Tournament: harvardwestlake | Round: 3 | Opponent: X | Judge: X “Free Speech” is not racially neutral, and is part of a broader historical tradition that allows anti-black violence to continue virtually unchecked. Gillborn 09 (David Professor of Education at the University of London “Risk-Free Racism: Whiteness and So-Called ‘Free Speech.’” Wake Forest Law Review 44 Wake Forest L. Rev. 535. Summer, 2009. LexisNexis Academic) "Whiteness at various times signifies and is deployed as identity, status, and AND rational and irrational) is determined by, and for, White people.
Their faith in speech as an act of emancipation presumes an access to subjectivity that the black does not have Wilderson 10 – (Frank, Professor of African American Studies at UC Irvine. “Red, White, and Black: Cinema and the Structure of U.S. Antagonisms.) Unfortunately, cultural studies that theorizes the interface between Blacks and Humans is hobbled in AND its very nature, crowds out and forecloses the Slave's grammar of suffering.
Democracy is not benign, but rather an extension of civil society that is used to legitimize anti-black violence Sexton and Lee 06 Jared Sexton, African American Studies Program, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA, Elizabeth Lee, Department of Geography, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, “Figuring the Prison: Prerequisites of Torture at Abu Ghraib”, Editorial Board of Antipode, page 1013-1014JC The rituals of torture exposed at Abu Ghraib—staged events both reckless and deliberate AND the so-called post-civil rights era) (Nast 2000).
Seemingly inclusive political movements recreate fungibility. They give the allusion that freedom for the black is the end sought when truly the master’s interests are what is in mind. Black flesh has always been the face of popular revolutions. It is by defining itself as something similar to but not the same as the black that movements like the affirmative have gained traction for their movement. This type of use of the black recreates a state of politics where the black is fungible. Wilderson’10 (Frank. B. Wilderson, Red White and black, 2010. Pg. 30 Frank B. Wilderson is a tenured professor at the University of California Irvine. He has attended the University of Colombia where he got a degree in psychology.) Eltis suggests that there was indeed massive debate which ultimately led to Britain taking the AND created the Human out of culturally disparate entities from Europe to the East.
Blackness is the position of ontological death. The legacy of America and the world at large is not tainted, but predicated on the gratuitous violence enacted onto the black body. Through every era, this violence haunts the structure of politics and every facet of social life, ensuring disenfranchisement, dishonor and discrimination. The plantation is not gone, but only relocated, first as Jim Crow, and now as the Prison Industrial Complex. Ellis 11 (Aime J. Ellis 2011 (PhD in Comparative Politics UT-Austin, If We Must Die From Bigger Thomas to Biggie Smalls, Intro) From recklessly dangerous acts that range from gun and gang violence, rampant drug abuse AND benign neglect, federal withdrawal, and the increased practice of economic privatization.
Natal alienation means the slave never had a starting point in civil society Wilderson 10 – (Frank, Professor of African American Studies at UC Irvine. “Red, White, and Black: Cinema and the Structure of U.S. Antagonisms.” Pg. 51-56) Whereas Humans exist on some plane of being and thus can become existentially present through AND (110) or, more precisely, in the eyes of Humanity.
Chattel Slavery and the slave ship in particular are foundational to modern systems of domination and neoliberalism – turns case Dillon 13 Stephen, “Fugitive Life: race, gender, and the rise of the neoliberal-carceral state”, P. 69-71 Chattel slavery is central to the contemporary politics of the market in addition to the AND does more than repeat: it envelops, seduces, and multiplies.141
The only means by which we can rectify the violent order imposed by civil society is through its entire destruction. As every contour of social relations is marked by anti-blackness, every aspect of society must be destroyed, dismantled and reconfigured. Farley 05 Anthony Farley Professor or Law @ Boston College. “Perfecting Slavery” Jan 2005 What is to be done? Two hundred years ago, when the slaves in AND the slave must become to pursue its calling that is not a calling.
The role of the ballot is to vote for the debater who better performatively and methodologically offers the best liberation strategy for black bodies. The culture of exclusion and lack of engagement with important conversations about race in status quo LD locks minority debaters out of the discussion. Smith 13 Elijah Smith (2013 Cross Examination Debate Association (CEDA) and National Debate Tournament (NDT) champion), A Conversation in Ruins: Race and Black Participation in Lincoln Douglas Debate, Vbriefly, 2013. VL At every tournament you attend this year look around the cafeteria and take note of AND students who look up to them why risking such an endeavor is necessary.
