OSpec 142

We meet the second sentence in our plan text uses the USFG CI- USFG is one or more branches. Solves their predictability and limits arguments. Reasonable compromise between affirmative solvency and negative link ground. Topical Phillip Corboy et al, lawyer, 30 Loy. U. Chi. L.J. 183, Winter, lexis, 1999,
Each branch of government, be it the legislative, executive, or judicial, has its own realm of authority, and one branch shall not exercise the powers that properly belong to a different branch. 190 The authority to determine when the separation of powers doctrine has been violated rests with the judiciary. 191

Defense: We only use one specific agent, and congress is big, no abuse on predictable limits Well defend links Congress defiantly links to all generics Card doesnt say has to be all 3 branches Offense Ground- We give them ground to specific agent links, politics, and procedural counterplans Specific literature- The best policy literature is written in the context of the government branch in question, not the USFG as a whole. They overlimitno plan affects every single part of the USFG

T-inc 148
1.

We meet increase doesnt require preexistence

Reinhardt 5 (U.S. Judge for the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT (Stephen, JASON RAY
REYNOLDS; MATTHEW RAUSCH, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC.; HARTFORD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants-Appellees., lexis) Specifically, we must decide whether charging a higher price for initial insurance than the insured would otherwise have been charged because of information in a consumer credit report constitutes an "increase in any charge" within the meaning of FCRA. First, we examine the definitions of "increase" and "charge." Hartford Fire contends that, limited to their ordinary definitions, these words apply only when a consumer has previously been charged for insurance and that charge has thereafter been increased by the insurer. The phrase, "has previously been charged," as used by Hartford, refers not only to a rate that the consumer has previously paid for insurance but also to a rate that the consumer has previously been quoted, even if that rate was increased [**23] before the consumer made any payment. Reynolds disagrees, asserting that, under [*1091] the ordinary definition of the term, an increase in a

charge also occurs whenever an insurer charges a higher rate than it would otherwise have charged because of any factor--such as adverse credit information, age, or driving record 8 --regardless of whether the customer was previously charged some other rate. According to Reynolds, he was charged an increased rate
because of his credit rating when he was compelled to pay a rate higher than the premium rate because he failed to obtain a high insurance score. Thus, he argues, the definitions of "increase" and "charge" encompass the insurance companies' practice. Reynolds is correct. Increase" means to make something greater. See, e.g., OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY (2d ed. 1989) ("The action, process, or fact of becoming or making greater; augmentation, growth, enlargement, extension."); WEBSTER'S NEW WORLD DICTIONARY OF AMERICAN ENGLISH (3d college ed. 1988) (defining "increase" as "growth, enlargement, etc[.]"). "Charge" means the price demanded for goods or services. See, e.g., OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY (2d ed. 1989) ("The price required or demanded for service rendered, or (less usually) for goods supplied."); WEBSTER'S NEW WORLD DICTIONARY OF AMERICAN ENGLISH (3d college ed. 1988) ("The cost or price of an article, service, etc."). Nothing in the definition of these words implies that the term "increase in any charge for" should be limited to cases in which a company raises the

rate that an individual has previously been charged. 2. 3.

We meet there are currently contracts to companies not based on sps Counter interp aff must be a net increase

Rogers 5 (Judge New York, et al., Petitioners v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Respondent, NSR Manufacturers Roundtable, et
al., Intervenors, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 12378, **; 60 ERC (BNA) 1791, 6/24, Lexis) [**48] Statutory Interpretation. HN16While the CAA defines a "modification" as any physical or operational change that "increases" emissions, it is silent on how to calculate such "increases" in emissions. 42 U.S.C. 7411(a)(4). According to government petitioners, the lack of a statutory definition does not render the term "increases" ambiguous, but merely compels the court to give the term its "ordinary meaning." See Engine Mfrs.Ass'nv.S.Coast AirQualityMgmt.Dist., 541 U.S. 246, 124 S. Ct. 1756, 1761, 158 L. Ed. 2d 529(2004); Bluewater Network, 370 F.3d at 13; Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. Glickman, 342 U.S. App. D.C. 7, 215 F.3d 7, 10 [*23] (D.C. Cir. 2000). Relying on two "real world" analogies, government petitioners contend that the

ordinary meaning of "increases" requires the baseline to be calculated from a period immediately preceding the change. They maintain, for example, that in determining whether a high-pressure weather system "increases" the
local temperature, the relevant baseline is the temperature immediately preceding the arrival of the weather system, not the temperature five or ten years ago. Similarly, [**49] in determining whether a new engine "increases" the value of a car, the relevant baseline is the value of the car immediately preceding the replacement of the engine, not the value of the car five or ten years ago when the engine was in perfect condition.

4. Counter-standards a. Limits they set an unfair limit on the topic there are very few current space programs b. Education only our interpretation allows scientific education on new possibilities for NASA instead of stale education on the same bureaucratic existing NASA programs 5. Reasonability competing interpretations ensures theyll always move to keep our aff out

Fiat thing 73
Fiat part of mandates, about what would happen if rez was mandates CI- Aff actions are based off of whether or not the resolution is true. Fiat is used to prove this. Solves their offense they research and debate about the resolution Most predictable what every other aff is about They cant go for this, they fiat counter plans Over limits, makes most arguments null No voter, all their reasons are unimpacted standards

T-Xpo/Dev 180
WM- humans travel to help SPS WM- the plan would be colonizing an area of space Development includes launch vehicles, SSP, tourism, comm satellites, and transportation infrastructure Hsu 9 (Feng, Ph.D. and Senior Fellow Aerospace Technology Working Group, and Ken Cox, Ph.D. and Founder & Director Aerospace
Technology Working Group, Sustainable Space Exploration and Space Development - A Unified Strategic Vision, 2-20, http://www.spacerenaissance.org/papers/A-UnifiedSpaceVision-Hsu-Cox.pdf)

In our view, even with adequate reform in its governance model, NASA is not a rightful institution to lead or manage the nation's business in Space Development projects. This is because human space development activities, such as development of affordable launch vehicles, RLVs, space-based solar power, space touring capabilities, communication satellites, and trans-earth or trans-lunar space transportation infrastructure systems, are primarily human economic and commercial development endeavors that are not only cost-benefit-sensitive in project management, but are in the nature of business activities and are thus subject to fundamental business principles related to profitability, sustainability, and market development, etc. Whereas, in space exploration, by its nature and definition, there are basic human scientific research and development (R&D) activities that require exploring the unknowns, pushing the envelope of

new frontiers or taking higher risks with full government and public support, and these need to be invested in solely by taxpayer contributions.

They overlimit- allows for one aff Contextuality- our interp supported by scholarly lit of space Ground- allows for ground to topic launch DAs as opposed to the bad colonization DAs There IS rez basis for a charter corporationChartering a Co is part of the USFG Most NASA projects charter a corp, its normal resolutional means We do mandate the USFG builds SSPWe say the US should provide support necessary, means it provides supplies for building them and funding to make more. This argument doesnt take out heg/econ our Nansen ev is specific to the perception of the plan

The PIC 534

No solvency, could be any Federal government, like Mexico. Their CP text still uses the means they link to the net benefit Our hegemony advantage is an impact turn to this: by creating a national unity of superiority we are able to proclaim ourselves as hegemons No impact to racism or violence PICare a VI: Infinite regression: You can PIC out of my friend Ben, the aff has no reason that doesnt solve case Time Skew: Moots the 1AC speech time Education: Gets to the point where Depth is ridiculous, focuses on a trivial detail. Strategy skew: We get no offense off of 90% of our case. Forces us to Debate ourselves. Voter for Fairness and education Their impact scenario is wrong Dr. Inis Claude is a Professor of Government and Foreign Affairs, Emeritus, at the University of Virginia. During
his teaching career, Professor Claude held positions at the University of Michigan, Harvard University, Columbia University, University of Wales, and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and the Institute of Social Studies at the Hague. States and the Global System 1988 The state has a widespread reputation, at least among academic people, as being in its international dealings utterly selfish and irresponsible. Its selfishness is epitomized in its putative devotion to the national interest. Its irresponsibility is expressed in its claim of sovereignty. This adds up to the notion that the state is, at best, amoral. It is a self-seeking entity that acknowledges no
value higher than its own advantage and no obligation transcending its commitment to its own welfare. We students of international politics have been inclined to think that Reinhold Niebuhr got it just right when he entitled one of his early books, Moral Man and Immoral Society, in order to highlight his thesis that 'a sharp distinction must be drawn between the moral and social behaviour of individuals and of social groups, national, racial and economic' .5 There is certainly no warrant for switching to the myth of the state as virtue incarnate, but this image of the state as selfish and irresponsible deserves critical appraisal. I see no logical reason to expect that

individuals would retain their virtues while transposing their vices to the national level, nor do I see convincing evidence that this occurs. The twentieth century has brought the collectivization of charity and compassion, and this has
spread to the international scene; states have become in many respects the successors to the religious and other charitable agencies that formerly were dominant in carrying out missions of mercy throughout the world. Governmental engagement in such activity is sometimes clearly

motivated by national self-interest, and is almost always justified domestically by reference to that interest, but claims of selfishness may deserve quite as sceptical a reception as claims of altruism. It is not inconceivable that a generous and compassionate government, acting on behalf of an entire people, may feign self-interestedness for the benefit of stingy taxpayers who are not disposed to make sacrifices to aid foreigners. The national interest is a conveniently elastic term, and those who believe that their state has a moral obligation to promote the welfare of other peoples are quite likely to make the happy discovery, and the delighted pronouncement, that this serves the national interest as well. All doing of good tends to derive from mixed motives, whether the doer is an individual or a collectivity.

