1ar discourse ks

7/24/2019 1AR Discourse Ks

1/15

1AR Discourse Ks


2/15

Strategy of the 1AR K


3/15

Word LinksDevelopment, poor, poverty [solutions to, poverty sector, pu!lic assistance, terrorism,

terrorist, underclass,


4/15

Development

"he revolutionary critic must al#ays interrogate the institutions and structures thatreproduce the systemic oppressions of modern society$ re%ection of the roots of those

structures is a necessary prere&uisite to un!iased criti&ueLandstreicher [Wolfi. Barbaric Thoughts: On a Revolutionary Critique of Civilization, the Anarchist ibrary. !ebruary ", #$%$&Revolutionary criti&ueis a critique thataims to challengethe 'resent society at its roots in order to create a

rupture #ith #hat isan( bring about ra(ical social transfor)ation. What else coul( *revolutionary+ )ean But there are )any i)'lications here. !irst of all, revolutionarycritique is 'ractical. -t sees a )etho( for /oring itself out in the /orl(, for 'ractically challenging the 'resent social or(er. -n other /or(s, it i s 'art of a real struggle against the /orl( thate0ists. !or this reason, it also begins fro) the 'resent. A 'ractical, revolutionary challenge to the 'resent /ill )ae use of the 'ast an( the future, but /ill not be (efine( by the). Rather they aretools to use in the attac against the 'resent social or(er. Revolutionary critique is a 'ractice that strives to gras' everything i))e(iately here an( no/. -t involves an ongoing, incisivee0a)ination of the state, ca'italist social relationshi's, class struggle an( t echnological (evelo')ent as /e encounter the). 1ince revolutionary critique ai)s at a ru'ture /ith the 'resent or(er, it

begins /ith an attac u'on all the institutions of this society.'t investigates their fundamental relationships to each other and

#hat these relationships mean( Thus, it is notso )uch interested in their e)cesses or the #ays in /hich they may

contradict the values they proclaim, !ut in ho#at their best, even /hen they live u' to their 'roclai)e( values,they fail to meet

the !asic needs and desires of human !eings( "his society is fundamentally anti*life, anti*humanand anti*individual, simply !ecause its o#n reproduction re&uires the su!%ection of living human

individuals to its needs( Revolutionary criti&ue starts from this reali+ation( Revolutionary criti&ue

also a!solutely re%ects moral criti&ue(This )ay be the )ost i )'ortant as'ect in ter)s of )y argu)ent. Revolution, in 'ractice, is a)oral. 2ven if at ti)es, in ourstruggles, a fe/ use the rhetoric of *3ustice+ an( *rights+, our revolutionary battle has nothing to (o /ith 3ustice or rights or any other value e0ternal to us. We /ant to overturn this reality not

because it is un3ust or evil or even *unfree+, but!ecause/e /ant our lives bac4 orality !elongs to this social order( 't has !een used

over an( over again to keep us in our place5 al/ays bace( u' by the force of ar)s. orality serves #ell for maintaining #hat

is, !ecause its final #ord is al#ays constraint(1ince /e /ant to (estroy /hat is, /e )ust also (estroy )orality 5 es'ecially that /hich e0ists /ithin us5 so that /e can attac this society /ithout constraint. At the sa)e ti)e, revolutionary critique (oes not re3ect 'rinci'les.[%& Rather it hel's us to (eter)ine a 'rinci'le( )anner for acting

concretely against the ruling or(er in our (aily lives."he lack ofa revolutionary criti&ue can lead us to face specific e)periences

of domination, e)ploitation and oppression as isolatedinci(ents,and to seek an immediate solution !y

any means necessary( A revolutionary criti&ue can e)pose the interconnections !et#een these

e)periences and sho# ho# the -solutions. offered !y the institutions only serve to increase their

po#erover our lives. When /e )ae a (ecision to tae our l ives bac in revolt against the social or(er, /e are choosing a /ay of encountering the /orl(. -t (oes not )ae sense for us to

use any )eans other than those that e)bo(y this en( of taing bac our lives."his is true on the personal level and on the level of social

revolution( /very time #e compromise #ith po#er, that part of our life is lost to us(There are so )any as'ects ofour lives /here /e are constraine( to co)'ro)ise against our /ill.

