Biopower K (Rishab)

7/24/2019 Biopower K (Rishab)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biopower-k-rishab 1/16

Biopower K



A. Link

1) The idea of human rights and a state’s obligation to protect things like hunger is just the moving of

security discourse into the private life. This idea of an ethical responsibility is just the state’s excuse for

further bio political control of everyday life.

Doucet1 1 2!

What we propose below is an examination of the complementarity between sovereign power and biopower via the concept of human security as it has been articulated

from the realm of the international, while concurrently revealing how the human security discourse itself provides a way of tracing some of the complexity highlighted

above, thus problematizing the more formal and theoretical assemblage of sovereign power and biopower found in the work of Foucault and Agamben. In order to place

this analysis in context, we begin by tracing the discourse of security from the postWorld War II context onward. What we intend to show is that the shift from the term

!defence" to !security" helps set the terrain from which the interweaving of biopower and sovereign power found in the concept of human security is rendered possible.

#he formal origins of the concept of human security are to be found in the worldview of an international organization that was concerned with post $old War

humanitarian issues, and only subse%uently became enmeshed in the discourse of national foreign policy concerns and academic debates on security. &enerally

attributed to the '(() *+- uman evelopment /eport and some of the concurrent writings of 0ahbub ula%, the initial impulse "as to shift

the referent from the state to the #legitimate concerns of ordinary people "ho s$eek% security in their daily

lives’ 1*+-, '(()2 334. In other words, the objective "as to bring security do"n to the level of human life by

seeking to develop strategies in the provision of both #safety from such chronic threats as hunger& disease

and repression’ and #protection from sudden and hurtful disruptions in the patterns of daily life '

"hether in homes and jobs or in communities " 1*+-, '(()2 354. In so doing, security "as to be decoupled from

the particular national interest of states and tied to the #universal concern$s%’ 1*+-, '(()2 334 of all people.

In articulating itself universally, human security "as therefore initially meant to be built upon the bedrock of

universal human rights. This move "ould be accompanied by efforts to identify a comprehensive list of

threats that the #all encompassing’ (*D+& 1,,- 2-) concept of human security "ould respond to ' that

is& economic& food& health& environmental& personal& community and political security 1*+-, '(()2 3)6374. $lear

connections were made between severe impediments to human development and pervasive and chronic threats to the fulfilment of human potential.

8uch a broad formulation sought to transcend the state, insofar as it brought into %uestion its role as a provider of security relative to other actors 6

for example, international organizations, +&9s and nonmilitary government agencies 6 while simultaneously identifying the state itself as a potential source of insecurity. #his elision of the state also served to make the %uotidian the ob:ect of security. Whereas security tended to be

understood in terms of defining historical moments centred around the survival and integrity of the state, we now see emerging an understanding of

1in4security that !arises more from worries about daily life than from the dread of a cataclysmic world event" 1*+-, '(()2 334. In this way, human

security certainly participated in the broader redefinition of security begun in the '(;<s and '(=<s> however, it also set off on new terrain, in that

shifting its referent to the individual introduces as threats a host of contingencies that emerge from daily life. #his initial deployment of the concept in

the mid'((<s was subse%uently accompanied by other efforts to theorize human security in ways that would be more amenable to the multilateral

and middlepower approaches found in the foreign policy concerns of certain states. /xamples like the Responsibility To Protect

generally moved a"ay from the broader development concerns of the 0uman Development eport

to"ards a more narro" focus on introducing a ne" set of international norms on intervention that "ould

guide and restrict the conduct of the state and the international community in #extreme and exceptional

cases’ 1I$I88, 3<<'2 5'4. ere, the threats are concomitantly narro"ed do"n to #violent threats to individuals’(uman 8ecurity $enter, 3<<72 viii4, such as #mass murder and rape& ethnic cleansing by forcible expulsion and

terror& and deliberate starvation and exposure to disease’ 1*nited +ations, 3<<)2 ?74. @mphasis shifts from an understanding

of threats that stem from a broad set of %uotidian political, social, economic and environmental contingencies, to what are deemed to be !avoidable

catastrophesB" 1*nited +ations, 3<<)2 ?74. Within this context, there is a partial but significant return to the state, in that it is through the nexus of the

state that the provision of both security and insecurity, by state and nonstate actors, is predominantly understood.

1 10iguel e Carrinaga and 0arc &, Assistant -rofessor at the *niversity of 9ttawa, Associate -rofessor at the epartment of

-olitical 8cience at 8aint 0ary"s *niversity, D8overeign -ower and the Eiopolitics of uman 8ecurity 8age Gournals4 #



2) The ability of the state to apply good or bad ethical claims is the root of security discourse. n the name

of ethics the affirmative gives the state increased biopolitical control.