Our interpretation is that the CP must be functionally and textually competitive. Word PICs are not functionally competitive because they do the same thing as the AFF. This is bad, takes away the purpose of fiat, is not real world because its functionally saying I disagree, we should still do the entire aff Discourse doesnt shape realitytranslation proves its the other way around.

Fram-Cohen 85 Michelle Fram-Cohen, freelance translator and interpreter between Hebrew and English
that has published articles on literature, translation theory, and philosophy, 1985 (Reality, Language, Translation: What Makes Translation Possible, Paper presented at the American Translators Association Conference, Available Online at http://enlightenment.supersaturated.com/essays/text/michelleframcohen//possibilityoftranslation.html, Accessed 07-31-2010) The idea that language is created inside one's mind independently of outside experience eliminates the possibility that the external world is the common source of all languages. But a common source of all languages underlies any attempt to explain the possibility of translation. Chomsky suggests that the common basis of all
languages is universal phonetics and semantics, with the result that "certain objects of human thoughts and mentality are essentially invariable across languages." (13) To the best of my knowledge Chomsky did not develop this idea in the direction of explaining the possibility of translation. In contrast, linguist Eugene Nida insists that outside experience is the common basis of all languages when he writes that "each language is different from all other languages in the ways in which the sets of verbal symbol classify the various elements of experience." (14) Nida did not provide the philosophical basis of the view that the external world is the common source of all languages. Such a basis can be found in the philosophy of Objectivism, originated by Ayn Rand. Objectivism, as its name implies, upholds the objectivity of reality. This means that

reality is independent of consciousness, consciousness being the means of perceiving reality, not of creating it.
Rand defines language as "a code of visual-auditory symbols that denote concepts." (15) These symbols are the written or spoken words of any language. Concepts are defined as the "mental integration of two or more units possessing the same distinguishing characteristic(s), with their particular measurements omitted." (16) This means that concepts are abstractions of units perceived in reality. Since words

denote concepts, words are the symbols of such abstractions; words are the means of representing concepts in a language. Since reality provides the data from which we abstract and form concepts, reality is the source of all words--and of all languages. The very existence of translation demonstrates this fact. If there was no objective reality, there could be no similar concepts expressed in different verbal symbols. There could be no similarity between the content of different languages, and so, no translation. Translation is the transfer of conceptual knowledge from one language into another. It is the transfer of one set of symbols denoting concepts into another set of symbols denoting the same concepts. This process is possible because concepts have specific referents in reality. Even if a certain word and the concept it designates exist in one language but not in another, the referent this word and concept stand for nevertheless exists in reality, and can be referred to in translation by a descriptive phrase or neologism. Language is a means describing reality, and as such can and should expand to include newly discovered or innovated objects in reality. The revival of the ancient Hebrew language in the late 19th Century demonstrated the dependence of language on outward reality. Those who wanted to use Hebrew had to innovate an enormous number of words in order to describe the new objects that did not confront the ancient Hebrew speakers. On the other hand, those objects that existed 2000 years ago could be referred to by the same words. Ancient Hebrew could not by itself provide a sufficient image of modern reality for modern users.

I apologize for saying The Retribution is unnecessaryaccepting our apology for the use of objectionable language is a superior remedy.

Latif 1 Elizabeth Latif, Law Clerk with the United States District Court of Connecticut, 2001 (Apologetic
Justice: Evaluating Apologies Tailored Toward Legal Solutions," Boston University Law Review, Volume 81, February, Available Online to Subscribing Institutions via Lexis-Nexis) In tandem with the above uses of apology, many legal scholars have been singing the praises of apologies in legal fora.
Wagatsuma and Rosett compare apologies in Japan, and the United States, and argue that greater incorporation of apology into American legal culture would reduce litigation and shrink court dockets. n66 They maintain that there are some injuries, such as defamation, insult, degradation, loss of status, and emotional distress, "that can only be repaired by an apology." n67 "To the extent that a place may be found for apology in the resolution of such conflicts," Wagatsuma and Rosett assert, "American law would be enriched and better able to deal with" them. n68 Indeed, "society at large might be better off and better able to advance social

peace if the law, instead of discouraging apologies in such situations by treating them as admissions of liability, encouraged people to apologize to those they have wronged and to compensate them for their losses." n69 David Hoffman, a partner at the Boston-based law firm of Hill & Barlow, stated in a recent lecture that "the need for

apology is ubiquitous in our lives and in our work." n70 Hoffman argues that apologies are essential in mediation, [*300] because "virtually all disputes have emotional components" and apologizing "can overcome emotional barriers to settlement" such as anger, betrayal and mistrust. n71 Apology is powerful in a legal setting, Hoffman further asserts, because "when we apologize, we are simultaneously affirming two things[: w]e are affirming that we share the same values and beliefs as the other party and that we care about them." n72

Conditionality is a voting issue Not reciprocal- we cant run multiple plans to find the best example of the resolution Time and strat skew: They could read 14 CP texts and wed have to at least cover them all Moving Target- we dont know what the issues in the debate are until the 2NR. Most real world- Policy makers cant propose competing pieces of legislation Makes for sloppy debate- negs can just guess and check Our interpretation is that the AFF gets one conditional K and two conditional CPs. This means less time skew and it solves their offense Voter for fairness and education

Review Body CP 433

Da to the CP: A-Commissions costs a ton

Glassman & Strauss 11 (Matthew Eric Glassman, Jacob R. Straus, Analysts on the Congress at the Congressional Research
Services, Congressional Commissions: Overview, Structure, and Legislative Considerations, http://www.wiseintern.org/orientation/documents/CRS%20commissions.pdf , February 2, 2011 A third criticism of commissions is that they have high costs and low returns. Congressional commission costs vary widely, ranging from several hundred thousand dollars to over $10 million. Coupled with this objection is the problem of congressional response to the work of a commission; in most cases, Congress is under no obligation to act, or even respond to the work of a commission. If legislators disagree with the results or recommendations of a commissions work, they may simply ignore it. In addition, there is no guarantee that any commission will produce a balanced product; commission members may have their own agendas, biases, and pressures. Or they may simply produce a mediocre work product.46 Finally, advisory boards create economic and legislative inefficiency if they function as patronage devices, with Members of Congress using commission positions to pay off political debts.47

B-New spending crushes economy Rahn 11 (Richard, CATO Institute, PhD @ Colombia, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=12785)JFS
There is evidence that once

a government lets its debt/GDP ratio rise more than 90 percent, the economy begins to seriously weaken and government spending starts to spiral out of control as the interest payments on the debt grow faster than the economy. The United States will probably hit the 90 percent threshold within a year (the current level is 68 percent, up from 37 percent in 2008). Up to now, foreigners have been willing to buy U.S. debt, but as inflation heats up (which it is now doing globally), domestic and foreign lenders will insist on higher interest to compensate for the expected inflation. The United States has been able to finance its debt with very low interest rates over the past few years, with the Federal Reserve's "quantitative easing" programs that is, they have been buying debt with money they just print. We are probably close to the endgame with this particular racket, which
cannot go on forever. Greece has already shown the world what happens when the debt/GDP ratio reaches critical levels. Government services, employment and transfer payments are drastically cut because there is no other

choice and the economy goes into the tank. The rest of the world will be in no position to help the United States. Britain and a number of other European countries will also likely breach the 90 percent threshold this year, while
Japan will be at 200 percent. Japan has been able to get away with a higher debt/GDP ratio because almost all of the debt is held by the Japanese and Japanese institutions. But this has led to economic stagnation and now the endgame is upon them (China just replaced Japan as the world's second largest economy). What will the United States do as the Japanese begin to sell their trillion dollars in U.S. government securities to meet their own liabilities? Mr. Obama has also proposed a number of tax increases in his budget. These tax increases will only slow economic growth, particularly given the high level of debt service that will be required to finance not only the federal debt but also the growing state and local government debts. Economic growth depends on having sufficient saving, which is put into productive investment to create jobs and technologies. If government is grabbing most of the savings of private individuals and businesses through debt issuance, inflation and taxes, the result is economic stagnation and increasing unemployment. Is there a way out of this bleak scenario? Yes. Real not phony reductions in government spending, particularly on transfer payments (commonly known as entitlements).

