Gop will pick up seats now but won’t achieve a filibuster proof majority – increasing Trump’s approval rating flips it

1NC T Curriculum Only

Education refers to only curriculum

[3] Michael Naish (1984, 151) argues that ‘education’ is a legitimatizing word: "the teaching of a particular subject or range of topics may be the more legitimated the more widely it is believed to fall under that term [i.e. education]". This is exactly what I mean with the manifesto-like character of the word ‘education’: it is not just a name, it is an ultimately concentrated piece of information. [4] Actually, the same idea can be found in Frankena (1973, 73), when he writes that education must foster disposition and use methods "that are desirable and morally unobjectionable, or at least regarded as such, otherwise it is not education" (emphasis mine). - Obviously this notion should lead to a conclusion that the characteristics of the phenomenon of ‘education’ have to be sought from the name-giving process, not from the things that are named as education. [5] Frankena (1973, 75) writes that Plato, Kant, Dewey or Chinese ---"all mean by ‘education’ (or its equivalents in their languages) the same thing, i.e. a process, involving an educator and an educated, of forming ’desirable dispositions by desirable methods’" (emphasis mine).

Violation – the plan increases regulation and/or funding of issues separate of curriculum.

Vote negative to protect limits – their interpretation of the resolution allows for increase funding for football fields, reform school lunches, create longer school days, or buy new desks.

Militarism Advantage

1. Stopping military recruitment in high school doesn’t translate into stopping Western imperialism across the globe—that’s an independent root cause of the War on Terror.

