Tournament: Ba-Lah-Kay | Round: 4 | Opponent: Minneapolis South OT | Judge: Kevin Hirn
1

The affirmative’s failure to advance a topical defense of federal policy undermines debate’s transformative and intellectual potential

1. “Resolved” means debate should be a legislative forum
   Army Officer School ‘4
   (5-12, “# 12, Punctuation – The Colon and Semicolon”, http://usawocc.army.mil/IMI/wg12.htm)
   The colon introduces the following: a. A list, but only after "
   AND
   resolved:"¶ Resolved: (colon) That this council petition the mayor.

2. The United States is the country composed of the 50 states
Encarta ‘7
The Encarta Online Dictionary. “United States” 2007 encarta.msn.com
U•nit•ed States  y? n?t?d stáyts  country in central North America, consisting of 50 states. Languages: English. Currency: dollar. Capital: Washington, D.C.. Population: 290,342,550 (2001). Area: 9,629,047 sq km (3,717,796 sq mi.) Official name United States of America

3. The federal government is the government in Washington DC – not its individual members
AHD ‘2
The American Heritage Dictionary. 2002, Pg 647GBS-JV
Of or relating to the central government of a federation as distinct from the governments of its member units.

4. “Should” means the debate is solely about a policy established by governmental means
Ericson ‘3
(Jon M., Dean Emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts – California Polytechnic U., et al., The Debater’s Guide, Third Edition, p. 4)
The Proposition of Policy: Urging Future Action In policy propositions, each topic contains
AND
compelling reasons for an audience to perform the future action that you propose.
First, a limited topic of discussion that provides for equitable ground is key to productive inculcation of decision-making and advocacy skills in every and all facets of life---even if their position is contestable that’s distinct from it being valuably debatable---this still provides room for flexibility, creativity, and innovation, but targets the discussion to avoid mere statements of fact
Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp45-
Debate is a means of settling differences, so there must be a difference of
AND
particular point of difference, which will be outlined in the following discussion.

Second, discussion of specific policy-questions is crucial for skills development---we control uniqueness: university students already have preconceived notions about how the world operates---government policy discussion is vital to force engagement with and resolution of competing perspectives to improve social outcomes, however those outcomes may be defined
Esberg and Sagan 12 *Jane Esberg is special assistant to the director at New York University's Center on. International Cooperation. She was the winner of 2009 Firestone Medal, AND Scott Sagan is a professor of political science and director of Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation “NEGOTIATING NONPROLIFERATION: Scholarship, Pedagogy, and Nuclear Weapons Policy,” 2/17 The Nonproliferation Review, 19:1, 95-108
These government or quasi-government think tank simulations often provide very similar lessons for
AND
quickly; simulations teach students how to contextualize and act on information.14

Third, switch-side is key---Effective deliberation is crucial to the activation of personal agency and is only possible in a switch-side debate format where debaters divorce themselves from ideology to engage in political contestation
Patricia Roberts-Miller 3 is Associate Professor of Rhetoric at the University of Texas "Fighting Without Hatred:Hannah Ar endt ' s Agonistic Rhetoric" JAC 22.2 2003
Totalitarianism and the Competitive Space of Agonism¶ Arendt is probably most famous for her
AND
not relativist, adversarial but not violent, independent but not expressivist rhetoric.

Effective decision-making outweighs---
Key to social improvements in every and all facets of life
Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp9-10
If we assume it to be possible without recourse to violence to reach agreement on
AND
in our intelligent self-interest to reach these decisions through reasoned debate.

And independently a voting issue for limits and ground---our entire negative strategy is based on the “should” question of the resolution---there are an infinite number of reasons that the scholarship of their advocacy could be a reason to vote affirmative--- these all obviate the only predictable strategies based on topical action---they overstretch our research burden and undermine preparedness for all debates

2

Their gesture of inclusion destroys the political by erasing the borders that sustain the friend-enemy distinction---inviting the enemy into an “inclusive” body politic relies on a false ontology of inherent human non-violence which masks and intensifies the drive to exclude
Rasch 5 – William Rasch, Professor of Germanic Studies at the University of Indiana, Spring 2005, “Lines in the Sand: Enmity as a Structuring Principle,” The South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol. 104, No. 2, p. 253-262
In The Concept of the Political, Schmitt concludes that ‘‘all genuine political theories
AND
that this imperfection manifests itself as violence and the guilt associated with it.

Dissolving stable friend-enemy binaries causes global, genocidal war and lashout
Reinhard 4 – Kenneth Reinhard, Professor of Jewish Studies at UCLA, 2004, “Towards a Political Theology- Of the Neighbor,” online: http://www.cjs.ucla.edu/Mellon/Towards_Political_Theology.pdf
If the concept of the political is defined, as Carl Schmitt does, in
AND
ultimately appeasing contours, because they would be identifiable” (PF 83). 

The alternative is to include the other and other forms of knowledge
Stringer 4 – Kevin D. Stringer, Fellow at the Center for Advanced Defense Studies, Visiting Professor at the Thunderbird School of Global Management, Reserve Major assigned to U.S. Special Operations Command, 2004, “Visa Diplomacy,” Diplomacy and Statecraft, Vol. 15, No. 4, p. 655-682
The visa is also a diplomatic tool to communicate government discontent or displeasure at other
AND
but they are not a magic bullet for achieving foreign policy goals.43

Tournament: Ba-Lah-Kay | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Bishop Guertin SZ | Judge: Matheson, Bolman, Haley-Hill
1

The affirmative’s failure to advance a topical defense of federal policy undermines debate’s transformative and intellectual potential

1. “Resolved” means debate should be a legislative forum
   Army Officer School ‘4
   (5-12, “# 12, Punctuation – The Colon and Semicolon”, http://usawocc.army.mil/IMI/wg12.htm)
   The colon introduces the following: a. A list, but only after "
   AND
   resolved:"¶ Resolved: (colon) That this council petition the mayor.

2. The United States is the country composed of the 50 states
Encarta ‘7
The Encarta Online Dictionary. “United States” 2007 encarta.msn.com
U•nit•ed States  y? n?t?d stáyts  country in central North America, consisting of 50 states. Languages: English. Currency: dollar. Capital: Washington, D.C.. Population: 290,342,550 (2001). Area: 9,629,047 sq km (3,717,796 sq mi.) Official name United States of America

3. The federal government is the government in Washington DC – not its individual members
AHD ‘2
The American Heritage Dictionary. 2002, Pg 647GBS-JV
Of or relating to the central government of a federation as distinct from the governments of its member units.

4. “Should” means the debate is solely about a policy established by governmental means
Ericson ‘3
(Jon M., Dean Emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts – California Polytechnic U., et al., The Debater’s Guide, Third Edition, p. 4)
The Proposition of Policy: Urging Future Action In policy propositions, each topic contains
AND
compelling reasons for an audience to perform the future action that you propose.

“Cuba” does not include the Guantanamo base
CFR 6 – Code of Federal Regulations, 19CFR Ch. 1(4-1-06 Edition), p. 634
Subpart O—Flights to and From Cuba
§122.151   Definitions.
Under this subpart, the following definitions apply:
(a) United States. The term "U.S." includes the several States, the District of Columbia, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico.
(b) Cuba. The term "Cuba" does not include the Guantanamo Bay Naval Station.

First, a limited topic of discussion that provides for equitable ground is key to productive inculcation of decision-making and advocacy skills in every and all facets of life---even if their position is contestable that’s distinct from it being valuably debatable---this still provides room for flexibility, creativity, and innovation, but targets the discussion to avoid mere statements of fact
Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp45-
Debate is a means of settling differences, so there must be a difference of
AND
Congress to make progress on the immigration debate during the summer of 2007.
Someone disturbed by the problem of the growing underclass of poorly educated, socially disenfranchised
AND
specific policies to be investigated and aid discussants in identifying points of difference.
To have a productive debate, which facilitates effective decision making by directing and placing
AND

the comparative effectiveness of writing or physical force for a specific purpose.
Although we now have a general subject, we have not yet stated a problem
AND
particular point of difference, which will be outlined in the following discussion.

Second, switch-side is key---Effective deliberation is crucial to the activation of personal agency and is only possible in a switch-side debate format where debaters divorce themselves from ideology to engage in political contestation
Patricia Roberts-Miller 3 is Associate Professor of Rhetoric at the University of Texas "Fighting Without Hatred:Hannah Ar endt ' s Agonistic Rhetoric" JAC 22.2 2003
Totalitarianism and the Competitive Space of Agonism¶ Arendt is probably most famous for her
AND
not relativist, adversarial but not violent, independent but not expressivist rhetoric.

Effective decision-making outweighs---
Key to social improvements in every and all facets of life
Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp9-10
If we assume it to be possible without recourse to violence to reach agreement on all the problems implied in the employment of the idea of justice we are granting the possibility of formulating an ideal of man and society, valid for all beings endowed with reason and accepted by what we have called elsewhere the universal audience.14
I think that the only discursive methods available to us stem from techniques that are
AND
city of man in which violence may progressively give way to wisdom.13
Whenever an individual controls the dimensions of" a problem, he or she can solve the problem through a personal decision. For example, if the problem is whether to go to the basketball game tonight, if tickets are not too expensive and if transportation is available, the decision can be made individually. But if a friend's car is needed to get to the game, then that person's decision to furnish the transportation must be obtained.
Complex problems, too, are subject to individual decision making. American business offers
AND
-to-day and even hour-to-hour decisions individually.
When President George H. W. Bush launched Operation Desert Storm, when President
AND
, debate is the only satisfactory way the exact issues can be decided:
A president, whoever he is, has to find a way of understanding the novel and changing issues which he must, under the Constitution, decide. Broadly speaking ... the president has two ways of making up his mind. The one is to turn to his subordinates—to his chiefs of staff and his cabinet officers and undersecretaries and the like—and to direct them to argue out the issues and to bring him an agreed decision…
The other way is to sit like a judge at a hearing where the issues
AND
one another, after he has questioned them himself he makes his decision…
It is a much harder method in that it subjects the president to the stress
AND
other satisfactory way by which momentous and complex issues can be decided.16
John F. Kennedy used Cabinet sessions and National Security Council meetings to provide debate
AND
18 All presidents, to varying degrees, encourage debate among their advisors.
We may never be called on to render the final decision on great issues of
AND
in our intelligent self-interest to reach these decisions through reasoned debate.

