wake hm 2nc v utsa es utd r2

8/11/2019 Wake Hm 2nc v Utsa Es Utd r2

1/10


2/10

2NC Advocacy Overview

Focusing on the micropolitical is key to reengage agencyColebrook 2002 (Claire, Understanding Deleuze, Pg. xxxviii)Human freedom became the problem. f human beings are free! does this mean that there is someultimate "man# who can be liberated from the forces of production $ or does radical freedom meanthat there is no longer any human essence to which politics can appeal % All this came to a head inthe student sit&ins and disruptions of '()*. +here were protests throughout ,urope in the late '()-s

which were random! unthought out! and motivated not by the economically defined class of workersso much as by students and intellectuals. n the aftermath of these disruptions it was realised thatpolitics was no longer the affair of economic classes and large or "molar# groupings. ocaldisruptions at the level of knowledge! ideas and identity could transform the political terrain ./eleu0e and others opened the politics of the virtual1 it was no longer accepted that actual materialreality! such as the economy! produced ideas. any insisted that the virtual 3images! desires!concepts4 was directly productive of social reality. +his overturned the simple idea of ideology! theidea that images and beliefs were produced by the governing classes to deceive us about our realsocial conditions.5e have to do away with the idea that there is some ultimate political reality or

actuality which lies behind all our images. Images are not just sura!e ee!ts o some underl"inge!onomi! !ause# images and t$e virtual $ave t$eir o%n autonomous &o%er . '$is is %$erestru!turalism and &ost*+ &oliti!s interse!ted.-e need to see our languages and s"stems o

re&resentation not just as masks or signs o t$e a!tual, but as ull" real &o%ers in t$eir o%n rig$t. '$e%a" %e t$ink, s&eak, desire and see t$e %orld is itsel &oliti!al# it &rodu!es relations, ee!ts, andorganises our bodies. .


3/10

2NC Alt ,6+ 7 8wO

,9tend the 'NC /eleu0e and :uattari *; evidence & ,ven if in the abstract the rhi0omaticpolitics of the 'AC are good! we have the best piece of comparative link evidence on thedistinction between the 'AC advocacy and the Alternative. +hey affirm the free space created bythe 8ody 5ithout Organs 7 a hypothetical space of e9istence where there are no pre&determined connections and no organi0ation. +his metaphor of the body without organs standsas a signifier for the potential of truly F '$e bod" %it$out organs is %$at remains %$en "ou take ever"t$ing a%a". -$at"ou take a%a" is &re!isel" t$e &$antas", and signii!an!es and subje!tii!ations as a %$ole. Ps"!$oanal"sis does t$e o&&osite>it translates ever"t$ing into &$antasies, it !onverts ever"t$ing into &$antas", it retains t$e &$antas". It ro"all"

bot!$es t$e real, be!ause it bot!$es t$e bod" %it$out organs. (Deleuze and uattari, *0,8) '$e bod" %it$out organs is &ure immanen!e (7t$e&lane o immanen!e7) $aving in it no !on!e&tual a&&aratus t$at $as been im&osed rom outside not$ing trans!endental about it. 7ter all, isn7t;&inoza7s ?t$i!s t$e great book o t$e bod" %it$out organs@7 (Deleuze and uattari, *0,85). 7ll bodies %it$out organs &a" $omage to ;&inoza7 (86).

'$e bod" %it$out organs is a state o !reativit", %$ere &re!on!e&tions are set aside . It is t$e state beore adesign takes s$a&e, %$ere all &ossibilities are immanent, and one $olds at ba" t$e !ommonsense ex&e!tations o %$at t$e design s$ould be.-$en a stimulus or an internal &ain &rom&ts a line o lig$t, t$en ormations assemble, giving t$e beginnings o a orm a stru!ture, a detail, a leitmoti.'$e aim !ould be t$at t$e design %ould be entirel" immanent in its initial !onditions, and %ould emerge as a &rodu!t o t$e various or!es in &la" in t$e

milieu. It %ould not be im&osed rom outside as a s&e!iied orm, but %ould %ork %it$ t$e grain o its matter,rom %it$in, but also seamlessl" %it$ t$e milieu and net%orks extending to its $orizons. It !an !r"stallize in

various %a"s, at a mole!ular level, to aggregate and &rodu!e dierent sura!e ee!ts %$en it be!omes a&&arent


4/10

to t$e senses in a %ider %orld. It is !learest in t$e sort o $ouse t$at is a !ontinuation o t$e &erson %$o lives init, as a mollus! lives in its s$ell.


