The promise of "the future" prevents a full confrontation with the violence of the present because it creates the possibility of relief "to come" – only understanding time as anti-black accumulation can index existing conditions of violence
Dillon 13 (Stephen Dillon, assistant professor of Queer Studies @ Hampshire, ""It's here, it's that time:" Race, queer futurity, and the temporality of violence in Born in Flames", Women and Performance: a journal of feminist theory, 2013) According to Spillers, the anti-blackness inaugurated under chattel slavery is a death AND what the future will be. The future will be what was before.
Their focus on international conflicts only ignores the living apocalypse for people of color under the domestic warfare of white supremacy-
Rodriguez 2010, ~Dylan, University of California, Abolition Now! 93-100~ We are collectively witnessing, surviving, and working in a time of unprecedented state AND , every desperate act, and every attack aborted or drowned in blood."
We should refuse appeals to the "official" white reality—conventional risk calculus relies on the false assumptions of "color neutrality"
Mills 97 – Associate Prof of Philosophy @ U Illinois, Chicago (Charles-; The Racial Contract) The Racial Contract has always been recognized by nonwhites as the real determinant of ( AND , part of the population covered by the moral operator, or not.
The presence of the slave makes ethics impossible. All actions within the matrix of anti-blackness are parasitic on the existence of blackness as the over-determination of incoherence, which precipitates anti-black freedom as a means of policing and disavowing black suffering.
Wilderson 10 /Frank Wilderson, Red, White, and Black: Cinema and the Structure of US Antagonisms/ Due to the presence of prior existing relations within a world of contemporaries, no AND being, and is positioned, by an a priori violence of genocide.
Emancipatory discourses are white flights of fancy on the vehicle of black fungibility; blackness prefigures modernity which means blackness is a prior question.
Wilderson 10 /Frank B., Red, White, and Black 20-21/ Again, what is important for us to glean from these historians is that the AND symbiosis between the political ontology of Humanity and the social death of Blacks.
There is no progress from the slave; freedom is an illusion created by the shackles of civil society – we must burn the 1ac to the ground.
The black body is the map of gratuitous violence which disarticulates their notions of resistance and freedom ¬– the black is always already marked with criminality – contingent interactions do not alter black ontology.
Our alternative is an unflinching paradigmatic analysis which forefronts discussions of black criminality in context of this year's resolution. Blackness as a site of absolute dereliction de-conceptualizes society as incoherent. We are the only ethical demand.
Wilderson 10 /Frank B., The Prison Slave as Hegemony's (Silent) Scandal, April 13th, 2002/ Civil society is not a terrain intended for the Black subject. It is coded AND via reform or reparation), but must nonetheless be pursued to the death.
Obscuring the position of blackness institutionalizes the impossibility of black liberation – every other starting point feeds white supremacy
Sexton10 (Jared, Director, African American Studies School of Humanities @ UC Irvine, "People-of-Color-Blindness: Notes on the Afterlife of Slavery" Social Text 28.2 Duke University Press) The upshot of this predicament is that obscuring the structural position of the category of AND it no doubt would entail nothing less momentous than yet another revolution.78
Slavery does not die because it has never lived. The anti-black grammar of suffering of the slave trade continues the crisis of language in which all actions and thoughts are contextualized within the slave trade. Their race-neutral intellectual project ignores the singularity of the black experience, appropriating black suffering as the template for non-black grievances, misrecognizing the afterlife of slavery.
Sexton 10 /Jared Sexton 'The Curtain of the Sky': An Introduction 2010 Critical Sociology/ The disqualification of black resistance by the logic of racial slavery is not unrelated to AND predicament of freedom: there is no such thing as a fugitive slave.
The aff's use of civil suits focuses on punishing individual perpetrators of violence, the police – this obscures the endemic violence of the police institution, which is the real problem
Feldman 15 ~(Leonard Feldman, Hunter College, CUNY) "Police Violence and the Legal Temporalities of Immunity"~ LADI link On the same day the Department of Justice declined to prosecute Ferguson Missouri Officer Darren AND practice" investigation through consent agreements that relied on "experimentalist regulation."61
The aff assumes the police violence can be addressed by bringing it under the control of law – in fact, the law is the apparatus legitimating police violence. Civil suits only identify "operational errors" committed by the police, fail to convict police, and excuse and reinforce the violence of the policing apparatus itself.
Simon Behrman 11 ~(Simon Behrman, ) Police killings and the law – International Socialism, 1-4-2011~ LADI impact Ever since the late 1970s some on the left have declared that Britain is either AND economics. In short, an ideology of "police fetishism" developed.