And independently a voting issue for limits and ground---our entire negative strategy is based on the “should” question of the resolution---there are an infinite number of reasons that the scholarship of their advocacy could be a reason to vote affirmative--- these all obviate the only predictable strategies based on topical action---they overstretch our research burden and undermine preparedness for all debates

2

Obama is shifting from drones to detention
Dillow 13 (Clay, “Obama Set To Reboot Drone Strike Policy And Retool The War On Terror “, 5/23/13, http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2013-05/obama-set-reboot-drone-strike-policy-and-retool-war-terror)
These three topics are deeply intertwined, of course. With the drawdown of troops
AND
to thwart terrorists rather hellfire missile strikes from unseen robots in the sky.
Restricted detention leads to increased drone use
Chesney 11 (Robert, Charles I. Francis Professor in Law, University of Texas School of Law, “ARTICLE: WHO MAY BE HELD? MILITARY DETENTION THROUGH THE HABEAS LENS”, Boston College Law Review, 52 B.C. L. Rev 769, Lexis)
The convergence thesis describes one manner in which law might respond to the cross-
AND
substantive grounds for detention takes place through the lens of habeas corpus litigation.
Increased drone use sets a precedent that causes South China Sea conflict
Roberts 13 (Kristen, News Editor at National Journal, “When the Whole World Has Drones”, 3/22/13, http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/when-the-whole-world-has-drones-20130321)
And that’s a NATO ally seeking the capability to conduct missions that would run afoul
AND
lead somebody to be subject for an engagement by the United States government.”
Extinction
Wittner 11 (Lawrence S., Emeritus Professor of History at the State University of New York/Albany, Wittner is the author of eight books, the editor or co-editor of another four, and the author of over 250 published articles and book reviews. From 1984 to 1987, he edited Peace and Change, a journal of peace research., 11/28/2011, "Is a Nuclear War With China Possible?", www.huntingtonnews.net/14446)
The gathering tension between the United States and China is clear enough. Disturbed by
AND
—destroying agriculture, creating worldwide famine, and generating chaos and destruction.

Case

Terrorism studies are epistemologically and methodologically valid---our authors are self-reflexive
Michael J. Boyle 8, School of International Relations, University of St. Andrews, and John Horgan, International Center for the Study of Terrorism, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, April 2008, “A Case Against Critical Terrorism Studies,” Critical Studies On Terrorism, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 51-64
 Jackson (2007c) calls for the development of an explicitly CTS on the
AND
community of scholars does not produce such scathing indictments of its own work. 

Global war does not result from a Western desire for control---it results from lack of clearly defined strategic imperatives---the aff is necessary to reclaim the political
David Chandler 9, Professor of International Relations at the Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Westminster, War Without End(s): Grounding the Discourse of `Global War', Security Dialogue 2009; 40; 243
Western governments appear to portray some of the distinctive characteristics that Schmitt attributed to ‘
AND
lack of clear contestation involving the strategic accommodation of diverse powers and interests.
No risk of genocidal wars
Gray 7—Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies and Professor of International Relations and Strategic Studies at the University of Reading, graduate of the Universities of Manchester and Oxford, Founder and Senior Associate to the National Institute for Public Policy, formerly with the International Institute for Strategic Studies and the Hudson Institute (Colin, July, “The Implications of Preemptive and Preventive War Doctrines: A Reconsideration”, http://www.ciaonet.org/wps/ssi10561/ssi10561.pdf)
7. A policy that favors preventive warfare expresses a futile quest for absolute security
AND
strategy, though not always policy, must be nothing if not pragmatic.

Tournament: St Marks | Round: 6 | Opponent: Casady KR | Judge: Yao Yao Chen
1
Immigration reform will pass now but itll be close
Le 10/17 Van, B.A. in Communications from Harvard University, Writer for America’s Voice, 2013, “When will Speaker Boehner Allow a Vote so Immigration Reform can Pass?” http://americasvoiceonline.org/blog/when-will-speaker-boehner-allow-a-vote-so-immigration-reform-can-pass/
The thing is, if John Boehner wanted to, passing immigration reform through the
AND
and turns out massive rallies. The opposition is distracted and lacking support.
Obama is spending PC and it is key
Sink 10-15 – Staff writer for The Hill (Justin, “Obama to push immigration reform 'day after' budget deal, October 15 f 2013, http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/328747-obama-to-push-immigration-reform-day-after-budget-deal-reached
President Obama vowed Tuesday that he would pursue an immigration reform vote in the House
AND
a partisan pursuit" and passing a bill "would benefit both parties."
Plan drains political capital
LeoGrande, 12
William M. LeoGrande School of Public Affairs American University, Professor of Government and a specialist in Latin American politics and U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America, Professor LeoGrande has been a frequent adviser to government and private sector agencies, 12/18/12, http://www.american.edu/clals/upload/LeoGrande-Fresh-Start.pdf
The Second Obama Administration Where in the executive branch will control over Cuba policy lie
AND
rarely happen unless the urgency of the problem forces policymakers to take action.

Comprehensive immigration reform is key to the economy and highly skilled workers
Farrell 12/13/12 (Chris, a contributing editor for Bloomberg Businessweek. From 1986-97, he was on the magazine's staff, as a corporate finance staff and department editor and then as an economics editor. Farrell wrote Right on the Money: Taking Control of Your Personal Finances and Deflation: What Happens When Prices Fall? Among Farrell's many awards are a National Magazine Award, two Loeb Awards, and the Edward R. Murrow Award. Farrell is a graduate of the London School of Economics and Stanford University. “Obama’s Next Act: Immigration Reform” http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-13/obamas-next-act-immigration-reform) 

Washington won’t get much of a reprieve from verbal pyrotechnics once the drama of the
AND
legality offers Washington a rare twofer: a just move that’s economically efficient.
Economic decline risks multiple global nuclear wars
O’Hanlon 12 Kenneth G. Lieberthal, Director of the John L. Thornton China Center and Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy and Global Economy and Development at the Brookings Institution, former Professor at the University of Michigan “The Real National Security Threat: America's Debt,” Los Angeles Times, July 10th, http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2012/07/10-economy-foreign-policy-lieberthal-ohanlon
Alas, globalization and automation trends of the last generation have increasingly called the American
AND
really possible if that fundamental prerequisite to effective foreign policy is not reestablished.
2

Obama is taking a hard line stance against Latin American countries now
Baverstock 5-17 - foreign correspondent based in Venezuela (Alasdair, “Venezuela's Maduro still waiting on Washington's recognition”, May 17 of 2013, CSM, http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2013/0517/Venezuela-s-Maduro-still-waiting-on-Washington-s-recognition)
More than a month after Venezuela’s contested presidential election, President Nicolás Maduro’s narrow victory
AND
– as a factor in the US’s reluctance to recognize Maduro as president.
The plan appeases Cuba
Poblete ’11 (Jason Poblete—attorney and expert on U.S. export control laws and regulations for military and dual-use items, economic sanctions, and free trade. FEBRUARY 25, 2011. http://jasonpoblete.com/2011/02/25/u-s-cuba-law-cherry-picking-makes-for-bad-pie/)
At Brookings last week, a panel of experts who support trade with the Cuban
AND
a copt out to making the tough decisions that need to be made.
Appeasement kills credibility – it shows countries that the US isn’t hard line - playing a weak hand doesn’t work
Weissberg 10 - Professor of Political Science-Emeritus, University of Illinois-Urbana (Robert, “President Obama's Compulsive Appeasement Disorder”, August 27 of 2010, American Thinker, http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/08/president_obamas_compulsive_ap.html)
There's a simple explanation: we are no longer feared. Superpowers of yesteryear,
AND
it. Israel long ago learned this lesson, regardless of world outrage.
Obama’s strength is uniquely key to solve multiple conflicts
Ben Coes 11, a former speechwriter in the George H.W. Bush administration, managed Mitt Romney’s successful campaign for Massachusetts Governor in 2002 and author, “The disease of a weak president”, The Daily Caller, http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/30/the-disease-of-a-weak-president/
The disease of a weak president usually begins with the Achilles’ heel all politicians are
AND
one or the other. The status quo is simply not an option.
South China Sea conflicts cause extinction
Wittner 11 (Lawrence S. Wittner, Emeritus Professor of History at the State University of New York/Albany, Wittner is the author of eight books, the editor or co-editor of another four, and the author of over 250 published articles and book reviews. From 1984 to 1987, he edited Peace and Change, a journal of peace research., 11/28/2011, "Is a Nuclear War With China Possible?",  www.huntingtonnews.net/14446)
While nuclear weapons exist, there remains a danger that they will be used.
AND
—destroying agriculture, creating worldwide famine, and generating chaos and destruction.
3

The United States federal government should
- ask the governments of Brazil and Mexico to diplomatically engage Cuba on its behalf to determine to remove
- inform Brazil and Mexico that it will abide by the results of negotiations
- implement any policy changes that negotiations between Brazil, Mexico, and Cuba recommend and
-establish an embassy in the Republic of Cuba

Solves the case and preserves US soft power
Iglesias 12 – Commander of the US Navy (Carlos, “United States Security Policy
Implications of a Post-Fidel Cuba”, 2012, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA560408~~)
Unlike the policy implications above, the major hurdle to this interest does not ¶
AND
with whom to act or just watching from ¶ across the Florida Straits.
4

 “Engagement” requires increasing economic contacts in trade or financial transactions
Resnick 1 – Dr. Evan Resnick, Ph.D. in Political Science from Columbia University, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yeshiva University, “Defining Engagement”, Journal of International Affairs, Spring, 54(2), Ebsco
Scholars have limited the concept of engagement in a third way by unnecessarily restricting the
AND
be shown below, permits the elucidation of multiple types of positive sanctions.
The plan is appeasement – they are distinct
Times-Dispatch Staff 12 (Jan 22, “Cuba: Patsies,” http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/cuba-patsies/article_5755996d-246f-5ca4-ada5-14b567a56603.html, jkim)
The Obama administration's appeasement of the Castro regime in Cuba was meant to improve conditions
AND
back efforts at promoting democracy in the island gulag, among other things.

Voting Issue –
Limits – their definition of engagement opens the floodgates for all affs that unilaterally act – destroys indepth education and clash
Ground – they will spike out of our disads that have engagement links – destroys predictability and fairness
Terrorism
AFF doesn’t change Cuban overall terrorist policies
French, 09 – is the Director for the U.S.-Cuba Policy Initiative at the New America Foundation(Anya Landau, “Options for Engagement A Resource Guide for Reforming U.S. Policy toward Cuba” http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/library/resources/documents/Cuba/USPolicy/options-for-engagement.pdf)
Section 6(j)(4) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 sets
AND
anyone living on the island that has ever had ties to terrorist groups.
War turns structural violence and genocide
PPU 07 (Peace Pledge Union, oldest pacifist organization of Britain.  Genocide.  June 16. http://www.ppu.org.uk/genocide/index1a.html)
These are horrors we want to protect children from, so why try to talk
AND
disagree in safety. And genocide will be a shame of the past.
Consequences matter – the tunnel vision of moral absolutism generates evil and political irrelevance
Issac, 2002 (Jeffery, Professor of Political Science at Indiana University, Dissent, Vol. 49 No. 2, Spring)
Politics, in large part, involves contests over the distribution and use of power
AND
not true believers.  It promotes arrogance.  And it undermines political effectiveness.  
Reps don’t come first and placing them first shatters real world change
Dewsbury ‘3 (John-David Dewsbury -- School of Geographical Studies, University of Bristol -- Environment and Planning A 2003, volume 35, pages 1907-1932 -- http://www.sages.unimelb.edu.au/news/mhgr/dewsbury.pdf)
That someone includes us -- the social scientists, the researchers, and the writers
AND
only it offers any sensible understanding at all -- that is critically flawed.
Empirics are sufficient backing of our impacts
Owen, 02 (David Owen, Reader of Political Theory at the Univ. of Southampton, Millennium Vol 31 No 3 2002 p. 655-7)
Commenting on the ‘philosophical turn’ in IR, Wæver remarks that ‘a
AND
the first and second dangers, and so a potentially vicious circle arises.