5/10

ink ' ,6+ 7 Fi9idity of the >lan

Our link argument has ? parts. +he first is one of fi9idity. 5e cannot begin our engagementwith politics via a pre&determined plan of action. +his guts solvency and leaves us powerless toadapt to specific situations! turns the caseilbert ?t l 200 (:erem" ilbert, Ari! lliez, Claire Colebrook, Peter 9all%ard, 3i!$olas '$oburn all $aveP$Ds and %$atever# 4Deleuzian Politi!s@ 1oundtable Dis!ussion4# 3e% =ormations)

Claire> I "ou t$ink about !ontem&orar" &oliti!s> all %e $ave to do is move rom talking about national liberationmovements and %orkers7 movements to looking at some o t$e most tortured and vexed &oliti!al situations, su!$as t$e relations$i& bet%een indigenous ustralian !ommunities and ?uro&ean settled !ommunities, and %e !an see t$at as long as %e $ave a notion o!olle!tivit" t$at7s ounded on t$e traditional notion o labour and its organisation, t$en %e %ill al%a"s be ne!essaril" disenran!$ising and robbing t$ose

&eo&le o a &otential orm o individuation. '$is is %$at t$is is all about. '$e ke"


6/10

characteri0ed by goals! schools! and periods . '$e" relate t$ese aest$eti! ormations to greater so!ial aggregates, inding int$em a ield o a&&li!ation, and ever"%$ere enslave art to a great !astrating ma!$ine o sovereignt". +here is a pole of reactionaryinvestment for art as well, a somber &aranoia!edi&alnar!issisti! organization.A foul use of painting! centeringaround the dirty little secret, even in abstra!t &ainting %$ere t$e axiomati! does %it$out igures> a style of painting

whose secret essence is scatological! an oedipali0ing painting! even when it has broken with theHoly +rinity as the Oedipal image! a neuroticor neuroti!izing painting that makes the process into agoal or an arrest!an interru&tion, or a !ontinuation in t$e void. +his style of painting flourishes today ! under theusurped name of modern painting&a poisonous flowerand broug$t one o Ja%ren!e7s $eroes to s&eak mu!$ like 9enr"Killer o t$e need to $ave done %it$ &ouring out one7s mer!iul and &itiul guts, t$ese 4lo%s o !orrugated iron.4>4 +he productive breaks

proDected onto the enormous unproductive cleavage of castration ! the flows that have becomeflows of Ecorrugated iron !E the openingsblocked on all sides .nd &er$a&s this, as %e $ave seen, is 5here

we find the commodity value of art and literature1 a paranoiacform of expression that nolonger even needs to EsignifyE its reactionary libidinal investments ! since these investmentsfunction on the contrary as its signifier$ an Oedipalform of content that no longer even needsto represent Oedipus! since the EstructureE suffices. 8ut on theot$er, t$e schi0orevolutionary! pole,the value of art is no longer measured e9cept in terms of the decoded and deterritorialized flows that itcauses to circulate beneath a signifier reduced to silence, beneat$ t$e !onditions o identit" o t$e &arameters, a!ross astru!ture redu!ed to im&oten!e# a %riting %it$ &neumati!, ele!troni!, or gaseous indierent su&&orts, and that appears all the moredifficultand intelle!tual to intellectuals as it is accessible to the infir m, t$e illiterate, and the schi0os!embracing all that flows and counterflows, t$e gus$ings o mer!" and &it" knowing nothing of meaningsand aims (t$e rtaud ex&eriment, t$e urroug$s ex&eriment). t is here that art accedes to its authentic modernity!

which simply consists in liberating what was present in art from its beginnings!but %as $iddenunderneat$ aims and obje!ts, even i aest$eti!, and underneat$ re!odings or axiomati!s> the pure process that fulfills itself! andthat never ceases to reach fulfillment as it proceeds&art as Ee9perimentation.@


7/10

ink 2 ,6+ 7 :ame +heory

+he affs description of their political process ignores the states ability to fight back. +heirstrategy for change assumes a static conception of the battle between state fascism andliberatory rhi0omatic politics. +he state and capitalism are not fro0en in carbonite! they areorganic systems capable of absorbing challenges against them. 5e should assume the responseof the state before we make our move. +he state will copy any strategy aimed at challenging itand conform accordingly. Attacks against the state will fail and be Buickly reabsorbed.Our /i9it and Nalebluff evidence is better than their link defense because it applies rationalgame theory as a model for understanding political struggle. :ame theory is a preferable way ofunderstanding political strategy because it takes into account the reaction of the state. +heylead to form of tunnel&vision politics which can only account for actions in a static vacuum.,ven if our 'NC evidence is only a metaphor! we should draw from that metaphor and apply itto the specific conte9t of the status Buo.

