Authors are racist Evidence cards

Baudrillard is a fuck
BALSAS, 2006 [BALSAS is an interdisciplinary journal on media culture.

Interview with Art Group BBM, on first cyborgs,

aliens and other sides of new technologies, translated from lithiuanianhttp://www.balsas.cc/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=151]

We all know that Jean Baudrillard did not believe that the
Gulf War did take place, as it was over-mediated and over-simulated. In fact, the Gulf War II is still not over, and
Valentinas:

Iraq became much more than just a Frankenstein laboratory for the new media, technology and democracy games. What can we learn
from wars that do not take place, even though they cannot be finished? Are they becoming a symptom of our times as a confrontation
between multiple time-lines, ideologies and technologies in a single place?

Lars: Actually, it has always been the same: new wars have been better test-beds for the state of art technologies and the latest computercontrolled firearms. The World War I already was a fully mechanized war where pre-robots were fighting each other and gassing the troops.

Who on hell is Baudrillard? The one

who earns money by publishing his prognoses after the things
happen? What a fuck, French philosophy deals too much with
luxury problems and elegantly ignores the problem itself. Its no
wonder, this is the colonizers mentality, you can hear it roaring in
their words they use phrases made to camouflage genocide.
And afterwards, the winners shape the new world order. Olaf:

I went to see that Virilios exhibition "Ce qui arrive" at Fondation Cartier in 2003. I was smashed by that banal presentation of the evil of

natural catastrophes and evil done by man were exposed on the same
wall, glued together with a piece of "theory". There you find it all, filled up in one row: the pure
luxury of the Cartier-funded Jean Nouvel building, an artwork without any blood in its
veins, and that late Christian philosophy about the techno-cataclysm being the revenge of God. Pure
shit, turned into gold in the holy cellars of the modern
alchemists museums.The artist-made video "documents" of the Manhattan towers
all kinds: again,

opposed to Iraq war pictures: thats not Armageddon, thats man-invented war technology to
be used to subdue others. Andthere is always somebody who pushes the

buttons, even when the button is a computer mouse some ten

thousand kilometers away from the place where people die, or
even if it is a civil airplanes redirected by Islamists. Everybody
knows that. War technology has always been made to make
killing easier. And to produce martyrs as well.Janneke: Compare Baudrillard with Henry
Dunant, the founder of the International Committee of the Red Cross. Dunant was
no philosopher, he was just an intelligent rich man in the late 19th century. But his ideas went far
more in the direction where you should hope to find
philosophers as well. He experienced war as a "randonneur": he passed by, he saw the suffering and
the inhumanity of war. And he felt obliged to act. Apart from the maybe 10 days he
spent on the battlefield, on the beautiful meadows in the Europeans Alps, helping wounded people to survive, as a complete
medical layman he decided to do something more sustainable
against these odds. He knew that his efforts couldnt prevent
war in general, but he felt that he could alter the cruelty of
reality. And he succeeded in doing it.No wonder that in our days we find the

most engaged people to support the TROIA projects intention in Geneva, where they are still based. And they are not
only doing their necessary surgeons work in the field: they are as well fighting with the same energy
on the diplomatic battlefield.

Zizek was racist

Johnson 09, Alan.( a professor in the Department of Social and Psychological Sciences at Edge

Hill University in England. He is the founder and editor of Democratiya, and the editor of Global
Politics After 9/11: The Democratiya Interviews (The Foreign Policy Centre, 2007).) "The
Reckless Mind of Slavoj iek." Dissent Magazine. N.P., Fall 2009. Web. 4 Dec. 2009.
<https://docs.google....3JubmNr&hl=en>.

