Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[48]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[6]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[48]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2017-04-12 17:58:23.938
	1	+2017-04-12 17:58:23.0

Caselist.CitesClass[6]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,7 @@
	1	+====The aff is an anthropocentric project which sustains the human nonhuman hierarchy – this makes any protections meaningless ====
	2	+**Deckha 10** – Associate professor of Law at the University of Victoria. ("The Subhuman as a Cultural Agent of Violence" Journal for Critical Animal Studies http://www.criticalanimalstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/JCAS-Special-Issue-Women-of-Color-November-FINAL-20101.doc)
	3	+The first part of this paper has established the importance of the subhuman figure in several contemporary manifestations of violence: militarized and police camps, slavery and slavery-like practices, and the laws of war. If this role played by subhumanization is accurate, a pressing question presents itself: should we continue to rely on anti-violence discourses (i.e., human rights or other "human" justice campaigns) that entrench the subhuman category? In other words, human rights discourses do not instruct us to purge the subhuman category or the human/nonhuman divide from our critical repertoire. Instead, they seek to convince us that we should see all human beings as definitely human and not subhumanize them. This approach does not effectivly achieve its aims of protecting vulnerable human groups from violence because it leaves the subhuman category intact, a category that humanized humans can always assert should convictions sway about the relative moral worth of a particular human group. The subhuman category is then poised to "animalize" or dehumanize the targeted group and generate corresponding justifications as to why the human group does not deserve better than subhuman treatment. A better strategy would be to eliminate the subhuman category from the onset by impugning the human/nonhuman boundary itself and thus the claim to human superiority.
	4	+
	5	+====Rather than produce the slaughterhouse of a so-called "radical" and more perfect humanity, vote negative to disrupt and revolutionize your humanist identity – every interaction and conversation is key – sole focus on animals comes before anything else====
	6	+**Best No Date** ~~Steven, Chair of Philosophy at UT-EP, "Animal Rights and the New Enlightenment", http://www.drstevebest.org/AnimalRightsandtheNewEnlightenment.htm~~
	7	+The next logical step in human moral evolution is to embrace animal rights and accept its profound implications. Animal rights builds on the most progressive ethical and political advances human beings have made in the last two hundred years. Simply put, the argument for animal rights states that if humans have rights, animals have rights for the same reasons. Moral significance lies not in our differences as species but rather our commonalities as subjects of a life.¶ This is the challenge of animal rights: can human beings become truly enlightened and overcome one of the last remaining prejudices enshrined in democratic legal systems? Can they reorganize their economic systems, retool their technologies, and transform their cultural traditions? Above all, can they construct new sensibilities, values, worldviews, and identities?¶ The animal rights movement poses a fundamental evolutionary challenge to human beings in the midst of severe crises in the social and natural worlds. Can we recognize that the animal question is central to the human question? Can we grasp how the exploitation of animals is implicated in every aspect of the crisis in our relation to one another and the natural world?¶ Animal rights is an assault on human species identity. It smashes the compass of speciesism and calls into question the cosmological maps whereby humans define their place in the world. Animal rights demands that human beings give up their sense of superiority over other animals. It challenges people to realize that power demands responsibility, that might is not right, and that an enlarged neocortex is no excuse to rape and plunder the natural world.¶ These profound changes in worldview demand revolutionizing one’s daily life and recognizing just how personal the political is. I teach many radical philosophies, but only animal rights has the power to upset and transform daily rituals and social relations. "Radical" philosophies such as anarchism or Marxism uncritically reproduce speciesism. After the Marxist seminar, students can talk at the dinner table about revolution while dining on the bodies of murdered farmed animals. § Marked 09:34 § After the animal rights seminar, they often find themselves staring at their plates, questioning their most basic behaviors, and feeling alienated from their carping friends and family. The message rings true and stirs the soul.¶ Let’s be clear: we are fighting for a revolution, not for reforms, for the end of slavery, not for humane slavemasters. Animal rights advances the most radical idea to ever land on human ears: animals are not food, clothing, resources, or objects of entertainment.¶ Our goal is nothing less than to change entrenched attitudes, sedimented practices, and powerful institutions that profit from animal exploitation. Indeed, the state has demonized us as "eco-terrorists" and is criminalizing our fight for what is right.¶ Our task is especially difficult because we must transcend the comfortable boundaries of humanism and urge a qualitative leap in moral consideration. We are insisting that people not only change their views of one another within the species they share, but rather realize that species boundaries are as arbitrary as those of race and sex. Our task is to provoke humanity to move the moral bar from reason and language to sentience and subjectivity.¶ We must not only educate, we must become a social movement. The challenge of animal rights also is our challenge, for animal rights must not only be an idea but a social movement for the liberation of the world’s most oppressed beings, both in terms of numbers and in the severity of their pain. As with all revolutions, animals will not gain rights because oppressors suddenly see the light, but rather because enough people become enlightened and learn how rock the structures of power, to shake them until new social arrangements emerge.¶ Are we asking for too much? Justice requires only what is right, and is never excessive. Is the revolution remotely possible? In a thousand ways, the revolution is gaining ground. From the near nation-wide ban on cockfighting to making animal abuse a felony crime in 37 states, from eliminating the use of animals to train doctors in two thirds of U.S. medical schools to teaching animal rights and the law seminars at over two dozen universities, from increasing media coverage of animal welfare/rights issues to a 2003 Gallup Poll finding that 96 of Americans say that animals deserve some protection from abuse and 25 say that animals deserve "the exact same rights as people to be free from harm and exploitation" it is clear that human beings are beginning to change their views about other species.¶ Human beings simply will have to reinvent their identities and find ways to define humanity and culture apart from cruelty. Whether people realize it or not, this is not a burden but a liberation. One no longer has to live the lie of separation and the opening of the heart can bring a profound healing.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2017-04-12 17:58:25.600

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Javier Gonzalez

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Reagan RB

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+48

Round

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

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Warren Okunlola Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+5 - K - Anthropocentrism - 1NC - Brandeis Round 1

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Brandeis