The courts fail at their sole purpose – judicial review is flawed when applied to the American bureaucratic model
Frug 97- Louis D. Brandeis Professor of Law at Harvard Law School(Gerald, "THE IDEOLOGY OF BUREAUCRACY IN AMERICAN LAW", 97 Harv. L. Rev 1276, pg 1352-1353), "LJH" link A similar process has occurred in response to the effort to find a role for AND the legitimating imprimatur on bureaucratic decisionmaking would be assumed by the constituents themselves.
Legal solutions to political problems cause externalization of agency—-rule of law removes individual responsibility
Rozo 4 (Diego Cagüeñas, MA in Philosophy and Cultural Analysis, International School for Humanities and Social Sciences, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Jan 2004, "Forgiving the Unforgivable: On Violence, Power, and the Possibility of Justice", http://admin.banrepcultural.org/sites/default/files/forgiving_the_unforgivable.pdf, Accessed 7/7/15)LD link For reasons explained before, Benjamin thinks that "law's interest in a monopoly of AND – the law infiltrates into and seeks to rule our most private conflicts.
The collapse of citizen agency necessitates violent forms of moral conceptions demanding the extermination of the other and everyday violence
Scheper-Hughes and Bourgois '4 (Prof of Anthropology @ Cal-Berkely; Prof of Anthropology @ UPenn) (Nancy and Philippe, Introduction: Making Sense of Violence, in Violence in War and Peace, pg. 19-22) Impact This large and at first sight "messy" Part VII is central to this AND including the house gun and gated communities; and reversed feelings of victimization).
The alternative is to create spaces beyond the grasp of bureaucratic institutions – our utopian ethic is key to breaking out of normative legal thought in the present
Newman 11 (Saul, associate professor in the Department of Government in the School of Public Affairs at American University in Washington, DC, "Postanarchism: a politics of anti-politics" (October 2011), Journal of Political Ideologies, vol. 16 no. 3)alt At the same time, this aporetic moment of tension central to classical anarchism generates AND ongoing elaboration of new practices of freedom within the context of power relations.
Questioning on the law is essential to question the ethics we live under
Farley '03 (Maria Grahn-Farley, Visiting Scholar at the Boston College Department of Sociology, "The Ideology of Genus and The Ghost of Heidegger(c)", Page 4 of 26, Published in 2003, Accessed July 14 2015 on Lexus Nexus, CMT) framing What does it mean to question, or rather to formulate and then ask the AND of contamination. Instead of being about entrance, it was about containment.
Moral *1nc
Grounding policy decisions in ideas of morality re-entrenches societal hierarchies and eliminates any acts of dissent. Using morals as justification for laws is just a way to lie to the public
Crawford '02 – Professor of Political Science at Boston University (Neta, Argument and Change in World Politics, p. 83-84, DWB) The dominant account of the role of ethics in international relations is that it is AND to 'tip the balance' in favor of stable departures from slavery."5
Ethical arguments for the state are inherently coercive and justify legal structures. These arguments result in submission and exclusionary practices.
Crawford '02 – Professor of Political Science at Boston University (Neta, Argument and Change in World Politics, p. 98-100, DWB) Normative beliefs are the ethical arguments we already hold as true. When people make AND are not hypocrites, and whose judgments will affect their policies toward him."
The collapse of citizen agency necessitates violent forms of moral conceptions demanding the extermination of the other and everyday violence
Scheper-Hughes and Bourgois '4 (Prof of Anthropology @ Cal-Berkely; Prof of Anthropology @ UPenn) (Nancy and Philippe, Introduction: Making Sense of Violence, in Violence in War and Peace, pg. 19-22) Impact This large and at first sight "messy" Part VII is central to this AND including the house gun and gated communities; and reversed feelings of victimization).
The alternative is to create spaces beyond the grasp of bureaucratic institutions – our utopian ethic is key to breaking out of normative legal thought in the present
Newman 11 (Saul, associate professor in the Department of Government in the School of Public Affairs at American University in Washington, DC, "Postanarchism: a politics of anti-politics" (October 2011), Journal of Political Ideologies, vol. 16 no. 3)alt At the same time, this aporetic moment of tension central to classical anarchism generates AND ongoing elaboration of new practices of freedom within the context of power relations.