Doucet 2 2!10iguel e Carrinaga and 0arc &, Assistant -rofessor at the *niversity of 9ttawa, Associate -rofessor at the epartment of -olitical 8cience at 8aint 0ary"s

*niversity, D8overeign -ower and the Eiopolitics of uman 8ecurity 8age Gournals4 0F

n (re)defining the threats to human life as its most basic operation& the discourse of human security must

begin by defining and enacting the human in biopolitical terms. The target of human security& "hether

broad or narro"& is to make live the life of the individual through a complex of strategies initiated at the

level of populations. n defining and responding to threats to human life& these strategies have as their

aim the avoidance of risk and the management of contingency in the overall goal of improving the life

lived by the subjects invoked in their o"n operation. In this sense, as with Foucault"s understanding of the biopolitical, the health and

welfare of populations is human security"s frame of intervention> however, until its recent institutionalization within the *+& the human security

discourse, from the vantage point of the international& has been marked mostly by defining and identifying the global

patterns and trends of human insecurity. In other words& the human security discourse’s initial move is found

in creating the measurements that aggregate the threats to human life . #he clearest example of this initial labour in relation to

the narrower understanding of human security can be found in the uman 8ecurity /eport in 3<<7, which boasts that !no annual publication maps the trends in the

incidence, severity, causes and conse%uences of global violence as comprehensively" 1uman 8ecurity $entre, 3<<72 viii4. #his %uest to properly order, categorize andaccount for the !true" threats to human life in the post$old War world is also exemplified in the series of *+- reports. As 0ark uffield H +icholas Waddell 13<<?2

74 point out, !the *+- . . . launched its annual Human Development Report in '((<, dedicating it to D. . . ending the mismeasure of human progress by economic

growth alone". t is through this mapping that the human security discourse then advocates on behalf of

specific areas of strategic intervention in the name of the health and "elfare of targeted populations.

Although still in their infancy, the strategies are meant to foster development as a means of securing the health and

"elfare of targeted populations. /ecent programmes detailed by the uman 8ecurity *nit include preventing the abuse of illicit drugs in Afghanistan

addressing the health of women and adolescents affected by I in onduras, @l 8alvador and &uatemala> contributing to the provision of more secure access to small

scale energy services for local basic necessities in 8enegal, Eurkina Faso, &hana and &uinea> combating the trafficking of women and children in $ambodia and

ietnam> providing access to education in Josovo> integrating displaced peoples in $olombia> promoting the radio broadcasting of information covering humanitarian

issues in areas of Africa and Afghanistan> building civic participation and selfreliance in #imorCeste> and stabilizing refugee host communities through a multifaceted

strategy that includes the reduction of small arms and the provision of basic education, food and environmental security in #anzania 1*nited +ations uman 8ecurity

*nit, 3<<?4. 8uch programmes operate at the level of the chronic insecurities in the daytoday life of targeted populations. #hey envision human security as part of!comprehensive, integrated, peoplecentered solutions" 1*nited +ations uman 8ecurity *nit, 3<<?2 34 that are meant to provide a measure of remedy to %uotidian

threats. While the programmes target specific populations in delimited locales, the threats are themselves framed in regards to

circulation and seek to ultimately distinguish the bad from the good flo"s in terms of (in)security . In this

scenario, following from the programme examples above, !good circulation’ "ould include information on humanitarian issues&

civic participation and self3reliance4 #bad circulation’ "ould entail& inter alia& trafficking& illicit drugs and

small arms. /eturning to Foucault"s understanding of security and circulation elaborated earlier, the frame of intervention of the human

security discourse& in seeking to maximi5e the positive elements and minimi5e the risks to human life&

operates on a terrain of calculability that attempts to manage the incalculable through probabilities. In its

initial stages, the objective of the human security discourse& in seeking to distinguish bet"een bad and good

circulation& had as its primary grammar of reference sustainable human development.'3 With the post(K'' momentand the ensuing !war on terror", however, the distinction between good and bad circulation tends to take as its frame of reference global order. With the attacks on the

World #rade $enter and the -entagon, as well as the subse%uent bombings in 0adrid and Condon, the globality of the circulation of threats for the !West" becomes more

explicit, and conse%uently a new cartography of threats and vulnerabilities is drawn up and rationalities and technologies are deployed to counter them. As uffield H

Waddell 13<<?2 '<4 explain in relation to the !war on terrorism"2 The predominance of security concerns& especially homeland

security& means that issuesof global circulation ' of people& "eapons& net"orks& illicit commodities&

money& information& and so on ' emanating from& and flo"ing through the "orld’s conflict 5ones& no"

influence the consolidating biopolitical function of development . *nlike uffield H Waddell"s work, the tack "e "ould

like to follo" in the section belo" is not directed to"ards tracing the biopolitical function of international

development practices in relation to the #"ar on terror’& but to the "ay in "hich the human security

discourse participates in setting the terrain for and the deployment of sovereign po"er.