Pragmatic focus on experience outweighs a focus on ethics -~-- value emerges in experience, not the other way around
Parker, 96 – Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Grand Valley State University (Kelly A., “Pragmatism and Environmental Thought,” Environmental Pragmatism, 1996, ed: Light and Katz, p. 25-27)
While it is wrong to suggest that there is a "consensus metaphysics" among
AND
might well mean recycling one's television set rather than upgrading the cable service.

We only need to win a 1 risk of existential threats to win
Bostrum, 05 (Nick – professor of philosophy at Oxford and winner of the Gannon Award, Transcribed by Joe Packer 4:38-6:12 of the talk at http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/44, accessed 10/20/07)

Now if we think about what just reducing the probability of human extinction by just
AND
be lost if we went extinct it should still be a high priority.

Even a low probability outweighs
Art, 03 (Robert – professor of IR at Brandeis University, A Grand Strategy for America, p. 212-213)

Fourth and finally, great-power wars are highly destructive, not only to
AND
-power peace should be over-determined, not left to chance.

Tournament: Ba-Lah-Kay | Round: 2 | Opponent: Marist AB | Judge: Liam Hancock
1
Trade promotion authority will pass – bipartisan support
Reuters 12-12 – (“Congress could OK trade promotion bill in early 2014”, December 12 of 2013, http://www.agprofessional.com/news/Congress-could-OK-trade-promotion-bill-in-early-2014-235387181.html)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Three top U.S. lawmakers on key congressional
AND
the House Ways and Means Committee, which is also oversees trade issues.
Plan trades off
LeoGrande, 12
William M. LeoGrande School of Public Affairs American University, Professor of Government and a specialist in Latin American politics and U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America, Professor LeoGrande has been a frequent adviser to government and private sector agencies, 12/18/12, http://www.american.edu/clals/upload/LeoGrande-Fresh-Start.pdf

The Second Obama Administration Where in the executive branch will control over Cuba policy lie
AND
rarely happen unless the urgency of the problem forces policymakers to take action.
Political capital is essential for TPA, which maintains US trade leadership, growth, and hegemony.
Riley and Kim, 13 (Bryan, Jay Van Andel senior policy analyst in trade policy for the Center for International Trade and Economics, and Anthony, senior policy analyst Center for International Trade and Economics, “Advancing Trade Freedom: Key Objective of Trade Promotion Authority Renewal,” http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/04/advancing-trade-freedom-key-objective-of-trade-promotion-authority-renewal)
Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) has been a critical tool for advancing free trade
AND
that accrue from such policies. It should not let the opportunity pass.

Collapse of trade causes great power war and US economic decline in the short term
PANITCHPAKDI ‘4 (Supachai Panitchpakdi, secretary-general of the UN Conference on Trade and Development, 2/26/2004, American Leadership and the World Trade Organization, p. http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/spsp_e/spsp22_e.htm)
The second point is that strengthening the world trading system is essential to America's wider
AND
constrained, not by multilateral rules, but by the absence of rules.

2

Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to promote the integration of China into the global trading and financial systems; and security engagement, to encourage compliance with the ten principles by diplomatic and military means when economic incentives do not suffice, in order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent
AND
105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate
3
Text: The United States federal government should phase out a substantial portion of its economic restrictions toward Cuba on the condition that the government of Cuba makes appropriate economic and political reforms.
Only conditioning removal of the embargo on continued reform prevents Castro from backsliding on status quo reforms
Sanguinetty 13
Jorge, “Who benefits and loses if the US-Cuba embargo is lifted?” http://devresearchcenter.org/2013/04/08/who-benefits-and-loses-if-the-us-cuba-embargo-is-lifted-by-jorge-a-sanguinetty/ April mtc
The answer depends on the conditions under which the embargo is lifted. I focus
AND
lifting of the US embargo is likely to bring about democracy in Cuba.
4

A. Discourses of danger reproduces an American identity – that posits the US as a the defender of global freedom and liberty
Campbell, 98- Professor of International Politics University of Newcastle (David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity) 

The crisis of representation the United States faces is unique only in the particularities of
AND
the idea that foreign policy/Foreign Policy is constitutive of political identity.

B. That makes extinction inevitable
Willson, 02- Ph.D New College San Fransisco, Humanities, JD, American University (Brian, “Armageddon or Quantum Leap? U.S. Imperialism and?Human Consciousness from?an Evolutionary Perspective”, http://www.brianwillson.com/quantum.html)

Awaiting the impending U.S. government's concocted "preventive" war against Iraq
AND
everything that contributes to their support" (General John Sullivan, 1779).
In a prominent history book published in 1906 (The History of the United States
AND
cyclical, indicate that we are dangerously near the end of our evolutionary branch

C. Alternative text – reject the affirmative to desecuritize the Political. Vote negative to challenge securitization itself in favor of a political ethic that approaches problems in non-security terms and exposes the limits of their methodology.

Oil

Prices low – Fed meeting and Libya
Gorondi 12-13-13 (Pablo, Associated Press, “Oil prices down as market awaits Fed meeting,” http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/dec/13/oil-prices-down-as-market-awaits-fed-meeting/, 12-13-13, ab)
The price of oil slid below $97 a barrel Friday on the possibility of
AND
keep prices from dropping sharply and hurting oil revenues that underpin their economies.

War in the Middle East will never escalate to all-out war – conflicts remain relatively localized
Cook, Takeyh, and Maloney, 07 (Douglas Dillon Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, Ray, Senior Fellow For Middle Eastern Studies at the CFR,  Suzanne, Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy, Brookings Institution, June 28, , online: http://www.cfr.org/publication/13702/why_the_iraq_war_wont_engulf_the_mideast.html, accessed December 25, 2007)
Yet, the Saudis, Iranians, Jordanians, Syrians, and others are very
AND
its civil strife and prevent local conflicts from enveloping the entire Middle East.

Airpower doesn't deter – only ground forces are perceived
Allan, 94 (Charles, Air Force National Defense Fellow at the CSIS,"Extended Conventional Deterrence: In from the Cold and Out of the Nuclear Fire?" Washington Quarterly, Summer, 1994)
Information. As we have seen, imperfect information about a defender's commitment may be
AND
Without clear recognition of U.S. power, deterrence cannot hold.

US airpower will be used against civilian targets because it’s not effective militarily – this will increase the risk of protracted conflicts
Crane, 01 (Conrad, Director of the U. S. Army Military History Institute at Carlisle Barracks, and fellow at the Strategic Studies Institute, The National Interest, Fall, lexis)
The 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review season is hard upon us, but this year's energies
AND
, the results were not at all those envisioned when the campaign started.
Warming
You don’t solve – your author
Specht 13 – Legal advisor, at Pearlmaker Holsteins (Jonathan, “Raising Cane: Sugar Sugarcane Ethanol’s Economic and Environmental Effects on the United States”, April 24 of 2013, http://works.bepress.com/jonathan_specht/2/)
It must be stressed that sugarcane-based ethanol, from Cuba or anywhere else
AND
grown sugarcane can, and should, be part of the solution to bot

Obama administration is hard-lining Cuba
Haven 13 (Paul, Associated Prices, NY Times, “Cuba, US try talking, but face many obstacles”, 6/21/13 http://www.timesherald.com/article/20130621/NEWS05/130629930/cuba-us-try-talking-but-face-many-obstacles#full_story)
To be sure, there is still far more that separates the long-time
AND
against the Cuban people, and respect basic human rights,” he said.
The AFF is appeasement
Walser 12 – Ph.D. and a Senior Policy Analyst at The Heritage Foundation (Ray, “Cuban-American Leaders: “No Substitute for Freedom” in Cuba”, June 25 of 2012, http://blog.heritage.org/2012/06/25/cuban-american-leaders-no-substitute-for-freedom-in-cuba/)
However, these pleasing liberal assumptions are negated on a daily basis by hard-
AND
tyranny of the Castro regime, there is “no substitute for freedom.”
Appeasement triggers multiple scenarios for nuclear– it is only a question of perception
Hanson 9 - American military historian, columnist and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution (Victor, “Change, Weakness, Disaster, Obama: Answers from Victor Davis Hanson”, December 7 of 2009, Interview between Bernard Chapin and Hanson, http://pjmedia.com/blog/change-weakness-disaster-obama-answers-from-victor-davis-hanson/)
BC: Are we currently sending a message of weakness to our foes and allies
AND
tiger and now no one quite knows whom it will bite or when.

Empirical trends disprove warming impacts
Goklany 11 - a science and technology policy analyst for the United States Department of the Interior (Indur M., “Misled on Climate Change: How the UN IPCC (and others) Exaggerate the Impacts of Global Warming” December 2011, http://goklany.org/library/Reason20CC20and20Development202011.pdf, PZ)
Discussion and Conclusions Despite claims that GW will reduce human well-being in poor
AND
been, overall, a very significant benefit to people in poor countries.
  Global Warming is a natural process – Antarctica proves
Kelly 12 (Conor “NASA’s Antarctic Study Casts Doubt on Global Warming” ForexTV.com 6/19/12 http://www.forextv.com/forex-news-story/nasa-s-antarctic-study-casts-doubt-on-global-warming)
A recent study published by University of Southern California researchers suggests that Antarctica featured drastically
AND
global temperatures will reach Miocene Era levels by the end of this century.
  Their authors are biased
Ferrara 11 – Heartland Institute senior fellow, senior fellow at the Social Security Institute, graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, general counsel of the American Civil Rights Union, Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under the first President Bush, author of The Obamacare Disaster, President Obama's Tax Piracy, and America's Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb: How the Looming Debt Crisis Threatens the American Dream-and How We Can Turn the Tide Before It's Too Late (Peter, “Packing Heat,” The American Spectator, 9/7/11, http://spectator.org/archives/2011/09/07/packing-heat)//PC
The theory that human activity is causing potentially catastrophic global warming is not science.
AND
objective science was a foundation of the rise of the West for centuries.