To accept the slightest degree of racism destroys our humanity, negates the possibility of political order, and could not be accepted by all Albert Memmi 2k, Professor Emeritus of Sociology @ U of Paris, Naiteire, Racism, Translated by Steve Martinot, p. 163-165 The struggle against racism will be long, difficult, without intermission, without remission AND . True, it is a wager, but the stakes are irresistible.
1/14/17
JF Biopower K
Tournament: USC | Round: 2 | Opponent: X | Judge: X Protest link – the law requires a certain degree of social instability and resistance to preserve its functioning. The promotion of social outburst is necessary to sustain the law as a method of domination. Agamben 05 (Giorgio - Univ. Verona Aesthetics Prof, State of Exception, Univ Chicago Press, p. 59-60) 4.6 The stakes in the debate between Benjamin and Schmitt on the state of exception can now be defined more clearly. The dispute takes place in a zone of anomie that, on the one hand, must be maintained in relation to the law at all costs and, on the other, must be just as impla¬cably released and freed from this relation. That is to say, at issue in the anomie zone is the relation between violence and law-in the last anal¬ysis, the status of violence as a cipher for human action. While Schmitt attempts every time to reinscribe violence within a juridical context, Benjamin responds to this gesture by seeking every time to assure it-as pure violence-an existence outside of the law. For reasons that we must try to clarify, this struggle for anomie seems to be as decisive for Western politics as the gigantomachia peri tes au¬sias, the "battle of giants concerning being," that defines Western meta-physics. Here, pure violence as the extreme political object, as the "thing" of politics, is the counterpart to pure being, to pure existence as the ultimate metaphysical stakes; the strategy of the exception, which must ensure the relation between anomic violence and law, is the counterpart to the onto-theo-logical strategy aimed at capturing pure being in the meshes of the logos. That is to say, everything happens as if both law and logos needed an anomic (or alogical) zone of suspension in order to ground their reference to the world of life. Law seems able to subsist only by capturing anomie, just as language can subsist only by grasping the nonlinguistic. In both cases, the conflict seems to concern an empty space: on the one hand, anomie, juridical vacuum, and, on the other, pure being, devoid of any determination or real predicate. For law, this empty space is the state of exception as its constitutive dimension. The relation between norm and reality involves the suspension of the norm, just as in ontol¬ogy the relation between language and world involves the suspension of denotation in the form of a fatigue. But just as essential for the juridical order is that this zone-wherein lies a human action without relation to the norm-coincides with an extreme and spectral figure of the law, in which law splits into a pure being-in-force vigenza without application (the form of law) and a pure application without being in force: the force-of-law. This inscription within biopolitics is at the heart of violence allowing every ‘citizen’ to be devalued and eliminated in the name of sovereign management. Agamben 98 (Giorgio, professor of philosophy at university of Verona, Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, pg. 139-140) ED 3.3.It is not our intention here to take a position on the difficult ethical problem of euthanasia, which still today, in certain coun¬tries, occupies a substantial position in medical debates and pro¬vokes disagreement. Nor are we concerned with the radicaliry with which Binding declares himself in favor of the general admissibility of euthanasia. More interesting for our inquiry is the fact that the sovereignty of the living man over his own life has its immediate counterpart in the determination of a threshold beyond which life ceases to have any juridical value and can, therefore, be killed without the commission of a homicide. The new juridical category of “life devoid of value” (or “life unworthy of being lived”) corre¬sponds exactly—even if in an apparently different direction—to the bare life of homo sacer and can easily be extended beyond the limits imagined by Binding. It is as if every valorization and every “politicization” of life (which, after all, is implicit in the sovereignty of the individual over his own existence) necessarily implies a new decision concerning the threshold beyond which life ceases to be politically relevant, becomes only “sacred life,” and can as such be eliminated without punishment. Every society sets this limit; every society—even the most modern—decides who its “sacred men” will be. It is even pos¬sible that this limit, on which the politicization and the exceprio of natural life in the juridical order of the state depends, has done nothing but extend itself in the history of the West and has now— in the new biopolitical horizon of states with national sovereignty—moved inside every human life and every citizen. Bare life is no longer confined to a particular place or a definite category. It now dwells in the biological body of every living being. Biopolitical capitalism produces value by dealing out death – the aff’s individualizing approach masks its violence Charkiewicz 5 (Ewa, economist, Green Party leader, researcher and university lecturer combining academic engagement in social movements) “Corporations, the UN and Neo-liberal Bio-politics” Development (2005) 48, 75–83 AT One of my biggest puzzles about CSR is why this discourse, founded on the principle of merging profits and morals, does not investigate how profits are made. The spotlight is on individual companies and not on the systemic problems in the generation of value. I have in part explained it by referring to the operations of pastoral power which individualizes, surveys and differentiates between the good and bad flock, assigns blame, offers confession as the road to redemption, and absolution by audit. Individualizing and normative approaches are static and do