock (AZ)
McDowell (PA)
McNeil (TX)
Meadows (NV)
Memorial (TX)
Millard North (NE)
Millard South (NE)
Millard West (NE)
Millburn (NJ)
Milpitas (CA)
Miramonte (CA)
Mission San Jose (CA)
Monsignor Kelly (TX)
Monta Vista (CA)
Montclair Kimberley (NJ)
Montgomery (TX)
Monticello (NY)
Montville Township (NJ)
Morris Hills (NJ)
Mountain Brook (AL)
Mountain Pointe (AZ)
Mountain View (CA)
Mountain View (AZ)
Murphy Middle (TX)
NCSSM (NC)
New Orleans Jesuit (LA)
New Trier (IL)
Newark Science (NJ)
Newburgh Free Academy (NY)
Newport (WA)
North Allegheny (PA)
North Crowley (TX)
North Hollywood (CA)
Northland Christian (TX)
Northwood (CA)
Notre Dame (CA)
Nueva (CA)
Oak Hall (FL)
Oakwood (CA)
Okoboji (IA)
Oxbridge (FL)
Oxford (CA)
Pacific Ridge (CA)
Palm Beach Gardens (FL)
Palo Alto Independent (CA)
Palos Verdes Peninsula (CA)
Park Crossing (AL)
Peak to Peak (CO)
Pembroke Pines (FL)
Pennsbury (PA)
Phillips Academy Andover (MA)
Phoenix Country Day (AZ)
Pine Crest (FL)
Pingry (NJ)
Pittsburgh Central Catholic (PA)
Plano East (TX)
Polytechnic (CA)
Presentation (CA)
Princeton (NJ)
Prosper (TX)
Quarry Lane (CA)
Raisbeck-Aviation (WA)
Rancho Bernardo (CA)
Randolph (NJ)
Reagan (TX)
Richardson (TX)
Ridge (NJ)
Ridge Point (TX)
Riverside (SC)
Robert Vela (TX)
Rosemount (MN)
Roseville (MN)
Round Rock (TX)
Rowland Hall (UT)
Royse City (TX)
Ruston (LA)
Sacred Heart (MA)
Sacred Heart (MS)
Sage Hill (CA)
Sage Ridge (NV)
Salado (TX)
Salpointe Catholic (AZ)
Sammamish (WA)
San Dieguito (CA)
San Marino (CA)
SandHoke (NC)
Santa Monica (CA)
Sarasota (FL)
Saratoga (CA)
Scarsdale (NY)
Servite (CA)
Seven Lakes (TX)
Shawnee Mission East (KS)
Shawnee Mission Northwest (KS)
Shawnee Mission South (KS)
Shawnee Mission West (KS)
Sky View (UT)
Skyline (UT)
Smithson Valley (TX)
Southlake Carroll (TX)
Sprague (OR)
St Agnes (TX)
St Andrews (MS)
St Francis (CA)
St James (AL)
St Johns (TX)
St Louis Park (MN)
St Margarets (CA)
St Marys Hall (TX)
St Thomas (MN)
St Thomas (TX)
Stephen F Austin (TX)
Stoneman Douglas (FL)
Stony Point (TX)
Strake Jesuit (TX)
Stratford (TX)
Stratford Independent (CA)
Stuyvesant (NY)
Success Academy (NY)
Sunnyslope (AZ)
Sunset (OR)
Syosset (NY)
Tahoma (WA)
Talley (AZ)
Texas Academy of Math and Science (TX)
Thomas Jefferson (VA)
Thompkins (TX)
Timber Creek (FL)
Timothy Christian (NJ)
Tom C Clark (TX)
Tompkins (TX)
Torrey Pines (CA)
Travis (TX)
Trinity (KY)
Trinity Prep (FL)
Trinity Valley (TX)
Truman (PA)
Turlock (CA)
Union (OK)
Unionville (PA)
University High (CA)
University School (OH)
University (FL)
Upper Arlington (OH)
Upper Dublin (PA)
Valley (IA)
Valor Christian (CO)
Vashon (WA)
Ventura (CA)
Veritas Prep (AZ)
Vestavia Hills (AL)
Vincentian (PA)
Walla Walla (WA)
Walt Whitman (MD)
Warren (TX)
Wenatchee (WA)
West (UT)
West Ranch (CA)
Westford (MA)
Westlake (TX)
Westview (OR)
Westwood (TX)
Whitefish Bay (WI)
Whitney (CA)
Wilson (DC)
Winston Churchill (TX)
Winter Springs (FL)
Woodlands (TX)
Woodlands College Park (TX)
Wren (SC)
Yucca Valley (CA)