B. Implications

1) +o"er s 6hat 7ustifies 8enocide& 9ass Destruction& :nd :tomic ;acrifice

<oucault 1 '(;=

10ichel Foucault, 8marter than your grandmother and $hair of the istory of 8ystems of #hought at the $ollege of France, #he Foucault /eader, @d. /abinow, '(=),

pg. 37(3?<, 9riginally '(;= in the istory of 8exuality ol. I4

8ince the classical age, the 6est has undergone a very profound transformation of these mechanisms of po"er. LeductionL has

tended to be no longer the major form of po"er$s% but merely one element among others, "ork ing to incite& reinforce& monitor.

optimi5e& and organi5e the forces under it a po"er bent on generating forces& making them gro"& and

ordering them to submit or destroying them. There has been a parallel shift in the right of death, or at least a

tendency to align itself accordingly.This death that "as based on the right of the sovereign is no" manifested as

simply the reverse of the right of the social body to ensure& maintain& or develop its life. =et "ars "ere

never as bloody as they have been since the nineteenth century. and all things being e>ual& never before

did regimes visit such holocausts on their o"n populations. ?ut this formidable po"er of death Mand this is

perhaps what accounts for part of its force and the cynicism with which it has so greatly expanded its limitsM no" presents itself as the

counterpart of a po"er that exerts a positive influence on life. that endeavors to administer& optimi5e and

multiply it& subjecting it to precise controls and comprehensive regulations. 6ars are no longer waged in the name of

a sovereign who must be defended> they are "aged on behalf of the existence of everyone. entire populations are

mobili5ed for the purpose of "holesale slaughter in the name of life necessity massacres have become

vital. It is as managers of life and survival, of bodies and the race, that so many regimes have been able to wage so many wars, causing so many people to be killed.

And through a turn that closes the circle, as the technology of wars has caused them to tend increasingly toward allout destruction, the decision that initiates them and

the one that termites them are in fact increasingly informed by the naked %uestion of survival. #he atomic situation is now at the end point of this process2 the power to

expose a whole population to death is the underside of the power to guarantee and individualNs continued existence. #he principle underlying the tactics of battleMthat

one has to be capable of killing in order to go on livingMhas become the principle that defines the strategy of states. Eut the existence in %uestion is no longer the

:uridical existence of sovereignty> at stake is the biological existence of a population. If genocide is indeed the dream of modern po"ers this

is not because of a recent return of the ancient right to kill4 it is because po"er is situated and exercised at

the level of life& the species& the race& and the large3scale phenomena of population.

34 ?iopo"er is the root of racism

<oucault2 2

I think that, broadly speaking& racism justifies the death3function in the economy of@ biopo"er by

appealing to the principle that the death of others makes one biologically stronger insofar as one

is a member of a race or a population, insofar as one is an element in a unitary living plurality. Ooucan see that, here, we are far removed from the ordinary racism that takes the traditional form of mutual

contempt or hatred between races. We are also far removed from the racism that can be seen as a sort of

ideological operation that allows 8tates, or a class, to displace the hostility that is directed toward

themB, or which is tormenting the social body, onto a mythical adversary. I think that this is something

much deeper than an old traPdition, much deeper than a new ideology, that it is something else. The

specificity of modern racism, or what gives it its specificity, is not bound up with mentalities,

ideologies, or the lies of power. It is bound up with the techni%ue of power, "ith the technology of

2 0ichel Foucault, D8ociety 0ust Ee efended2 Cectures at the $ollQge de France, '(;7;? p.37=



po"er. It is bound up with this, and that takes us as far away as possible from the race war and the

intelligibility of history. We are dealing with a mechanism that allo"s biopo"er to "ork . 8o racism

is bound up "ith the "orkings of a ;tate that is obliged to use race& the elimAination of races and

the purification of the race& to exercise its sovAereign po"er. The juxtaposition of3or the "ay

biopo"er functions throughthe old sovereign power of life and death implies the workings, the

introduction and activation, of racism. And it is, I think, here that "e find the actual roots of racism.