not lend themselves to the analysis of processes and power relations, which are contested and dynamic. As Foucault argued pastoral power has historically been imported from the economy of household (oikos), to the economic theories and regulations of the market, and subsequently to the organization of the global economy. It has been concerned with the maintenance of the flock, the household or populations as sources of wealth. Nowadays, the source of wealth and the goal to which pastoral power is deployed is the maintenance and multiplication of financial capital. According to the theory of value developed by Karl Marx profits are made because of what labour adds to production. Marx attributed the sources of profits or surplus value to the difference between what labour added to production within a given time and the time it takes to maintain and reproduce labour-power. Teresa Brennan reworked this theory by introducing the concept of interactive economy linked by the exchange of energy in the living (human and non-human) nature. She argued that the reproduction of labour power cannot take place without or outside the cycles of natural reproduction. Capital intervenes in these cycles, and draws on energy to turn living nature into commodities and money. Value is therefore derived not only from time and energy provided by human labour but from the energy provided by nature as well. In these processes, control over time has been augmented by an ever-increasing spatial expansion. The range and speed in circulation of capital is key to how surplus value is extracted and profits are made (Brennan, 1997, 2000). Theresa Brennan's theory of energetics (generation of value by extracting it from time and energies of human bodies and nature, which she calls living nature) shows that adding value to money requires the input of living nature (human and non-human) into products or services (Marx, 1993; Brennan, 2003). Speed and expansion increase pressures on living nature. Life is consumed and killed in the processes of the reproduction of capital. Those without spending power are redundant human waste. Hidden therefore behind the caring face of biopolitics is its double, the control of life by means of dispensation of death.5 We control the root cause:
biopower uses capitalism to fuel its own sovereignty: this is why sovereigns construct threats to justify resource wars like the war in iraq for oil. 2. biopolitical entities uses capitalism to gain control over other countries for example the us funds and created the world bank to gain leverage over developing countries through loans
Vote negative to endorse the state of whatever being in resistance to sovereign power. Whatever being is the only way to solve. Working within the law only furthers sovereign control of life. Solves case because whateverbeing means that nothing can be distinguished which prevents the state from unequally applying the law and stripping us away to bare life. Caldwell 4 (Anne, Asst Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Louisville, Theory and Event, 7.2shree) Can we imagine another form of humanity, and another form of power? The bio-sovereignty described by Agamben is so fluid as to appear irresistible. Yet Agamben never suggests this order is necessary. Bio-sovereignty results from a particular and contingent history, and it requires certain conditions. Sovereign power, as Agamben describes it, finds its grounds in specific coordinates of life, which it then places in a relation of indeterminacy. What defies sovereign power is a life that cannot be reduced to those determinations: a life "that can never be separated from its form,a life in which it is never possible to isolate something such as naked life. " (2.3). In his earlier Coming Community,Agamben describes this alternative life as "whatever being." More recently he has used the term "forms-of-life." These concepts come from the figure Benjamin proposed as a counter to homo sacer: the "total condition that is 'man'." For Benjamin and Agamben,mere life is the life which unites law and life. That tie permits law, in its endless cycle of violence, to reduce life an instrument of its own power. The total condition that is man refers toan alternative life incapable of serving as the ground of law. Such a lifewould exist outside sovereignty. Agamben's own concept of whatever being is extraordinarily dense. It is made up of varied concepts, including language and potentiality; it is also shaped by several particular dense thinkers, including Benjamin and Heidegger. What follows is only a brief consideration of whatever being, in its relation to sovereign power. "Whatever being," as described by Agamben, lacks the features permitting the sovereign capture and regulation of life in our tradition. Sovereignty's capture of life has been conditional upon the separation of natural and political life. That separation has permitted the emergence of a sovereign power grounded in this distinction, and empowered to decide on the value, and non-value of life (1998: 142). Since then, every further politicization of life, in turn, calls for "a new decision concerning the threshold beyond which life ceases to be politically relevant, becomes only 'sacred life,' and can as such be eliminated without punishment" (p. 139). This expansion of the range of life meriting protection does not limit sovereignty, but provides sites for its expansion. In recent decades, factors that once might have been indifferent to sovereignty become a field for its exercise. Attributes such as national status, economic status, color, race, sex, religion, geo-political position have become the subjects of rights declarations. From a liberal or cosmopolitan perspective, such enumerations expand the range of life protected from and serving as a limit upon sovereignty. Agamben's analysis suggests the contrary. If indeed sovereignty is bio-political before it is juridical, then juridical rights come into being only where life is incorporated within the field of bio-sovereignty. The language of rights, in other words, calls up and depends upon the life caught within sovereignty: homo sacer.