C-c/a Beardon its a try or die

2-Cant solve

Andrews 10 (Edmond Andrews, Writer at the Fiscal Times, Deficit Panel Faces Obstacles in Poisonous Political Atmosphere,
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2010/02/18/Fiscal-Commission-Faces-Big-Obstacles.aspx#page1, February 18, 2010 With mid-term elections less than nine months away, and Republicans capitalizing on populist anger against Washington, the gridlock is only intensifying. With Republican backing necessary for the commission to advance recommendations, the GOP could deadlock the effort simply by withholding its support from any final plan. "In terms of pure politics, Republicans have no incentive to play," said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former director of the Congressional Budget Office and the top economic adviser to Republican Senator John McCains presidential campaign. "The deficit is a problem that the Democrats own," Mr. Holtz-Eakin continued. "If you have a commission, it becomes the commissions problem. Republicans look at this and say, why should we let Democrats off the hook?" But partisan warfare isnt the only problem. The commission also faces suspicion and resentment from Democratic lawmakers, some of whom see it as an attempt to circumvent their power and others who fear that it will be used to rush through cuts in Social Security and Medicare.

3-nonu Labs and Research Groups are already conducting scientific research on the best way to approach SBSP

NSS 07 (National Space Society, Report to the Director, National Security Space Office Interim Assessment
http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/final-sbsp-interim-assessment-release-01.pdf. October 10, 2007) For those applications that favor or rely upon liquid hydrocarbon fuels, Americas national labs are pursuing several promising avenues of research to manufacture carbonneutral synthetic fuels (synfuels) from direct solar thermal energy or radiated/electrical SBSP. The lab initiatives are developing technologies to efficiently split energy neutral feedstocks or upgrade lowergrade fuels (such as biofuels) into higher energy density liquid hydrocarbons. Put plainly, SBSP could be utilized to split hydrogen from water and the carbon monoxide (syngas) from carbon dioxide which can then be combined to manufacture any desired hydrocarbon fuel, including gasoline, diesel, kerosene and jet fuel. This technology is still in its infancy, and significant investment will be required to bring this technology to a high level of technical readiness and meet economic and efficiency goals. This technology enables a carbonneutral (closed carboncycle) hydrocarbon economy driven by clean renewable sources of power, which can utilize the existing global fuel infrastructure without modification. This opportunity is of particular interest to traditional oil companies. The ability to use renewable energy to serve as the energy feedstock for existing fuels, in a carbon neutral cycle, is a total game changer that deserves significant attention.

4-Consults a voter a. Infinitely regressive- infinite number of consultable actors and plan modifications b. Time and strat skew- we only get one constructive to generate offense c. Multiple actor fiat illegit not reciprocal d. Education- Consult CPs void the round of topic specific education to debate non germane net benefits from thousands of potential actors. e. Voter fairness education 5-Our interpretation is that a competitive counterplan must be both functionally and textually competitive. They violate this because Consult CPs texts have every word of the plan text in it so it is not textually competitive. Functional competition good 1. Predictable- Text is predictable because it is the only stable, distinct advocacy, argument changes everything else 2. Forces better plan writingbetter for negative ground on all issues and better debate to avoid procedural and vagueness debates. 6-Perm do the CP 7-Perm Consult Review Board as per the counterplan and do the plan no matter what. 8- Perm Do the plan and consult 9- Constitution DA -A. Consultation violates the constitution James R. Edwards Jr, is an adjunct fellow with the Hudson Institute, 9-4-02, Washington Times, p. ln
In other words, Congress would lose much of its constitutional ability to check the executive branch. And foreign governments, unelected supranational bodies and bureaucrats would be free to dictate to Americans what our laws are. The courts have consistently upheld the right of Congress to determine who to admit, exclude and expel and on what basis. This is a right of sovereignty. And exercising this right

belongs to Congress alone among its plenary powers. To pawn off this exclusive congressional power to the executive branch or foreign entities would upset the constitutional balance. It would give noncitizens of the United States the ability to dictate our own laws, even if the Senate had never ratified a related treaty.

B. Must reject constitutional violations Levinson, 2000 (Daryl J., Associate Professor, University of Virginia School of Law. University of Chicago Law
Review- Spring) Extending a majority rule analysis of optimal deterrence to constitutional torts requires some explanation, for we do not usually think of violations of constitutional rights in terms of cost-benefit analysis and efficiency. Quite the opposite, constitutional rights are most commonly conceived as deontological side-constraints that trump even utility-maximizing government action. n69 Alternatively, constitutional rights might be understood as serving rule-utilitarian purposes. If the disutility to victims of constitutional violations often exceeds the social benefits derived from the rights-violating activity, or if rights violations create longterm costs that outweigh short-term social benefits, then constitutional rights can be justified as tending to maximize global utility, even though this requires local utility-decreasing steps. Both the deontological and rule-utilitarian descriptions imply that the optimal level of constitutional violations is zero; that is, society would be better off, by whatever measure, if constitutional rights were never violated.

10- DA to CP A. Consulting other actors hurts democracyunaccountable policymakers are acting instead of representative democracy John Hulsman, research fellow in Euro. Affairs @ Heritage and Greg Schmitt, Heritage Euro Affairs, 7-212001, Washington Times
The treaty would infringe on the sovereignty of the national court system and give more power to a supranational organization that has no democratic claim over U.S. citizens, and is thus politically unaccountable. Obviously, such a system undermines the legitimacy of the U.S. Constitution and the rights of each citizen.

B. Democracy key to check extinction Larry Diamond, Sen. Research Fellow @ Hoover, 1995, Promoting Democracy in the 1990s, p. 6-7
This hardly exhausts the lists of threats to our security and well-being in the coming years and decades. In the former Yugoslavia nationalist aggression tears at the stability of Europe and could easily spread. The flow of illegal drugs intensifies through increasingly powerful internationalist crime syndicates that have made common cause with authoritarian regimes and have utterly-corrupted the institutions of tenuous, democratic ones. Nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons continue to proliferate. The very source of life on Earth, the global ecosystem, appears increasingly endangered. Most of these new and unconventional threats to security are associated with or aggravated by the weakness or absence of democracy, with its provisions for legality, accountability, popular sovereignty, and openness.

11-Consult makes it look like were not totally committed to the plan Tobias Harris, Editor of Concord Bridge, 5-20-2003, Gulliver Unbound, Concord Bridge,
http://people.brandeis.edu/~cbmag/Articles/2003%20May/Gulliver%20unbound-%20May%202003.pdf
As the Bush administration made its final preparations for war following the failure to secure a new Security Council resolution, Senate minority leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) issued a repartee typical of much of the flak received during the lead-in to Operation Iraqi Freedom. Im saddened, he said, saddened that this president failed so miserably at diplomacy that were now forced to war. This view, often repeated by various members of the Democratic Party, the New York Times editorial page, the European press and the various foreign policy experts in Ho llywood, is reflective of an attitude towards the exercise of power that achieved unprecedented prominence in the wake of the cold war. During the cold war, it was acknowledged both within the American foreign policy establishment and among Americas allies that American power was the bulwark of the Free World. The United States secured the sphere of liberal democracies from Soviet aggression, allowing for a stable trading system and the peaceful mediation of disputes by a host of international organizations, while resisting communism elsewhere in the world, whether by dispatching its military or providing aid along the lines of the Truman or Reagan doctrines. With the end of the Eastern Bloc and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, however, many intellectua ls on both sides of the Atlantic came to regard power as superfluous. The real challenges were soft challenges, challenges like global warming, international financial crises, trade liberalization and the spread of AIDS which necessitated multilateral cooperation in international fora. Even security issues such as the break- up of Yugoslavia and the

containment of Iraq were seen as the concern of the international community; the rest of the world deserved the right to adjudicate on the appropriate course of action, although the United States would be bearing the brunt of the responsibility. The Clinton administration acquiesced to demands for multilateralism at the dawn of the unipolar moment, advocating assertive multilateralism that would seek a consensus on the use of force. Thus at a time of unprecedented American power, America embraced a foreign policy that, while not actually altering power disparities, called for Americas submission to the international community. In the immediate postcold war world,
the United States could afford the luxury of a foreign policy not driven by national interest. Democratization and liberalization, its major foreign policy aims, could be achieved adequately through multilateral institutions. September 11th raised the stakes of multilateralism

