Tournament: CPS | Round: 2 | Opponent: Brentwood JD | Judge: Samee Ziaee
I affirm. Resolved: Public colleges and universities in the US ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech.
To clarify, here’s a list of things the First Amendment does not permit – meaningless obscenity, child pornography, expression that in and of itself causes injury, and remarks intended to cause violence
Ruane 14 (Kathleen Anne Ruane – Legislative Attorney. Her report was published by the Congressional Research Service, which is a branch of government, “Freedom of Speech and Press: Exceptions to the First Amendment”, https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/95-815.pdf,pgs. 1-5, EmmieeM)
The First Amendment to the united States Constitution provides that “Congress shall make no 

AND

constitutes a “true threat,” and not against mere “political hyperbole.”
Framework
The standard is maximizing expected wellbeing
The constitutive obligation of the state is to protect citizen interest—individual obligations are not applicable in the public sphere. Goodin 95
Robert E. Goodin. Philosopher of Political Theory, Public Policy, and Applied Ethics. Utilitarianism as a Public Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, 1995. p. 26-7
The great adventure of utilitarianism as a guide to public conduct is that it avoids 

AND

thus understood is, I would argue, a uniquely defensible public philosophy.
Moral uncertainty means we default to preventing extinction under any ethical framework
BOSTROM 11
(2011) Nick Bostrom, Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford Martin School and Faculty of Philosophy
These reflections on moral uncertainty suggests an alternative, complementary way of 

AND

value. To do this, we must prevent any existential catastrophe. 

Death is the worst form of evil since it destroys the subject itself.
Paterson 03 – Department of Philosophy, Providence College, Rhode Island (Craig, “A Life Not Worth Living?”, Studies in Christian Ethics.
Contrary to those accounts, I would argue that it is death per se that 

AND

the person, the very source and condition of all human possibility.82 

Innovation
Restrictions on free speech are increasing, destroying the educational environment
Slater 16 (Tom Slator – editor of this book (it’s a collection of essays from many different people). He also wrote the introduction from which this was cut. Deputy Editor of Spiked, runs Free Speech University Ratings, and has written for The Times/The Telegraph/Independent, “Unsafe Space: The Crisis of Free Speech on Campus”, pgs. 2 - 3, https://books.google.com/books?hl=enandlr=andid=vdP7CwAAQBAJandoi=fndandpg=PP1anddq=college+speech+restrictions+risingandots=YBNOvRNy1Tandsig=BmpSFkTJts9QsI1YcDAjxmB6dpQ#v=onepageandq=college20speech20restrictions20risingandf=false, EmmieeM)
Over the past few years, campus censorship has reached epidemic levels. In 2015

AND

dwell on the easy arguments and defend only the most socially acceptable targets.
Free speech on public colleges is a key internal link to scientific discovery --- campus speech restrictions allows for worse forms of coercion that skews data and a culture of open debate is key to advancement
Economist 16 (“Under Attack”, “The Inconvenient Truth”, http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21699909-curbs-free-speech-are-growing-tighter-it-time-speak-out-under-attack, EmmieeM)
Intolerance among Western liberals also has wholly unintended consequences. Even despots know that locking 

AND

Win the argument without resorting to force. And grow a tougher hide.
The ability to handle differing opinion is the most important internal link to competitiveness --- prevents workplace apathy and encourages diverse perspectives on issues
Viljoen 15 (Rica Viljoen - Adjunct Faculty at Henley Business School – Africa, “Inclusive Organizational Transformation: An African Perspective on Human Niches and Diversity of Thought”, “2.8 Conclusion”, https://books.google.com/books?id=WDE3DAAAQBAJandpg=PA46andlpg=PA46anddq=the+ability+to+handle+opposing+views+is+critical+forandsource=blandots=Zf3rT7MKovandsig=gtUj7Y8AxKh-TPNlCrT6ebbJ9Gsandhl=enandsa=Xandved=0ahUKEwjqqsus-tjQAhVB5mMKHb4ICiAQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepageandq=the20ability20to20handle20opposing20views20is20critical20forandf=false , pgs. 45-46, EmmieeM)
The integral inclusivity framework presented in Figure 2.2 depicts how, through the 