3/4/17
JF Colleges T
Tournament: harvardwestlake | Round: 6 | Opponent: X | Judge: X Interpretation: The aff must defend all public colleges and universities and must not defend that only a single college or combination of colleges ought to remove specific speech codes. DeBois 16 Danny; Danny DeBois (Harvard ’18) debated for Harrison High School in New York for 4 years. He won the TOC, NCFL Grand Nationals, the Minneapple, the Glenbrooks, and the Harvard Invitational (twice). As a coach at Harvard- Westlake in California, his students have won the TOC, Greenhill, the Voices Round Robin, the Kandi King Round Robin, and Loyola, reached finals of NDCA Nationals and Emory, and made the USA Debate World Schools Team; Victory Briefs Jan/Feb Some people will find it a good idea to specify particular public colleges or universities AND speech, not why certain public colleges and universities should have certain procedures.
Violation:
Limits – there’s 1,699 public colleges and universities, solvency advocate doesn’t check back DeBois 16 does the math Danny; Danny DeBois (Harvard ’18) debated for Harrison High School in New York for 4 years. He won the TOC, NCFL Grand Nationals, the Minneapple, the Glenbrooks, and the Harvard Invitational (twice). As a coach at Harvard- Westlake in California, his students have won the TOC, Greenhill, the Voices Round Robin, the Kandi King Round Robin, and Loyola, reached finals of NDCA Nationals and Emory, and made the USA Debate World Schools Team; Victory Briefs Jan/Feb Second, an interpretation allowing specification of particular public colleges and universities is truly limitless AND characterized by bad theory and generic K links, don’t specify an actor.
Multiply that by the thousands of speech codes there are Lukianoff 08 (Greg Lukianoff, "Campus Speech Codes: Absurd, Tenacious, and Everywhere", May 23, 2008 , https://www.nas.org/articles/Campus_Speech_Codes_Absurd_Tenacious_and_Everywhere) For our 2007 report, FIRE surveyed publicly available policies at the 100 “Best AND to our knowledge, the most extensive evaluation of campus codes ever attempted.
Research overload has real world consequences, it’s an independent voter Harris 13, Scott Debate coach for over 25 years, coaches University of Kansas Policy Debate Team, " This ballot," Published on CEDADebate.org Forums. 5/5/13. http://www.cedadebate.org/forum/index.php?topic=4762.msg10246 Debates about what kinds of arguments we should or should not be making in debates AND little to no effect on the teams that refuse to debate the topic.