C. AlternativeThe :lternative is to eject ?iopo"er

0ichael <oucaultB Bwrites2

9aybe the target no"adays is not to discover "hat "e are& but to refuse "hat "e are. 6e have to imagine

and to build up "hat "e could be to get rid of a political @double bind@& "hich is the simultaneous

individuali5ation and totali5ation of modern po"er structures. The conclusion "ould be that the

political& ethical& social& philosophical problem of our days is not to try and liberate the individual from

the state& and from the state@s institutions& but to liberate us both from the state and from the type of

individuali5ation "hich is linked to the state. 6e have to promote ne" forms of subjectivity through

refusal of this kind of individuality "hich has been imposed upon us for several centuries.

3 Godiwala, Dimple. "The Western patriarchal impulse (1)/Batinin ataeril !uc irli!i." #nteractions 1$.1(2%%&)' . *tudent. We. + u!. 2%1%. This is Dimple -uotin! oucault, which is where # came across this



D. Role of the Ballot

The "ords "ith "hich "e speak have the po"er to create real damage. 6e must monitor

our language to stop oppression& as discourse shapes reality.

Shepherd4, 2010

In our personal lives, we know that language matters& that "ords are constitutive of reality. There are "ords that have

been excised from our vocabularies& deemed too damaging to use. #here are forbidden words that children whisper with guilty

glee. #here are words we use daily that would be meaningless to our grandparents. 0oreover, the cadence and content of our communications vary by

context> words that are suitable for the boardroom may not be appropriate for the bedroom or the bar.n our personal lives, we admit that "ords

have po"er& and in <ormal politics "e do the same. It is not such a stretch to admit the same in our +rofessional lives.

am not claiming that all analysis must be discoursetheoretical 6 must take language seriously 6 to be policyrelevant, for that would clearly be nonsense. I

am, however, claiming that post3structural theories of language have much to offer policy makers and

practitioners, and arguing that in order to understand ho" best to implement policy "e first need to

understand #ho"’ a policy means& not just "hat it means. #hat is, "e must understand a policy before "e can

implement it. This article argues that "e need to engage critically "ith ho" that understanding is mediated

through and facilitated by our ideas about the "orld "e live in . f "e are to avoid unconsciously

reproducing the different forms of oppression and exclusion that different forms of policy seek toovercome& we need to take seriously Gac%ues errida"s suggestion that !il n"y a pas de horstexte"

#he /oll of the Eallot dictates that you must re:ect Eiopower as an educator, and if we embrace such ideals, real damage

will occur as a result of such bio political discourse. J comes before anything else in the round.

**Respond to theory spikes in the AC if applicable

ejecting the affirmative "ill reject ?iopo"er and thus strongly urge a negative ballot.

0aura, 0ecturer in #nternational elations and #nternational 0aw, Women, armed conict and lan!ua!e 4 Gender,5iolence and discourse6, 7arch 2%1%, http'//8ournals.camrid!e.or!, 0



AFC bad

A. Interpretation' 9e!ati5es must e allowed to challen!e the a:rmati5e ;ramewor.

B. Violation The a< ;orids me ;rom challen!in! the a< ;ramewor choice

C. !tandards'

1. =hilosophical !round>? destro@s philosophical !round ecause we presume anethical theor@ is true. This pre5ents us ;rom ha5in! ;ramewor clash which is ad ;oreducation and is also un;air ecause the a< can set the philosophical terms ;or thedeate. =hilosophical education outwei!hs topic education ecause it is more astract. ThatAs empiricall@ 5eried @ the ;act that our topic ar!uments are ;ramed @ thecriterion.

2. Cualitati5e !round'>ou canAt run certain ;ramewors success;ull@ on oth the a< and

the ne!. or instance, i; the a< had a deontolo!ical standard and the ne! couldnAtcontest it, the@ would e se5erel@ disad5anta!ed. ou canAt run deontolo!@ success;ull@on the ne! ;or the nues topic, ;or eEample. This sews ne! !round and suse-uentl@destro@s ;airness ecause one side has a sustantial ad5anta!e in terms o; !round.

3. =redictailit@' >? maes ne!atin! impossile i; deaters donAt ha5e specic casesadaptale to each possile ;ramewor. ? encoura!es a<s to run oscure ;rameworar!uments that the@ now their opponents are not prepared ;or. The ne! should at leaste !i5en the opportunit@ to compare ;ramewors so the@ donAt ha5e to ;or;eit the roundi; the@ donAt ha5e a case adaptale to the a<As random ;ramewor. ? destro@s ;airnessecause with certain unpredictale ;ramewors @ou simpl@ canAt ha5e cases prepared to

adapt to them. =redictailit@ is also e@ to education ecause it ensures we are preparedto deate on issues sustanti5el@.