"he evaluations of the negative are irrelevant in the face of social criti&ue$ the %udge should

&uestion the motivations and structures upon #hich the negative relies, and ho# those

politics affect the personal lives of the people involved in the round !efore assuming that

the argumentative assumptions upon #hich the hypothetical #orld of the 0 rests are true(

0o matter the conte)t, the #ord development evokes the memory of #hat those

lo#er in society are not, constructing a form of society #here the 2developing3 are

inferior

/steva, 67e0ican activist, 8(e'rofessionalize( intellectual8 an( foun(er of the 9niversi(a( (e la Tierra in the 7e0ican city of Oa0aca 6;ustavo, *The


5/15

#hich it is used. or the 'recise connotation that the 'erson using it /ants to give i t,the e)pression !ecomes &ualified and coloured !y

meanings perhaps un#anted( "he #ord al#ays implies a favoura!le change, a step from the simple

to the comple), from the inferior to the superior, from #orse to !etter( The /or( in(icates that one is (oing /ell because one isa(vancing in the sense of a necessary, ineluctable, universal la/ an( to/ar( a (esirable goal. The /or( retains to this (ay the )eaning given to it a century ago by the creator of ecology, aecel:

4Development is, fro) this )o)ent on,the magic #ord #ith #hich #e #ill solve all the mysteries that surround

us or. at least. that /hich /ill gui(e us to/ar( their solution.@ But for t/othir(s of the 'eo'le on earth, this 'ositive )eaning of the /or( @(evelo')ent@ 'rofoun(ly roote( after t/o centuries

of its social construction is a re)in(er of /hat they are not.'t is a reminder of an undesira!le, undignified condition( "o escapefrom it, they need to !e enslaved to others4 e)periences and dreams(

5se of the #ord developing confines those in emerging countries to positions of

inferiority and defines them a homogenous entity to molded to the ideals of the

-developed #orld./steva[;ustavo, Boar( 7e)ber an( -nteri) Chair)an of the 9nite( ations Research -nstitute for 1ocial rinceton 9niversity >ress, '. #%G&Thedevelopment discourse, as this boo has sho/n,has !een the central and most u!i&uitous operator of the

politics of representation and identity in )uch of Asia, Africa, an( atin A)erica in the 'ostJWorl( War -- 'erio(. Asia, Africa, an( atin A)erica have

/itnesse(

a succession of regimes of representation7originating in colonialism and /uropean modernity

but often a''ro'riate( as national

pro%ects in 'ostin(e'en(ence atin A)erica an( 'ostcolonial Africa an( Asia5each #ith its accompanying regime

of violence( As places of encounter and suppression of local cultures, #omen, identities, and

histories, these regimes of representation are originary sites of violence6Ro3as (e !erro %DDG?.As a regime of

representation of this sort, development has !een linked to an economy of production and desire,

!ut also of closure, difference, and violence. To be sure, t his violence is also )i)etic violence, a source of selffor)ation. Terror an( violence circulate

an( beco)e, the)selves, s'aces of cultural 'ro(uction 6;irar( %DFF an( Taussig %D"F?. Butthe moderni+ed violence introduced #ith

colonialism and development is itself a source of identity . !ro) the /ill to ci vilization in the nineteenth century to to(ay, violence has been

We must de!unk development discourse for any real change;ilbertRist, >rofessor of >olitical 1cience an( teaches social an( cultural anthro'ology, intercultural relations, an( the history of (evelo')ent theories at the ;ra(uate -nstitute of