Anti-cyberbullying laws key to prevent cyberbullying – squo solves and checks off campus behavior Patchin 10. Justin W. Patchin, Professor of Criminal Justice in the Department of Political Science at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, 09/28/10, "Cyberbullying Laws and School Policy: A Blessing or Curse?," Cyberbullying Research Center, http://cyberbullying.org/cyberbullying-laws-and-school-policy-a-blessing-or-curse//AD Many schools are now in a difficult position of having to respond to a mandate AND election time, so I’m sure your local representative will be all ears…
Cyberbullying is conducive to abuse and kills self worth – impedes the ability to get education, turns case ETCB 16, End To Cyber Bullying, The End to Cyber Bullying (ETCB) Organization was founded in 2011 to raise global awareness on cyberbullying, and to mobilize youth, educators, parents, and others in taking efforts to end cyberbullying, “A Surprising Long-Term Effect of Cyberbullying, ETCB Organization, 2016, http://www.endcyberbullying.org/a-surprising-long-term-effect-of-cyberbullying///AD If someone repeatedly tells the victim online that they is are AND of the abuse upon the psyche of the victim are anything but impermanent.
1/14/17
JF Open Carry CP
Tournament: USC | Round: 2 | Opponent: X | Judge: X Counterplan Text: Public colleges and universities in the United States ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech, except for open-carry demonstrations.
Open carry protests are constitutionally protected speech Lithwick and Turner 13 Dahlia Lithwick (Writer for Slate) and Christian Turner (Associate professor at the University of Georgia School of Law), 11-12-2013, "A Gun? Or Free Speech? The Strange and Alarming Rise of “Open Carry” Demonstrations.", http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/11/open_carry_demonstrations_is_carrying_a_gun_to_a_protest_protected_by_the.html Whether or not open-carry counterdemonstrations are a good thing, they are assuredly a thing. Opponents of gun control strap on weapons and parade around to prove that parading around with weapons is constitutional and that they have a First Amendment right to say so. They increasingly target other meetings for these demonstrations. Open-carry advocates demonstrated at an MDA event in Indianapolis last spring and at a Let’s Roll America event on the Texas capitol grounds last month. This goes beyond the open-carry demonstration at the site of John F. Kennedy’s assassination in Dallas or the open-carry protest at the Alamo in October. What we are seeing is new: These are demonstrations that target gun-control activists at their meetings and demonstrations that attempt to provoke the police into responding. By that definition they are expressive First Amendment activity. The question is whether that activity can and should be limited.
These protests can occur on campus McWilliams 16 Nicholas McWilliams and Nick Roll, 12-5-2016, "Open-carrying protesters walk through campus to campaign for gun rights", http://thelantern.com/2016/12/open-carrying-protesters-walk-through-campus-to-campaign-for-gun-rights/ One week after an attack which left 11 people in the hospital and the attacker shot dead, a group of protesters came to Ohio State, quietly walking through campus with guns strapped across their chests. The protesters were in favor of Ohio House Bill 48, pending legislation which could allow for concealed carry on public college campuses in Ohio, among other places where concealed carry is currently restricted. The bill wouldn’t allow concealed carry outright, but would allow colleges to opt in. University President Michael Drake recently spoke out against the bill during a segment on WOSU. The timing of protest, referred to as “a walk,” just after the attack, was intentional, said Jeffry Smith, the organizer. “The purpose of these walks, in general, is to advocate for conceal and carry … legal conceal carrying in Ohio,” he said. “Secondarily, to engage in dialogue with people about firearms rights and privileges.”
Open carry risks violence by hindering effective law enforcement Johnson 12 Constance N. Johnson (Oklahoma State Senator), 4-25-2012, "Open Carry Is an Invitation to Chaos", http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/should-people-be-allowed-to-carry-guns-openly/open-carry-is-an-invitation-to-chaos The proposal to allow open carry in Oklahoma is unnecessary, redundant, not well thought out, and will lead to dire unintended consequences for Oklahoma citizens and visitors to the state. Oklahoma already permits concealed carry, with a brief course of instruction. To now allow open carry (one proposal would even allow unlicensed open carry), i.e., to put more guns into the hands of more people, is an invitation to chaos, especially given the disparity in who will be armed and who won't. The baseline question is whether those who will be armed will be trustworthy with their advantage over the unarmed. Open carry is unsafe, intimidating, and potentially dangerous, especially given that there are no provisions for proper administration, controls, and protections for the public. Many first-time "toters" will also be untrained in retaining control of their own weapons and may make it possible for others to grab their guns and use them against innocent bystanders. Guns kill the innocent and the guilty equally. When the smoke settles, the dead have no voice. Open carry predicates a well-balanced and rational society in an era when reality suggests differently. Guns consistently factor into these equations in Oklahoma, where domestic violence is epidemic (we rank third in spousal abuse deaths); where there is a history of racially motivated violent actions against people of color, the most notable of which have taken place in Tulsa, where five African-Americans were shot and three died recently, and thousands were killed or made homeless in the 1921 burning of Greenwood; and where there are significant numbers of unanswered and unresolved questions about African-American shooting deaths at the hands of law enforcement. But even law enforcement is fearful of the consequences of allowing people to open carry, out of a concern about not knowing who is the good guy or the bad guy in the midst of a violent encounter. Law enforcement and communities at large view the carrying of any type of weapon, openly or concealed, as a threat to their well-being and public safety.