But iek mocks this tradition in the crude, bullying style of the Stalinist intellectual policeman, Andrei
Zhdanov. Anti-totalitarian thought appears in all its misery as what it really is, a worthless sophistic
exercise, writes iek, a pseudotheorisation of the lowest opportunist survivalist fears and instincts, a
way of thinking that is ... reactionary. The antitotalitarians, he claims, were opposed to anyone who
dared to deconstruct [the] religious and moral foundations of our society. No. What the antitotalitarian
thinkers really objected to was not social and ethical criticism of the liberal democracies but rather what
the great Russian writer Vasily Grossman described in Forever Flowing: the crazed eyes; smashed
kidneys; [the] skull[s] pierced by a bullet; rotting infected, gangrenous toes; and scurvy racked corpses
in log-cabin, dugout morgues. Because they did so, they, not the thugs, despots, and fellow travellers
that iek seeks to rehabilitate, will be forever the intellectual heroes and heroines of that
century.Adam Kirsch has pointed to the sheer weight and the troubling texture of imagery and
example in ieks writings concerning the Jews. We read of Jews smashed into bloody
pulp, and that all good films about the Holocaust are also comedies. He illustrates the
spontaneity of racism by reference to his own instinctive anti-Semitism. (iek describes his
response to reading a tale in Janusz Bardachs Gulag book Man Is Wolf to Man: My immediate racist
assumption was, of course: Typical Jews! Even in the worst Gulag, the moment they are given a
minimum of freedom and space for manoeuvre, they start tradingin human blood!honest, for sure,
but why of course?) When iek urges the revolutionary Left to ignore liberal qualms about terror he
offers this exemplar: To be clear and brutal to the end, there is a lesson to be learned fromHermann
Goerings reply, in the early 1940s, to a fanatical Nazi who asked him why he protected a wellknown
Jew from deportation: In this city, I decide who is a Jew! . . . In this city we decide what is left, so we
should simply ignore liberal accusations of inconsistency. (The thuggish quality of the new style in
leftism seems more Tony Soprano than Karl Marx.)And what on earth are we to make of this
sentence in Lost Causes?: The only true solution to the Jewish Question is the final solution (their
annihilation) because Jews ... are the ultimate obstacle to the final solution of History itself, to
the overcoming of divisions in an all-encompassing unity and flexibility?

1.

Heidegger was a Nazi, if we abide by their advocacy, we empower nazi thinkers.

Steiner, 2k. (Alex, staff for ICFI. April 3, 2000.) DOA: 2/10/15. ICFI, International Committee of the Fourth
International. Retrieved from:http://www.wsws.org/...4/heid-a03.html.

Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) has been considered by many to be one of the titans of twentieth
century philosophy. His international reputation was assured with the publication in 1927 of Being and Time, a book
that was characterized by the young Jurgen Habermas as the most significant philosophical event since
Hegel's Phnomenologie ...[1] The success of Being and Time was immediate and its influence pervasive.

Many currents of contemporary thought over the past 70 years have been inspired by and in some
cases directly derived from the work of Heidegger. Among these we can mention existentialism,
hermeneutics, postmodernism, eco-feminism, and various trends in psychology, theology and

literature. His writings have influenced thinkers as diverse as Herbert Marcuse, Jean-Paul Sartre, Jacques Derrida,
Paul Tillich and countless others. Heidegger's distinguished career as professor of philosophy at the University of Freiburg
was marred by a singular event in his life. After Hitler's seizure of power in 1933 Heidegger the world-

renowned philosopher became Heidegger the Nazi, holding membership card number 312589. The
topic of Heidegger's Nazism has recently stepped out of the pages of scholarly journals and become
an issue in the popular press and mass media. Last year, the BBC aired a television series about three
philosophers who have strongly influenced our epoch, Nietzsche, Heidegger and Sartre. The episode on Heidegger could
not help but discuss his Nazism. Late last year, the New York Review of Books published an article covering the
relationship between Heidegger and his colleagues Karl Jaspers and Hannah Arendt.

Attack on White Philosophy

The 1NC is constitutive of a white experience theorizing from nowhere. They

bracket all others into their universal ethics, speaking for everyone to empower
their own opinion without a mention of their raced identity, social location,
privilege, and where they speak from. This form of authorship is the basic
functioning of whiteness, supremacy, and policing.
George Yancy, 2005 (Associate Professor of Philosophy at Duquesne University and Coordinator of the
Critical Race Theory Speaker Series, Whiteness and the Return of the Black Body, The Journal of
Speculative Philosophy 19.4 (2005) 215-241,

This view from nowhere results in racist tactical methodologies that hide racist
ideologies behind a mask of criticism. They only make things worse
Lenz 2004(Brooke, Assistant Professor of English at Saint Mary's University of Minnesota Postcolonial Fiction and the Outsider Within: Toward a Literary Practice of
Feminist Standpoint Theory NWSA Journal, 2004, pp. 98-120

Your authors were privileged and colorblind

Monique Roelofs, Prof @ Hampshire College and teaches and writes at the intersection of European,
analytical, and postcolonial philosophies with a special focus on aesthetics and the philosophy of art and culture,
feminist philosophy, and critical race theory, 2006, The Veiled Presence of Race in the Philosophy of Art:
Reclaiming Race for Aesthetics

Your authors were armchair philosophers that sustain traditional white

enlightenment views and do nothing for people of color.
Siskanna Naynaha, composition coordinator at Lane Community College and teaches courses on
African American and Latino literature, May 2006, RACE OF ANGELS: XICANISMA,
POSTCOLONIAL PASSIONS, AND RHETORICS OF REACTION AND REVOLUTION,

Nick Land is a Neonazi DA

Your authors philosophy is grounded in neofascism he thinks women should be limited to domestic
servitude and that non-white races are inferior. The 1AC is a faade for spreading neofascist views
voting aff uniquely causes spread of Lands ideas which are on the brink now

Bartlett 14 Jamie Bartlett Director of the Centre for the Analysis of Social Media at Demos,
Specialises in online culture and the dark net. Meet The Dark Enlightenment: sophisticated neofascism that's spreading fast on the net The Telegraph January 20 th 2014 http://blogs.telegra...ast-onthe-net/ PBM SME
Since 2012 a sophisticated but bizarre online neo-fascist movement has been growing fast. Its called "The Dark
Enlightenment". Its modus operandi is well suited to a digital society. Supporters are dotted all over the world, connected
via a handful of blogs and chat rooms. Its adherents are clever, angry white men patiently awaiting the

collapse of civilisation, and a return to some kind of futuristic, ethno-centric feudalism . It started, suitably
enough, with two blogs. Mencius Moldbug, a prolific blogger and computer whizz from San Francisco, and Nick Land,
an eccentric British philosopher (previously co-founder of Warwick Universitys Cybernetic Culture Research Unit)
who in 2012 wrote the eponymous "The Dark Enlightenment", as a series of posts on his site . You can
find them all here. The philosophy, difficult to pin down exactly, is a loose collection of neo-reactionary ideas,
meaning a rejection of most modern thinking: democracy, liberty, and equality . Particular contempt is
reserved for democracy, which Land believes "systematically consolidate[s] and exacerbate[es] private vices,
resentments, and deficiencies until they reach the level of collective criminality and comprehensive social corruption." The

neo-fascist bit lies in the view that races arent equal (they obsess over IQ testing and pseudoscience
that they claim proves racial differences, like the Ku Klux Klan ) and that women are primarily suited for
domestic servitude. They call this "Human biodiversity" a neat little euphemism. This links directly to
their desire to be rid of democracy: because if people arent equal, why live in a society in which
everyone is treated equally? Some races are naturally better to rule than others, hence their support for various
forms of aristocracy and monarchy (and not in the symbolic sense but the very real divine-right-of-kingssense). The whole bankrupt edifice, they think, is maintained by what they call "The Cathedral" (what conspiracy
theorists call the New World Order): a cabal of universities, newspapers, and establishment forces
which perpetuate the status quo and prevent dissent. Whenever someone is arrested for a racist tweet,
it is taken as proof that the Cathedral is pulling strings . You become darkly enlightened when you start to see
these constructs for what they really are: modern atrocities that go against the natural order of things which must be torn
down. Its all a little bit like the movie The Matrix (and indeed some adherents refer to the Red and Blue Pill scene, in
which the protagonist is offered a choice between blissful ignorance and painful reality). So how many have been

enlightened? No one knows, but unlikely to be many . Yet. There is certainly a growing interest in this
type of rejectionist philosophy and politics. As I argue in a forthcoming essay for the think-tank IPPR,radical antiestablishment politics of all shades are on the rise, driven by a growing belief (and surveys bear this out) that our
current way of doing things our parliamentary system, our judicial system, our economic system dont work. While
researching my book about internet subcultures, Ive bumped into plenty of online movements that reject

democracy, believe in racial superiority and fantasise about a purer more "natural" life before the French

Revolution or the Normans came along and ruined everything . The internet has transformed the ability of niche
movements to gain support across the world: already the Dark Enlightenment has picked up interest from the
bigger (though still tiny) New Right and other reactionary neo-fascist movements . By bringing together
diverse elements of alternative Right-wing and fantastical rejection of the system into a single political
philosophy for internet intellectuals, this could well grow . Ill be keeping an eye on them, and report back here
with any interesting developments as they happen.