Questioning on the law is essential to question the ethics we live under
Farley '03 (Maria Grahn-Farley, Visiting Scholar at the Boston College Department of Sociology, "The Ideology of Genus and The Ghost of Heidegger(c)", Page 4 of 26, Published in 2003, Accessed July 14 2015 on Lexus Nexus, CMT) framing What does it mean to question, or rather to formulate and then ask the AND of contamination. Instead of being about entrance, it was about containment.
12/4/16
1 - Neoliberalism K
Tournament: CPS | Round: 2 | Opponent: Brentwood | Judge: 1NC – Neolib K The claim that free speech leads to democratic debate and social progress is a neoliberal myth – the AFF’s faith in the free exchange of ideas displaces a focus on direct action and re-entrenches multiple forms of oppression. Instead, the alternative is to reject the AFF’s neoliberal framing of speech and direct pedagogy to focus on direct action against oppression. Tillett-Saks 13 Andrew Tillett-Saks (Labor organizer and critical activist author for Truth-Out and Counterpunch), Neoliberal Myths, Counterpunch, 11/7/13, http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/07/neoliberal-myths/LADI In the wake of the Brown University shout-down of Ray Kelly, champion of the NYPD’s racist stop-and-frisk policy and racial profiling in general, the debate has resurfaced. Rather than talking past the anti-protestors’ arguments, they need to be addressed directly. The prototypical argument in denouncing the protestors is not a defense of Ray Kelly’s racism. It is twofold: First, that a free-flowing discourse on the matter will allow all viewpoints to be weighed and justice to inevitably emerge victorious on its merits. Second, that stopping a bigot from speaking in the name of freedom is self-defeating as it devolves our democratic society into tyranny. The twofold argument against the protestors stems from two central myths of neoliberalism. The argument for free discourse as the enlightened path to justice ignores that direct action protest is primarily responsible for most of the achievements we would consider ‘progress’ historically (think civil rights, workers’ rights, suffrage, etc.), not the free exchange of ideas. The claim that silencing speech in the name of freedom is self-defeating indulges in the myth of the pre-existence of a free society in which freedom of speech must be preciously safeguarded, while ignoring the woeful shortcomings of freedom of speech in our society which must be addressed before there is anything worth protecting. Critics of the protest repeatedly denounced direct action in favor of ideological debate as the path to social justice. “It would have been more effective to take part in a discussion rather than flat out refuse to have him speak,” declared one horrified student to the Brown Daily Herald. Similarly, Brown University President Christina Paxson labeled the protest a detrimental “affront to democratic civil society,” and instead advocated “intellectual rigor, careful analysis, and…respectful dialogue and discussion.” Yet the implication that masterful debate is the engine of social progress could not be more historically unfounded. Only in the fairy tale histories of those interested in discouraging social resistance does ‘respectful dialogue’ play a decisive role in struggles against injustice. The eight-hour workday is not a product of an incisive question-and-answer session with American robber barons. Rather, hundreds of thousands of workers conducted general strikes during the nineteenth century, marched in the face of military gunfire at Haymarket Square in 1886, and occupied scores of factories in the 1930’s before the eight-hour work day became American law. Jim Crow was not defeated with the moral suasion of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s speeches. Rather, hundreds of thousands marched on Washington, suffered through imprisonment by racist Southern law enforcement, and repeatedly staged disruptive protests to win basic civil rights. On a more international scale, Colonialism, that somehow-oft-forgotten tyranny that plagued most of the globe for centuries, did not cease thanks to open academic dialogue. Bloody resistance, from Algeria to Vietnam to Panama to Cuba to Egypt to the Philippines to Cameroon and to many other countries, was the necessary tool that unlocked colonial shackles. Different specific tactics have worked in different contexts, but one aspect remains constant: The free flow of ideas and dialogue, by itself, has rarely been enough to generate social progress. It is not that ideas entirely lack social power, but they have never been sufficient in winning concessions from those in power to the oppressed. Herein lies neoliberal myth number one—that a liberal free-market society will inexorably and inherently march towards greater freedom. To the contrary, direct action has always proved necessary. Doesn’t dialogue cause for change because dialogue triggers direct action A radical pedagogical stance is key – anti-capitalist movements can be effective, but critical consciousness is a necessary prerequisite. Peter Mclaren 4, Education and Urban Schooling Division prof, UCLA—and Valerie Scatamburlo- D'Annibale; University of Windsor, Educational Philosophy and Theory, Vol. 36, No. 2, 2004, www.freireproject.org/articles/node2065/RCGS/class_dismissed-val-peter.10.pdf. LADI These are the concrete realities of our time—realities that require a vigorous class analysis, an unrelenting critique of capitalism and an oppositional politics capable of confronting what Ahmad (1998, p. 2) refers to as ‘capitalist universality.’ They are realities that require something more than that which is offered by the prophets of ‘difference’ and post-Marxists who would have us relegate socialism to the scrapheap of history and mummify Marxism along with Lenin's corpse. Never before has a Marxian analysis of capitalism and class rule been so desperately needed. That is not to say that everything Marx said or anticipated has come true, for that is clearly not the case. Many critiques of Marx focus on his strategy for moving toward socialism, and with ample justification; nonetheless Marx did provide us with fundamental insights into class society that have held true to this day. Marx's enduring relevance lies in his indictment of capitalism which continues to wreak havoc in the lives of most. While capitalism's cheerleaders have attempted to hide its sordid underbelly, Marx's description of capitalism as the sorcerer's dark power is even more apt in light of contemporary historical and economic conditions. Rather than jettisoning Marx, decentering the role of capitalism, and discrediting class analysis, radical educators must continue to engage Marx's oeuvre and extrapolate from it that which is useful pedagogically, theoretically, and, most importantly, politically in light of the challenges that confront us. The urgency which animates Amin’s call for a collective socialist vision necessitates, as we have argued, moving beyond the particularism and liberal pluralism that informs the ‘politics of difference.’ It also requires challenging the questionable assumptions that have come to constitute the core of contemporary ‘radical’ theory, pedagogy and politics. In terms of effecting change, what is needed is a cogent understanding of the systemic nature of exploitation and oppression based on the precepts of a radical political economy approach (outlined above) and one that incorporates Marx’s notion of ‘unity in difference’ in which people share widely common material interests. Such an understanding extends far beyond the realm of theory, for the manner in which we choose to interpret and explore the social world, the concepts and frameworks we use to express our sociopolitical understandings, are more than just abstract categories. They imply intentions, organizational practices, and political agendas. Identifying class analysis as the basis for our understandings and class struggle as the basis for political transformation implies something quite different than constructing a sense of political agency around issues of race, ethnicity, gender, etc. Contrary to ‘Shakespeare’s assertion that a rose by any other name would smell as sweet,’ it should be clear that this is not the case in political matters. Rather, in politics ‘the essence of the flower lies in the name by which it is called’ (Bannerji, 2000, p. 41). The task for progressives today is to seize the moment and plant the seeds for a political agenda that is grounded in historical possibilities and informed by a vision committed to overcoming exploitative conditions. These seeds, we would argue, must be derived from the tree of radical political economy. For the vast majority of people today—people of all ‘racial classifications or identities, all genders and sexual orientations’—the common frame of reference arcing across ‘difference’, the ‘concerns and aspirations that are most widely shared are those that are rooted in the common experience of everyday life shaped and constrained by political economy’ (Reed, 2000, p. xxvii). While post-Marxist advocates of the politics of ‘difference’ suggest that such a stance is outdated, we would argue that the categories which they have employed to analyze ‘the social’ are now losing their usefulness, particularly in light of actual contemporary ‘social movements.’ All over the globe, there are large anti-capitalist movements afoot. In February 2002, chants of ‘Another World Is Possible’ became the theme of protests in Porto Allegre. It seems that those people struggling in the streets haven’t read about T.I.N.A., the end of grand narratives of emancipation, or the decentering of capitalism. It seems as though the struggle for basic survival and some semblance of human dignity in the mean streets of the dystopian metropoles doesn’t permit much time or opportunity to read the heady proclamations emanating from seminar rooms. As E. P. Thompson (1978, p. 11) once remarked, sometimes ‘experience walks in without knocking at the door, and announces deaths, crises of subsistence, trench warfare, unemployment, inflation, genocide.’ This, of course, does not mean that socialism will inevitably come about, yet a sense of its nascent promise animates current social movements. Indeed, noted historian Howard Zinn (2000, p. 20) recently pointed out that after years of single-issue organizing (i.e. the politics of difference), the WTO and other anti-corporate capitalist protests signaled a turning point in the ‘history of movements of recent decades,’ for it was the issue of ‘class’ that more than anything ‘bound everyone together.’ History, to paraphrase Thompson (1978, p. 25) doesn’t seem to be following Theory’s script. Our vision is informed by Marx's historical materialism and his revolutionary socialist humanism, which must not be conflated with liberal humanism. For left politics and pedagogy, a socialist humanist vision remains crucial, whose fundamental features include the creative potential of people to challenge collectively the circumstances that they inherit. This variant of humanism seeks to give expression to the pain, sorrow and degradation of the oppressed, those who labor under the ominous and ghastly cloak of ‘globalized’ capital. It calls for the transformation of those conditions that have prevented the bulk of humankind from fulfilling its potential. It vests its hope for change in the development of critical consciousness and social agents who make history, although not always in conditions of their choosing. The political goal of socialist humanism is, however, ‘not a resting in difference’ but rather ‘the emancipation of difference at the level of human mutuality and reciprocity.’ This would be a step forward for the ‘discovery or creation of our real differences which can only in the end be explored in reciprocal ways’ (Eagleton, 1996, p. 120). Above all else, the enduring relevance of a radical socialist pedagogy and politics is the centrality it accords to the interrogation of capitalism. We can no longer afford to remain indifferent to the horror and savagery committed by capitalist's barbaric machinations. We need to recognize that capitalist democracy is unrescuably contradictory in its own self-constitution. Capitalism and democracy cannot be translated into one another without profound efforts at manufacturing empty idealism. Committed Leftists must unrelentingly cultivate a democratic socialist vision that refuses to forget the ‘wretched of the earth,’ the children of the damned and the victims of the culture of silence—a task which requires more than abstruse convolutions and striking ironic poses in the agnostic arena of signifying practices. Leftists must illuminate the little shops of horror that lurk beneath ‘globalization’s’ shiny façade; they must challenge the true ‘evils’ that are manifest in the tentacles of global capitalism's reach. And, more than this, Leftists must search for the cracks in the edifice of globalized capitalism and shine light on those fissures that give birth to alternatives. Socialism today, undoubtedly, runs against the grain of received wisdom, but its vision of a vastly improved and freer arrangement of social relations beckons on the horizon. Its unwritten text is nascent in the present even as it exists among the fragments of history and the shards of distant memories. Its potential remains untapped and its promise needs to be redeemed. We have reached a tipping point – neoliberalism is no longer able to control its spiral into disaster. Massive structural violence and extinction are inevitable without a fundamental rethinking of the current system. Farbod 15 ( Faramarz Farbod , PhD Candidate @ Rutgers, Prof @ Moravian College, Monthly Review, http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2015/farbod020615.html, 6-2) LADI Global capitalism is the 800-pound gorilla. The twin ecological and economic crises, militarism, the rise of the surveillance state, and a dysfunctional political system can all be traced to its normal operations. We need a transformative politics from below that can challenge the fundamentals of capitalism instead of today's politics that is content to treat its symptoms. The problems we face are linked to each other and to the way a capitalist society operates. We must make an effort to understand its real character. The fundamental question of our time is whether we can go beyond a system that is ravaging the Earth and secure a future with dignity for life and respect for the planet. What has capitalism done to us lately? The best science tells us that this is a do-or-die moment. We are now in the midst of the 6th mass extinction in the planetary history with 150 to 200 species going extinct every day, a pace 1,000 times greater than the 'natural' extinction rate.1 The Earth has been warming rapidly since the 1970s with the 10 warmest years on record all occurring since 1998.2 The planet has already warmed by 0.85 degree Celsius since the industrial revolution 150 years ago. An increase of 2° Celsius is the limit of what the planet can take before major catastrophic consequences. Limiting global warming to 2°C requires reducing global emissions by 6 per year. However, global carbon emissions from fossil fuels increased by about 1.5 times between 1990 and 2008.3 Capitalism has also led to explosive social inequalities. The global economic landscape is littered with rising concentration of wealth, debt, distress, and immiseration caused by the austerity-pushing elites. Take the US. The richest 20 persons have as much wealth as the bottom 150 million.4 Since 1973, the hourly wages of workers have lagged behind worker productivity rates by more than 800.5 It now takes the average family 47 years to make what a hedge fund manager makes in one hour.6 Just about a quarter of children under the age of 5 live in poverty.7 A majority of public school students are low-income.8 85 of workers feel stress on the job.9 Soon the only thing left of the American Dream will be a culture of hustling to survive. Take the global society. The world's billionaires control $7 trillion, a sum 77 times the debt owed by Greece to the European banks.10 The richest 80 possess more than the combined wealth of the bottom 50 of the global population (3.5 billion people).11 By 2016 the richest 1 will own a greater share of the global wealth than the rest of us combined.12 The top 200 global corporations wield twice the economic power of the bottom 80 of the global population.13 Instead of a global society capitalism is creating a global apartheid. What's the nature of the beast? Firstly, the "egotistical calculation" of commerce wins the day every time. Capital seeks maximum profitability as a matter of first priority. Evermore "accumulation of capital" is the system's bill of health; it is slowdowns or reversals that usher in crises and set off panic. Cancer-like hunger for endless growth is in the system's DNA and is what has set it on a tragic collision course with Nature, a finite category. Secondly, capitalism treats human labor as a cost. It therefore opposes labor capturing a fair share of the total economic value that it creates. Since labor stands for the majority and capital for a tiny minority, it follows that classism and class warfare are built into its DNA, which explains why the "middle class" is shrinking and its gains are never secure. Thirdly, private interests determine massive investments and make key decisions at the point of production guided by maximization of profits. That's why in the US the truck freight replaced the railroad freight, chemicals were used extensively in agriculture, public transport was gutted in favor of private cars, and big cars replaced small ones. What should political action aim for today? The political class has no good ideas about how to address the crises. One may even wonder whether it has a serious understanding of the system, or at least of ways to ameliorate its consequences. The range of solutions offered tends to be of a technical, legislative, or regulatory nature, promising at best temporary management of the deepening crises. The trajectory of the system, at any rate, precludes a return to its post-WWII regulatory phase. It's left to us as a society to think about what the real character of the system is, where we are going, and how we are going to deal with the trajectory of the system -- and act accordingly. The critical task ahead is to build a transformative politics capable of steering the system away from its destructive path. Given the system's DNA, such a politics from below must include efforts to challenge the system's fundamentals, namely, its private mode of decision-making about investments and about what and how to produce. Furthermore, it behooves us to heed the late environmentalist Barry Commoner's insistence on the efficacy of a strategy of prevention over a failed one of control or capture of pollutants. At a lecture in 1991, Commoner remarked: "Environmental pollution is an incurable disease; it can only be prevented"; and he proceeded to refer to "a law," namely: "if you don't put a pollutant in the environment it won't be there." What is nearly certain now is that without democratic control of wealth and social governance of the means of production, we will all be condemned to the labor of Sisyphus. Only we won't have to suffer for all eternity, as the degradation of life-enhancing natural and social systems will soon reach a point of no return.
The student anti-militarism movement is back and growing – but colleges are cracking down. Ending the crackdown will allow for the movement.
SW 5 ~(Socialist Workers) Cracking down on student protests, International Socialist Review10-7-2005~ AT CAMPUS ADMINISTRATORS are cracking down on student activists who stand up against the presence of AND HCC and GMU students have a more powerful movement that's got their back."
North Korea is becoming more aggressive- armament testing is imminent and south korea is hapless to stop it
College campus activism against war undermines morale and forces withdrawal – collapses American presence abroad and causes massive instability that culminates in extinction
Janet Levy 7 ~(Janet Levy, ) Iraq's only Similarity to Vietnam: Its Dangerous Anti-War Movement, Accuracy in Media 2-28-2007~ AT Contrary to media reports and the perception of a majority of Americans, the United AND S. allies and interests and threaten the very existence of our nation.
US prescence key to maintain stability and check aggression in the region
Mason 10 ~Jeff, Obama Tells Military: Prepare for North Korea Aggression. (2017). Common Dreams. Retrieved 19 January 2017, from http://www.commondreams.org/news/2010/05/24/obama-tells-military-prepare-north-korea-aggression~~ CS WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama has directed the U.S. military to coordinate AND Korea counterparts to ensure readiness and to deter future aggression" he said.
Withdrawal from korea goes nuclear
Cirincone 2000 ~Joseph, The Asian Nuclear Chain Reaction, Joseph Cirincione, Senior Fellow and Director for Nuclear Policy at the Center for American Progress, Foreign Policy, Spring 2000, p. 120~ CS The blocks would fall quickest and hardest in Asia, where proliferation pressures are already AND , perhaps, the first combat use of a nuclear weapon since 1945.
Prescence in Afghanistan is key to break the stalemate and check back the terrorist threat
Nuclear terrorism causes extinction – independent of retaliation
Owen B. Toon 7, chair of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at CU-Boulder, et al., April 19, 2007, "Atmospheric effects and societal consequences of regional scale nuclear conflicts and acts of individual nuclear terrorism," To an increasing extent, people are congregating in the world's great urban centers, AND should be carried out as well for the present scenarios and physical outcomes.