considerably. The disparate but related problems of Islamist terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction among rogue states could no longer be handled with the kid gloves of the Clinton administration. Urgency demanded the mailed fist. And as the Bush administration acquired new faith in the many possibilities inherent in American power, the multilateralists of the 1990s recoiled in horror. Gulliver was snapping the multilateral bonds he had so graciously accepted during more pacific times. Lilliputians saw the need to restrain him become more pressing as the Bush administration signaled its intention to destroy the regime of Saddam Hussein in order to remove a major rogue state while simultaneously enforcing a long string of UN Security Council resolutions. Despite the emergence of the Paris-Berlin-Moscow axis of Lilliputians, the United States launched an attack without UN sanction but with a multitude of allies (the coalition of the willing), quickly reaching Baghdad and destroying the Hussein regime, with the war in its mopping- up phase at the time of this writing. The Iraq incident marks a clear departure in international politics from post-cold war to post-post-cold war, with the United States restoring national interest to its proper place as the key motivator of American foreign policy. America has reached the limits of unipolar multilateralism, and indeed stands at the crossroads of the unipolar moment. If the Bush administration and hawks in the Democratic Party unite to acknowledge the inadequacies of multilateralism in providing for American security, and institutionalize a long-term foreign policy based on the robust use of American power to alter the international security environment in Americas favor, the United States can extend the unipolar moment into a unipolar era lasting well into the foreseeable future. As the 2002 National Security Strategy declares, We will maintain the forces sufficient to support our obligations, and to defend freedom. Our forces will be strong enough to dissuade potential adversaries from pursuing a military build-up in hopes of surpassing, or equaling, the power of the United States. Before downgrading multilateralism as an element of American foreign policy, however, it is necessary to assess both its possibilities and drawbacks for the United States. Multilateralism is applicable in a variety of policy areas, including but not limited to security affairs, the environment, trade and international finance. The much-maligned WTO, with its predecessor GATT, is perhaps the worlds most successful multilateral body, as WTO/GATT has succeeded in lowering industrial tariffs, and, since the creation of the WTOs Dispute Settlement Body, providing legal recourse for the victims of unilaterally- imposed discriminatory trade practices. America participates fully in these organizations and, contrary to the claims of environmentalists, is party to a variety of multilateral environmental agreements and was the major instigator of the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. Multilateralism clearly contains unmitigated benefits for the United States in these realms, as it allows America to reap the many gains associated with institutionalization, including lower transaction costs and more certain guarantees that promised actions will be performed. Multilateralism becomes more problematic in the security realm, when lesser powers demand

that the United States considers and accedes to their demands when pondering the use of force to achieve a desired outcome. A considerable part of the problem is technical. Due to post-cold war defense budgets that far
exceeded those of the rest of the world, especially in research and development, which is currently roughly 85% of the worlds total, the United States enjoys an unassailable advantage in military technology, from various fighting platforms to the C4ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computing, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance) technology that allow American units to dominate the battlefield. Accordingly, security multilateralism is increasingly asymmetrical, with the United States forced to respect the input of nations that do not even possess the technology that would allow them to share the battlefield with the United States military.

At what point does asymmetrical multilateralism cease being multilateral and become the mediocre acting to restrain the supremely capable? Beyond the gross inequality of capabilities, however, lies the political challenge
of security multilateralism. During the 1990s, the use of force, even multilateral force, became increasingly unpopular in the international community. International efforts were organized, but for more limited objectives than during the cold war. International security initiatives in the Balkans, for example, were purely reactive. Rather than clearly identifying the threat posed by Slobodan Milosevic and acting decisively to eliminate that threat, the international community dithered, and when it did act in Bosnia and Kosovo, it merely sought to bring Milosevic back to the negotiating table. The Iraq crisis shows how deep-seated the aversion to power is within the international community. Various governments and their citizenries, despite being presented with a vast array of evidence of Iraqi proliferative activities in violation of more than a dozen UN Security Council resolutions issued since the end of the Gulf War in 1991, adamantly opposed any use of force in response to Husseins recalcitrance. The most extreme case was Germany, which unilaterally declared that it would not support the use of force against Iraq even if sanctioned by the United Nations. The protests that crowded the streets of the worlds major cities demonstrated the extent to which the international community has come to disdain the use of force in international relations. There are several possible explanations as to why force (or hard power) has become so objectionable to international opinion. Among these explanations is the development of an international norm against the aggressive use of force; a reply based on the impotency of much of the world in the face of Americas overwhelming military superiority; and anti-Americanism that has accompanied the unipolar moment, signifying that opposition is more to the American unilateral use of force rather than to any use of force per se. Reality probably lies somewhere in the midst of these options. Clearly the rise of legalized institutions within the Free World since the end of World War II has delegitimized the use of force, as nations have come to view institutions as more capable of resolving international disputes than force-of-arms. Force has become bte noire especially among the nations of Europe, who, through the European Union, have seen the supposed bounty of institutionalized multilateral cooperation. To them, force is the bluntest tool in the foreign policy toolbox, often causing more problems than it solves. Engagement and discussion are seen as softer tools that ensure an equitable outcome for those involved, forestalling war and its attendant train of miseries, including civilian casualties, refugee flows and economic disruption. The international community and many Americans view the associated costs of war as far outweighing any benefits of military action, and thus nations must go to great length to avoid international conflict. In short, multilateralism is Europeanism writ large, as pointed out by Robert Kagan in Of Paradise and Power. It is consensus-driven because, after all, consensus means no one loses. But consensus precludes the possibility of firm moral positions, as decisions reflect the lowest-common denominator among actors. American foreign policy has long had a moralistic strain that seeks to improve the world, by force if necessary. Decisions are not made between two relatively equivalent choices but between what is right and wrong. Thus unless

America can convince the international community to accept the virtues of its moral stances, multilateralism necessarily entails moral equivocation and watereddown positions.

12-CP links to NB, uses a top-down approach in implementation 13-No internal- aerospace not key to econ and heg, there are hundreds of other industries that would be uniquely helped by SPS 14- plan not top-down approach only use the congress at the bottom

15-NB link card doesnt even use the term top-down means they have no internal net benefit

Tech Kritik 566

FrameworkA. interpretation the affirmative should be able to weigh the advantages against the alternative, which must be enacted by the USFG. B. Violation they dont let us weigh the aff and their alt is not enacted by the USfg C. Vote Aff 1. Plan focus we allow for a stable locus for links and comparison of alternatives. 2. Ground they access a massive amount of K frameworks, links, and impacts. They can leverage framework to moot the 1AC. 3. Topic education their framework encourages generic Ks that get rehashed every year. Second is the Anti-Politics Disadvantage A. They embrace anti-politics this takes out alt solvency and moves politics to the right Carl Boggs, Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles, 1997 (The great retreat: Decline of the public sphere in late twentieth-century America, Theory and Society, Volume 26, Number 6, December, Available Online to Subscribing Institutions via SpringerLink, p. 773-774)
The decline of the public sphere in late twentieth-century America poses a series of great dilemmas and challenges. Many ideological currents scrutinized herelocalism, metaphysics, spontaneism, post-modernism, Deep Ecologyintersect with and reinforce each other. While these currents have deep origins in popular movements of the 1960s and 1970s, they remain very much alive in the 1990s. Despite their different outlooks and trajectories, they all share one thing in common: a depoliticized expression of struggles to combat and overcome alienation. [end page 773] The false sense of empowerment that comes with such mesmerizing impulses is accompanied by a loss of public engagement, an erosion of citizenship and a depleted capacity of individuals in large groups to work for social change. As this ideological quagmire worsens, urgent problems that are destroying the fabric of American society will go unsolvedperhaps even unrecognizedonly to fester more ominously into the future. And such problems (ecological crisis, poverty, urban decay, spread of infectious diseases, technological displacement of workers) cannot be understood outside the larger social and global context of internationalized markets, finance, and communications. Paradoxically, the widespread retreat from politics, often

inspired by localist sentiment, comes at a time when agendas that ignore or sidestep these global realities will, more than ever, be reduced to impotence. In his commentary on the state of citizenship today, Wolin refers to the increasing sublimation and dilution of politics, as larger numbers of people turn away from public concerns toward private ones. By diluting the life of common involvements, we negate the very idea of politics as a source of public ideals and visions.74 In the meantime, the fate of the world hangs in the balance. The unyielding truth is that, even as the ethos of anti-politics becomes more compelling and even fashionable in the United States, it is the vagaries of political power that will continue to decide the fate of human societies. This last point demands further elaboration. The shrinkage of politics hardly means that corporate colonization will be less of a reality, that social hierarchies will somehow disappear, or that gigantic state and military structures will lose their hold over people's lives. Far from it: the space abdicated by a broad citizenry, well-informed and ready to participate at many levels, can in fact be filled by authoritarian and reactionary elitesan already familiar dynamic in many lesser-developed countries. The fragmentation and chaos of a Hobbesian world, not very
far removed from the rampant individualism, social Darwinism, and civic violence that have been so much a part of the American landscape, could be the

the eclipse of politics might set the stage for a reassertion of politics in more virulent guiseor it might help further rationalize the existing power structure. In either case, the state would likely become what Hobbes anticipated: the embodiment of those universal, collective interests that had vanished from civil society.75
prelude to a powerful Leviathan designed to impose order in the face of disunity and atomized retreat. In this way