D. Voters'airness is a 5oter ecause deate is a competiti5e acti5it@ ased on wins andlosses. The allot ass ;or who did the etter deatin!, which is impossile todecide when each side doesnAt ha5e e-ual acess to the allot.Fducation is a 5oter ecause deate is an educational acti5it@, and that is wh@schools ;und itDrop the deater donAt drop the ar! ecause # had to spend 5aluale speech timemain! this ar!ument.=re;er competin! interps o5er reasonailit@ ecause



F"#$ Bad

A% Interpretation # $he affirmative advocacy must be directly topical.

B% Violation & #he A$ is only topical through its effects

C) ;tandards 3

'% Limits if the affirmative is not re%uired to defend an advocacy that in and of itself affirms the

resolution, it becomes impossible for the neg to predict the countless potential affirmative advocaciesthat do not directly affirm resolution but whose solvency is the affirmation. Eeing re%uired to advocate a

direct affirmation of the resolution narrows the scope of potential aff advocacies, giving the neg a

general idea of what to expect when entering a round. -redictability is key to fairness because the aff hasa greater chance of accessing the ballot than the neg who was severely isadvantaged with lack of

previous knowledge of the arguments in the round. -redictability is also key to education because

unpredictable advocacies decrease in depth argumentation and clash because one debater will not have

appropriate preparation to develop wellwarranted responses.

(% Co)nterplan *ro)nd the affirmative denies crucial strategic counterplan ground by

claiming a way to solve for the harms of other affirmative advocacies while achieving an external net

benefit from the extratopical advocacy. 0y interpretation effectively prohibits aff"s usage of suchground and thus returns counterplan ground to the negative which is entitled to run alternative solvency

mechanisms for the aff $ounterplan ground is crucial negative ground because it is key to fairness in

debate because it clearly defines which arguments debaters are and are not allowed to make, and so bytaking the negatives ground, the aff is taking the neg"s capability to make arguments. #hus loss of such

critical ground destroys fairness. $ounterplan ground is also key to education because if the affirmative

steals counterplan ground, debate loses the educational clash over the plan v counterplan debate

because the plan is altogether eliminated from the round if the aff defends the counterplan.

+% D,A -ro)nd -ermitting the affirmative to gain topical impacts through nontopical advocacies

gives them the ability to access KA ground because they can link into neg specific impacts through

advocacies that aren"t topical. Ey disallowing this fairness is increased because the neg maintainsground that should only be theirs and is only gained by a nontopical advocacy. #his also increases

education in the round because it causes the affirmative to come up with new advocacies that have new

impacts which furthers their general knowledge.

% Research skew We do research in preparation for the topic if the affirmative advocacy has

nothing to do with the topic or only does the aff by effects it skews prep this is an internal link to

fairness because the aff can do specific research on :ust one advocacy while the negatives research isvoid because the affirmative doesn"t affirm the resolution its also an internal link to education because if one side doesn"t have any prep against an aff it destroys clash and topic specific education.

D. Voters



A,$ Kritiks Bad

1. Time sew>1) B@ runnin! a riti, #Am not sewin! time. 7@ opponent has the chance to de;end

her/his position in the 1 and eat the . The ? can pla@ a role within the roundi; the a:rmati5e attempts to de;end it and show wh@ it is still rele5ant/wh@ itdoesnAt ite into the . # donAt put the a:rmati5e at a structural disad5anta!e @runnin! a strate!ic position.

2) ThereAs no ri!htline on time sew> an innite numer o; thin!s can sew time. oreEample, i; m@ opponent runs an ? with multiple preclusi5e ar!uments thatrestrict how # spend m@ time in the 9?, we wouldnAt consider that time sew. lso,5arious other ;actors inuence how we spend our speech time, includin! the speedo; deli5er@ and numer o; ar!uments on the ow. The implication o; there ein!no ri!htline means this standard should e re8ected.

2. eciprocal urdens>1) The ar!ument sa@s that the is ausi5e since it lets me access an area o; the topicnot a5ailale to the a<. ThatAs ;undamentall@ untrue, thou!h, since (s)he hasaccess to ar!uments lie discourse which operate e;ore the teEt o; the topic in thesame wa@ the riti does.