Giroux and Brad 16 (Henry Giroux, English and Cultural Studies at McMaster University, and Brad Evans, Sociology, Politics and International Studies at University of Bristol, 3-9-2016, “Imagination warfare: targeting youths on the everyday battlefields of the 21st century,” Social Identities, accessed 7-19-2017)
Western powers cannot allow the fog of violence to cover over the bankruptcy of a militaristic response to an act of indiscriminate violence. Such militaristic responses function largely to govern the effects of acts of terror by ISIS while ignoring its wider systemic dimensions. Dealing with the violence of ISIS requires political contextualization and serious engagement. However abhorrent we might find their actions, it is patently absurd for any leader involved with the ongoing acts of violence constantly recorded and made available on the internet not to recognize that one strategic assault posed by ISIS is to deploy the production values and aesthetics of entertainment used in Hollywood films and video games to project images of subjugation and power like those produced by US military media operations in Guatánamo Bay at the outset of the terror wars. John Pilger ventures to take this a step further by noting the historical parallels with the Khmer Rouge, which terrorized Cambodia. As Pilger writes, this movement was the direct outcome of a US bombing campaign: The Americans dropped the equivalent of five Hiroshimas on rural Cambodia during 1969–73. They levelled village after village, returning to bomb the rubble and corpses. The craters left monstrous necklaces of carnage, still visible from the air. The terror was unimaginable. (Pilger, 2015) The outcome was the emergence of a group largely made up of radical young men, driven by a dystopian ideology, all dressed in black, sweeping the country in the most violent and terrifying of ways. The historical comparison is all too apparent: ‘ISIS has a similar past and present. By most scholarly measures, Bush and Blair’s invasion of Iraq in 2003 led to the deaths of some 700,000 people – in a country that had no history of jihadism.’ If a nation continually bombs a people, invades and occupies their land, appropriates their resources, harms their children, imprisons and humiliates their families, and tears apart the fabric of the social order, there is direct responsibility for the inevitable backlash to follow. It actually produces the very conditions in which violence continues to thrive. The rush to violence kills more innocent people, is strategically useful only as a recruiting tool for extremists, and further emboldens those who thrive on a culture of fear, and benefit from creating a surveillance state, a lock-down society, and a violently determined order based on the principles of limitless control, managed forms of social and political exclusion, and privilege – including the privilege to destroy. But the rush to violence does more than perpetuate a war on youth; it also eliminates what might be called a politics of memory, the legacy of an insurrectional democracy, and in doing so furthers the registers of the militaristic state. The call for lethal violence in the face of the murderous attacks in Paris eviscerates from collective consciousness the mistakes made by President Bush who declared ‘a war on terror’ after 9/11, a statement that led us to the USA PATRIOT Act, the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and Guantánamo (Kaldor, 2015). The consequences of that rush to judgment and war are difficult to fathom. As Bret Weinstein observes, Bush responded in a way that fed right into the perpetrators’ playbook: The 9/11 attack was symbolic . . . It was designed to provoke a reaction. The reaction cost more than 6,000 American lives in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and more than $3 trillion in U.S. treasure. The reaction also caused the United States to cripple its own Constitution and radicalize the Muslim world with a reign of terror that has killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghani civilians. (Weinstein, 2015) How different might our futures look now had an alternative response been sought at that particular moment? Continuing the cycle of violence and revenge, the response ramped up the violence and derided anybody who called for ‘addressing some of the social, cultural, and economic problems that create a context for extremism’ (Kaldor, 2015). The Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, the failure of the US war in Vietnam, the failure of the Western invasion of Iraq, and the futility of the military attacks on Libya and Syria all testify to the failure of wars waged against foreign populations, especially people in the Middle East. As Peter Van Buren dryly observes, We gave up many of our freedoms in America to defeat the terrorists. It did not work. We gave the lives of over 4,000 American men and women in Iraq, and thousands more in Afghanistan, to defeat the terrorists, and refuse to ask what they died for. We killed tens of thousands or more in those countries. It did not work. We went to war again in Iraq, and now in Syria, before in Libya, and only created more failed states and ungoverned spaces that provide havens for terrorists and spilled terror like dropped paint across borders. We harass and discriminate against our own Muslim populations and then stand slack-jawed as they become radicalized, and all we do then is blame ISIS for Tweeting. (Van Buren, 2015) The Wars on Terror and the ethos of militarism that has driven it into the normalized fabric of everyday politics is seen by many of its victims as an act of terrorism because of the dreadful toll it takes on non-combatants, and who can blame them? When Obama uses drone strikes to blow up hospitals, kill members of a wedding party, and slaughter innocent children, regardless of the humanitarian signatures, the violence becomes a major recruiting factor for ISIS and other groups. When the practice of moral witnessing disappears, along with the narratives of suffering on the part of the oppressed, politics withers, and the turn to violence and extremism gains ground, especially among impoverished youth. When the West forgets that as ‘UN data shows that Muslim avoidable deaths from deprivation in countries subject to Western military intervention in 2001–2015 now total about 27 million’ such actions further serve to both create more fear of the ‘Other’ and generate more resentment and hatred by those who are relegated to the shameless and ethically reprehensible status of collateral damage (Polya, 2015). The call for war eliminates historical and public memory. The pedagogical dimensions embedded in its practice of forgetting ensure that any intervention in the present will be limited by erasing any understanding of the past which might cultivate a renewed sense of political identification, social responsibility, and those forms of ethical and political commitments that bear on the immediacy of a world caught in the fog of war and the thoughtlessness of its conditioning. As such, those who forget the past ignore precisely the similarities mentioned above, whether we are discussing the Western actions that created Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge or the histories of violence that created the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (Pilger, 2015). Chris Floyd is right to remind us that without the American crime of aggressive war against Iraq – which, by the measurements used by Western governments themselves, left more than a million innocent people dead – there would be no ISIS, no ‘Al Qaeda in Iraq.’ Without the Saudi and Western funding and arming of an amalgam of extremist Sunni groups across the Middle East, used as proxies to strike at Iran and its allies, there would be no ISIS. Let’s go back further. Without the direct, extensive and deliberate creation by the United States and its Saudi ally of a world-wide movement of armed Sunni extremists during the Carter and Reagan administrations, there would have been no ‘War on Terror’ – and no terrorist attacks in Paris. (Floyd, 2015)

2. No enforcement mechanism – even if they remove the mandate of military recruitment, schools will still allow JROTC or unofficial military recruiters in.

3. It also won’t stop militaristic rhetoric and the characterization of the Other which fuels the war from home—demonstrated in Republican political rhetoric.

Giroux and Brad 16 (Henry Giroux, English and Cultural Studies at McMaster University, and Brad Evans, Sociology, Politics and International Studies at University of Bristol, 3-9-2016, “Imagination warfare: targeting youths on the everyday battlefields of the 21st century,” Social Identities, accessed 7-19-2017)