B. Moving away from anti-politics is vital to check extinction Small 6

(Jonathan, former Americorps VISTA for the Human Services Coalition, Moving Forward, The Journal for Civic Commitment, Spring, http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/other/engagement/Journal/Issue7/Small.jsp)
What will be the challenges of the new millennium? And how should we equip young people to face these challenges? While we cannot be sure of the exact nature of the challenges, we can say unequivocally that humankind will face them together. If the end of the twentieth century marked the triumph of the capitalists, individualism, and personal responsibility, the

new century will present challenges that require collective action, unity, and enlightened self-interest. Confronting global warming, depleted natural resources, global super viruses, global crime syndicates, and multinational corporations with no conscience and no accountability will require cooperation, openness, honesty, compromise, and most of all solidarity ideals not exactly cultivated in the twentieth century. We can no longer suffer to see life through the tiny lens of our own existence. Never in the history of the world has our collective fate been so intricately interwoven. Our very existence depends upon our ability to adapt to this new paradigm, to envision a more cohesive society. With humankinds next great challenge comes also great opportunity. Ironically, modern individualism backed us into a corner. We have two choices, work together in solidarity or perish together in alienation. Unlike any other crisis before, the noose is truly around the neck of the whole world at once. Global super viruses will ravage rich and poor alike, developed and developing nations, white and black, woman, man, and child. Global warming and damage to the environment will affect climate change and destroy ecosystems across the globe. Air pollution will force gas masks on our faces, our depleted atmosphere will make a predator of the sun, and chemicals will invade and corrupt our water supplies. Every single day we are presented the opportunity to change our current course, to survive modernity in a manner befitting our better nature. Through zealous cooperation and radical solidarity we can alter the course of human events. Regarding the practical matter of equipping young people to face the challenges of a global, interconnected world, we need to teach cooperation,
community, solidarity, balance and tolerance in schools. We need to take a holistic approach to education. Standardized test scores alone will not begin to prepare young people for the world they will inherit. The three staples of traditional education (reading, writing, and arithmetic) need to be supplemented by three cornerstones of a modern education, exposure, exposure, and more exposure. How can we teach solidarity? How can we teach community in the age of rugged individualism? How can we counterbalance crass commercialism and materialism? How can we impart the true meaning of power? These are the educational challenges we face in the new century. It will require a radical transformation of our conception of education. Well need to trust a bit more, control a bit less, and put our faith in the potential of youth to make sense of their world. In addition to a declaration of the gauntlet set before educators in the twenty-first century, this paper is a proposal and a case study of sorts toward a new paradigm of social justice and civic engagement education. Unfortunately, the current pedagogical climate of public K-12 education does not lend itself well to an exploratory study and trial of holistic education. Consequently, this proposal and case study targets a higher education model. Specifically, we will look at some possibilities for a large community college in an urban setting with a diverse student body. Our guides through this process are specifically identified by the journal Equity and Excellence in Education. The dynamic interplay between ideas of social justice, civic engagement, and service learning in education will be the lantern in the dark cave of uncertainty. As such, a simple and straightforward explanation of the three terms is helpful to direct this inquiry. Before we look at a proposal and case study and the possible consequences contained therein, this paper will draw out a clear understanding of how we should characterize these ubiquitous terms and how their relationship to each other affects our study. Social Justice, Civic Engagement, Service Learning and Other Commie Crap Social justice is often ascribed long, complicated, and convoluted definitions. In fact, one could fill a good-sized library with treatises on this subject alone. Here we do not wish to belabor the issue or argue over fine points. For our purposes, it will suffice to have a general characterization of the term, focusing instead on the dynamics of its interaction with civic engagement and service learning. Social justice refers quite simply to a community vision and a community conscience that values inclusion, fairness, tolerance, and equality. The idea of social justice in America has been around since the Revolution and is intimately linked to the idea of a social contract. The Declaration of Independence is the best example of the prominence of social contract theory in the US. It states quite emphatically that the government has a contract with its citizens, from which we get the famous lines about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Social contract theory and specifically the Declaration of Independence are concrete expressions of the spirit of social justice. Similar clamor has been made over the appropriate definitions of civic engagement and service learning, respectively. Once again, lets not get bogged down on subtleties. Civic engagement is a measure or degree of the interest and/or involvement an individual and a community demonstrate around community issues. There is a longstanding dispute over how to properly quantify civic engagement. Some will say that todays youth are less involved politically and hence demonstrate a lower degree of civic engagement. Others cite high volunteer rates among the youth and claim it demonstrates a high exhibition of civic engagement. And there are about a hundred other theories put forward on the subject of civic engagement and todays youth. But one thing is for sure; todays

youth no longer see government and politics as an effective or valuable tool for affecting positive change in the world. Instead of
criticizing this judgment, perhaps we should come to sympathize and even admire it. Author Kurt Vonnegut said, There is a tragic flaw in our precious Constitution, and I dont know what can be done to fix it. This is it: only nut cases want to be president. Maybe the youths rejection of American politics isnt a shortcoming but rather a rational and appropriate response to their experience. Consequently, the term civic engagement takes on new meaning for us today. In order to foster fundamental change on the systemic level, which we have already said is necessary for our survival in the twenty-first century, we need to fundamentally change our systems. Therefore, part

of our challenge becomes convincing the youth that these systems, and by systems we mean government and commerce, have the potential for positive change. Civic engagement consequently takes on a more specific and political
meaning in this context. Service learning is a methodology and a tool for teaching social justice, encouraging civic engagement, and deepening practical understanding of a subject. Since it is a relatively new field, at least in the structured sense, service learning is only beginning to define itself. Through service learning students learn by experiencing things firsthand and by exposing themselves to new points of view. Instead of merely reading about government, for instance, a student might experience it by working in a legislative office. Rather than just studying global warming out of a textbook, a student might volunteer time at an environmental group. If service learning develops and evolves into a discipline with the honest goal of making better citizens, teaching social justice, encouraging civic engagement, and most importantly, exposing students to different and alternative experiences, it could be a major feature of a modern education. Service learning is the natural counterbalance to our current overemphasis on standardized testing. Social justice, civic engagement, and service learning are caught in a symbiotic cycle. The more we have of one of them; the more we have of all of them. However, until we get momentum behind them, we are stalled. Service learning may be our best chance to jumpstart our democracy. In the rest of this paper, we will look at the beginning stages of a project that seeks to do just that.

Third, Permutation do both Perm solves their K business net benefit is our 1AC and not ceding to the Right Todd Gitlin formerly served as professor of sociology and director of the mass communications program at the University of California,
Berkeley, and then a professor of culture, journalism and sociology at New York University. He is now a professor of journalism and sociology and chair of the Ph.D. program in Communications at Columbia University. He was a long-time political activist( from the Left). From the Book: The Intellectuals and the Flag 2005 available via CIAO Books date accessed 7/17/10 http://www.ciaonet.org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/book/git01/git01_05.pdf So two Manichaeisms squared off. Both were faith based, inclined to be impervious toward evidence, and tilted toward moral absolutism. One proceeded from the premise that U.S. power was always benign, the other from the premise that it was always pernicious. One justified empireif not necessarily by that nameon the ground that the alternatives were worse; the other saw empire every time the United States wielded power. But these two polar tendencies are

not the only options. There is, at least embryonically, a patriotic left that stands, as Michael Tomasky has put it, between Cheney and Chomsky.5 It disputes U.S. policies, strategies, and tacticsvociferously. But it criticizes from the inside out, without discarding the hope, if not of redemption, at least of improvement. It looks to its intellectuals for, among other things, scrutiny of the conflicts among the powers, the chinks in the armor, the embryonic and waning forces, paradoxes of unintended consequences, the sense immured in the nonsense, and vice versa. It believes in securitythe nations physical security as much as its economic security. It does not consider security to be somebody
elses business. When it deplores conditions that are deplorable, it makes it plain, in substance and tone, that the critic shares membership with the criticized. It acknowledgesand wrestles withthe dualities of America: the liberty and arrogance twinned, the bullying and tolerance, myopia and energy, standardization and variety, ignorance and inventiveness, the awful dark heart of darkness and the self-reforming zeal. It does not labor under the illusion that the world would be benign but for U.S. power or that capitalism is uniformly the most damaging economic system ever. It lives inside, with an indignation born of family feeling. Its anger is intimate.