AND

diversity dynamics that typically may negatively impact on organizational behaviour, are optimized.
Competitiveness is key to US dominance – we need to keep innovating faster to ensure economic prosperity and hegemony
Segal 04 – Senior Fellow in China Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations
Adam, Foreign Affairs, “Is America Losing Its Edge?” November / December 2004, http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20041101facomment83601/adam-segal/is-america-losing-its-edge.html
The United States' global primacy depends in large part on its ability to develop new 

AND

, the United States must get better at fostering technological entrepreneurship at home.
Loss of competitiveness results in great power conflict—retrenchment makes war inevitable and ensures the US would be dragged in – that causes your heg bad impacts so it’s try or die for the AFF
Khalilzad 11 — Zalmay Khalilzad, Counselor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, served as the United States ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq, and the United Nations during the presidency of George W. Bush, served as the director of policy planning at the Defense Department during the Presidency of George H.W. Bush, holds a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago, 2011 (“The Economy and National Security,” National Review, February 8th, Available Online at http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/print/259024, Accessed 02-08-2011)

Today, economic and fiscal trends pose the most severe long-term threat to 

AND

leading the world toward a new, dangerous era of multi-polarity.
Terror
Freedom of expression allows extremist viewpoints to be challenged through debate, which demonstrates their flaws and de-motivates others from adopting them -- speech bans only lead to hostility, divided communities, and push-back, which exacerbates terrorism
Lombardi 15 (Marco Lombardi – member of the Italian Team for Security, Terroristic Issues, and Managing Emergencies, which is a research department in the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Milan, “Countering Radicalisation and Violent Extremism Among Youth to Prevent Terrorism”, https://books.google.com/books?id=_kAoBgAAQBAJandpg=PA3andlpg=PA3anddq=preventing+free+discussion+leads+to+extremismandsource=blandots=TJ8fW6700zandsig=Lz4MWuGl6LkEYxy5RdXBDrCAxfUandhl=enandsa=Xandved=0ahUKEwiq56aDsvTQAhUS1GMKHRNUBC4Q6AEIXzAN#v=onepageandq=preventing20free20discussion20leads20to20extremismandf=false , pgs. 3- 4, EmmieeM)
First, we should carefully calibrate prevention activities and avoid catch-all, indiscriminate 

AND

law enforcement or secret services because this would discredit and ultimately sabotage them.          
This is especially pertinent in the case of colleges – students are much more likely to be recruited or adopt extremist views
Borum 5 (Randy Borum – Professor and Director of Intelligence Studies in the School of Information and Academic Coordination for Cybersecurity at the University of Southern Florida; Chuck Tilby – member of the Police Department, “Anarchist Direct Action: A Challenge for Law Enforcement”, “Recruitment, pg. 214, http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1552andcontext=mhlp_facpub, EmmieeM)
It should not be surprising to learn that jails and prisons are major recruiting sites 

AND

to be young, energetic, and idealistic with time available to act.  
Solvency
Outlawing hate-speech is counter-productive – rules will be turned on minorities, discussions become diverted towards fights over censorship, and students are taught to rely on their oppressors for protection. The AFF allows for counterspeech, which creates community mobilization, turns third-parties away from hate-speech, and is empowering – empirically proven to work
Calleros 95 (Charles R. Calleros – Professor of Law at Arizona State University, “PATERNALISM, COUNTERSPEECH, AND CAMPUS HATE-SPEECH CODES: A REPLY TO DELGADO AND YUN”,
 “II. Reply to the Authors’ Rejection of The Arguments of the Moderate Left”, EmmieeM)
To challenge them on their strongest ground, I will work within the analytic framework 

AND

it sparked counterspeech and community action that strengthened the campus support for diversity.