Tournament: HoFlo | Round: 2 | Opponent: East Kentwood BB | Judge: Erin Dinser
1

Obama’s political capital is effectively holding off passage of the Iran sanctions bill now – but it’s still a fight
Delmore 2/5/14 (Erin, Political Analyst @ MSNBC, "Democrats split over Syria, Iran," http://www.msnbc.com/all/democrats-split-over-syria-iran)
Over strong objections from the president, 16 Senate Democrats support a bill that would impose new sanctions on Iran should the country fail to reach a permanent agreement with international negotiators to roll back its nuclear program. Those senators, along with 43 Republicans, argue that tough sanctions brought Iran to the negotiating table in the first place and further pressure would flex American muscle in the 6-month talks toward crafting a permanent solution. The bill drew support from Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y, and Harry Reid, D-Nev., both close allies of Obama’s but also leading supporters of policies favoring Israel. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, America’s most powerful pro-Israel advocacy group, has lobbied members of Congress from both parties to support the sanctions.¶ Other Democrats are siding with the Obama administration, which argues that imposing new sanctions damaged “good-faith” negotiations while empowering Iran’s hard-liners rooting for the talks to fail. (A National Security Council spokeswoman charged last month that the sanctions bill could end negotiations and bring the U.S. closer to war.) ¶ The Senate bill has been losing steam ever since the White House ratcheted up pressure on Senate Democrats to abandon the it. Introduced in December by Democrat Robert Menendez, D-N.J. and Sen. Mark Kirk. R-Ill., the legislation was backed by 59 members – but now Senate leaders say they will hold off bringing the legislation to a vote until the six-month negotiation process ends.¶ Adam Sharon, a spokesman for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which Menendez chairs, said the New Jersey Senator stands behind the bill that bears his name. ¶ Menendez and 58 other senators support the bill, Sharon said. “It’s his bill, three or four senators say they wouldn’t call for a vote now. His position has been, having a bill, having this in place is an extremely effective and necessary tool when negotiating with the Iranians that we need to have to avoid Iran crossing the nuclear threshold. He stands behind this bill and the whole essence of the bill is to have sanctions in waiting, but you have to move on them now to make it happen.”¶ The movement is still alive in the House with enough votes to pass, despite a letter signed by at least 70 Democrats opposing the measure, and a letter of criticism by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Obama reiterated in last week’s State of the Union address a promise to veto any attempt to impose new sanctions on Iran.
Plan drains PC.
Shear, 13
(Michael, NYT White house correspondent, 5/5,  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/05/world/americas/in-latin-america-us-shifts-focus-from-drug-war-to-economy.html?pagewanted=all)

Last week, Mr. Obama returned to capitals in Latin America with a vastly different message. Relationships with countries racked by drug violence and organized crime should focus more on economic development and less on the endless battles against drug traffickers and organized crime capos that have left few clear victors. The countries, Mexico in particular, need to set their own course on security, with the United States playing more of a backing role. That approach runs the risk of being seen as kowtowing to governments more concerned about their public image than the underlying problems tarnishing it. Mexico, which is eager to play up its economic growth, has mounted an aggressive effort to play down its crime problems, going as far as to encourage the news media to avoid certain slang words in reports. “The problem will not just go away,” said Michael Shifter, president of the Inter-American Dialogue. “It needs to be tackled head-on, with a comprehensive strategy that includes but goes beyond stimulating economic growth and alleviating poverty. “Obama becomes vulnerable to the charge of downplaying the region’s overriding issue, and the chief obstacle to economic progress,” he added. “It is fine to change the narrative from security to economics as long as the reality on the ground reflects and fits with the new story line.” Administration officials insist that Mr. Obama remains cleareyed about the security challenges, but the new emphasis corresponds with a change in focus by the Mexican government. The new Mexican president, Enrique Peña Nieto, took office in December vowing to reduce the violence that exploded under the militarized approach to the drug war adopted by his predecessor, Felipe Calderón. That effort left about 60,000 Mexicans dead and appears not to have significantly damaged the drug-trafficking industry. In addition to a focus on reducing violence, which some critics have interpreted as taking a softer line on the drug gangs, Mr. Peña Nieto has also moved to reduce American involvement in law enforcement south of the border. With friction and mistrust between American and Mexican law enforcement agencies growing, Mr. Obama suggested that the United States would no longer seek to dominate the security agenda. “It is obviously up to the Mexican people to determine their security structures and how it engages with other nations, including the United States,” he said, standing next to Mr. Peña Nieto on Thursday in Mexico City. “But the main point I made to the president is that we support the Mexican government’s focus on reducing violence, and we look forward to continuing our good cooperation in any way that the Mexican government deems appropriate.” In some ways, conceding leadership of the drug fight to Mexico hews to a guiding principle of Mr. Obama’s foreign policy, in which American supremacy is played down, at least publicly, in favor of a multilateral approach. But that philosophy could collide with the concerns of lawmakers in Washington, who have expressed frustration with what they see as a lack of clarity in Mexico’s security plans. And security analysts say the entrenched corruption in Mexican law enforcement has long clouded the partnership with their American counterparts. Putting Mexico in the driver’s seat on security marks a shift in a balance of power that has always tipped to the United States and, analysts said, will carry political risk as Congress negotiates an immigration bill that is expected to include provisions for tighter border security. “If there is a perception in the U.S. Congress that security cooperation is weakening, that could play into the hands of those who oppose immigration reform,” said Vanda Felbab-Brown, a counternarcotics expert at the Brookings Institution in Washington. “Realistically, the border is as tight as could be and there have been few spillovers of the violence from Mexico into the U.S.,” she added, but perceptions count in Washington “and can be easily distorted.” “Drugs today are not very important to the U.S. public over all,” she added, “but they are important to committed drug warriors who are politically powerful.” Representative Michael T. McCaul, a Texas Republican who is chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, has warned against the danger of drug cartels forming alliances with terrorist groups. “While these threats exist, you would be surprised to find that the administration thinks its work here is done,” he wrote in an opinion article for Roll Call last month, pressing for more border controls in the bill. The Obama administration has said any evidence of such cooperation is very thin, but even without terrorist connections, drug gangs pose threats to peace and security. Human rights advocates said they feared the United States would ease pressure on Mexico to investigate disappearances and other abuses at the hands of the police and military, who have received substantial American support. The shift in approach “suggests that the Obama administration either doesn’t object to these abusive practices or is only willing to raise such concerns when it’s politically convenient,” said José Miguel Vivanco, director of Human Rights Watch’s Americas division. Still, administration officials have said there may have been an overemphasis on the bellicose language and high-profile hunts for cartel leaders while the real problem of lawlessness worsens. American antidrug aid is shifting more toward training police and shoring up judicial systems that have allowed criminals to kill with impunity in Mexico and Central America. United States officials said Mr. Obama remains well aware of the region’s problems with security, even as he is determined that they not overshadow the economic opportunities. It is clear Mr. Obama, whatever his words four years ago, now believes there has been too much security talk. In a speech to Mexican students on Friday, Mr. Obama urged people in the two countries to look beyond a one-dimensional focus on what he called real security concerns, saying it is “time for us to put the old mind-sets aside.” And he repeated the theme later in the day in Costa Rica, lamenting that when it comes to the United States and Central America, “so much of the focus ends up being on security.” “We also have to recognize that problems like narco-trafficking arise in part when a country is vulnerable because of poverty, because of institutions that are not working for the people, because young people don’t see a brighter future ahead,” Mr. Obama said in a news conference with Laura Chinchilla, the president of Costa Rica.
 