2) There is alwa@s some urden sew ecause o; what the resolution implies, ie,some resolutions clearl@ impl@ a cate!orical a:rmation, which sets up non>reciprocal urdens.

3. =redictailit@1) ThereAs no ri!htline ;or how predictale an ar!ument needs to e to e ;air.

*trate!ic cases will use di5erse and uni-ue warrants which nood@ would considerausi5e. Hust ecause nood@ else is runnin! the doesnAt mean itAs ausi5e.

2) =redictailit@ decreases education @ ;orcin! us to onl@ deal with ar!uments insideo; the stoc topic area. unnin! unpredictale ar!uments introduces newar!uments that weAd ne5er hear i; predictailit@ were an asolute constraint onar!umentation. Breadth outwei!hs depth since it introduces to lots o; di<erenttopics that we can sustanti5el@ en!a!e in out o; round where most o; our learnin!is done, so introducin! new di5erse ar!uments into round.

3) The structure o; deate is desi!ned to account ;or unpredictale ar!uments. #; allar!uments were totall@ predictale e5er@one would ha5e prewritten locs toe5er@ ar!ument e5er run, we wouldnAt ha5e a need o; cross eEamination or prep

time. The ;act that oth o; these s@stems eEists is a structural chec to stopunpredictale ar!uments ;rom ein! un;air.

) ritis are more predictale than an@ topic specic ar!ument since the@Are run one5er@ resolution and thus are used more in deate than the ar!uments that rel@ onthe topic. Thus, i; predictailit@ matters @ou ne!ate since m@ ad5ocac@ is morepredictale than an@thin! (s)hAe runnin!.

4. Research burdens



1) Everybody has the same research burden because anyone can run a kritik. Just because you had to research a lot to engage the

kritik doesn’t mean there are unfair research burden. I had to research a lot to justify and run this Kritik as well as a lot to

defend against others.

2) There’s no reason why research is necessary to engage the argumentation of the Kritiks. Kritiks function on analytical

arguments so there are easy to engage even without preround research on the subject.

3) Reading certain schools of philosophy that are used in Ks such as postmodernism, Neo-Marxism, and semiotics are

considered part of necessary reading for understanding arguments run in debate rounds. Thus because it is generally known

that Ks are based on these and similar schools of thought everyone has the same burden to research them.



A,$ Kritiks harm ed)cation

1. T/unnin! ritis en!a!es the resolution on a new le5el @ e5aluatin! it criticall@rather than 8ust acceptin! all the assumptions we usuall@ operate under. Ienr@

GirouE

$

eEplains that education relies on constant criti-ue. Ie writes' /d)cation asa critical practice co)ld provide0s1 the means for disconnectin*commonsense learnin* from the narrowl2 ideolo*ical impact of mass media3the re*ressive tendencies associated with h2per#masc)linit23 the rit)als ofever2da2 violence, the inabilit2 to identif2 with others3 as well as from thepervasive ideolo*ies of state repression and its ill)sions of empire. dornoJsresponse to retro!rade ideolo!ies and practices was to emphasiKe the role o;autonomous indi5iduals and the ;orce o; sel;>determination, which he saw as theoutcome o; a moral and political pro8ect that rescued education ;rom the narrowlan!ua!e o; sills, unprolematiKed authorit@, and the seduction o; common sense.!elf#re4ection3 the abilit2 to call thin*s into 5)estion3 and the willin*ness to

resist the material and s2mbolic forces of domination were all central to aned)cation that ref)sed to repeat the horrors of the past and en*a*ed thepossibilities of the f)t)re. dorno ur!ed educators to teach students how to ecritical, to learn how to resist those ideolo!ies, needs, social relations, and discoursesthat led ac to a politics where authorit@ was simpl@ oe@ed and the totall@administered societ@ reproduced itsel; throu!h a miEture o; state ;orce and o;tenorchestrated consensus. reedom in this instance meant ein! ale to thin criticall@and act coura!eousl@, e5en when con;ronted with the limits o; oneJs nowled!e.6itho)t s)ch thinkin*3 critical debate and dialo*)e de*enerate intoslo*ans3 and politics3 disassociated from the search for 7)stice3 becomes apower *rab.6

2. ritis increase the t@pes o; ar!umentation in deate which means we !et a widerscope o; education. This doesnAt trade o< with the depth o; education we !et on otherparts o; the resolution ecause there are still plent@ o; deates that occur on stocpositions. The content o; ritis is ar!uments that we do not traditionall@ en!a!ewithin the connes o; deate. ritis uni-uel@ add a new t@pe o; educational positionto the acti5it@.