Here is conte9tual framework evidence to support thatDixit and 3alebu **5 (vinas$, :o$n =. ;$errard Universit" Proessor o ?!onomi!s at Prin!eton and arr",Proessor o e!onomi!s and management at t$e "ale s!$ool o organization and management. 4'$inking;tategi!all"4)

9o% s$ould &eo&le be$ave in so!iet"@ ur ans%er does not deal %it$ et$i!s or eti t$e !onli!t bet%een t$ese s&a!emoments and t$e %orld t$at surrounds t$em. It is im&ortant to sing t$e


8/10

glories o t$e %orlds t$at are being !reated, t$e ne% so!ial relations and t$e ne% %a"s o doing t$ings> but%e !annot go ver" ar%it$out talking o t$e !las$ %it$ t$e %orld to %$i!$ t$ese dignities are o&&osed. '$ere is a !onstantantagonism,a !onstant &ressure to make t$e ot$erness "ield to t$e enormous !o$esive or!e o t$e so!iet" t$at surrounds ll;. '$e s&a!es are notautonomous, t$oug$ t$e" as&ire to be. '$e" are rat$er !ra!ks, t$e s$ar& ends o a so!ial !onli!t. Dignit" is an atta!k on !a&italism, but notne!essaril" a !onrontation. 'o !onront !a&ital is to allo% it to set t$e 6* .I4,ellda. Dignit" !onsists in setting our o%n agenda > t$is is%$at %e s$ould do, irres&e!tive o !a&ital. I !a&ital !$ooses to re&ressli;, t () 7oo&t JI;, to imitate us, so be it, but let it be !leart$at %e initiate t$e dan!e.'$is !ertainl" does not mean, !annot mean, t$at%e !ease to struggle against !a&italism, butt$at, as ar as &ossible, %e take t$e initiative, %e set t$e agenda, %e make it !lear t$at it is !a&italism struggling against us, our lives, our &roje!ts, our

$umanit". Dignit" is to reuseand!reate> to reuse to make !a&italism and to !reate a ne% %orld. In an arti!le on t$e movement

in axa!a, ustavo ?steva !omments, 7'$ousands, millions o &eo&le assume no% t$at t$e time $as !ome to %alk our o%n &at$. s t$e La&atistas sa", to!$ange t$e %orld is ver" dii!ult, i not im&ossible. more &ragmati! attitude demands t$e !onstru!tion o a ne% %orld. '$at7s %$at%e are no% tr"ing to do, as i %e $ad alread" %on7 (?steva 200/d> /). uilding a ne% %orld does o !ourse mean !$anging t$eexisting one, but t$e s$it in em&$asis is !ru!ial> instead o o!using our attention on t$e destru!tion o !a&italism,%e!on!entrate on building somet$ing else. '$is is an inversion o t$e traditional revolutionar" &ers&e!tive t$at &uts t$e destru!tion o!a&italism irst and t$e !onstru!tion o t$e ne% so!iet" se!ond. 'o make a ne% %orld means to !ut t$e %eb t$at binds us into t$e!o$ering or!e o !a&italist so!iet", so t$at %e !an !reate somet$ing dierent. '$e enem" is t$e so!ial s"nt$esis o !a&italist so!iet".


9/10

ink ? ,6+ 7 Agency of the tate

'$is normative or $umanist r$etori! is ver" likel" t$eunolding o bureau!rati! logi !. '$e modern la%"er is ver" oten a kind o metainsuran!e adjuster. nd t$at makes "ou and me, as legala!ademi!s, trainers o metainsuran!e adjusters. '$is is &er$a&s an un&leasant realization. ne o t$e most im&ortant ee!ts onormative legal t$oug$t is to inter!ede $ere so t$at %e, as legal a!ademi!s, do not $ave to !onront t$isun&leasant realization. 3ormative legal t$oug$t allo%s us to &retend t$at %e are &re&aring our students to be!ome tti!us =in!$ n+ %$ile %e

are in a!t training &eo&le %$o %ill enter t$e metainsuran!e adjustment business. =or our students, t$is role!onusion is unlikel" to be ver" unn". It%ill get even less so u&on t$eir graduation %$en t$e" learn t$at tti!us =in!$ $as been %ritten out o t$e s!ri&t. =or us, o !ourse, it is a &leasantantas" to t$ink %e are tea!$ing tti!us =in!$. -$en t$e antas" is over, it be!omes one $ell o a !ategor" mistake. nd in t$e rude transition rom t$e

one to t$e ot$er, tti!us =in!$ !an


10/10

&ro!ess o transormation is seen as a movement rom t%o sides, above and belo%, and t$e leaders s&eak o t$e need to over!omet$e bourgeois state and !reate a 7!ommunal t"&e o state7 .20 '$e !reation and &romotion o !ommunal !oun!ils is at t$e !ore ot$is movement.2

wake hm 2nc v utsa es utd r2

Documents