Causes Israel strikes
Perr 12/24 (Jon Perr 12/24/13, B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University; technology marketing consultant based in Portland, Oregon, has long been active in Democratic politics and public policy as an organizer and advisor in California and Massachusetts. His past roles include field staffer for Gary Hart for President (1984), organizer of Silicon Valley tech executives backing President Clinton's call for national education standards (1997), recruiter of tech executives for Al Gore's and John Kerry's presidential campaigns, and co-coordinator of MassTech for Robert Reich (2002). (Jon, “Senate sanctions bill could let Israel take U.S. to war against Iran” Daily Kos, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/24/1265184/-Senate-sanctions-bill-could-let-Israel-take-U-S-to-war-against-Iran#)
As 2013 draws to close, the negotiations over the Iranian nuclear program have entered a delicate stage. But in 2014, the tensions will escalate dramatically as a bipartisan group of Senators brings a new Iran sanctions bill to the floor for a vote. As many others have warned, that promise of new measures against Tehran will almost certainly blow up the interim deal reached by the Obama administration and its UN/EU partners in Geneva. But Congress' highly unusual intervention into the President's domain of foreign policy doesn't just make the prospect of an American conflict with Iran more likely. As it turns out, the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act essentially empowers Israel to decide whether the United States will go to war against Tehran.¶ On their own, the tough new sanctions imposed automatically if a final deal isn't completed in six months pose a daunting enough challenge for President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry. But it is the legislation's commitment to support an Israeli preventive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities that almost ensures the U.S. and Iran will come to blows. As Section 2b, part 5 of the draft mandates:¶ If the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in legitimate self-defense against Iran's nuclear weapon program, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide, in accordance with the law of the United States and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force, diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.¶ Now, the legislation being pushed by Senators Mark Kirk (R-IL), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ) does not automatically give the President an authorization to use force should Israel attack the Iranians. (The draft language above explicitly states that the U.S. government must act "in accordance with the law of the United States and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force.") But there should be little doubt that an AUMF would be forthcoming from Congressmen on both sides of the aisle. As Lindsey Graham, who with Menendez co-sponsored a similar, non-binding "stand with Israel" resolution in March told a Christians United for Israel (CUFI) conference in July:¶ "If nothing changes in Iran, come September, October, I will present a resolution that will authorize the use of military force to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb."¶ Graham would have plenty of company from the hardest of hard liners in his party. In August 2012, Romney national security adviser and pardoned Iran-Contra architect Elliott Abrams called for a war authorization in the pages of the Weekly Standard. And just two weeks ago, Norman Podhoretz used his Wall Street Journal op-ed to urge the Obama administration to "strike Iran now" to avoid "the nuclear war sure to come."¶ But at the end of the day, the lack of an explicit AUMF in the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act doesn't mean its supporters aren't giving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu de facto carte blanche to hit Iranian nuclear facilities. The ensuing Iranian retaliation against to Israeli and American interests would almost certainly trigger the commitment of U.S. forces anyway.¶ Even if the Israelis alone launched a strike against Iran's atomic sites, Tehran will almost certainly hit back against U.S. targets in the Straits of Hormuz, in the region, possibly in Europe and even potentially in the American homeland. Israel would face certain retaliation from Hezbollah rockets launched from Lebanon and Hamas missiles raining down from Gaza.¶ That's why former Bush Defense Secretary Bob Gates and CIA head Michael Hayden raising the alarms about the "disastrous" impact of the supposedly surgical strikes against the Ayatollah's nuclear infrastructure. As the New York Times reported in March 2012, "A classified war simulation held this month to assess the repercussions of an Israeli attack on Iran forecasts that the strike would lead to a wider regional war, which could draw in the United States and leave hundreds of Americans dead, according to American officials." And that September, a bipartisan group of U.S. foreign policy leaders including Brent Scowcroft, retired Admiral William Fallon, former Republican Senator (now Obama Pentagon chief) Chuck Hagel, retired General Anthony Zinni and former Ambassador Thomas Pickering concluded that American attacks with the objective of "ensuring that Iran never acquires a nuclear bomb" would "need to conduct a significantly expanded air and sea war over a prolonged period of time, likely several years." (Accomplishing regime change, the authors noted, would mean an occupation of Iran requiring a "commitment of resources and personnel greater than what the U.S. has expended over the past 10 years in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.") The anticipated blowback?¶ Serious costs to U.S. interests would also be felt over the longer term, we believe, with problematic consequences for global and regional stability, including economic stability. A dynamic of escalation, action, and counteraction could produce serious unintended consequences that would significantly increase all of these costs and lead, potentially, to all-out regional war.
Impact is nuclear war
Reuveny 10 (Rafael – professor in the School of Public and Environmental affairs at Indiana University, Unilateral strike on Iran could trigger world depression, p. http://www.indiana.edu/~spea/news/speaking_out/reuveny_on_unilateral_strike_Iran.shtml)
A unilateral Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities would likely have dire consequences, including a regional war, global economic collapse and a major power clash. For an Israeli campaign to succeed, it must be quick and decisive. This requires an attack that would be so overwhelming that Iran would not dare to respond in full force. Such an outcome is extremely unlikely since the locations of some of Iran’s nuclear facilities are not fully known and known facilities are buried deep underground. All of these widely spread facilities are shielded by elaborate air defense systems constructed not only by the Iranians, but also the Chinese and, likely, the Russians as well. By now, Iran has also built redundant command and control systems and nuclear facilities, developed early-warning systems, acquired ballistic and cruise missiles and upgraded and enlarged its armed forces. Because Iran is well-prepared, a single, conventional Israeli strike — or even numerous strikes — could not destroy all of its capabilities, giving Iran time to respond. A regional war Unlike Iraq, whose nuclear program Israel destroyed in 1981, Iran has a second-strike capability comprised of a coalition of Iranian, Syrian, Lebanese, Hezbollah, Hamas, and, perhaps, Turkish forces. Internal pressure might compel Jordan, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority to join the assault, turning a bad situation into a regional war. During the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, at the apex of its power, Israel was saved from defeat by President Nixon’s shipment of weapons and planes. Today, Israel’s numerical inferiority is greater, and it faces more determined and better-equipped opponents. Despite Israel’s touted defense systems, Iranian coalition missiles, armed forces, and terrorist attacks would likely wreak havoc on its enemy, leading to a prolonged tit-for-tat. In the absence of massive U.S. assistance, Israel’s military resources may quickly dwindle, forcing it to use its alleged nuclear weapons, as it had reportedly almost done in 1973. An Israeli nuclear attack would likely destroy most of Iran’s capabilities, but a crippled Iran and its coalition could still attack neighboring oil facilities, unleash global terrorism, plant mines in the Persian Gulf and impair maritime trade in the Mediterranean, Red Sea and Indian Ocean. Middle Eastern oil shipments would likely slow to a trickle as production declines due to the war and insurance companies decide to drop their risky Middle Eastern clients. Iran and Venezuela would likely stop selling oil to the United States and Europe. The world economy would head into a tailspin; international acrimony would rise; and Iraqi and Afghani citizens might fully turn on the United States, immediately requiring the deployment of more American troops. Russia, China, Venezuela, and maybe Brazil and Turkey — all of which essentially support Iran — could be tempted to form an alliance and openly challenge the U.S. hegemony. Replaying Nixon’s nightmare Russia and China might rearm their injured Iranian protege overnight, just as Nixon rearmed Israel, and threaten to intervene, just as the U.S.S.R. threatened to join Egypt and Syria in 1973. President Obama’s response would likely put U.S. forces on nuclear alert, replaying Nixon’s nightmarish scenario. Iran may well feel duty-bound to respond to a unilateral attack by its Israeli archenemy, but it knows that it could not take on the United States head-to-head. In contrast, if the United States leads the attack, Iran’s response would likely be muted. If Iran chooses to absorb an American-led strike, its allies would likely protest and send weapons, but would probably not risk using force. While no one has a crystal ball, leaders should be risk-averse when choosing war as a foreign policy tool. If attacking Iran is deemed necessary, Israel must wait for an American green light. A unilateral Israeli strike could ultimately spark World War III.
2
Nieto has to credibility to follow through with his reform efforts now – but he has to tread carefully
Thomson 4-24 - Adam Thomson is the FT's Mexico and Central America correspondent (Adam, “President Enrique Peña Nieto works to soothe Mexico tensions”, April 24 of 2013, Financial Times, http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/628aabae-acfa-11e2-9454-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2YVlziShn)
Mexico’s four-month-old administration on Wednesday appeared to overcome its first political crisis after opposition leaders said that they had largely settled their differences with the government.¶ The agreement, which came after an emergency meeting of party heads, appears to put the government’s economic reform back on track in a turnaround that will doubtless ease investor concerns.¶ Billions of dollars have flowed into Mexico in recent months on hopes that centrist President Enrique Peña Nieto of the Institutional Revolutionary Party will push a series of reforms aimed at transforming Latin America’s second-largest economy into a more vibrant emerging market.¶ The inflows have pushed the local stock market index to record highs. In one clear sign of investors’ new-found fascination with Mexico, the local currency this month strengthened against the US dollar, reaching an 18-month high.¶ Speaking after the meeting on Wednesday, Jesús Zambrano, leader of the leftwing Democratic Revolution Party, suggested that things were getting back to normal after a tense week. “At least we have laid the foundations for continuing along the reform path,” Reforma, the Mexican daily, quoted him as saying.¶ A statement by Mexico’s interior ministry, which organised the meeting, confirmed that the parties had agreed to keep working together to further the so-called Pact for Mexico, a list of economic, social and political reform pledges signed in December by party leaders.¶ “Everyone reaffirmed their conviction that the reform agenda laid out in the Pact comes before party interests,” said the statement.¶ In Lima, Luis Videgaray, Mexico’s finance minister, expressed optimism that a banking-reform bill, which the government had planned to unveil this week but postponed because of the political tension, would get back on track.¶ “I haven’t the slightest doubt the financial reform will be presented in the next few days,” he told Reuters. “I’m sure it’ll have strong support from the political forces and representatives in the Pact for Mexico.”¶ The latest events come after Democratic Revolution Party members and the conservative National Action Party, both signatories to the Pact, recently accused government officials of using social-assistance programmes in the state of Veracruz to gain an advantage in forthcoming elections.¶ Almost half of Mexico’s 31 states go to the polls in the coming months, and political rivalries have already started to surface in the run-up to voting day.¶ Roy Campos, a pollster in Mexico City, argues that Mr Peña Nieto’s swift and energetic response to the building storm – after initially underestimating the problem – went a long way to resolving what could have become much worse.¶ Not least, on Tuesday Mexico’s leader gave a rousing speech in the state of Puebla where he asked all the political parties to join him in helping to ensure that social programmes were protected from the threat of use for political gain “Let’s bulletproof them,” he said.¶ That, says Mr Campos, allowed everyone involved to claim some sort of victory – the opposition parties that they brought the administration to task, and Mr Peña Nieto that he was able to pull in the opposition in a joint crusade against corruption.¶ “Peña Nieto has recovered very quickly,” says Mr Campos. “The pact is far from broken.”¶ Yet it seems clear that the Veracruz scandal serves as a reminder of how carefully Mr Peña Nieto must tread in the coming months as he seeks to bring his economic reform agenda to fruition.¶
Overwhelming opposition to the AFF – the plan is an insurmountable obstacle which kills Nieto’s credibility
Starr 12 - Director, U.S.-Mexico Network Associate Professor (NTT) University Fellow, Center on Public Diplomacy University of Southern California (Pamela, “U.S.-Mexico Relations and Mexican Domestic Politics”, October 6 of 2012, https://www.google.com/url?sa=tandrct=jandq=andesrc=sandsource=webandcd=3andcad=rjaandved=0CD4QFjACandurl=http3A2F2Fcollege.usc.edu2Fusmexnet2Fwp-content2Fuploads2F20102F102FCamp-Oxford-paper-final.docandei=mTLYUZTDMbOLyQGT14GwCQandusg=AFQjCNH_cqiYTQRo7SFmpfWugH9ABshhCgandsig2=_M2KmLNnt3e8v4vVshc_fQ)
The final implication of Mexican nationalism for U.S.-Mexico relations is the nearly insurmountable obstacle it erected to political alliances between Mexican actors and their U.S. counterparts, which has broken down only gradually and incompletely since the mid-1990s. For decades, the fear of being tarred as a traitor to the nation prevented Mexican leaders from seeking allies to their cause in the United States and thereby deprived U.S. actors of an easy point of entry into Mexican politics. Mexicans who ignored this taboo paid the price even in the final years of the twentieth century. In the 1980s, the then opposition National Action Party openly elicited U.S. backing for its charges of electoral fraud and associated actions of civil disobedience, producing a nationalist backlash in Mexico that sharply undercut the legitimacy of its claims. In the early 1990s, Mexican opponents of the North American Free Trade Agreement formed an alliance with their U.S. and Canadian counterparts, leading to accusations of having organized traitorous “campaigns against Mexico in the United States.” ¶ Carlos Salinas’ 1990 decision to summon U.S. assistance to lock in his domestic economic reform agenda through a bilateral trade treaty and his active lobbying to gain U.S. congressional approval of the treaty dealt a blow to this long-standing taboo. As a result, cross-border alliances are now increasingly common and accepted, but they are heavily concentrated among civil society actors. Mexico’s continuing anxiety about U.S. political domination, however, means that tolerance for cross-border political alliances is much less developed. While Mexican policy makers and analysts of the bilateral relationship have significantly more freedom of action to work with their U.S. counterparts in the early twenty-first century than did their predecessors, they still must watch their step or risk having their reputation sullied for being excessively “pro-gringo.” Mexicans remain uneasy living next door to a superpower; they continue to worry that the United States might get the notion to translate its power into domination of Mexico, its politics, policy, and culture, and they thus still approach their neighbor with trepidation. As a result, Mexican politicians and policy makers still must take care to avoid the appearance of being too willing to accept support and guidance from north of the border.

Nieto credibility is key the Mexican economy – loss of cred guarantees collapse
Ruelas-Gossi 12 - professor of strategy at the Santiago, Chile-based Universidad Adolfo Ibañez (Alejandro, “Peña Nieto's Plans for Mexico's Economy”, October 15 of 2012, Harvard Business Review, http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/10/mexico_is_the_perfect_dictator.html)
For one, Peña Nieto will likely bring about major reforms in the energy sector soon after he takes office. The new laws should enable Mexico, one of the world's top 10 producers, to follow Brazil in developing a successful oil and gas industry in South America. That will attract several potential investors from abroad.¶ Two, fiscal and labor reforms will enable Mexico to become more competitive. The former will help the government switch from volatile sources of revenue, such as oil prices, to more stable ones. Fiscal stability will also create a more competitive environment and eliminate subsidies, such as those on gasoline. An economy without subsidies will undoubtedly attract more foreign investment.¶ The changes in the labor laws are also linked to fiscal reforms since the current tax regime doesn't provide incentives for the informal economy to change. Mexico is the only OECD economy that doesn't offer unemployment insurance; health insurance for informal workers; or short-term contracts that will attract more women to the workforce.¶ Many of these reforms have been on the agenda for the last decade, so the PAN will have to support policies that it promoted when it was in power. Moreover, allies and adversaries alike concede that Peña Nieto showed a knack for working with opposition parties when he was the governor of the state of Mexico, but lacked a majority in the legislature.¶ Three, Peña Nieto wants to develop closer links between the Mexican economy and those of the Spanish-speaking countries in Latin America. That's a step in the right direction.¶ Historically, Mexico hasn't taken advantage of the three most important predictors of trade: A shared history, a common language, and regional trade agreements. As a result, big Mexican companies haven't moved into Latin America while American multinational corporations have done so, and Mexico depends on NAFTA for more than 80 of its exports.¶ Finally, Peña Nieto's economic slogan during the election campaign was Para Que Ganes Mas (You Will Earn More). He hasn't quite explained how his government will ensure that, but the message sends the signal that the PRI wishes not just to create jobs, but jobs that will pay higher salaries.¶ That's a major shift from the ideas of a previous PRI president, Ernesto Zedillo, who firmly believed that "the best industrial policy is one that doesn't exist." Instead, Mexico must grow by developing policies that will augment the value of the products and services produced in the country -- just like some other countries in Latin America.