6/15

9overty

5sing the #ord -poor. to refer to a group of people creates a dualism !et#een thenormal and a!normal 8 !et#een the good and evil( "his degenerates to violent

hatred of the target of their 0(Ross :1[Tho)as, >rofessor of a/, 9niversity of >ittsburgh, ;eorgeto/n a/ ournal, *The Rhetoric of >overty: Their -))orality, Our el'lessness,+ '. %H%K%H#", A


7/15

conclu(e by locating )y authorshi' in the conte0t of (iscourse an( the resolution of the 'overty 'roble)."he po#er of an authorhas t/o (i)ensions: oneis

derived fromthe (iscursive net/or e0ten(ing fro) the t heoretical selection of causes toactions, agency, and po#er$ theother s'rings fro) i nstitutional

i(entities of the author, as for e0a)'le, a university 'resi(ent, a 'olitician, a business e0ecutive, an( so on. -n )y case thepo#erthat ' #ield as author is'ri)arily

discursiveI lie/ise, )y institutional i(entity as a university teacher 'uts )e even closer to the (iscursive real). Although this 'a'er is about 'overty, the ob3ect of inquiry is not the

'oor but the aca(e)ics /ho teach an( /rite about the 'oor. - have chosen aca(e)ic (iscourse as ob3ect for t/o i)'ortant reasons. !irst,discourse is, in )y o'inion,a part of

the pro!lem of poverty(1econ(, my a!ility to act in the #orld, to e)ercise po#er, has to !e

commensurate #ith my po#er as a teacher and author (- no/ return to the 'erennial question 'ose( by )y stu(ents, 8What is your solution to

the 'roble)8 7y res'onse is that - /ish to shift the focus fro) the notion of a 8solution in the /orl(8 6/hich is the intent of the question? to the notion of 8yourL)y solution.8"he

;aca demic; #ork that ' do on poverty is ;my solu tion$; it is the ;practice; of my politics( 7y 8solution8(oes not treat the 'oor as a target grou'I in that sense, this 'articular aca(e)ic /or /ill not )ae any i))e(iate )aterial (ifference to the lives of the 'oor, although there is nothing to 'revent

aca(e)ics 6an( )any (o? fro) 'laying interventionist roles. or is this /or ai)e( at state bureaucrats /hose role it is to (esign 'overty 'olicies.;y solution; is aimed

at fello# academics #ho, lie )yself,are deeply implicated in the pro! lem and #hose po#er lies

primarily in our ca pacity to engage the discourse critically( because of the stig)a 6the social taint? of being a clai)ant.>nce

people place themselves #ithin the discourse of poverty, their identity is defined in its terms( "hey

are positioned as 2su!%ects3/ithin it J that is,they are themselves su!%ects of the discourse and understand

their o#n position through it( >oor 'eo'le have things (one to the). Being 'oor is to be 'lace( in a 'osition /here other 'eo'le have rights over you. 1ociety@sinstitutional arrange)ents have so)eti)es focuse( on segregating the 'oor J 'utting the) in /orhouses, for e0a)'le J to ee' t he) a/ay fro) the rest of PusQ. 1o)eti)es they have beenconcerne( to nor)alise the 'oor J giving lessons in bu(getary )anage)ent, goo( houseee'ing, or 'arenting J /ith the ai) of )aing Pthe)Q )ore lie PusQ. At other ti)es the e)'hasis has

been on )aintaining surveillance on the 'oor J )onitoring their behaviour to )ae sure that they behave P'ro'erlyQ.Although different policies on poverty

aim to do different things, they are framed !y the discourse of poverty in that they see poor peopleas the o!%ects of policy 8 people to #hom things are done 6often Pin their o/n best interestsQ?.Discourses in this sense

are also a!out relations of po#er( They organise 'ositions an( 'laces in a fiel( of 'o/er. 1o,in relation to poverty, they

empo#er6give 'o/er to? state agenciesto )onitor, assess orintervene in the lives of poor people( "hey empo#er some

agencies6both state an( voluntary agencies? to evaluate the 2#orth3 or 2desert3 of poor people before benefits or services are 'rovi(e(.