3. ritis ;orce deaters to e accountale ;or their ar!uments and understand theirimplications. unnin! the will teach deaters to increase research o; positions andto learn the impacts o; their ar!uments e;ore usin! them in the round.

$ Ienr@ . GirouE, What 7i!ht Fducation 7ean ;ter u Ghrai' e5isitin! dornoJs =olitics o;Fducation, "?omparati5e *tudies o; *outh sia, ;rica and the 7iddle Fast 2.1 (2%%) 3>22"



Kritiks -ood

1. ritis ;orce us to deal with the actual impacts o; our ar!uments rather than ein!disen!a!ed spectators 8ust pla@in! a !ame. Gordon 7itchell& notes' While an

isolated academic space that a<ords students an opportunit@ to learn in aprotected en5ironment has si!nicant peda!o!ical 5alue (see e.!. ?o5erstone1LL$, p. +>L), the notion o; the academic deate tournament as a sterile laorator@carries with it some disturin! implications, when the metaphor is eEtended to itslimit. $o the e8tent that the academic space be*ins to take oncharacteristics of a laborator23 the barriers demarcatin* s)ch a spacefrom other spheres of deliberation be2ond the school *row taller and lesspermeable. 6hen s)ch barriers reach ins)rmo)ntable dimensions3ar*)mentation in the academic settin* )nfolds on a p)rel2 sim)latedplane3 with st)dents practicin* critical thinkin* and advocac2 skills instrictl2 h2pothetical tho)*ht#spaces. lthou!h the@ ma@ research and trac

pulic ar!ument as it un;olds outside the connes o; the laorator@ ;or researchpurposes, in this approach, students witness ar!umentation e@ond the walls o;the academ@ as spectators, with little or no apparent recourse to directl@participate or alter the course o; e5ents (see 7itchell 1LL$M 1LL+). $he sense ofdetachment associated with the spectator post)re is hi*hli*hted d)rin*episodes of alienation in which debaters cheer news of h)man s)9erin*or misfort)ne. #nstead o; ;ocusin! on the 5isceral ne!ati5e responses to newsaccounts o; human death and miser@, debaters overcome with thecompetitive :eal of contest ro)nd competition show a tendenc2 toconcentrate on the meanin*s that s)ch evidence mi*ht hold for thestren*th of their academic debate ar*)ments. For e8ample3 news reports

of mass starvation mi*ht tid2 )p the ;)ni5)eness of a disadvanta*e; orbolster the ;inherenc2 of an a<rmative case" (in the technical parlance o;deate>spea). 7urchland cate*ori:es c)ltivation of this ;spectator;mentalit2 as one of the most politicall2 debilitatin* fail)res ofcontemporar2 ed)cation' "Fducational institutions ha5e ;ailed e5en more!rie5ousl@ to pro5ide the ind o; ci5ic ;orums we need. #n ;act, one could easil@conclude that the principle purposes o; our schools is to depri5e successor!enerations o; their ci5ic 5oice, to turn them into mute and uncomprehendin!spectators in the drama o; political li;e" (1LL1, p. +)6 ritis remo5e us ;rom the!ame o; deate and let us address the actual harms o; ad5ocacies. WeAre humanse;ore weAre deaters, so the riti is inherentl@ 5aluale. ritis let us reco!niKe

the people actuall@ impacted @ the ar!uments weAre willin! to de;end inastraction. Ha@an 9a@ar writes' Located within a site of privile*e3 andchar*ed to re4ect )pon the *rand 5)estions of world#order and the humancondition as the third ?hristian 7illennium dawns, we are tempted to t)rn themind to the task of abstract ima*inin*s of ;what co)ld be; of o)r ;world3;

& 7itchell in L+ NGordon ., ssociate =ro;essor, Oni5ersit@ o; =ittsur!h, =FDGPG#?0=P**#B#0#T#F* P GO7F9TT#QF GF9? #9 ?DF7#? DFBTF6 r!umentation R d5ocac@,Qol. 3$ #ssue 2, p1>&%S 9a@ar in LL NHa@an, all, *chool o; 0aw, Oni5ersit@ o; Warwic Transnational 0aw R?ontemporar@ =rolems Prders o; #nhumanit@6S



and ;how sho)ld we or*ani:e; o)r ;h)manit2." =erhaps such contemplationsare a necessar@ antidote to c@nicism and septicism re!ardin! an@ possiilit@ o;human etterment, a necessar@ re5italiKation o; critical and creati5e ener!ies tochec the complacencies o; the state o; thin!s as the@ are. n1 Iowe5er, ima!inin! N&%1S possiilities o; astractions>>"world>order," "international societ@," "the!loal 5illa!e," "the ;amil@ o; humanind," etc.>>does carr@ with it a ris. $he;total; view that is the take#o9 point for disco)rses on preferred ;world#order; f)t)res risks de4ection as the abstracted pro7ections it provokes

mi*ht entail little conse5)ence for the faces and the names of theh)manit2 on whose behalf we mi*ht speak . *o, what do we doU6