Global war
Royal 10 – Jedediah Royal, Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction at the U.S. Department of Defense, 2010, “Economic Integration, Economic Signaling and the Problem of Economic Crises,” in Economics of War and Peace: Economic, Legal and Political Perspectives, ed. Goldsmith and Brauer, p. 213-215
Less intuitive is how periods of economic decline may increase the likelihood of external conflict. Political science literature has contributed a moderate degree of attention to the impact of economic decline and the security and defence behaviour of interdependent states. Research in this vein has been considered at systemic, dyadic and national levels. Several notable contributions follow.
First, on the systemic level, Pollins (2008) advances Modelski and Thompson's (1996) work on leadership cycle theory, finding that rhythms in the global economy are associated with the rise and fall of a pre-eminent power and the often bloody transition from one pre-eminent leader to the next. As such, exogenous shocks such as economic crises could usher in a redistribution of relative power (see also Gilpin. 1981) that leads to uncertainty about power balances, increasing the risk of miscalculation (Feaver, 1995). Alternatively, even a relatively certain redistribution of power could lead to a permissive environment for conflict as a rising power may seek to challenge a declining power (Werner. 1999). Separately, Pollins (1996) also shows that global economic cycles combined with parallel leadership cycles impact the likelihood of conflict among major, medium and small powers, although he suggests that the causes and connections between global economic conditions and security conditions remain unknown.
Second, on a dyadic level, Copeland's (1996, 2000) theory of trade expectations suggests that 'future expectation of trade' is a significant variable in understanding economic conditions and security behaviour of states. He argues that interdependent states are likely to gain pacific benefits from trade so long as they have an optimistic view of future trade relations. However, if the expectations of future trade decline, particularly for difficult to replace items such as energy resources, the likelihood for conflict increases, as states will be inclined to use force to gain access to those resources. Crises could potentially be the trigger for decreased trade expectations either on its own or because it triggers protectionist moves by interdependent states.4
Third, others have considered the link between economic decline and external armed conflict at a national level. Blomberg and Hess (2002) find a strong correlation between internal conflict and external conflict, particularly during periods of economic downturn. They write:
The linkages between internal and external conflict and prosperity are strong and mutually reinforcing. Economic conflict tends to spawn internal conflict, which in turn returns the favour. Moreover, the presence of a recession tends to amplify the extent to which international and external conflicts self-reinforce each other. (Blomberg and Hess, 2002. p. 89)
Economic decline has also been linked with an increase in the likelihood of terrorism (Blomberg, Hess, and Weerapana, 2004), which has the capacity to spill across borders and lead to external tensions.
Furthermore, crises generally reduce the popularity of a sitting government. “Diversionary theory" suggests that, when facing unpopularity arising from economic decline, sitting governments have increased incentives to fabricate external military conflicts to create a 'rally around the flag' effect. Wang (1996), DeRouen (1995). and Blomberg, Hess, and Thacker (2006) find supporting evidence showing that economic decline and use of force are at least indirectly correlated. Gelpi (1997), Miller (1999), and Kisangani and Pickering (2009) suggest that the tendency towards diversionary tactics are greater for democratic states than autocratic states, due to the fact that democratic leaders are generally more susceptible to being removed from office due to lack of domestic support. DeRouen (2000) has provided evidence showing that periods of weak economic performance in the United States, and thus weak Presidential popularity, are statistically linked to an increase in the use of force.
In summary, recent economic scholarship positively correlates economic integration with an increase in the frequency of economic crises, whereas political science scholarship links economic decline with external conflict at systemic, dyadic and national levels.5 This implied connection between integration, crises and armed conflict has not featured prominently in the economic-security debate and deserves more attention.
This observation is not contradictory to other perspectives that link economic interdependence with a decrease in the likelihood of external conflict, such as those mentioned in the first paragraph of this chapter. Those studies tend to focus on dyadic interdependence instead of global interdependence and do not specifically consider the occurrence of and conditions created by economic crises. As such, the view presented here should be considered ancillary to those views.
3
Thus AJ and I demand that the United States federal government condition economically engaging Mexico by opening the US-Mexican border on the federal government of Mexico meeting the four human rights requirements of the Mérida Initiative. The United States federal government should decide if the federal government of Mexico meets these requirements based off the findings of Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos.
We use the economic genealogy of the 1AC as an interrogation process necessary for decolonizing our minds and moving toward a new consciousness.
Solves the AFF and boosts our human rights cred
WOLA 10 - (Washington Office of Latin America- contains multiple experts on human rights abuse in latin america and quotes the state department's report "Congress: Withhold Funds for Mexico Tied to Human Rights Performance" 9/14/10, http://www.wola.org/publications/congress_withhold_funds_for_mexico_tied_to_human_rights_performance)
The US government significantly strengthened its partnership with Mexico in combating organized crime in 2007 when it announced the Merida Initiative, a multi-year US security assistance package for Mexico. To date, the US government has allocated roughly $1.5 billion in Merida funding to Mexico. From the outset, the US Congress recognized the importance of ensuring that the Mexican government respect human rights in its public security efforts, mandating by law that 15 percent of select Merida funds be withheld until the State Department issued a report to the US Congress which showed that Mexico had demonstrated it was meeting four human rights requirements. ¶ ¶ On September 2, 2010, the State Department issued its second report to Congress concluding that Mexico is meeting the Merida Initiative’s human rights requirements, and it stated its intention to obligate roughly $36 million in security assistance that had been withheld from the 2009 supplemental and the 2010 omnibus budgets. ¶ However, research conducted by our respective organizations, Mexico’s National Human Rights Commission, and even the State Department’s own reports, demonstrates conclusively that Mexico has failed to meet the four human rights requirements set out by law. As a result, Congress should not release these select Merida funds. Releasing these funds would send the message that the United States condones the grave human rights violations committed in Mexico, including torture, rape, killings, and enforced disappearances.¶ We recognize that Mexico is facing a severe public security crisis, and that the United States can play a constructive role in strengthening Mexico’s ability to confront organized crime in an effective manner. However, human rights violations committed by Mexican security forces are not only deplorable in their own right, but also significantly undermine the effectiveness of Mexico’s public security efforts. Building trust between the Mexican people and the government is essential to gathering information to dismantle organized crime. When security forces commit grave human rights violations and they are not held accountable for their actions, they lose that trust, alienating key allies and leaving civilians in a state of terror and defenselessness. It is thus in the interest of both of our countries to help Mexico curb systematic human rights violations, ensure that violations are effectively investigated and those responsible held accountable, and assess candidly the progress Mexico is making towards improving accountability and transparency. ¶ Evidence demonstrates that Mexico is not fulfilling effectively any of the requirements established by Congress, particularly those dealing with prosecuting military abuses and torture: 

HR cred solves conflict
Burke-White 4 (William W., Lecturer in Public and International Affairs and Senior Special Assistant to the Dean, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University The Harvard Environmental Law Review Spring, 2004 LN,https://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/wburkewh/workingpapers/17HarvHumRtsJ249(2004).pdf)
This Article presents a strategic--as opposed to ideological or normative--argument that the promotion of human rights should be given a more prominent place in U.S. foreign policy. It does so by suggesting a correlation between the domestic human rights practices of states and their propensity to engage in aggressive international conduct. Among the chief threats to U.S. national security are acts of aggression by other states. Aggressive acts of war may directly endanger the United States, as did the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941, or they may require U.S. military action overseas, as in Kuwait fifty years later. Evidence from the post-Cold War period  *250  indicates that states that systematically abuse their own citizens' human rights are also those most likely to engage in aggression. To the degree that improvements in various states' human rights records decrease the likelihood of aggressive war, a foreign policy informed by human rights can significantly enhance U.S. and global security.¶ Since 1990, a state's domestic human rights policy appears to be a telling indicator of that state's propensity to engage in international aggression. A central element of U.S. foreign policy has long been the preservation of peace and the prevention of such acts of aggression. n2 If the correlation discussed herein is accurate, it provides U.S. policymakers with a powerful new tool to enhance national security through the promotion of human rights. A strategic linkage between national security and human rights would result in a number of important policy modifications. First, it changes the prioritization of those countries U.S. policymakers have identified as presenting the greatest concern. Second, it alters some of the policy prescriptions for such states. Third, it offers states a means of signaling benign international intent through the improvement of their domestic human rights records. Fourth, it provides a way for a current government to prevent future governments from aggressive international behavior through the institutionalization of human rights protections. Fifth, it addresses the particular threat of human rights abusing states obtaining weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Finally, it offers a mechanism for U.S.-U.N. cooperation on human rights issues.
4