Demonstrations chill free speech and protest – turns case Blanchfield 14 Patrick Blanchfield (Doctoral candidate and Woodruff Scholar in Comparative Literature at Emory University and a graduate of the Emory Psychoanalytic Institute), 5-4-2014, "What Do Guns Say?", https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/04/what-do-guns-say/?_r=0 Contemplating guns as speech, we confront a kind of autoimmune disorder: The tools once instrumental to the birth of our nation, and to the protection of the individual and the state alike, are increasingly turned against both. Guns historically used to midwife and safeguard the right to free speech are now growing ever more cross-wired with it, and speech cannot but be degraded in the process. Citizens in a democracy make a certain pact with one another: to answer speech with more speech, not violence. No matter how angry what I say makes you, you do not have a right to pull a gun on me. But now the gun has already been drawn, nominally as an act of symbolic speech — and yet it still remains a gun. A slippage has occurred between the First and Second Amendments, and the First suffers as a result. The moral bravery political protest demands is no longer enough; to protest in response now requires the physical bravery to face down men with guns.
These pro-gun movements reinforce capitalism – turns case Esposito and Finley 14 (Luigi, Prof Sociology @Barry, Laura, Asst. Prof Sociology and Criminology @Barry, Beyond Gun Control: Examining Neoliberalism, Pro-gun Politics and Gun Violence in the United States, Theory in Action, Vol. 7, No. 2, April) Both neoliberal and pro-gun philosophy reinforce one another in that both presuppose an atomistic view of the world in which people are not understood as part of an interconnected community. Instead, all individuals are assumed to be autarkic subjects concerned almost exclusively with their own private lives. Far from supporting freedom and democracy, therefore, critics argue that what easily results from this social imagery is a depoliticized citizenry that is anathema to an effective democracy (e.g., McChesney 1999). As is well known, a viable democracy requires that people have a strong sense of connection to their fellow citizens. Yet because of the emphasis on self-interest/self-reliance, neoliberalism attenuates democracy by giving individuals a green light to prioritize their self-serving interest over those of a community (e.g., Giroux 2008). The fanatical-like zeal with which many gun supporters prioritize Second Amendment rights over all other rights is consistent with this tendency. While those who support the Second Amendment emphasize the individual's right to own firearms in order to protect his/her personal liberty, safety, or property, this right ignores the fact that individuals are also members of a community. More specifically, an emphasis on the individual's right to own firearms overlooks how that right might infringe on other people's right to live without fear of unprovoked gun violence or unintended gun-related tragedies. And while ardent Second Amendment supporters might argue that guns are a tool to protect human life, there should be little doubt that the logic behind pro-gun/ anti-gun control politics-much like the logic advanced by neoliberal ideology presupposes an "every person to him/herself' type of order as normal and even virtuous. At most, armed individuals might decide to take "heroic" action and come to the rescue of others during incidents such as mass shootings (much like neoliberals suggest that private charity should replace the welfare state as the primary mechanism for dealing with people in need, but the individual's right to own firearms supersedes any communal/societal concern associated with gun violence.
3/4/17
JF Oppression NC
Tournament: harvardwestlake | Round: 1 | Opponent: X | Judge: X The standard is minimizing the material harms of oppression
Adopting the perspective of the oppressed is the only way to account for dominant ideologies that skew our thought processes. Mills 5 Charles W. Mills (John Evans Professor of Moral and Intellectual Philosophy) ““Ideal Theory” as Ideology” Hypatia vol. 20, no. 3 (Summer 2005) Now what distinguishes ideal theory is not merely the use of ideals, since obviously AND specifi c experience in distorting our perceptions and conceptions of the social order.