Tournament: Harvard Westlake | Round: 1 | Opponent:  | Judge:
Framework 

The political process has changed – instead of trying to engage with society, we have become fixated on symbolic gestures and look to personal ethics, leading to serial policy failure and the War on Terror. We need to engage with concrete action.
Chandler 7 (David Chandler – Professor of International Relations and the Director of the Centre for the Study of Democracy at the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Westminster. He’s also the founding editor of the Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, “The Attraction of Post-Territorial Politics: Ethics and Activism in the International Sphere (The Inaugural Lecture of Professor David Chandler)”, http://www.davidchandler.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Inaugural-lecture.pdf, pgs. 1-9, EmmieeM)

Introduction. It seems that our engagement with and understanding of politics is increasingly shaped 

AND

critique, and ultimately overcome the practices and subjectivities of our time. 

Focusing on apocalyptic scenarios justifies all atrocities carried out in the name of avoiding them – prefer being an intellectual coming up with methodologies for change rather than feeding the security machine
Matheson 15 (Calum Matheson – This is his PhD dissertation at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, “Desired Ground Zeros: Nuclear Imagination and the Death Drive”, https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/indexablecontent/uuid:4bbcb13b-0b5f-43a1-884c-fcd6e6411fd6, pg. 187-189, EmmieeM)

The danger of seeking the Real of nuclear warfare in language is that the inevitable 

AND

the impossibility of an eventual triumph of automaton against the caprice of tuché.

Challenging background beliefs about security measures is a prior question because educational spaces like debate is where knowledge about war is created and asserted. Acting as a critical outsider within public spaces is crucial to changing prevailing beliefs and practices
Crawford 16 (Neta C Crawford is a professor of Political Science at Boston University who focuses on international relations theory and discourse ethics. She has won the American Political Science Association Jervis and Schroeder Award for her writings on international politics. She has been published in numerous scholarly journals and books, in addition to having served as the chair of the International Studies Association, The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, “What is war good for? Background ideas and assumptions about the legitimacy, utility, and costs of offensive war”, http://bpi.sagepub.com/content/18/2/282.full.pdf+html, pages 286-288, EmmieeM)

While the deeper background ideas about war are not routinely surfaces, foregrounded 

AND

has been the case with assumptions about the legitimacy and utility of war. 

Questioning the legitimacy of war and securitization is key to deconstruct the background ideas that shape the development of tactics, research, and weapons. Thus the role of the ballot is to vote for the debater that best deconstructs the security state
Crawford 16 (Neta C Crawford is a professor of Political Science at Boston University who focuses on international relations theory and discourse ethics. She has won the American Political Science Association Jervis and Schroeder Award for her writings on international politics. She has been published in numerous scholarly journals and books, in addition to having served as the chair of the International Studies Association, The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, “What is war good for? Background ideas and assumptions about the legitimacy, utility, and costs of offensive war”, http://bpi.sagepub.com/content/18/2/282.full.pdf+html, pages 284-186, EmmieeM)

War is defined as the use of military force to achieve a political objective. 

AND

may be rarely expressed in explicit propositional form among the politically dominant classes. 

Offense 

Colleges are the newest target of the security state – the perception that universities are uniquely capable of supporting democracy and dissent over the War on Terror and free enterprise drives right-wing extremists to enforce censorship, under the guise of advancing tolerance and rights
Giroux 6 (Henry A. Giroux – one of the founding theorists of critical pedagogy, PhD from Carnegie, was a professor at Boston University and scholar at Miami University. Was the founding Director of the Center for Education and Cultural Studies. Published by John Hopkins University Press, “Academic Freedom Under FIre: The Case for Critical Pedagogy, pgs. 1 – 9, http://muse.jhu.edu/article/203608/pdf, EmmieeM)

Higher education in the United States appears to be caught in a strange contradiction. 

AND

the best talent to American universities” (Jonathan Cole 2005b, B7).