purports a neoliberal economic system which devastates the envionrment
Harris 8 (Richard L Harris: Professor of Global Studies at California State University, Monterey Bay; Managing Editor of the Journal of Developing Societies (SAGE India); and Coordi­ nating Editor of Latin American Perspectives (SAGE USA). “Latin America’s Response to Neoliberalism and Globalization,” http://www.nuso.org/upload/articulos/3506_2.pdf)
The economic, political and social development of the Latin American and Caribbean countries is obstructed by the power relations and international structures that regulate the world capitalist system. The structures of this system provide a hierarchical political and economic exoskeleton that constrains all national efforts to pursue any significant degree of self-directed, inward-oriented, balanced and environmentally sustainable development. Indeed, the geopolitical power structures that preserve and support the world capitalist system have made it almost impossible for the governments of the core as well as the peripheral countries in this system to pursue a path of inward-oriented, equitable, democratically controlled and environmentally sustainable development (Amin 2001b:20). Since the 1980s, inter-American relations and the economic, political and social development of the Latin American and Caribbean states have been shaped by these geo­ political structures and the neoliberal strategic agenda put forward by the government of the United States of America (USA), the major transnational corporations and the three major international financial institutions (IFIs) that operate in the Latin American and Caribbean region (Harris and Nef, 2008). This later group of IFIs includes the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). The policies of these IFIs based in Washington generally follow the dictates of the government of the USA due to the controlling influence that it exercises over these institutions. Their agenda for the Latin American and Caribbean region gives priority to promoting and protecting the interests of the major investors and transnational corporations that are largely based in the USA and operate in the region. It also serves to maintain and strengthen the geopolitical hegemony of the USA over the Western Hemisphere (Harris and Nef). But conditions are changing. Washington’s neoliberal agenda for controlling the capi­ talist development of the Western Hemisphere and maintaining US hegemony over the region is increasingly threatened by a progressive alternative agenda for the regio­ nal integration of the Latin American and Caribbean countries that has begun to gain widespread support in the region. This alternative agenda for the region calls for the autonomous economic development of the region free of the hegemonic control and influence of the USA and the IFIs based in Washington. Not only does this type of development pose a fundamental threat to the hegemony of the USA in the region, it threatens the dominance of transnational capital throughout the Americas. Moreover, it also poses a significant threat to the global expansion and integration of the world capitalist system in general and to the global hegemonic coalition led by the government and transnational corporations of the USA. Today, political and economic strategies are being developed for moving from the prevailing export-oriented neoliberal model of economic development to new in­ ward-oriented models of sustainable development, tailored to the diverse conditions, economic capacities, political structures, natural endowments and cultural values of the societies involved. Moreover, a growing number of international and regional civil society organizations have emerged in recent years to create such alternatives. What the forums, networks, programs, and activities of these various types of organizations reveal is that there is a growing international network of organizations and social movements committed to promoting new, more equitable forms of international cooperation and regulation that support inward-oriented and sustainable development as well as genuine democracy at the regional and national levels. At the same time, these organizations argue that the present global trading regime that has been erected under the WTO should and can be replaced by a new global trading system that replaces the present system of so-called free but in fact unfair trade, with a sys­ tem that ensures «fair trade» and promotes South-South economic exchange and coo­ peration. Most of the progressive alternatives advocated by these organizations and the new left-leaning governments that have been elected to office in the region give priority to aligning the external relations of the countries in the region to the internal needs of the majority of the population. That is to say, decisions about what to export and what to import should be aligned with the needs of the population rather than the interests of transnational capitalists and transnational corporations or the hegemonic interests of the USA. Some of these alternative strategies involve what Walden Bello (2002) has referred to as «deglobalization.» That is to say, they involve unlinking the economies of these peripheral capitalist societies from the advanced capitalist centers of the world economy, particularly in the USA. They also involve throwing off the constraints that have been imposed upon the economic policies and structures of the­ se countries by the IFIs (IMF, World Bank, and IDB), the WTO and the other agents and regulatory regimes that regulate the world capitalist system. In fact, there appears to be growing interest throughout Latin America in revivifying the Pan-American ideal of unification, currently perhaps best expressed in Hugo Chávez’ Bolivarian dream of turning South America into a regional economic hegemon (DeLong, 2005). The governments of Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Uruguay have indicated they want to join the government of Venezuela in creating a regional union. It has been proposed that this coalescing continental confederation should shift the region’s extra-continental trade towards Europe, Asia and South Africa and away from North America. The prospect of this happening appears to have alarmed Washington more than the increasing number of electoral triumphs of leftist politicians in the region (Delong). There has also been considerable talk in the region about creating a single currency for the South American countries that would be modeled on and perhaps tied to the Euro rather than the US Dollar. This discussion is symptomatic of what appears to be an emerging desire to create an integrated economic and political community that is strikingly different from the type of hemispheric economic integration scheme being pursued by the Washington and its allies in the region (DeLong). Moreover, there is an increasing tendency in the region to find alternatives to trading with the USA. In particular, several Latin American nations (Brazil, Cuba, Venezuela and Chile) have been strengthening their economic relations with Asia, particularly with China. But the widespread popular opposition to neoliberalism and so-called globalization, and the shift to the Left in the region’s politics, represent much more than a serious challenge to US hegemony, they also represent a serious threat to the existing pattern of capitalist development in the region. Central to Washington’s strategy for the hemisphere has been the imposition of a neoliberal model of capitalist development on the region which involves the increasing integration of the region’s economies into a hemispheric ‘free trade’ area or rather a trade bloc that is dominated by the USA. This project is itself an essential part of the strategy of the USA for the domination of the global economy by its transnational corporations. The restructuring of the economies of the region under the mantra of neoliberalism and the banner of globalization has been aimed at giving the USA-based transnational corporations and investors free reign within the region and a strong hemispheric base from which to dominate the world economy In opposition to the neoliberal, polyarchical and globalizing model of development that has been imposed by the government of the USA and its allies in the region, the growing movement for an alternative form of development that is both genuinely democratic, equitable and environmentally sustainable appears to be gaining ground in various parts of Latin America and the Caribbean. This alternative model of development requires the reorganization and realignment of the existing economies in the region. It also requires the replacement of the existing political regimes, which serve the interests of the transnational bloc of social forces that are behind the integration of the region into the new global circuits of accumulation and production that the major trans­ national corporations and the IFIs have been constructing since the 1970s. In addition to fundamental economic changes, most of the existing pseudo-democratic political regimes in the region need to be thoroughly democratized so that they are responsive to and capable of serving the needs and interests of the majority of the people rather than the ruling polyarchies and the transnational corporations operating in the region. An essential requirement for realigning the region’s economies so that they produce people-centered and environmentally sustainable development is the integration of these economies into a regional economic and political union that has the resources, structures and the power to operate independently of the government of the USA and the transnational corporations based in the USA as well as in the European Union and Japan. If this type of regional integration takes place, it will enable the Latin American and Caribbean states to break free of the hegemonic influence of the USA, and reverse the denationalization (‘globalization’) of the Latin American and Caribbean economies. Instead of the corporate-driven hemispheric integration of the region under the hegemony of the USA, a new system of regional economic cooperation and both equitable as well as environmentally sustainable development is desperately needed to improve the lives of the vast majority of the people living in Latin America and the Caribbean. This type of regional, equitable and sustainable development can only be success­ fully carried out by truly democratically elected political leaders with broad-based popular support who are sincerely committed to achieving this alternative rather than the elitist neoliberal model. It probably will also require democratic socialist political institutions and structures of production and distribution. Regionalism has been the dream of the democratic left for some time. The European Union has its origins in the French socialist dream of ending Franco-German enmity through unifying Europe, and African regionalism was the vision of African socialists such as Julius Nyerere of Tanzania who saw regional integration as the only means to progress beyond tribalism and colonialism and create a united and democratic Africa (Faux, 2001:4). Viewed from the perspective of those who want to create a people-cen­ tered, democratic, equitable and environmentally sustainable social order in the Ame­ ricas, the corporate-dominated process of capitalist pseudo-globalization taking place in the region and around the world urgently needs to be replaced by what Samir Amin has referred to as a new system of «pluricentric regulated globalization» (Amin, 2001a). This alternative form of globalization requires the development of regional economic and political unions in Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean, the Middle East and elsewhere, which collaboratively promote people-centered, democratic and envi­ ronmentally sustainable forms of development on a regional basis. According to Amin, these regional unions of states are needed to collaborate as partners in collecti­ vely regulating the global restructuring of the world economy for the benefit of the vast majority of humanity rather than the transnational corporations and the northern centers of the world capitalist system in the USA, Europe and Japan. This type of regional-based regulative order is needed to regulate and redirect inter­ national economic, social, and political relations so that these relations serve the inte­ rests and needs of the vast majority of the world’s population. The present power structures and regulatory regime of the world capitalist system support the transna­ tional corporate-driven restructuring and denationalization of the economies of both the societies at the core and in the periphery of this system. The Latin American and Caribbean countries need to ‘de-link’ step-by-step from this exploitative and inequitable system. They need to redirect and restructure their eco­ nomies so that they serve the needs of the majority of their people while also protec­ ting their natural resources and ecosystems. The alternative policies of economic, poli­ tical and social development proposed and in some cases adopted by the new leftist leaders, the progressive civil society organizations and their supporters, combined with the project of regional integration associated with the new Unión de Naciones Suramericanas (UNASUR), are significant indications of unprecedented and pro­ found transformation unfolding in the Americas. A growing number of civil society organizations and social movements throughout the Americas are pressuring the governments of the region to follow what the pro­ gressive civil society networks such as the Alianza Social Continental/ Hemispheric Social Alliance (ASC/HSA) describes as a regional model of integration that supports the environmentally sustainable and democratic development of all the societies in the region (see ASC-HSA, 2006). The ASC/HSA also contends that the UNASUR pro­ ject and the Bolivarian dream of unification is threatened by the so-called free trade agreements that Washington has negotiated with Chile, Colombia, Peru, the Central American countries and the Dominican Republic. As the ASC/HSA makes clear in its documents and public information campaigns, these agreements compromise the national sovereignty, obstruct the local production of medicines, threaten public health, facilitate the profit-driven privatization of water and vital services such as health and sanitation, and threaten the survival of indigenous cultures, biodiversity, food sovereignty, and local control over natural resources. The «Alternatives for the Americas» proposal developed by this inter-American network of progressive civil society organizations and social movements calls on all governments in the region to subordinate trade and investments to sustainability and environmental protection as well as social justice and local democratic control over economic and social development (ASC/HSA 2002:5). The growing number and political influence of these kinds of networks, organizations and movements provide unquestionable evidence of the emergence of the social for­ ces and political conditions that Panitch (1996:89) and others (Harris, 1995:301-302; Jo­ nas and McCaughan, 1994) predicted in the 1990s would arise in opposition to neoli­ beralism, corporate-dominated pseudo globalization and the extension and consolida­ tion of the hegemony of the USA. It now seems increasingly possible that these forces and the political mobilization that they have helped to create will transform the politi­ cal regimes in the region as well as the nature of inter-American relations, bring about the regional integration of the Latin American countries and free these countries from US hegemony and the form of ‘turbo-capitalism’ to which they have been subjected. At this point, we can only speak in general terms about the new model(s) of develop­ ment that will replace the neoliberal model of uneven and inequitable development that has pillaged most of the region.
Extinction---tech and reforms fail