The return to such fascistic language is also evident in the various ways in which the discourse of bigotry and xenophobia has become a major and manipulative tool of politicians in the United States. It empties politics of any viable meaning, substituting an anti-politics that feeds on fear and mobilizes a racist discourse and culture of cruelty. The Republican Party’s leading presidential candidates have resorted to racist and politically reactionary comments in the aftermath of the Paris killings that would seem unthinkable in a country that calls itself a democracy. When asked about Syrian refugees, Ben Carson referred to them as ‘rabid dogs’ (Fahrenthold and DelReal, 2015). Donald Trump echoed the Nazi practice of registering Jews and forcing them to wear a yellow star when he stated that, if elected president, he would force all Muslims living in the United States ‘to register their personal information in a federal database’ (Jimenez, 2015). He also called for shutting down mosques in the United States. Marc Rubio, another leading president candidate, went even further arguing that he would not only shut down mosques but would shut down ‘any place where radical Muslims congregate, whether it be a café, a diner, and internet site – any place where radicals are being inspired’ (Steiger, 2015). Carson and Rubio have also called for policies that would eliminate abortions, even for women whose lives are at risk or who have been raped (Lund, 2015). The roots of antidemocratic practices reach, in this case, deeply into American society. Of course, all of these polices will do nothing more than legitimate and spread insidious acts of racism and xenophobia as an acceptable political discourse while normalizing the forces of oppression and violence. How else to explain the rabid racism expressed by Elain Morgan, a state senator in Rhode Island in which she stated in an email that ‘The Muslim religion and philosophy is to murder, rape, and decapitate anyone who is a non-Muslim’ (Yu-His Lee, 2015). There is more at stake here than Islamophobia, there is also the call for policies that make recruiting young people easier for ISIS and other extremist groups. As Peter Bouckaert, Human Rights Watch’s emergencies director, points out: Every Syrian refugee who reaches the United States has gone through four levels of security review. These are the most carefully screened refugees anywhere in the world. And there have been no incidents with the hundreds of thousands of refugees that the U.S. has taken in over the years. The United States’ values are built on being welcoming to refugees. And our most powerful tool in the war against Islamic extremism, are our values. It’s not our military planes and our bombs. The only way we can fight against this brutality, this barbarism, is with our values. And if we’re going to shut the door on these refugees, we’re giving a propaganda victory to ISIS . . . because they would love it if we shut the door on the people who are fleeing their so-called Islamic caliphate. (cited in Goodman, 2015)

4. Doesn’t resolve other militaristic school policies such as the curriculum, zero-tolerance policies, and surveillance cameras

Nguyen 14 (Nicole Nguyen, Syracuse University, Cultural Foundations of Education, January 21st, “Education as Warfare?: Mapping Securitised Education Interventions as War on Terror Strategy”)
US PUBLIC EDUCATION AND NATIONAL IN/SECURITY Since September 11, the US has renewed its focus on domestic education as a critical component of protecting national and economic security. This focus includes shifting instruction and curricula toward preparing students for the military and security industry, infusing ideas of security and safety into school culture, militarising school space through the implementation of techniques like zero tolerance policies and surveillance cameras, and teaching students these dominant representations of the brown Other. In this articulation of the role of schools, fighting the war on terror begins at home in our public schools, which conscript students into the war effort by educating them for war and perpetuating fear and anxiety. Such measures are not new in the post-9/11 US security state. Jackson reminds us that “educational policies in the United States have been integrally related to social and economic policies, with domestic and foreign interests linked inextricably.”112 Following Sputnik, “there was a massive infusion of money to enhance the curriculum of high schools, with a greater emphasis on math and the sciences as well as foreign language instruction” in order to globally compete economically and militarily.113 Means offers that “connections between public education, crisis, and national security are nothing new in the United States. Cold War anxieties and concerns over national security provided inspiration for Dwight Eisenhower’s National Education Defense Act (NDEA) in 1958 ...”114 Three years later the Fulbright-Hays Act of 1961 promised to bolster language and area studies expertise of American students and faculty and to “increase understanding and mutual cooperation between the people of the United States and the people of other countries” and to “strengthen the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of the people of the United States and other nations” in order to “assist inthe development of friendly, sympathetic, and peaceful relations between the United States and the other countries of the world.”115 In other words, by sending US educators abroad, Fulbright-Hays operated as both a diplomacy project and an effort in spreading American ideals, values, market economy and epistemologies. David Austell, while supporting this assertion, argues that these education initiatives work more insidiously in relation to the US war agenda: “International education in the United States has its roots firmly planted in views of homeland security stemming from the Cold War, and its role and effectiveness as a foil to a purely militaristic foreign policy has changed very little in the intervening sixty years.”116 Further, Webber, in tracing the genealogy of the use of US domestic public education as a means to warehouse and re-socialise immigrants, argues that “the democratic school [in the US] has always been as instrument of the security state. This is by no means a new idea, pace 9/11 ... . Schools have always been a hegemonic tool of the security state as ‘schooling’ by which Ivan Illich understood it to be a process of training people to believe in the legitimacy of the state’s orders.”117 The late nineteenth-century warehousing of Native Americans in white boarding schools in the United States also served to assimilate populations wholesale to defuse the threat they putatively posed. In present day,such historical efforts anesthetise contemporary educational projects abroad as purely apolitical aid, and provide the humanitarian veneer necessary to continue such efforts. Following this history, recent domestic school reforms rely on fear and insecurity to justify and legitimise reforms that situate schools squarely in line with the war agenda. Former Chancellor of New York City’s Department of Education Joel Klein and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice explain in their 2012 U.S. Education Reform and National Security commissioned report that “far too many U.S. schools are failing to teach students the academic skills ... they need to succeed” and, as such, “... America’s failure to educate is affecting national security.”118 The Report specifically calls for a focus on job training in math and science – human capital development – in order to continue to protect and defend the US homeland and economy. This follows The U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century report (Phase III: Roadmap for National Security: Imperative for Change, Journeys through the Teacher Pipeline addendum, 2001).119 This report names education as a “national security imperative” where “[US] education in science, mathematics, and engineering has special relevance for the future of U.S. national security, for America’s ability to lead ...”120 Such discourses around national and economic in/security, risk, and education do much work to continue to authorise and justify particular school reform efforts intended to train and recruit students for war and work in the multi-billion dollar security industry. Following this logic, schools are transformed from a “public good to a security risk.”121 Such preparation contributes to the war machine.122 Since the Cold War, the US has increasingly militarised schools, reflective of the larger push of militarisation – the privileging of the military and military logics in everyday day life – in the US. Militarising and securitizing education means that schools adopt harsh disciplinary policies, regulate student movement and mobility, and teach students to value and privilege military doctrine. While fear of nuclear warfare dotted US school curriculum and pedagogy during the Cold War, the global war on terrorism has continued to reshape US public education. Indeed, since the Cold War, US cities increasingly militarise, police, and fortify schools and children.1