Royal 10 – Jedediah Royal, Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction at the U.S. Department of Defense, 2010, "Economic Integration, Economic Signaling and the Problem of Economic Crises," in Economics of War and Peace: Economic, Legal and Political Perspectives, ed. Goldsmith and Brauer, p. 213-214 Less intuitive is how periods of economic decline may increase the likelihood of external conflict AND popularity, are statistically linked to an increase in the use of force.
Extinction
Wickersham '10 - University of Missouri adjunct professor of Peace Studies and a member of The Missouri University Nuclear Disarmament Education Team, author book about nuclear disarmament education (Bill, 4/11/10, "Threat of 'nuclear winter' remains New START treaty is step in right direction." http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2010/apr/11/threat-of-nuclear-winter-remains/) In addressing the environmental consequences of nuclear war, Columbian Steve Starr has written a AND war fought with thousands of strategic nuclear weapons would leave the Earth uninhabitable."
Current protections against hate speech are working – on campus harrassment is decreasing nationally now. Sutton 16 Halley Sutton, Report shows crime on campus down across the country, Campus Security Report 13.4 (2016), 9/9/16,http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/casr.30185/fullLADI A recent report released by the National Center for Education Statistics found an overall decrease in crimes at educational institutions across the country since 2001. The overall number of crimes reported by postsecondary institutions has dropped by 34 percent, from 41,600 per year in 2001 to 27,600 per year in 2013. The report, titled Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2015, covers higher education campuses as well as K–12 schools and includes such topics as victimization, teacher injury, bullying and cyberbullying, use of drugs and alcohol, and criminal incidents at postsecondary institutions. The report found significant decreases in instances of bullying, harassment due to sexual orientation, and violent crime at all levels of education. The number of on-campus crimes reported at postsecondary institutions in 2013 was lower than in 2001 for every category except forcible sex offenses and murder. Removing restrictions on free speech allows hate speech – hate speech IS free speech Volokh 15 Eugene Volokh,No, There’s No “hate Speech” Exception to the First Amendment, The Washington Post, 5/7/15, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/07/no-theres-no-hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/?utm_term=.05cfdd01dea4LADI I keep hearing about a supposed “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment, or statements such as, “This isn’t free speech, it’s hate speech,” or “When does free speech stop and hate speech begin?” But there is no hate speech exception to the First Amendment. Hateful ideas (whatever exactly that might mean) are just as protected under the First Amendment as other ideas. One is as free to condemn Islam — or Muslims, or Jews, or blacks, or whites, or illegal aliens, or native-born citizens — as one is to condemn capitalism or Socialism or Democrats or Republicans. To be sure, there are some kinds of speech that are unprotected by the First Amendment. But those narrow exceptions have nothing to do with “hate speech” in any conventionally used sense of the term. For instance, there is an exception for “fighting words” — face-to-face personal insults addressed to a specific person, of the sort that are likely to start an immediate fight. But this exception isn’t limited to racial or religious insults, nor does it cover all racially or religiously offensive statements. Indeed, when the City of St. Paul tried to specifically punish bigoted fighting words, the Supreme Court held that this selective prohibition was unconstitutional (R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992)), even though a broad ban on all fighting words would indeed be permissible. (And, notwithstanding CNN anchor Chris Cuomo’s Tweet that “hate speech is excluded from protection,” and his later claims that by “hate speech” he means “fighting words,” the fighting words exception is not generally labeled a “hate speech” exception, and isn’t coextensive with any established definition of “hate speech” that I know of.) Hate speech will be amplified in the face of powerless minorities—it instills terror and destroys education—turns the 1ac because free speech becomes exclusionary SCU, S. (2016). Campus Hate Speech Codes - Resources - Character Education - Santa Clara University. Scu.edu. Retrieved 11 December 2016, from https://www.scu.edu/character/resources/campus-hate-speech-codes/ AS Those who advocate hate speech codes believe that the harm codes prevent is more important than the freedom they restrict. When hate speech is directed at a student from a protected group, like those listed in Emory University's code, the effect is much more than hurt feelings. The verbal attack is a symptom of an oppressive history of discrimination and subjugation that plagues the harmed student and hinders his or her ability to compete fairly in the academic arena. The resulting harm is clearly significant and, therefore, justifies limiting speech rights. In addition to minimizing harm, hate speech codes result in other benefits. The university is ideally a forum where views are debated using rational argumentation; part of a student's education is learning how to derive and rationally defend an opinion. The hate speech that codes target, in contrast, is not presented rationally or used to provoke debate. In fact, hate