The technology of the affirmative can operate in unison with the alternative. As long as we can see technology as a tool, we can avoid ontological damnation. Cario 9 [Jovito, Mentor College of Architecture University of Santo Tomas. Philippiniana Sacra Vol. 44 Issue 132, p491-504, 14p, Heidegger and the Danger of Modern Technology, 2009, SM, accessed: 6/29/11]
The benefits of modern technology can never be overstated and Heidegger himself is not discounting them. The surest way to miss the point of Heidegger is to consider him as anti-technology. Heidegger does 40 Huxley, Aldous.
Brave New World. London: Vintage, 2004, pp. 211-212. 41 TCT, Ibid., p. 27. 42 Ibid., p. 28. 502 JOVITO V. CARIOPHILIPPINIANA SACRA, Vol. XLIV, No. 132 (September-December, 2009) not oppose technology and certainly he does not propose that we slip back to the primitive ways of the Neanderthal age. He himself stated that technology is not the danger and that there is no demonry in technology. 43 As a thinker, Heideggers main concern is to bring to fore, or better yet, to challenge, to subject to question modern mans seeming forgetfulness in the face of the danger posed by modern technology. For as long as man withholds his attention from what Heidegger describes as the inconspicuous state of affairs; 44 for as long as we consider technology as something neutral,

then the essence of technology and its danger shall remain unknown to us.

Permutation: Do the alternative in every other instance. Establishing a pragmatic relationship with technological advances confers the benefits of ontological thought upon the plan and solves the kritik. Margolis 6 (Joseph, Pragmatisms Advantage 2006, Temple University http://www.arsdisputandi.org/index.html?
http://www.arsdisputandi.org/publish/articles/000126/index.html) It was, of course, originally a parochial success, though it did gain adherents abroad; and it began to attract a wider Eurocentric interest in its short second life, despite a distinctly poor showing at home. We may even speculate about a third career. For pragmatism has begun, possibly for the first time in its history, to be seriously treated as a distinct alternative to possibly more than an alternative, perhaps a connective tissue spanning the great divide between analytic and continental philosophy. At any rate, it now counts

as a distinctly strong constellation of doctrines and strategies potentially capable of contesting the hegemonies of the daywithin both the English-language analytic movement of the last half of the twentieth century and the trailing forces of the Cartesian, Kantian, Husserlian, and Heideggerean movements of late continental Europe. It would not be
unreasonable to say that pragmatisms promise at the present time is a function of the fatigue of its principal competitors and of the economy and fluency with which it can coopt the principal strengths that remain attractive among the many movements of Eurocentric philosophy, without betraying its own conviction. Rightly perceived, pragmatisms best feature lies with its post-Kantian ancestry coupled with its opposition to the extreme forms of analytic scientism with which it has shared a gathering sense of conceptual rigor. It forms, for that reason, a natural bridge between analytic and continental philosophy, for rigor is not inherently scientistic. In my opinion, none of the three movements mentioned (hardly unified within themselves) is separately likely to overtake its own limitations or incorporate the best work of the others in a compelling way. Still, within its own conceptual space, pragmatism favors a constructive realism drawn in as spare a way as possible from post-Kantian

resources, freed from every form of cognitive, rational, and practical privilege, opposed to imagined necessities de re and de cogitatione, committed to the continuities of animal nature and human culture, confined to the existential and historical contingencies of the human condition, and open in principle to plural, partial, perspectived, provisional, even non-converging ways of understanding what may be judged valid in any and every sort of factual and normative regard. There may well be a touch of reportorial distortion in going beyond these clichs; but, risking that, it would not be
unreasonable to say that pragmatists believe that the analysts are likely to favor scientism and the continentals, to exceed the bounds of naturalism, and that both tendencies are more extreme or extravagant than their policies require. In this fairly direct sense, pragmatisms strength lies in the possibility of a rapprochement by way of the corrections mentioned. It could never have claimed such an advantage earlier, had not the main efforts of analytic and continental philosophy perseverated too long in their obviously vulnerable commitments. Pragmatism has persevered as well, of course, but it seems poised now for a larger venture

Reject this to prevent human extinction.

Faye 9 Emmanuel Faye, Associate Professor at the University Paris OuestNanterre La Dfense, translated
into English by Michael B. Smith, Professor Emeritus of French and Philosophy at Berry College and translator of numerous philosophical works into English, 2009 (Conclusion, Heidegger, the introduction of Nazism into philosophy in light of the unpublished seminars of 1933-1935, Published by Yale University Press, ISBN 0300120869, p. 322) The vlkisch and fundamentally racist principles Heidegger's Gesamtausgabe transmits strive toward the goal of the eradication of all the intellectual and human progress to which philosophy has contributed. They

are therefore as destructive and dangerous to current thought as the Nazi movement was to the physical existence of the exterminated peoples. Indeed, what can be the result of granting a future to a doctrine whose author desired to become the "spiritual Fuhrer" of Nazism, other than to pave the way to the same perdition? In that respect, we now know that Martin Heidegger, in his unpublished seminar on Hegel and the state, meant to make the Nazi domination last beyond the next hundred years. If his writings continue to proliferate without our being able to stop this intrusion of Nazism into human education, how can we not expect them to lead to yet another translation into facts and acts, from which this time humanity might not be able to recover? Today more than ever, it is philosophy's task to work to protect humanity and alert men's minds; failing this, Hitlerism and Nazism will continue to germinate through Heidegger's writings at the risk of spawning new attempts at the complete destruction of thought and the extermination of humankind.

Turn in the affs case, technology is a prerequisite to any meaningful relationship with the Earth; solving warming lets us escape cycles of environmental disruption and return to the natural state of humans existence.
The alternative fails attempts to rethink phenomenology collapse into limited anthropological analysis. Bartok 84 (Philip J. Dept of Phil U of Notre Dame FOUCAULTS ANALYTIC OF FINITUDE AND THE DEATH OF
PHENOMENOLOGY) TBC 7/8/10
In support of Foucaults argument it should be noted that Husserl readily admits that in

its attempt to move beyond the empirical to the transcendental, transcendental phenomenology does not leave behind the horizon of empirical contents, but merely wins for the data in this horizon a transcendental rather than an empirical significance. From its starting point in the natural attitude, the transcendental phenomenological reduction merely effects a readjustment of viewpoint, one which
preserves a thoroughgoing parallelism between a phenomenological psychology and a transcendental phenomenology: [T]o each eidetic or empirical determination on the one side there must correspond a parallel feature on the other.15 But for Husserl, the full sense of the transcendental is achieved only through the application of both transcendental phenomenological and eidetic reductions, that is, in the in the discovery of the essential features of pure conscious experience.16 The eidetic reduction too departs from the empirical, taking a fact, whether in the natural attitude or in transcendentally purified consciousness, as the starting point for systematic variation in pure fantasy.17 Taken together, the transcendental phenomenological and eidetic 7 reductions lead the phenomenologist from the empirical starting point of the natural attitude to a description of the essences of pure conscious experience. Against this attempt to move from the empirical to the transcendental Foucault suggests that, [i]t is probably impossible to give empirical contents transcendental value, or to displace them in the direction of a constituent subjectivity, without giving rise, at least silently to an anthropology - that is, to a mode of thought in which the rightful limitations of acquired knowledge . . . are at the same time the concrete forms of existence, precisely as they are given in that same empirical knowledge.18