5. NCLB revisions or new enactments cannot solve militarism perceptions—that’s their 1AC author

Furumoto, 7 (Rosa Furumoto is an assistant professor in the Chicana/o Studies Department at California State University, Northridge. She is an activist scholar that is involved in researching and addressing educational equity issues in Chicano/Latino and African American communities, 2-23-2007, No Poor Child Left Unrecruited: How NCLB Codifies and Perpetuates Urban School Militarism, Taylor & Francis, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10665680591002579)

The institutionalized racism and classism of U.S. schooling has historically benefited privileged students. Challenging this will require extensive organizing, education, and the involvement of all sectors of the U.S. public. In a strange way NCLB may provide the organizing focal point for unifying disparate elements of the U.S. public to come together and engage in a national conversation about the meaning of democratic schooling and about the hopes and dreams that we hold for our children and the future of this country. Fighting to enact new federal legislation or revise the current NCLB legislation is not enough. Engaging African American, Latino, and other marginalized communities in the debate, processes, and struggles around school reform is one of the critical ways not only to counter the negative policies in NCLB but to propose a new agenda and conceptual framework for public schooling.

6. Alt causes to Militarism within schools, High Stake Accountability Measures, Aff Cant Solve—that’s their 1AC author

Abajian 13 (Suzie Marie Abajian- Suzie Moses Abajian- Doctor of Philosophy in Education UCLA, FELLOWSHIPS: Project ADVANCE Fellowship, Graduate School of Education UCLA, Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowship in Arabic, Center for Near Eastern Studies UCLA, University Fellowship, Graduate School of Education UCLA, American Education Research Association- Reviewer Division G- Social Context of Education, “Drill and Ceremony: A Case Study of Militarism, Military Recruitment and the Pedagogy of Enforcement in an Urban School in Southern California “, http://escholarship.org/uc/item/3vg767qx#page-15//TB)

The high stakes accountability threats as well as the heightened “security” measures within Washington High School contributed to a climate of control, enforcement, disciplining and militarism. The heavy focus on student testing also contributed to the narrowing of the curriculum within a school that did not offer its students many enrichment activities and elective classes. Within this context the Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC) was one of the few well-resourced “fun” outlets for students within the school.

Directory: file -> view
view -> Western Europe after wwii
view -> Author study: paul fleischman
view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide
view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg
view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh
view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce
view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy
view -> Table of Contents Lesson #
view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad

Download 186.34 Kb.

Share with your friends: