GWHS Policy Debate

2014/2015

1. Case outweighs
a. Worsening acidification if left unchecked will lead to global extinction, thats
Diner 94.
b. The US being reliant on foreign oil will lead to war, thats Glaser 11.
c. OTEC is the best way to solve for both of these impacts, extend solvency from

the 1AC. These impacts outweigh the K.

2. Perm do both: There is no reason we cant give Turtle Island back to the
so-called Savage while simultaneously providing an investment into a
renewable energy sector. They arent mutually exclusive, the perms not
an advocacy, its a test of competition.
3. Perm do the plan then the alt: A single investment in OTEC, however
degenerative they claim the rhetoric of the 1AC to be will not be the sole
determiner of their impacts. Doing the plan prior to a rejection of future
rhetoric sets the same precedent of alt solvency.
4. Perm do the plan in the mindset of anonymity. The US Federal
Government can implement the plan through a series of policy options
that sever from the intrinsically oppressive nature of the state. That
solves the thesis of the alternative and still garners case solvency.
5. Double Bind: Either the alt is strong enough to overcome the link to the
plan, in which case the perm solves, or it isnt strong enough to overcome
the residual links to the status quo in which case the alt fails.
6. Turn: Democracy checks coercion, violence and exclusionary politics.
Dickinson 04 (Edward Ross, Associate Professor of History at the University of California-Davis, Biopolitics, Fascism, Democracy: Some
Reflections on Our Discourse about "Modernity", in Central European History, Vol. 37, No. 1 (2004), pg 32.)
Again, as Peukert pointed out, many advocates of a rights-based welfare structure were open to the idea that "stubborn" cases might be legitimate tar-gets for

the difference between a

strategy of social management built on the rights of the citizen and a system of racial
policy built on the total power of the state is not merely a semantic one; such differences
had very profound political implications, and established quite different constraints. The rights-based
strategy was actually not very compatible with exclusionary and coercive policies; it relied
too heavily on the cooperation of its targets and of armies of volunteers, it was too embedded in a democratic
institutional structure and civil society, it lacked powerful legal and institutional instruments of coercion, and its rhetorical
structure was too heavily slanted toward inclusion and tolerance.
sterilization; the right to health could easily be redefined as primarily a duty to be healthy, for example. But

7. No Link: Ummm, their link is literally Modern Politics and State

Institutions. They have to prove why plan action in itself constitutes
institutional ethics or the justification of violence, not just that the state
has a history of violence.
8. Turn: The kritik creates a distinction between biological and political life
that destroys value to life
Fassin, 10 - Social Science Prof at Princeton (Didier, Ethics of Survival: A Democratic Approach to the Politics of Life Humanity: An International
Journal of Human Rights, Humanitarianism, and Development, Fall, Vol 1 No 1, Project Muse)//

Survival, in the sense Jacques Derrida attributed to the concept in his last interview, not only shifts lines that are too
often hardened between biological and political lives: it opens an ethical space for
reflection and action. Critical thinking in the past decade has often taken biopolitics
and the politics of life as its objects. It has thus unveiled the way in which individuals and groups, even entire nations,
Conclusion

I still think Im the greatest - Kanye West

GWHS Policy Debate

2014/2015

have been treated by powers, the market, or the state, during the colonial period as well as in the contemporary era. However, through
indiscriminate extension, this powerful instrument has lost some of its analytical sharpness and heuristic potentiality. On the one hand, the

binary reduction of life to the opposition between nature and history, bare life and qualified life,
when systematically applied from philosophical inquiry in sociological or anthropological study, erases much of the
complexity and richness of life in society as it is in fact observed. On the other hand, the
normative prejudices which underlie the evaluation of the forms of life and of the
politics of life, when generalized to an undifferentiated collection of social facts, end up
by depriving social agents of legitimacy, voice, and action. The risk is therefore both scholarly and political. It calls
for ethical attention. In fact, the genealogy of this intellectual lineage reminds us that the main founders of these theories expressed tensions
and hesitations in their work, which was often more complex, if even sometimes more obscure, than in its reduced and translated form in
the humanities and social sciences today. And also biographies, here limited to fragments from South African lives that I have described and
analyzed in more detail elsewhere, suggest the necessity of complicating the dualistic models that oppose biological and political lives.