More stuf

Land is a hack who cant write and is a Nazi not even in a Nietzsches a Nazi way hes actually a
neo-nazi -- theres no threat in his movement now, only a risk the aff changes thathis writing is
intentionally vague to entice neofascism

Stanley 14 Tim Stanley, MA, Mphil, PhD in Modern History, The 'neo-fascist' Dark Enlightenment
is more sad than scary The Telegraph Jan 22nd 2014 http://blogs.telegra...-fascist-scary/ PBM SME
This paragraph is actually contained within a vaguely negative critique of white nationalism , but it's

hard to tell it's intention because a) Land can't write and

he appears to have a lot of sympathy for
the discourse of "whites as victims". Land probably thinks that he walks a semantic line between
reason and racism. But even just trying to do that is an indication of myopia and an invitation for Nazis
to endorse him. There is no line to be walked between reason and racism. Racism and biological
determinism are unscientific and immoral, and they have no place in a sane philosophy . Jamie interprets
the rise of the Dark Enlightenment in terms of a resurgence of historical fascism. He maybe right. But I also think it's an
insight into how desperate elements of the Right have become . They believe they've lost the battle for
control of the West and would now like to withdraw from democracy altogether . Some are driven into the
arms of Putin, some into the Far, Far Right and some up trees with guns. As such, the Dark Enlightenment is
probably more tragic than it is scary. Or, at least, let's hope it stays that way .

They say they dont support that part of his philosophy but they do his concepts about death, desire
and excess are intrinsically intertwined with his Nazism and his conceptions of continental philosophy
to be a Nazi, according to Land, is a logical follow of Bataille, DnG and Nietzsches philosophy.
-We obviously dont advocate the language or the implication of this evidence it just shows how
screwed up Land is

Land 93 Nick Land, Making it with Death, Nazbol.net [national bolshevism a pretty racist nationalist
ideology] 1993http://nazbol.net/li... with Death.pdf
What if instead of How Do You Make Yourself A Body Without Organs? one were to ask: how do
you make yourself a Nazi? For this is far more strenuous than the 1980 diagnosis suggests. 1) Wherever there is
impersonality and chance introduce conspiracy, lucidity. and malice. Look for enemies everywhere,
ensuring that they are such that one than simultaneously envy and condemn them . Proliferate new
subjectivities; racia1 subjects, national subjects, elites, secret societies, destinies. 2) Burn Freud, and take desire
back to the Kantian conception of will. Wherever there is impulse represent it as choice, decision, the
whole theatrical drama of volition. Introduce a gloomy atmosphere of oppressive responsibility by couching all
discourses in the imperative form. 3) Revere the principle of the great individual. Personalize and mythicize
historical processes. Love obedience above all things. and enthuse only for signs; the name of the
leader, the symbol of the movement, and the icons of molar identity . 4) Foster nostalgia for what is
maximally bovine, inflexible, and stagnant: a line of racially pure peasants digging the same patch of
earth for eternity. 5) Above all. resent everything impetuous and irresponsible, insist upon unrelenting
vigilance, crush sexuality under its reproductive function, rigidly enforce the domestication of women,
distrust art,classicize cities to eliminate the disorder of uncontrolled flows, and persecute all minorities
exhibiting a nomadic tendency. Trying not to be a Nazi approximates one to Nazism far more radically than any
irresponsible impatience in destratification. Nazism might even be characterized as the pure politics of effort;

the absolute dominion of the collective super-ego in its annihilating rigor . Nothing could be more politically
disastrous than the launching of a moral case against Nazism: Nazism is morality itself; heir to Europe's
respectable history; that of witchburnings, inquisitions, and pogroms. To want to be in the right is the common
substratum of morality and genocidal reaction; the same desire for repression organized in terms of the
disapproving gaze of the father that AntiOedipus analyzes with such power. Who could imagine Nazism without daddy?
And who could imagine daddy being pre-figured in the energetic unconscious? Nazism can turn you into a stiff before the
messy passage into death.Death is too simple. too fluid. too disdainful of races and fatherlands to have anything much to
do with the Nazis. Ressentiment was something they knew about. as was the aspiration to a mythic

sacrifice, a Gtterdmmerung that would inscribe them in the history books, but these things never stretch
to dissolution-desire. After all, lose control and you might end up fucking with a Jew, becoming
effeminate, or creating something degenerate like a work of art. Does anyone really think that Nazism is like
letting go? Theweleit's studies of Nazi body posture should be sufficient to disabuse one of such an absurdity. Nazism can
turn you into a stiff before the messy passage into death.