speech often intends to provoke violence. Hate speech codes emphasize the need to support convictions with facts and reasoning while protecting the rights of potential victims. As a society we reason that it is in the best interest of the greatest number of citizens to sometimes restrict speech when it conflicts with the primary purpose of an event. A theater owner, for example, has a right to remove a heckler when the heckler's behavior conflicts with the primary purpose of staging a play - to entertain an audience. Therefore, if the primary purpose of an academic institution is to educate students, and hate speech obstructs the educational process by reducing students' abilities to learn, then it is permissible to extend protection from hate speech to students on college or university campuses. Hate speech codes also solve the conflict between the right to freely speak and the right to an education. A student attending a college or university clearly has such a right. But students exercising their "free speech" right may espouse hateful or intimidating words that impede other students abilities to learn and thereby destroy their chances to earn an education. Finally, proponents of hate speech codes see them as morally essential to a just resolution of the conflict between civil rights (e.g., freedom from harmful stigma and humiliation) and civil liberties (e.g., freedom of speech). At the heart of the conflict is the fact that under-represented students cannot claim fair and equal access to freedom of speech and other rights when there is an imbalance of power between them and students in the majority. If a black student, for example, shouts an epithet at a white student, the white student may become upset or feel enraged, but he or she has little reason to feel terror or intimidation. Yet when a white student directs an epithet toward a black student or a Jewish student, an overt history of subjugation intensifies the verbal attack that humiliates and strikes institutional fear in the victim. History shows that words of hatred are amplified when they come from those in power and abridged when spoken by the powerless. Discrimination on college and university campuses is a growing problem with an uncertain future. Whether hate speech codes are morally just responses to campus intolerance depends on how society interprets the harms of discriminatory harassment, the benefits and costs of restricting free speech, and the just balance between individual rights and group rights. Hate speech leads to a genocidal increase in crimes against marginalized groups. Greenblatt 15 Jonathan Greenblatt, When Hateful Speech Leads to Hate Crimes: Taking Bigotry Out of the Immigration Debate, Huffington Post, 8/21/15, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-greenblatt/when-hateful-speech-leads_b_8022966.htmlLADI When police arrived at the scene in Boston, they found a Latino man shaking on the ground, his face apparently soaked in urine, with a broken nose. His arms and chest had been beaten. One of the two brothers arrested and charged with the hate crime reportedly told police, “Donald Trump was right — all these illegals need to be deported.” The victim, a homeless man, was apparently sleeping outside of a subway station in Dorchester when the perpetrators attacked. His only offense was being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The brothers reportedly attacked him for who he was — simply because he was Latino. In recent weeks anti-immigrant — and by extension anti-Latino — rhetoric has reached a fever pitch. Immigrants have been smeared as “killers” and “rapists.” They have been accused of bringing drugs and crime. A radio talk show host in Iowa has called for enslavement of undocumented immigrants if they do not leave within 60 days. There have been calls to repeal the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of citizenship to people born in the United States, with allegations that people come here to have so-called “anchor babies.” And the terms “illegal aliens” and “illegals” — which many mainstream news sources wisely rejected years ago because they dehumanize and stigmatize people — have resurged. The words used on the campaign trail, on the floors of Congress, in the news, and in all our living rooms have consequences. They directly impact our ability to sustain a society that ensures dignity and equality for all. Bigoted rhetoric and words laced with prejudice are building blocks for the pyramid of hate. Biased behaviors build on one another, becoming ever more threatening and dangerous towards the top. At the base is bias, which includes stereotyping and insensitive remarks. It sets the foundation for a second, more complex and more damaging layer: individual acts of prejudice, including bullying, slurs and dehumanization. Next is discrimination, which in turn supports bias-motivated violence, including apparent hate crimes like the tragic one in Boston. And in the most extreme cases if left unchecked, the top of the pyramid of hate is genocide. Just like a pyramid, the lower levels support the upper levels. Bias, prejudice and discrimination — particularly touted by those with a loud megaphone and cheering crowd — all contribute to an atmosphere that enables hate crimes and other hate-fueled violence. The most recent hate crime in Boston is just one of too many. In fact, there is a hate crime roughly every 90 minutes in the United States today. That is why last week ADL announced a new initiative, #50StatesAgainstHate, to strengthen hate crimes laws around the country and safeguard communities vulnerable to hate-fueled attacks. We are working with a broad coalition of partners to get the ball rolling.
