Tournament: greenhill | Round: 2 | Opponent: jason yang | Judge: adegoke

Part 1 is Framing

The role of the ballot is to endorse a better ontological understanding. Our ontological understanding of the world shapes the way we perceive any kind of thinking it becomes a prerequisite before making any type of decision. Dillon 99

~Michael Dillon, MA and PhD and Professor in Department of philosophy, politics, and religion @ University of Lancaster, 1999, Moral Spaces: Rethinking Ethics and World Politics Pgs. 96-98,  PN~
Heidegger – himself an especially revealing figure of the deep and mutual implication of the
AND
-innocent political slaves who claim only to be technocrats of decision making.

Ontology is a gateway issue because the justifications of theories depend on understanding of our environment and our role with it. Bryant 09

~Levi R. Bryant, prof of phil @ Collin College The Ontic Principle: Outline of an Object-Oriented Ontology, 2009, http://www.re-press.org/book-files/OA'Version'Speculative'Turn'9780980668346.pdf, PN~
Consequently, prior to even posing questions of knowledge, of how we can know
AND
of a metaphysical sort. Thus, for example, Kant does not first

====The status quo ontology treats technology as a standing reserve, which results in Enframing. Heidegger====
~Heidegger, Martin. The Question Concerning Technology, and Other Essays. New York: Harper and Row, 1977. Print., PN~
The other point that we should observe with regard to technē is even more important
AND
challenge of Enframing, but it never comprises Enframing itself or brings it about

Enframing is manipulative and neglects local and particular anomalies. Humalisto and Joronen 13

~Niko Heikki and Mikko, Researchers at University of Turku, Department of Geography and Geology, "Looking beyond calculative spaces of biofuels: Onto-topologies of indirect land use changes," Geoforum 50 (2013), PN~
It is crucial to take into account that as a modality of revealing¶ things
AND
be ordered, controlled and challenged with calculative plans, scenarios and models.

Enframed things are displaced and turned into standing reserves becoming variables subordinate through this managerialist ontology. Humalisto and Joronen 2

~Niko Heikki and Mikko, Researchers at University of Turku, Department of Geography and Geology, "Looking beyond calculative spaces of biofuels: Onto-topologies of indirect land use changes," Geoforum 50 (2013), PN~

In the Gestell things are not only undifferentiated in ontological terms but also spatially. As ‘enframed’ things are moved apart from their originary sites of revealing, displaced into spatially indifferent and universally measurable relations, eventually being turned into mere nodes and variables subordinate to the distanceless nexuses of calculative ordering (Joronen, 2012, see also Elden, 2006). Accordingly, the iLUC impact is solely measured with regard to¶ the calculative schemes set beforehand, such ‘enframing’ reducing¶ the complex and unpredictably invasive land use changes into universal, topologically uncomprehending ontological frameworks. In¶ order to secure the ecological sustainability of biofuel feedstock, the abstractions of the calculative models are structured to force the impacts of biofuel production from their surroundings and connections to the realm of calculative handling. All in all, Gestell is able to ‘enframe’ things into ‘standing-reserves’ by veiling two elements intrinsic to the emergence of biofuel production: the actual¶ multiplicity of topological connections between things and human¶ actors and the inexhaustible possibility behind the unpredictable¶ self-emerge of material entities.

Part 2 is the Plan

Plan Text: The United States Federal Government will ban the production of nuclear power.

Lovins 2 clarifies the advocacy

~Amory B. Lovins, "Energy Strategy: The Road Not Taken?" originally published in Foreign Affairs, reprinted by Friends of the Earth, Special Reprint Issue, Not Man Apart, November 1977, vol. 6, no. 20. This can be found at http://www.rmi.org/Knowledge-Center/Library/E77-01'EnergyStrategyRoadNot Taken, PN~
The United States will phase out its nuclear power program and its support of others'
AND
could move to energy and foreign policies that our grandchildren can live with.

Advantage 1 – Anti-Managerialism

Managerial thought reduces the world to objects for manipulation and control, which renders it as a self-circulating resource for our use and disposal. This privileges a single way of viewing the world and forecloses alternative modes of thought. McWhorter 92

(Ladelle, Professor of Philosophy and Women’s Studies at Richmond, Heidegger and the earth: Essays in environmental philosophy, Thomas Jefferson University Press, pp. 6, PN)
The danger of a managerial approach to the world lies not, then, in
AND
we have not yet dreamed, directions of which we may never dream.

Nuclear power entrenches managerial thought through an energy economy that politically enslaves us. Taylor 13

(Taylor, B. Polity (2013) 45: 297. doi:10.1057/pol.2013.3),(Bill Pepperman Taylor, "Thinking about Nuclear Power", PN)
For Lovins, even if we could solve the safety problems of nuclear power,
AND
local communities and post- materialist political, social, and personal goods. 

Only total rejection of managerial thoughts allow us to redirect our relationship with nature. → The AC solves. James 01

(James, Simon Paul (2001) Heidegger and Environmental Ethics, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/3958/, PN)
Many environmental thinkers would reject the idea that the global environmental crisis is a practical
AND
of the tradition with an appreciation of the 'oneness' of mind and nature. 