Gender K 225
Rejecting the aff reinforces static IR boundaries and prevents academic possibilities for feminist advancement. Vote aff to embrace an ethic of both and strategically combine the affs policy goals with the feminist understanding of security. Shepherd 2007 [Laura J., Department of Political Science and International Studies, University of Birmingham, Victims, Perpetrators and
Actors Revisited:1 Exploring the Potential for a Feminist Reconceptualisation of (International) Security and (Gender) Violence, BJPIR: 2007 VOL 9, 239256] This adherence is evidenced in the desire to fix the meaning of concepts in ways that are not challenging to the current configuration of social/political order and subjectivity, and is product/productive of the exclusionary presuppositions and foundations that shore up discursive practices insofar as those foreclose the heterogeneity, gender, class or race of the subject (Hanssen 2000, 215). However, the terms used to

describe political action and plan future policy could be otherwise imagined. They could remain that which is, in the present, never fully owned, but always and only redeployed, twisted, queered from prior usage and in the direction of urgent and expanding political purposes (Butler 1993, 228). The concepts both produced by and productive of policy could reflect an aversion to essentialism, while recognising that strategic gains can be made through the temporary binding of identities to bodies and constraining of authority within the confines of the territorial state. This is, in short, an appeal to a politics of both/and rather than either/or. Both the state (produced through representations of security and violence) and the subject (produced through representations of gender and violence) rely on a logic of sovereignty and ontological cohesion that must be problematised if alternative visions of authority and subjectivity are to become imaginable. International Relations as a discipline could seek to embrace the investigation of the multiple modalities of power, from the economic to the bureaucratic, from neo- liberal capitalism to the juridical. Rather than defending the sovereign boundaries of the discipline from the unruly outside constituted by critical studies of development, political structures, economy and law, not to mention the analysis of social/ political phenomena like those undertaken by always-already interdisciplinary feminist scholarship, IR could refuse to fix its own boundaries, and refuse to exercise sovereign power, in terms of authority, over the meanings of its objects of analysis. Future research on global politics could look very different if it were not for the

inscription of ultimately arbitrary disciplinary borderlines that function to constrain rather than facilitate understanding. It may seem that there is a tension between espousing a feminist poststructural politics and undertaking research that seeks to

detail, through deconstruction, the ways in which particular discourses have failed to manifest the reforms needed to address security and violence in the context of gendered subjectivity and the constitution of political community. In keeping with the ontological position I hold, I argue that there is nothing inherent in the concepts of (international) security and (gender) violence that necessitated their being made meaningful in the way they have been. Those working on policy and advocacy in the area of security and violence can use the

reconceptualisation I offer to enable people to imagine how their being-in-the-world is not only changeable, but perhaps, ought to be changed (Milliken 1999, 244). War is the root cause of patriarchal domination and call for womens rights is used by the right to justify military intervention Prefer our impacts AFP 04 (Agence France Presse, December 10, 2004, http://www.worldrevolution.org/news/article1702.htm) Raped, treated as the sexual 'booty' of war or slain by indiscriminate bombings, women are too often the first victims of conflict,
Amnesty International charged Wednesday in a report demanding legal redress. The London-based human rights group called for action by the International Criminal Court to halt oppressive violence against women. "Patterns of violence against women in conflict do not arise 'naturally' but are ordered, condoned or tolerated as a result of political calculations," its secretary general Irene Khan said in introducing the 120-page report on women in war. Not only are women "considered as the legitimate booty of victorious army," the report said, but "the use of rape as a weapon of war is perhaps the most notorious and brutal way in which conflicts impact on women." "Women's bodies, their sexuality and reproductive capacity are often used as a literal battleground," it said. Khan, the first women, the first Asian and the first Muslim to head Amnesty International, told AFP in an interview that "it's quite interesting to see that women rights have been used as justification for military intervention, in the cases of both Iraq (news - web sites) and Afghanistan (news - web sites)." But, she added, "on the ground the situation changes very little in favor of women ... In the case of Afghanistan we have seen no improvement. "Warlords are occupying parts of the territory and see women as commodities for trading, to settle land dispute. Abductions and forced marriages are about as bad, if not worse, than at any time in Afghan history. "Warlords are not being pulled out, they're not being prosecuted, they're not being investigated for the crimes that are openly committing." Even where women are not deliberately targetted, they are the main victims of so-called collatoral damage, whether caused by "precision" bombing or landmines, the report said. "In Iraq in 2003, US forces reportedly used more than 10,500 cluster munitions containing at least 1.8 million bomblets. An average failure rate of five percent would mean that about 90,000 unexploded munitions are now on Iraqi soil." The report urged the International Criminal Court to "pick up and prosecute one or two high-profile cases because that will send the message that violence against women cannot continue in such an impunity, which is the norm today." The court, headquartered in The Hague (news - web sites), began operating in July 2002 and is mandated to try genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Kahn acknowledged the way ahead would be tough, but said she hoped the report would generate pressure for change. Women and children make up 80 percent of the world's 40 million refugees, but they have no voice, and injustices go unpunished," she added. "If you take the example of the Korean women, the comfort women in Japan,

who were used as sex slaves during the second world war, even now they're still battling for the recognition of their case," Khan said. The report detailed widespread rape in conflicts around the world, including the Darfur region of Sudan, Colombia, Nepal, Chechnya (news - web sites), India and, earlier this year, in the tiny Pacific territory of the Solomon Islands. Tens
of thousands of women and young girls were raped during the conflicts sweeping the Democratic Republic of Congo (news - web sites). "Ten years on from the genocide in Rwanda, where violence against women was a central element of the strategy to eliminate a particular ethnic group, little or nothing seems to have been learned about how to prevent such horrors," the report said.

Critiques of heteronormativity and queerness re-entrench existing subject identity roles and manifest the harmful aspects of capitalism

McNamara in 2000 (Liam, Review: The Political economy of Sex,

http://culturemachine.tees.ac.uk/Reviews/rev11.htm)
In Chapter Three, Hennessey attacks the current reigning ideology of neoliberalism, which involves

an increasing drive for profits, globalization, and a general cultural turn in theory, leading to the assimilation of critical theory by the academy. This has lead to the abandonment of Marxism and its substitution by cultural materialism. Hennessey tries to turn the argument back to theories of exploitation, ultimately rejecting overdetermination in favour of commodity fetishism. She explicitly links heteronormativity to the emergence of the commodity form, since it is the division of labour that has allowed the formation of new sexual subjectivities in the consumer society. This liberation of productive forces has enabled the emergence of new desiring subjects that escape the heterosexual norm, but this development is underpinned by a new patriarchal hierarchy ushering in a renascent form of heteronormativity. Hennessey points out how in the nineteenth century sexology and psychoanalytic discourses
allowed for new divergent sexual identities that were swiftly reterritorialized under the perversions. Heteronormative paradigms have gone on to manage desire by restricting queer desire to the perversions. Basically Hennessey is trying to historicize Cixous ideas of a patriarchal binary logic and the persistence of gendered active/passive roles of sexuality.6 Hennessey links sexual liberation to economic imperatives and the division of labour in addition to the conventional cultural explanations, and suggests that desire has been managed and moved away from procreative norms due to the demands of the new productive forces found in mass consumption. Hennesseys stance shows a critical understanding of sexual liberation, by the introduction of the theory of class. Hennessey points out: capitalism does

not require heteronormative families or even a gendered division of labour. What it does require is an unequal division of labour (P&P, 105). Some gay men have adopted the ideology of the family, but this ideology is generally compulsory for the disadvantaged. At bottom, what is needed is commodity exchange and surplus value for the few not many. Capitalism still relies on heterosexuality for the poor, and the new non-normative forms of sexuality are generally reserved for

the affluent consumer subjectivities. These emergent postmodern sexualities are compatible with the new liquescent forms of the commodity, possessing a fluidity that has an affinity with the new consumer ethos.

Alt cant solve- altering masculine and feminine roles wont change anything- ideas, especially IR, cant be gendered Lind 05 (Michael Lind is Policy Director of the Economic Growth Program at the New America Foundation. He is executive editor of The National Interest. The Morning After: Sexual Politics at the End of the Cold War January 20 http://feminism.eserver.org/ofarms-and-the-woman.txt) AK This recurrent focus on little sisterhoods, mobilizing against "gendered" nation-states, multinational capitalism and racial and religious prejudice, owes a lot to the Marxist dream of a transnational fraternity of workers (in a new form, as a transnational sorority of feminists) and even more to the hope of early twentieth-century peace crusaders such as Jane Addams that the women of the world can unite and put an end to war and exploitation. Enloe tries to justify the attention paid to quite different groups of women in various countries with the claim that "no national movement can be militarized"--or demilitarized?--"without changing the ways in which femininity and masculinity infuse daily life." Even if "militarization," however defined, does result in certain kinds of gender relations, it does not follow that altering masculine and feminine roles will, in itself, do much to reverse the process. Something may, after all, be an effect without being a cause. Rejecting the feminist approach to international relations does not mean rejecting the subjects or the political values of feminist scholars. Differing notions of masculinity and femininity in different societies, the treatment of women and homosexuals of both sexes in the armed forces, the exploitation of prostitutes by American soldiers deployed abroad, the sexual division of labor both in advanced and developing countries: all of these are important topics that deserve the attention that Enloe awards them. She shows journalistic flair as well as scholarly insight in detailing what abstractions like the Caribbean Basin Initiative mean in the lives of women in particular Third World countries. Still, such case studies, however interesting, do not support the claim of feminist international relations theorists that theirs is a new and superior approach. One thing should be clear: commitment to a feminist political agenda need not entail commitment to a radical epistemological agenda. Ideas do not have genders, just as they do not have races or classes. In a century in which physics has been denounced as "Jewish" and biology denounced as "bourgeois," it should be embarrassing to denounce the study of international relations as "masculinist." Such a denunciation, of course, will not have serious consequences in politics, but it does violence to the life of the mind. The feminist enemies of empiricism would be well-advised to heed their own counsel and study war no more.