Certainly, powers like the market and the state do act sometimes as if human beings
could be reduced to mere life, but democratic forces, including from within the structure of power, tend
to produce alternative strategies that escape this reduction.
9. Impacts Inevitable: Given their link is predicated off of the use of the state
as an actor and nothing further, every piece of legislation passed will
result in the exploitation of the black body if you buy their shady link
evidence.
10.No Alt Solvency: Insofar as their link is predicated off of the US
government being an inherently damaging state inherently, regardless of
the reparative policies they initiate, they cant solve what is already
broken.
11.Perm do the plan for no reason
12.Perm do the plan through a critical cartographic lens. Critical Cartographic
expansion allows the people to be free from control by governmental
elites, combats the Biopolitical control of the state and recontours the
realm of global political theory
Crampton 10 [Jeremy W, Associate Professor of Geography, University of Kentucky, Mapping: A Critical Introduction to
Cartography and GIS, page 40-41, PAC]

cartography has been slipping from the control of the powerful elites that
have exercised dominance over it for several hundred years. You haveprobably already have noticed this with the
In the last few years

emergence of fantastically popular mapping applications such as Google Earth. The elites the map experts, the greatmap houses of the
West, national and local governments, the major mapping andGIS companies, and to a lesser extent academics have been confronted by
two important developments that threaten to undermine their dominance. First, as GoogleEarth
has shown, the actual business of mapmaking, of collecting spatial data andmapping it out, is passing out of the hands of the experts. The
ability to make a map,even a stunning interactive 3D map, is now available to anyone with a home computerand a broadband internet
connection. Cartographys latest technological transition (Monmonier 1985; Perkins 2003) is not only a technological questionbut a
mixture of open source collaborative tools, mobile mapping applications,and the geospatial web.While this trend has been apparent to

This is a social theoretic critique that is

challenging the way we have thought about mapping in the post-war era. During the last 50
years or so cartography and GIS have very much aspired to push maps as factual scientific documents. Critical cartography
and GIS however conceives of mappingas embedded in specific relations of power. That is,
industry insiders for some time, a second challenge has also been issued.

mapping is involved in what wechoose to represent, how we choose to represent objects such as people and things,and what decisions are
made with those representations. In other words, mappingis in and of itself a political process. And it

is a political process in
which increasing numbers of people are participating. If the map is a specific set of power/knowledge
claims, then not only the state and the elites but the rest of us too could make competing and equally powerful claims (Wood 1992).

Critical mapping operates from the ground up in a diffuse manner withouttop-down

control and doesnt need the approval of experts in order to flourish. It is a movement
I still think Im the greatest - Kanye West

GWHS Policy Debate

2014/2015

that is ongoing whether or not the academic discipline of cartographyis involved (D. Wood
2003). It is in this sense that cartography is being freed from the confines of the academy and
opened up to the people.
13.Theory
a. Interpretation: The thesis of the link of a Kritik should be a Kritik of
either affirmative action or affirmative mindset, not the post-fiat actor
b. Violation: A kritik of the United States Federal Government is neither a
kritik of action or mindset - They never prove a definitive link to
affirmative action as opposed to Federal Government existence
c. Reasons to Prefer:
i. Ground: A Kritik of the United States Federal Government precludes
any topical affirmative plan as the resolution binds the affirmative
to that actor. The story of these Ks is then unrelated to the aff plan,
as it links to any affirmative under any resolution, destroying aff
ground as we cant effectively debate the link level.
ii. Education: If the only way to avert the link to this Kritik is to use a
different actor than the USFG, both teams lose all education related
to the policy-making process of the United States, an integral part
of policy debate.
iii. Critical Thinking: Forcing the negative team to run a Kritik that
actually pertains to affirmative plan action increases critical
thinking and good alternative writing rather than the same generic
shells each round.
iv. Fairness: The affirmative team is bound by the resolution to using
the USFG as an actor, meaning we are bound to linking to their
generic K. This precludes the aff from attacking it at a link level,
which is a necessary affirmative argument key to fairness.
d. Voters:
i. Ground and fairness are voters because it is necessary for fair and
equitable debate, without which debate is unfairly skewed towards
the negative. The terminal impact to fairness and ground is the
extinction of debate. If debate becomes prohibitively unfair or
skewed towards the negative, teams will just stop coming to
tournaments.
ii. Education is a voter because its the core purpose of debate. We
come here to learn.

I still think Im the greatest - Kanye West