8/15

>ther @rame#ork ards

't3s our ethical responsi!ility to critici+e the 0eg3s representations of violence 8 >nce

#e hear the plight of those in poverty #e must not !e complicit in silence(

Ross :1[Tho)as, >rofessor of a/, 9niversity of >ittsburgh, ;eorgeto/n a/ ournal, *The Rhetoric of >overty: Their -))orality, Our el'lessness,+ '. %H%K%H#", A


9/15

Links


10/15

Words

Speaking of a -poverty sector. as a thing #e can locate creates an inauthentic

understanding of poverty(

9acchioli :[enn 1tate, *overty,+ une, researchL'enn state, htt':LL///.r's.'su.e(uL3unDEL'overty.ht)l, Arofessor of a/, 9niversity of >ittsburgh, ;eorgeto/n a/ ournal, *The Rhetoric of >overty: Their -))orality, Our el'lessness,+ '. %H%K%H#", A


11/15

A)erican fa)ilies for %$ years, . . . [b&oth 'overty an( /elfare use . . . laste( relatively briefly, an( chil(ren /hose 'arents relie( on /elfare /ere no )ore liely to nee( 'ublic assistance asa(ults than /ere others in the sa)'le. What the stu(y sho/s, in short, i s that 'overty is )ore accurately 'erceive( no/, as before in A)erican history, as a 'oint on a continuu) rather than ashar', clearly (e)arcate( category of social e0'erience. -n truth, t he forces that 'ush in(ivi(uals an( fa)ilies into 'overty originate in the structure of A)erica@s 'olitical econo)y. 1o)e of us

are lucy, not (ifferent. nK$As a metaphor, the underclass is the perfect e)pression of the rhetorical themes of

difference and deviance( 9erhaps !ecause it so perfectly e)presses these persistent historical themes,

it has remained as part of the pu!lic discourse on poverty not#ithstanding its metaphoric and

distorting &uality.

"he #ord -poverty. carries #ith it the discursive construction of a #ay to separate

the rich from the poor( 't only helps to sta!ili+e the system of oppression(


12/15

laimsCActions

"he idea of a -solution. to end poverty only feeds into the trap of development

#hich reproduces the case harms

=apa :[ash)an, >rof of ;eogra'hy N >ennsylvania 1tate, *What Causes >overty A >ost7o(ern ie/,+ Annals of the Association of A)erican ;eogra'hers, ol. "E, o. G 6


13/15

Security


14/15

"error

"errorism scholarship is !eset !y multiple epistemological fla#s* no consistentdefinition, no primary sources, narro# focus on policy making, and e)aggeration of

the threat( "he fla#s in kno#ledge production have to !e resolved !efore proper

analysis of the 0 can !egin$ this is a preempt to their offense(Eackson F[Richar(6eace an( Conflict 1tu(ies?, #L%GL$", *The 1tu(y of Terroris) after %% 1e'te)ber #$$%: >roble)s, Challenges an( !utureh< dissertations pu!lished every year on terrorismJ in a((ition to a vast 'o'ular cultural an( 'olitical cor'us of terroris)

te0ts. o/ever,recent revie#s of the scholarly literature on terrorism suggest that the field is !eset !y a

persistent set of conceptual, epistemological, methodological and political normative #eaknesses

andchallenges6see Burnett an( Whyte, #$$HI acson, #$$FaI acson et al., #$$DI Ranstor', #$$EI 1ile, #$$Ga?.Some of the main pro!lems

identified include, but are not li)ite( to: thefailure to develop rigorous theories or even to agree on a definition

or set of identifying criteria for the field3s primary concept$ a reliance on secondary sources and a

failure to undertake primary research, particularly in terms of face*to*face engagement #ith