A world subsumed by calculative technological thought destroys our ontological relationship with Being. Our instant access to everything as a tool for use obliterates the essential being of all things making even total planetary destruction a radically less important issue and a likely inevitability. Caputo 93

gender paraphrased
(John, Demythologizing Heidegger, p. 136-41, PN)
The essence of technology is nothing technological; the essence of language is nothing linguistic
AND
to a more inward, profound, essential, authentic, ontological destruction.

This destruction of ontology is worse than nuclear war. 2 Warrants.

1. Zimmerman 97

~Michael Zimmerman, Contesting Earth’s Future: Radical Ecology and Postmodernity, 1997, University of California Press, page 119-120, PN~
This view was popularized by Stoicism and later by Christianity, which depicted Creation as
AND
state of ontological damnation: hell on earth, masquerading as material paradise. 

2. James 13

Leverhulme Research Fellow in Philosophy at the University of Durham, UK (Simon, ("Philistinism and the preservation of nature", Durham Research Online, http://dro.dur.ac.uk/11245/1/11245.pdf)/, PN)

A related threat to nature’s meaningfulness is the increasing tendency for policymakers to adopt a ‘managerial’ idiom when talking, writing and (presumably) thinking about the natural world. Whether one is considering a Government White Paper on rural affairs, a declaration on sustainability from a private corporation, or the mission statement of an environmental pressure group, one typically encounters the same set of all too familiar references – to the rolling out of strategies, the embedding of commitments, the fixing of objectives, the setting of targets, the estimation of added value, the determination of key performance indicators and the identification of best practice. Such language has its uses of course, and in any case it would be absurd to recommend that managers start trying to write their reports in more evocative, Hughes- or Heaneyesque styles. Be that as it may, the idiom of strategies, objectives, and key performance indicators is a poor vehicle for the communication of nature’s meanings. On the one hand, this is because of the emphasis managerially-minded thinkers place on measurability, as epitomised in the perennial demand that management objectives be SMART (that is, specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and timely). Talk of values can lend itself to being expressed in such terms (hence the popularity of appeals to ‘added value’ or to the cash value of nature’s ‘services’). However, meanings are hard to quantify and prone, therefore, to being overlooked in discussions that are conducted exclusively in managerial terms. On the other hand, the familiar managerial idiom of strategies, objectives and key performance indicators is simply too bland to convey the meanings of things. As Orwell observed, managerial prose seems to consist ‘less and less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning, and more and more of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated henhouse.’ 39 References to the rolling out of strategies, the embedding of commitments and the identification of best practice are simply too insipid to capture the rich variety of political, historical, mythic, religious and personal meanings that people find in the natural world. Hence a devotion to this sort of rhetoric can blind one to nature’s meaningfulness. Martin Heidegger thought that the rise of scientistic-cum-managerial philistinism was a ‘destining’ (Geschick) of history.40 In fact he insisted that the greatest ‘danger’ facing us moderns is not that of nuclear war, but the possibility that the ‘calculative thinking’ typically practised by modern advocates of scientism and managerialism ‘may someday come to be accepted and practiced as the only way of thinking’.41 I do not want to go that far. It is not clear to me that philistinism has permeated all aspects of society. Nonetheless, as commentators such as Frank Furedi have noted, it seems to be spreading, at least in some quarters.42 And if this impression is accurate, then nature’s meaningfulness can be preserved. If it is accurate, then the works of men and women such as Mabey, Dillard and Goldsworthy do not merely reveal nature to be generally meaningful; they serve as bulwarks, preserving nature’s meaningfulness against the forces that would destroy it.43

Nuclear technologies are extremely interventionist, contribute to the destruction of Being, and reduce the world to a standing reserve. 2 Warrants.

1. Senecah 05

(Environmental theorist, "The Environmental Communication Yearbook" pg 67-68, 2005, http://books.google.com/books?hl=enandlr=andid=wW-RAgAAQBAJandoi=fndandpg=PA49anddq=nuclear+power+2B+heideggerandots=LuiJiOUoF7andsig=jXKkKiEFaN9DipueYbZwMZ3aqnw~~#v=onepageandqandf=false, PN)
The theme of nuclear entelechy provides a basis for some concluding observations on nuclear discourse
AND
products of a modernist discursive formation that is now almost 4 centuries old. 

2. Lovins 77

~Amory B. Lovins, "Energy Strategy: The Road Not Taken?" originally published in Foreign Affairs, reprinted by Friends of the Earth, Special Reprint Issue, Not Man Apart, November 1977, vol. 6, no. 20. This can be found at http://www.rmi.org/Knowledge-Center/Library/E77-01'EnergyStrategyRoadNot Taken, PN~
To Mr. Lovins any centralized power plant is "hard." Nuclear power plants
AND
or a nuclear temperature of millions—like cutting butter with a chainsaw.