c/a anti-politics c/a framework

Deploy PIC 145

No solvency: Use the word 'employ' when describing something being put into service and deploy when something is placed into a position so that it can be used from their Stanley ev. Our solvency evidence says we must put a co into position to do the plan Impact turn Anxiety key to deterring threats and the economy Science Daily 8 (da: 9-9-2011, dw: 4-5-2008,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080403104350.htm, lido)
ScienceDaily (Apr. 5, 2008) Anxiety gets a lot of bad press. Dwelling on the negative can lead to chronic stress and anxiety disorders and phobias, but evolutionarily speaking, anxiety holds some functional value. In humans, learning to avoid harm is

necessary not only for surviving in the face of basic threats (such as predators or rotten food), but also for avoiding more complex social or economic threats (such as enemies or questionable investments). A team of psychologists at Stanford University have identified a region of the brain, the anterior insula, which plays a key role in predicting harm and also learning to avoid it. In a new study, Gregory Samanez-Larkin and colleagues scanned the brains of healthy adults while they anticipated losing money. Adults with greater activation of their insula while anticipating a financial loss were better at learning to avoid financial losses in a separate game several months later. Conversely, participants with low levels of insula activation had a harder time learning to avoid losses and lost more money in the game as a result. For these subjects, higher levels of insula activation helped them to learn to avoid losses months later. However, researchers have found that excessive insula activation might prove
problematic. Previous research has shown that people who are chronically fearful and anxious have abnormal patterns of insula activation. So, while people with excessive insula activity are at risk for psychological disorders like anxiety and phobias, higher levels of insula activation in the normal range may allow people to avoid potentially harmful situations. The findings, which appear in the April issue of Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, point toward an optimal level of anxiety. While a healthy amount of anxiety grants some survival value, too much may lead to excessive worry and clinical conditions. This may help to explain why anxious traits persist in humanity's genetic endowment, even as environmental threats vary over the ages.

They have no terminal impact to anxiety vote aff on presumption Their Stanley evidence says nothing about weapons Not functionally competitive-does the same thing as the aff I apologize for saying Deploy. Apologies solve, thats from The PIC

India CP 222
They have no net benefit to this CP, means you vote aff on presumption because there is no preferable reason to do the plan. If they make one in the block, we get new 1ar answers. Perm-do both CP causes war with china Bidwai 07 [Praful, July, Ties With China Sour as Alliance With US Grows, Transnational News, last accessed
6/30/11, http://www.tni.org//archives/act/17111] TD NEW DELHI, Jul 6 (IPS) - Indian decision-makers are coming under growing pressure to narrow their foreign policy options as New Delhi deepens its "strategic partnership" with Washington. Of particular importance here are Indias complex relations with its giant neighbour, China. Days before the United States sent its aircraft carrier USS Nimitz to southern Chennai port on a high-profile controversial visit meant to underline its strategic proximity with India, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice taunted India on its long-standing policy of non-alignment. Rice told a meeting of the U.S.-India Business Council in Washington: Non-alignment may have "made sense during the Cold War when the world really was divided into rival camps", but has now "lost its meaning"; the time has come for India to "move past old ways of thinking". "Underlying the message was a broader hint", says Srikanth Kondapalli, from the Centre for East Asian Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University. "The hint is that India must pursue the logic of its growing strategic closeness with the U.S. and severely reorder its entire general foreign policy orientation in line with Washingtons priorities." "Rices speech was an attempt to ideologically wean India away from China and their combined past of Afro-Asian solidarity. Coupled with recent U.S. actions, it could drive a wedge in SinoIndian relations, Kondapalli said. Indias foreign ministry reacted to Rices statement by asserting that as a founding member of the Non-Aligned Movement, India is still committed to it; non-alignment remains relevant "in promoting South-South cooperation and the democratisation of the international system." However, the deeper implications of Rices statement were not lost on New Delhi as it struggles to manage its relationship with China, which is souring thanks to Indias growing proximity with the U.S. "In recent years, China has felt increasingly upset at Indias growing closeness to the U.S. and its staunchest Asia-Oceanic allies, Japan and Australia", says Kondapalli. "This resentment, coupled with certain domestic factors, have taken the form of Beijing laying a claim to Arunachal Pradesh, an Indian state bordering Tibet, with an area of 84,000 sq km." The most dramatic recent consequence of this assertion was the cancellation of a confidence-building visit to China by Indian civil servants undergoing a training programme. Beijing refused to issue a visa to one of the 107 members of the group because he is from Arunachal, which Beijing says belongs to China. Although this crisis was relatively minor, it revived tensions between India and China over their rival territorial claims, which were thought to have been on the way to a settlement after a quarter-century of talks. India and China fought a war in 1962 over claims on Arunachal Pradesh in Indias northeast, and Aksai Chin, a high-altitude desert near Jammu and Kashmir. The war resulted in a humiliating defeat for India, which is still recalled with rancour. But relations have since improved. The two governments signed a number of agreements in the 1990s, including one on peace and tranquillity along the border and on demilitarisation of parts of it. In 2005, they also agreed to "guiding principles" for a border settlement. India-China trade has grown at an impressive annual rate of 45 percent since 2000 and clocked 26 billion US dollars last year. "However, there is a growing danger that these recent gains will be undone", says Achin Vanaik, professor of international relations and global politics at Delhi University. "That will be a huge setback and raise the price that India pays for courting the U.S.

Perm do the CP. Normal means is that we will share info with other countries even if the SSP is strictly a US project

Flournoy 10 [Don, professor and editor of the Online Journal of Space Communication (www.spacejournal.org)
at Ohio University, September 13, Why Not Space Solar Power?, Space News, last accessed 6/28/11, http://spacenews.com/commentaries/100913why-not-space-solar-power.html] TD The 2010 U.S. National Space Policy, which supports a robust and competitive commercial space sector, is good news for those of us working to design and launch the new types of satellites that will collect solar energy in space and deliver it to Earth as a nonpolluting source of electrical power. Among the goals of President Barack Obamas National Space Policy is expansion of international cooperation on mutually beneficial space activities to broaden and extend the benefits of space and further the peaceful use of space. As members of the National Space Society, the Society of Satellite Professionals International and the Space Energy Group, we believe space, as a shared resource, can best be explored and developed by a partnership of nations and businesses working together. Since acquiring clean and abundant energy is a common requirement for economic growth and an eventual necessity for the health of all societies, harvesting space solar power is a logical human endeavor when the high frontier is precisely where energy is most plentiful. But achieving success doing large-scale commercial innovation in outer space requires long-range planning, pooling of financial resources, sharing of knowledge and expertise, and the careful framing of a way forward that will earn and sustain the public trust.

Not textually competitive-has all words of the plan in the CP text India will never cooperate with the US self-interest Twining 10 [Dan, a senior fellow for Asia at the German Marshall Fund, November 12, Are U.S.-India relations
oversold?, Foreign Policy, last accessed 6/29/11, http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/11/12/are_us_india_relations_oversold] TD In brief, Perkovich argues for a more "realistic" Indo-U.S. relationship that treats India in many ways as the impoverished, non-aligned, defensive, and even hostile country it once was. India does not want to be an Asian balancer, the report maintains; alleged U.S. efforts to maneuver India into position as a counterweight to China will only create discord between Asia's giants and upset China's peaceful rise. Indian and U.S. interests diverge on a host of important issues, from climate change to Iran. The best thing India can do for the world is not partner with the United States to fuel its rise and shape an international system tilted toward freedom, but instead to make its own economy an example for other developing powers. The United States' embrace of India is actually detrimental (for instance, by alienating China and Pakistan, or by upending the established global nuclear order) or only marginally useful. By this logic, both countries therefore should scale back their visions for global partnership, and Washington should invest more in relations with Beijing and other emerging powers rather than lavish such policy attention on India. At the end of the day, India will set its own course, often in ways that do not align with U.S. interests -- and Americans will need to live with that.

Plan would trigger the Indo-Pak conflict impact better-Pakistan would see the US helping India as a threat to their power.