2. ritis increase critical education @ encoura!in! in depth discussions o; criticalthou!ht that we normall@ do not encounter throu!h deate. While we understandthe stoc ar!uments on topics a;ter hearin! a ;ew rounds, ritis pro5ide a newt@pe o; ar!ument donAt normall@ en!a!e in. *toc ar!uments are eas@ tounderstand and we !et diminishin! returns ;rom hearin! them repeated in e5er@round. ritis pro5ide us with a new t@pe o; education that we normall@ arenAt aleto en!a!e in within our rounds. ritis challen!e the wa@s in which we traditionall@;rame our 5iew o; the world around us and challen!e the assumptions we ha5ecomin! into the round. {But moreover, critical arguments are more complex than

classic stock arguments so they’ll inevitably take more time to explain, justifyingusing all my speech time on the K and not directly engaging the AC!

3. ritis more accuratel@ reect the real world. #n academics, one must e preparedto de;end oneAs position not onl@ a!ainst con5entional criticism ut also a!ainstcritical challen!es to the assumptions o; oneAs position. #n the end, deate is anacti5it@ desi!ned to ;oster education and promote the tools that will e necessar@to succeed in li;e. #t would e unrealistic to eEclude a certain t@pe o;ar!umentation that challen!es a position simpl@ ecause it -uestions a di<erentpart o; the position.

. ritis let us reco!niKe the impacts our lan!ua!e has on real li;e. lert ee+ writesBesides 5ocaularies, lan*)a*es also s)ppl2 r)les and conventions that*overn the speech or )tterances that are possible and hence in part thepolitical actions that can ens)e. In some well#de=ned instances3 thesespeech acts are themselves actions that perform illoc)tionar2 f)nctions>i. e.3 the )tterances themselves are doin* somethin*%. ?ore *enerall23however3 speech acts prod)ce perloc)tionar2 e9ects >i. e.3 the e9ects of)tterances on listeners% onl2 within ;the str)ct)re of the disco)rsiveinteraction.; $his str)ct)re consists not onl2 of the conte8t or ;sit)ation3;b)t also ;the se5)ence of disco)rsive moves."6

$. ritis ha5e out o; round implications that outwei!h in round ar!umentation. Whena riti is won, it !enerates a lot o; h@pe and attention and spreads the criticalthou!ht e@ond the mere connes o; the round. ritis help ;rame the wa@ inwhich we 5iew the world and can restructure the thou!ht processes o; thosearound us. This is more important that the ima!inar@ ar!uments that we constructaout how the world ou!ht to e ecause ritis acti5el@ chan!e the wa@ the realworld ;unctions @ chan!in! the elie;s s@stems o; those who li5e in it.

&. ritis are predictale ne!ati5e !round. ?omin! into the round, the onl@ thin! othm@ opponent and # new was that there would e a deate aout the resolution.ritis challen!e the assumptions that are presented @ the resolution. There;orethe onl@ predictale di5ision o; !round would allow ;or ritis which -uestion the

+ lert ee, Watson #nstitute ;or #nternational *tudies, Brown, #9TF9T#P90 PG9#VT#P9,Winter 1LL&, p.L$. (7I*P0T121)



underl@in! assumptions o; the resolution as it reects the ne!ati5e urden to showthat the resolution can not e pro5ed true. =redictailit@ is e@ to ;airness ecausei; ar!uments arenAt predictale it se5erel@ hurts m@ ailit@ to answer them andeducation ecause it is a prere-uisite sustanti5e clash in the round. #; ar!umentsor strate!ies arenAt predictale it ;orces us to read !eneric responses and o< case.Without clash deates ecome meanin!less as deaters read ar!uments withoutha5e to understand them or deate their merits.

. ritis ;orce deaters to e accountale ;or the entiret@ o; their ar!uments

includin! the assumptions that their ar!uments rel@ on. This increases educationecause there will e a shi;t towards more in depth research on ar!uments andpositions as deaters will ha5e to e ale to de;end them.

Documents

Biopower K (Rishab)