2terrorists3$ a narro# focuson a restricted set of topicsfre&uently tailored to the demands of policy

makers for practically useful kno#ledge I large num!ers of ne# scholars lacking ade&uate

grounding in the e)isting literature$ and a persistent tendency to treat the current terrorist threat

as unprecedented and e)ceptional. !or the )ost 'art,terrorism research that is theoretically and

methodologically sophisticated, intellectually independent, !ased on primary sources, normatively

sensitised and rooted in the e)isting literature is, unfortunately, relatively rare(

=ou as an academic should re%ect the negative and their terrori+ing rhetoric 8

discursive re%ection is the only #ay to solve the repression of entire cultures and

peoplesKapitan[To)is, >rofessor of >hiloso'hy at orthern -llinois 9niversity, -n(iana 1tate 9niversity, Birzeit 9niversity, 2ast Carolina9niversity, The A)erican 9niversity of Beirut, an( Bogazici 9niversity in -stanbul, e(itor of >hiloso'hical >ers'ectives on the -sraeli>alestinian

Conflict,, Archaeology, istory, an( Culture in >alestine an( the ear 2ast. a)es 1terba, e(., Terroris) an( -nternational ustice 6O0for(, #$$K?,GFEE, The Terroris) of PTerroris)Q&

-n the absence of a negotiate( settle)ent,the continuation of tit*for*tat violence !et#een 'sraelis and 9alestinians has

long !een foreseen. Al rea(y in %DHE the 9.. 1ecretary;eneral, ri)e 7inister , alestinians /oul( 'ost'one in(efinitely 'eaceful coe0istence bet/een -sraelis an( Arabs 69rquhart %DF#, '. %HF?. a))ars3ol(Qs a(vice /ent unhee(e( assuccessive

'sraeli governments added retaliation to retaliation, #ith deterrence offered as the standard

%ustification6


15/15

ersistent terroris) ste))ing fro) a given 'o'ulation is in(icative of a serious 'olitical (isor(er. As long as the )e)bersof that 'o'ulation are outrage( over 'erceive( in3ustices an( (eci(e that terroris) is the only viable for) of re(ress, then )ere 'olice action, cou'le( /ith a re'eate( failure to a((ress their

grievances, /ill solve no thing, an( certainly, in (iscri)inate retaliation /ill only intensify hatre( an( resolve."he solution to a particular pro!lem ofterrorism re&uires, at the very )ini)u), e)amining the circumstances #herein violence against civilians is

seen as the onlye)otional outlet orroute of resistance(Only then can intelligent )oral res'onses be crafte(."o reach this stage, it is

imperative that the rhetoric of 2terror3 !e recogni+ed for #hat it is( -ts 'ractitioners are serving a 'olitical agen(a, un/ittingly or

not. 'ts victims are innocents, civilians, nonco)batants, /hose 'light is ignore( an(#hose communities suffer from reprisals

!ecause some of their mem!ers have found violence to !e the only #ay to react in a desperate hope

thatso)eho/, someone/ith enough sense an( 'o/er, #ill reali+e that these grievances must !e addressed. >erha's they are /holly

)isgui(e(, but /henthe rhetoric of 2terror3 succeeds in discrediting them !efore rational in&uiry into the

causes of their grievances and !ehavior can !egin , then it is itself a cause of terroris). -f its 'ractitioners antici'ate this sort of result, they are guiltyof no/ingly furthering terroris). 1houl( they inten( to bring that result, then they are the)selves guilty of terrorist actions. anguage )oul(s thought, an( thought 'reci'itates action. The'e3orative bias that infects the current e)'loy)ent of Pterroris)Q an( PterroristQ (iscourages a clear )oral assess)ent of 'olitical conflicts lie that bet/een -sraelis an( >alestinians. -f these/or(s cannot be use( in a consistent an( un're3u(ice( )anner, then they are obstacles in the 'ath to/ar(s the resolution of such conflicts an( sti)ulators of further violence against civilians.

Consequently, if terrorism has no place in a civili+ed #orld, then the rhetoric of 2terror3 has no place in the

civili+ed discourse of today.

1ar discourse ks

Documents