Affirmative Evidence Packet
Download 0.65 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Disadvantage Overview 1/2
- Disadvantage Overview 2/2
Disadvantage OverviewRegardless of what disadvantage the negative runs in the debate, the following argument should help the affirmative frame the decision of the judge to emphasize the strength of the affirmative impact in contrast with the negative impact of the disadvantage. The overview seeks to compare the magnitude, risk and time-frame of the negative arguments with the magnitude, risk and time frame of the impacts the affirmative claims to solve. Disadvantage Overview 1/2The disadvantage is highly uncertain and cannot justify voting negative. 1. A number of arguments prove that the disadvantage impact is not unique and is inevitable whether or not you vote Affirmative. 2. The disadvantage also does not link to the affirmative, further proving that the affirmative does not increase the risk of the impact. 3. The affirmative also outweighs the negative two ways: A. Obesity. Over 100,000 people die each year. Unless you vote for the plan, you condemn one million people to die over the next ten years. The probability that you will cause a nuclear war is obscenely small compared to the certain death as a result of voting negative. B. Social Justice. Current transportation is a form of apartheid, excluding particular groups of society from full participation in society. Our continued acceptance of this racist governance condemns tens of millions to a new form of slavery that should outweigh the minimal risk of nuclear war. Giroux 6 (Henry, the Global TV Network Chair Professorship at McMaster University in the English and Cultural Studies Department, “Reading Hurricane Katrina: Race, Class, and the Biopolitics of Disposability,” College Literature, Vol. 33, No. 3) With the social state in retreat and the rapacious dynamics of neoliberalism, unchecked by government regulations, the public and private policies of investing in the public good are dismissed as bad business, just as the notion of protecting people from the dire misfortunes of poverty, sickness, or the random blows of fate is viewed as an act of bad faith. Weakness is now a sin, punishable by social exclusion. This is especially true for those racial groups and immigrant populations who have always been at risk economically and politically. Increasingly, such groups have become part of an evergrowing army of the impoverished and disenfranchised—removed from the prospect of a decent job, productive education, adequate health care, acceptable child care services, and satisfactory shelter. As the state is transformed into the primary agent of terror and corporate concerns displace democratic values, dominant “power is measured by the speed with which responsibilities can be escaped” (Qtd. in Fearn 2006, 30).With its pathological disdain for social values and public life and its celebration of an unbridled individualism and acquisitiveness, the Bush administration does more than undermine the nature of social obligation and civic responsibility; it also sends a message to those populations who are poor and black—society neither wants, cares about, or needs you (Bauman 1999, 68-69). Katrina revealed with startling and disturbing clarity who these individuals are: African- Americans who occupy the poorest sections of New Orleans, those ghettoized frontier-zones created by racism coupled with economic inequality. Cut out of any long term goals and a decent vision of the future, these are the populations, as Zygmunt Bauman points out, who have been rendered redundant and disposable in the age of neoliberal global capitalism. Katrina reveals that we are living in dark times.The shadow of authoritarianism remains after the storm clouds and hurricane winds have passed, offering a glimpse of its wreckage and terror. The politics of a disaster that affected Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi is about more than government incompetence, militarization, socio-economic polarization, environmental disaster, and political scandal. Hurricane Katrina broke through the visual blackout of poverty and the pernicious ideology of color-blindness to reveal the government’s role in fostering the dire conditions of largely poor African-Americans, who were bearing the hardships incurred by the full wrath of the indifference and violence at work in the racist, neoliberal state. Global neoliberalism and its victims now occupy a space shaped by authoritarian politics, the terrors inflicted by a police state, and a logic of disposability that removes them from government social provisions and the discourse and privileges of citizenship. One of the most obvious lessons of Katrina—that race and racism still matter in America—is fully operational through a biopolitics in which “sovereignty resides in the power and capacity to dictate who may live and who may die” (Mbembe 11-12).Those poor minorities of color and class, unable to contribute to the prevailing consumerist ethic, are vanishing into the sinkhole of poverty in desolate and abandoned enclaves of decaying cities, neighborhoods, and rural spaces, or in America’s ever-expanding prison empire. Under the Bush regime, a biopolitics driven by the waste machine of what Zygmunt Bauman defines as “liquid modernity” registers a new and brutal racism as part of the emergence of a contemporary and savage authoritarianism. Disadvantage Overview 2/24. Reject appeals to cold economic cost-benefit analysis – societal conditions are created by the decisionmaking processes we use in formulating policies – and utilitarian calculus eventually results in ignoring groups most affected by racism Wenz 1 (Peter S., Professor of Philosophy and Legal Studies at Sangamon State University and adjunct Professor of Medical Humanities at Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, , Faces of Environmental Racism: Confronting Issues of Global Justice (2nd ed.,), p. 63-67)
the two leading contenders at the moment, utilitarians announce the conclusions of their calculations without ever being able to show the calculation itself. When I was in school, math teachers suspected that students who could never show their work were copying answers from other students. I suspect similarly that utilitarians, whose “calculations” often support conclusions that others reach by recourse to principles of gratitude, retributive justice, commensuration between burdens and benefits, and so forth, reach conclusions on grounds of intuitions influenced predominantly by these very principles.
Some principles seem prima facie opposed to utilitarianism, such as the one prescribing special solicitude of parents for their own children. It would seem that in cold climates more good would be produced if people bought winter coats for needy children, instead of special dress coats and ski attire for their own children. But utilitarians defend the principle of special parental concern. They declare this principle consistent with utilitarianism by appeal to entirely untested, unsubstantiated assumptions about counterfactuals. It is a kind of “Just So” story that explains how good is maximized by adherence to current standards. There is no calculation at all. Another indication that utilitarians cannot perform the calculations they profess to rely upon concerns principles whose worth is in genuine dispute. Utilitarians offer no calculations that help to settle the matter. For example, many people wonder today whether or not patriotism is a worthy moral principle. Detailed utilitarian calculations play no part in the discussion. These are some of the reasons why utilitarianism provides no help to those deciding whether or not
Free Market Approach Toxic wastes, a burden, could be placed where residents accept them in return for monetary payment, a benefit. Since market transactions often satisfactorily commensurate burdens and benefits, this approach may seem to honor the principle of commensuration between burdens and benefits. Unlike many market transactions, however, whole communities, acting as corporate bodies, would have to contract with those seeking to bury wastes. Otherwise, any single individual in the community could veto the transaction, resulting in the impasse attending libertarian approaches.7 Communities could receive money to improve such public facilities as schools, parks, and hospitals, in addition to obtaining tax revenues and jobs that result ordinarily from business expansion.
Directory: wp-content -> uploads -> 2012 2012 -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It? 2012 -> Aa and na members Dying from Tobacco 2012 -> [Baby Crying] 01: 04 [Ching 2012 -> Unit Name / Nom de l’unité uic / ciu dates 2012 -> What We Owe Jehovah’s Witnesses 2012 -> Oceans Challenge Badge 2012 -> Canadian cycling olympians 2012 -> Greg landry, june olkowski and tom lysiak 2012 -> William goldman 2012 -> Does translocation and restocking confer any benefit to the European eel population? A review Download 0.65 Mb. Share with your friends:
|