The dissenter has become the terrorist to be eradicated – the security state has transformed college censorship into a tool of suppression for radical or brown students under the pretense of enforcing diversity and tolerance for right-wing students. Absent analysis of the War on Terror, liberation becomes impossible because struggles for racial or gender equality becomes coopted to further Islamaphobia and Middle East interventionism.
Chatterjee 14 (Piya Chatterjee – Gender and Woman’s Studies Chair of the Feminist, Gender, and Sexuality Department at Scripps; B.A. from Wellesley in Political Science/Anthropology; M.A. at UChicago in Political Science/Anthropology; PhD at UChicago in Anthropology; numerous awards (professor of the year, bridging theory to practice grant, ford foundation grant, etc); Sunandra Maira – Professor of Asian American studies at UC Davis; Ed.D in Human Development and Psychology from Harvard; “The Imperial University: Race, War, and the Nation-State”, “Academic Contaiment” – entire section, pg. 17 – 25, https://www.csun.edu/cdsc/Imperial20University20Introduction20-20Piya20Chatterjee20and20Sunaina20Maira.pdf, “Academic Containment”, EmmieeM)

State warfare and militarism have shored up deeply powerful notions of patriotism, intertwined with 

AND

the mission of higher education and the future of the nation-state. 

Security thrives on insecurity – the state fabricates dangerous “Others” to justify endless warfare to sustain hegemony and the myth of perpetual threats. Any weighing calculus that fails to account for the invisible violence happening in the status quo is epistemologically flawed – only through acknowledging that the War on Terror is fueled by the torture and slaughter of ordinary citizens can we deconstruct securitization.
McClintock 9 (Anne McClintock – B.A in English from University of Cape Town; M.Phil in Linguistics at the University of Cambridge; PhD in English Literature from Columbia; previous Associate Professor of Gender and Cultural Studies at Columbia“Paranoid Empire: Specters From Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib”, pgs. 50-54, http://english110fall2014leroy.qwriting.qc.cuny.edu/files/2014/06/13.1.mcclintock.pdf, EmmieeM)

The question is still open: what is the purpose of Guantanamo Bay? Is 

AND

contradictory sites where imperial racism, sexuality, and gender catastrophically collide.11

Thus, the plan. Resolved: Public colleges and universities ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech.
Downs 4 (Donald Alexander Downs – Professor of Political Science, Law and Journalism at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute, Oakland, California. He has won the Annisfield-Wolf Book Award, the Gladys M. Kammerer Award of the American Political Science Association, and has been in published in journals, encyclopedias, and professional books. “Restoring Free Speech and Liberty on Campus”, pgs. Xx – xxi, http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/Z5243N.pdf, EmmieeM)

During most of the twentieth century, threats to campus free speech and academic freedom 

AND

commitment on campus can help to bring about this retrieval of liberal principles.

Solvency 

The affirmative is an act of carpentry – the world is a really messed up place, but you cannot deny the existence of 6 billion people who cannot survive absent infrastructure and networks that provide food, transportation, and medicine. Empty critiques and radical upheavals devoid of concrete proposals are incomprehensible, doomed to failure, and drive people towards reigning ideology
Bryant 12 — Levi R. Bryant, Professor of Philosophy at Collin College, holds a Ph.D. in Philosophy from Loyola University in Chicago, 2012 (“Underpants Gnomes: A Critique of the Academic Left,” Larval Subjects—Levi R. Bryant’s philosophy blog, November 11th, Available Online at http://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/2012/11/11/underpants-gnomes-a-critique-of-the-academic-left/, Accessed 02-21-2014)

I must be in a mood today–half irritated, half amused–because 

AND

.  Instead we prefer to shout and denounce.  Good luck with that.

The security state operates on a binary where people are either complacent allies or dissenters to be suppressed at all costs – by framing unsavory speech acts as coming from people who are our equals and share more similarities than differences rather than evil “Others” to be destroyed, the affirmative avoids cooption of “protection” movements and the antagonisms that drive war. Anything other than complete rejection hyperlinks to the impacts of the AFF.
Ivie 5 (Robert L. Ivie – PhD in Rhetoric and Communication at WashU, “Democratic Dissent and the Trick of Rhetorical Critique”, “Dissent as a Form of Struggle” – entire section, pg. 279 – 280, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.832.4092andrep=rep1andtype=pdf, EmmieeM)

Democracy’s formidable challenge may be most clearly indicated on the occasion of war.

AND

it is otherwise curtailed and constrained by a regime of crisis and war?