Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[17]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[16]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[17]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-10-11 05:54:33.815
	1	+2016-10-11 05:54:33.0

Caselist.CitesClass[16]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,72 @@
	1	+=1-off =
	2	+Interpretation: If the affirmative chooses to specify an actor that bans the production of nuclear power, they must specify a minimum of two countries with a carded solvency advocate that specifies all the countries involved in the aff plan text.
	3	+
	4	+
	5	+====Dictionary.com defines that countries is a, Dictionary.com, Countries, http://www.dictionary.com/browse/countries====
	6	+noun, plural countries.
	7	+Violation: Aff defends one country.
	8	+
	9	+Standards:
	10	+Grammar- "countries" is a plural noun, which
	11	+AND
	12	+shell. Giving you another way out creates a 2:1 skew.
	13	+
	14	+
	15	+=2-off=
	16	+
	17	+
	18	+====
	19	+First is framing—====
	20	+
	21	+
	22	+====The role of the ballot is to question the border assumptions of the 1AC's scholarship prior to the consequence of the plan. Questioning the violence of borders is a forgotten discussion in that needs to be revisisted. ====
	23	+**Van Houtum 05** ~~Henk Van Houtum, Nijmegen Centre for Border Research, Radboud University, The Netherlands, "The Geopolitics of Borders and Boundaries," 2005~~ JW
	24	+The second reason why I think it is a shame that we are not discussing
	25	+AND
	26	+making when b/ordering ourselves and others? And at what price?
	27	+
	28	+
	29	+====Next is the criticism:====
	30	+
	31	+
	32	+====The affirmative reifies the legitimacy of nation states by choosing to defend a specific country pursuing prohibition of nuclear weapons. The affirmative chose to orient it's politics around the nation-state which inevitably reproduces violent boundaries and borders. This link is unavoidable and damning. ====
	33	+Walker 9** **~~R.B.J., Walker is a professor in the department of Political Science at the University of Victoria and is the chief editor of the Journal of International Political Sociology, "After the Globe, Before the world", pg. 77 – 80~~
	34	+The consequence, however, can also be read in relation to all those historical
	35	+AND
	36	+the limits of the modern political imagination will necessarily run into irresolvable difficulties.
	37	+
	38	+
	39	+====The affirmative cannot delink. This link is supercharged because borders are an ontological division of the inside versus the outside which fuels nationalism. ====
	40	+**Agnew 08**—Department of Geography @ UCLA (John, 2008, Ethics and Global Politics, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 175-191"Borders on the mind: re-framing border thinking," rmf)
	41	+A third connection with political identity is made by those who emphasize the idea of
	42	+AND
	43	+project that simply takes place at the border or simply between adjacent states.
	44	+
	45	+
	46	+====The affirmative fuels the creation of a mutual xenophobic otherization of those across the border- this results in cartographical violence that is justified by the perpetually fear of the other. Bornstein 2:====
	47	+**Bornstein 2**(Avram Bornstein, professor @ John Jay college anthropology PhD and masters @ Columbia, "Borders and the Utility of Violence State Effects on the 'Superexploitation' of West Bank Palestinians" vol 22, 2002)
	48	+Heyman (1998a, 1998b, 1999) has argued that militarization of the border
	49	+AND
	50	+are more complicated than surplus extraction and that those motivations can have impoverishing consequences
	51	+
	52	+
	53	+====The permutation cannot solve the link without being severance, since the very plan text and advocacy of the aff is the link to the K. Even if affirming would result in some good impacts, its underlying assumptions are intellectually bankrupt. The permutation is akin to the slave master saying they are good because they donate to charity.====
	54	+
	55	+
	56	+====The K turns case—best case scenario the aff results in a ruse of solvency where they cause some small net decrease in militarism but do nothing to address the underlying root cause of modernized violence, i.e. the nation-state's constant race for global supremacy. Energy policy is just one instantiation of this race—you can substitute nuclear energy for renewables but you'll still end up with the same violence====
	57	+
	58	+
	59	+====3. The K link turns the militarism aff. The bifurcation of borders is what drives militaristic ideologies to begin with. The only reason we believe we need to be militarily ready is because we conceptualize those across the border as our enemies. ====
	60	+
	61	+
	62	+====The alternative is to critically engage the border and re-evaluate our norms in relation to the violence they create. ====
	63	+**Grosfoguel 06** ~~Ramon Grosfoguel, Associate Professor of Ethnic Studies @ UC Berkeley, "World-Systems Analysis in the Context of Transmodernity, Border Thinking, and Global Coloniality," Review (Fernand Braudel Center), Vol. 29, No. 2, From Postcolonial Studies to Decolonial Studies: Decolonizing Postcolonial Studies, 2006~~ JW
	64	+One of many plausible solutions to the Eurocentric versus fun- damentalist dilemma is what
	65	+AND
	66	+how to transcend the impe- rial monologue established by the Eurocentered modernity.
	67	+
	68	+
	69	+=Case =
	70	+1. No reverse causality:
	71	+2. Huge amounts of alt cause
	72	+3. Turn: nuclear power is a peaceful extension of our development of the atom

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-10-11 05:54:35.253

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Wheeler, Fife, Walton

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Mountain View DZ

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+17

Round

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

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+West Ranch Won Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+SEPTOCT - Voices Octas NC

Tournament

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