Richard A. Smith 7, Research Associate at the Institute for Policy Research and Development, UK; PhD in History from UCLA, June 2007, “The Eco-suicidal Economics of Adam Smith,” Capitalism Nature Socialism, Vol. 18, No. 2, p. 22-43
In the midst of the record-breaking heat wave in the summer of 2003, George Monbiot, the renowned columnist for the London Guardian, penned a short but eloquent essay entitled "Sleepwalking to Extinction." Monbiot wrote: We live in a dreamworld. With a small, rational part of our brain, we recognize that our existence is . . . destroying the conditions for human life on earth. Were we governed by reason, we would be on the barricades today, dragging the drivers of Range Rovers and Nissan Patrols out of their seats, occupying and shutting down the coal-burning power stations, bursting in upon the Blairs' retreat from reality in Barbados and demanding a reversal of economic life as dramatic as the one we bore when we went to war with Hitler.1 But despite the frightening trends and increasingly desperate pleas from the world's scientists, the world's corporate and political leadership show no sign of abandoning denial and adopting "reason" nor scrapping business-as-usual to mobilize against catastrophe. The ritual has now become depressingly familiar and predictable: After each new "shocking" report on melting icecaps, the slowing Gulf Stream in the North Atlantic, or eco-devastation in Africa or China, "concerned" politicians call for "immediate action" and "drastic steps" to curb emissions but then do nothing of substance. Successive post-Kyoto talks begin with urgent pleas from devastated Third World peasants and expert scientists, then collapse in disagreement. At every turn, the priority of growth and profits overrides every ringing alarm, and society carries on in its "sleepwalk to extinction." In the latest rehearsal of this charade, the United Nations talks on climate change in Nairobi in November 2006 collapsed with no firm targets adopted and every issue of any seriousness postponed yet again. Then-UN secretary-General, Kofi Annan, decried the assembled ministers as "frighteningly timid," "lacking in leadership" and said they displayed "a failure of political will." One Greenpeace observer remarked that "the glaciers in Greenland are moving faster than the negotiators."2 The Nairobi session came just after Britain's Treasury secretary and former World Bank chief economist, Sir Nicholas Stern, sounded the latest alarm with his own blistering report laying down a challenge to Britain, the U.S., and developing nations like China and India that the planet faces imminent catastrophe unless urgent measures are taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions immediately. Stern's warning went beyond restating an apocalyptic vision of hundreds of millions fleeing floods and drought; it struck at the heart of the corporate resistance to environmental measures by demonstrating that the cost of inaction could result in the permanent loss of perhaps 20 percent of global output, while the cost of preventive action right now is as little as 1 to 2 percent of global gross national product (GNP). By illustrating the huge economic cost that inaction will impose on the industrialized economies, Stern's report should have knocked the last leg out from under the "environment versus economy" argument. Reiterating the conclusions of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scientists, Stern warned that just to stabilize CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere at between 450 and 500 parts per million, we will have to cut global emissions by 25 percent and wealthy country emissions by 60 percent by 2050. Presenting the findings in London, Prime Minister Tony Blair said the consequences of inaction were "literally disastrous" and warned: This disaster is not set to happen in some science fiction future many years ahead in our lifetime. We can't wait the five years it took to negotiate Kyoto-we simply don't have the time . . . Without radical measures to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the next ten to fifteen years, there is compelling evidence to suggest that we might lose the chance to control temperature rises."3 The Stern report came just as the International Energy Agency announced that China, which is commissioning a new coal-fired power plant every five days, will surpass the United States in 2009-nearly a decade ahead of previous predictions-as the world's biggest emitter of carbon dioxide.4 Largely because of China's growth, the Global Carbon Project reported in the November 13, 2006 issue of Nature that "Global carbon emissions are now growing by 3.2 percent a year... That's four times higher than the average annual growth of 0.8 percent from 1990-1999 . . . We are not on any of the stabilization paths." Professor Bill McGuire, director of the Benfield Hazard Research Center in London, said: "This is more very bad news. We need a 60 to 70 percent cut in emissions, but instead, emission levels are spiraling out of control. The sum total of our meager efforts to cut emissions amounts to less than zero."5 The Necessity of Hypocrisy So what sort of "radical measures to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the next ten to fifteen years" do Blair and Stern propose to stop this onrushing catastrophe? None. After all their rhetoric about impending disaster, the best they could do was call for more "carbon pricing," "more research into new technologies," and "robust international agreements." They specifically rejected mandatory limits on emissions as "too inflexible" and-most crucially-have nothing whatsoever to say about the implications of inexorable growth. On the face of it, this was a completely inadequate response to the crisis, and Blair was immediately chastised by his own party for resisting binding targets.6 After all, carbon pricing schemes, notably in the EU, have already proved to be a colossal failure since economic growth has just barreled through the Kyoto carbon "limits." And what possible technical breakthroughs could cut global CO2 emissions by 60 percent, particularly in the ten-to-fifteen-year timeframe Blair says we must act in order to save ourselves, when China is adding a new coal-fired power plant every week and coal-fired plants are still being built in the United States.7 Nearly everywhere, we see that despite the increased energy efficiency and installation of pollution controls in cars or power plants, without limits to growth these gains are outstripped by ever-increasing production. So instead of CO2 emissions falling, globally emissions are actually accelerating.8 And CO2 emissions are only one-and perhaps not the even the worst-of the oncoming ecological catastrophes we face. Around the world, forests are also vanishing, clean water is disappearing, coral reefs are dying off, species after species is being driven to extinction, resource after resource is being exhausted; everywhere the natural world is being systematically plundered and sacrificed to the god of relentless growth, profits and consumption.9 The Inconvenient Truth Al Gore Does Not Want to Face Blair's contradictions are entirely predictable, rational, and necessary from the standpoint of his capitalist perspective, because the problems he faces are systemic, built into the logic of capitalist economics, and thus unsolvable within the framework of capitalism. The solution to the threat of global warming is obvious: The only way to cut emissions by 60 to 70 percent in the next ten to fifteen years-barring some as yet unknown technical miracle-is by drastically cutting production, output and consumption, particularly in the advanced industrial economies. Al Gore says we face an "inconvenient truth": consume less, conserve more-or die. The problem is the admonition to consume less has to translate into the reality of consuming less-less oil, electricity, steel, aluminum, wood, paper, plastic, fabric, beef, fish, and so on. That, in turn, can only mean producing fewer cars, airplanes, kitchen remodels, fashions, resort vacations, TVs and TV shows, hamburgers and Starbucks Frappuccinos-i.e., converting less of nature into consumable commodities to give a break to the fish, forests, oceans, atmosphere, and all the other natural resources exploited to support the capitalist consumer lifestyle. This is the really inconvenient truth that no investor, labor union, government, mainstream environmental organization, nor anyone of us-including Al Gore-wants to face.10 But this is the truth we have to face if we want to survive. Despite the difficulty such a massive challenge poses, it does not mean that people have to starve. On the contrary, if we do not make these cuts and restructure the global economy, not only will millions soon die from starvation, floods, drought and other catastrophes, but the capitalist engine of ecodestruction will drive humanity to the brink of collapse, if not extinction. The problem is, given the requirements of capitalist reproduction, particularly the need to meet shareholder demands for growing profits, no corporation can cut production and stay in business. Furthermore, any broad effort to slow production and consumption would only bring on market collapse and economic depression. So, as long as Blair, Stern, Al Gore, and the rest of the corporate and political elite are committed to maintaining and perpetuating global capitalism as their first and foremost priority, they have no choice but to subordinate the environment to growth and consumption, override their own environmental targets, turn themselves into hypocrites, and doom the future of humanity. To imagine, as they do, that technical innovations, carbon taxes, "green shopping" and the like will allow production and consumption to spiral endlessly upward and consume evermore resources while pollution and emissions spiral downward is to live in a delusional dreamworld of faith-based economics that has no empirical basis.11 Through most of human history up to around the 17th century, humanity suffered from class structures that put brakes on productivity growth, institutionalized underproduction as a regular feature of economic life, and so brought on periodic famines and demographic collapse. But since the advent of the capitalist mode of production, humanity has both benefited-but also increasingly suffered-from the opposite problem: crises and consequences of overproduction, which have typically taken the form of economic crashes and depression. Today, this engine of relentless technological revolution and productivity growth has built an economy of such power, capacity and scale that it is systematically destroying the very ecological basis of human life. The Smithian Operating System To understand why the free market can't solve our global environmental crisis, the place to start is with an examination of the logic and contradictions of capitalist economics-the economics of Adam Smith. Needless to say, Smith can't be held responsible for the problems and consequences of capitalist development. But Smith's economic theory is a metonym - the language of capitalism, its intellectual "operating system." For it was Smith, the original and foremost theorist of capitalism, who first discovered and elaborated the organizing principle of capitalist economic life, which he famously termed the "invisible hand." Smith found it remarkable that in what he called "commercial society" (what we today call capitalism), no one looks out for the "general welfare" of society as such. Yet somehow, the provision of the necessities of life-e.g., enough food, clothes, housing, and transportation-so that society can carry on from day-to-day and year-to-year seems to more or less unconsciously get taken care of. In some of the most famous phrases in all of economic literature Smith asserted: In almost every other race of animals each individual, when it grows up to maturity, is entirely independent, and in its natural state has occasion for the assistance of no other living creature. But man has almost constant occasion for the help of his brethren, and it is in vain for him to expect it from their benevolence only. He will be more likely to prevail if he can interest their self-love in his favour, and shew them that it is for their own advantage to do for him what he requires of them. Whoever offers to another a bargain of any kind, proposes to do this. Give me that which I want, and you shall have this which you want . . . and it is in this manner that we obtain from one another the far greater part of those good offices which we stand in need of. It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages . . . (Smith, Wealth of Nations, Book 1, Chapter 1, p. 14.)12 And again that: Every individual . . . neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it . . . He intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. (Smith, Wealth of Nations, Book IV, Chapter II, p. 423.)13 Smith's insight, one of the most powerful and elegant concepts in the history of capitalist economics, grasps the essence of the market system-namely, production for exchange, specialized division of labor, and mutual dependence of all producers/commodity sellers/consumers upon one another through the market. This is what distinguishes the market system from all previous economic systems, such as communal tribal society, slavery, and feudalism-all of which were, in one way or another, systems based overwhelmingly on direct production for use rather than for exchange. For example, in pre-capitalist economic systems like medieval agrarian Europe, farm production was planned and largely for direct use. The basic unit of rural production was the peasant family with its farm, rudimentary tools and livestock. Peasant farmers not only grew their own food but often made their own clothes, fabricated most of their own tools, and built their own houses. Peasants produced mostly for subsistence and, where they were enserfed, to pay rents to feudal landlords, tithes to the church, and sometimes additional obligations to the state. Beyond this, those who could produce and retain some surplus over subsistence, rent, and tithe obligations sold it in local town markets to procure the few necessities they could not produce for themselves on the farm or in the lord's demesne shops, such as metal for plows or tools. In the villages, patriarchal family households organized the day-to-day operations of farm life, determining which crops to grow and when, and assigning a division of labor within the family. They planned this production based on their foreknowledge of what their family unit needed to carry on from year-to-year-how much and what kinds of crops and animals to raise, and how much labor to devote to farming, husbandry, and building upkeep. More often than not, because village agricultural regimes required village-wide cooperation to regulate seasonal plantings, field rotations, harvest, and commons management, peasant farmers collectively planned and regulated their seasonal work rhythms in cooperation with their neighbors according to the custom and village bylaws in tightknit village communities. Throughout Europe, most rural agrarian output was directly consumed on the farm, in the hamlets and villages. The feudal aristocracy consumed the surpluses directly and marketed some of their surpluses in urban markets to purchase luxury goods and military equipment. In short, rural Europe, at least up to the 15th century, was in a sense a "planned" economy-or more precisely, consisted of masses of miniature planned village economies.14 By Adam Smith's day in the late 18th century, rural peasant village self-sufficiency with its limited division of labor had largely given way to generalized production for market throughout England and parts of Western Europe. In this new "commercial" economy, Smith observed there is no general economic "plan." No one plans production for the self-sufficient family anymore. Production is now specialized and geared for the whole society-and it is to society that one must turn to satisfy one's own needs. No one knows how much wheat or wool, how many shoes, coats, ships, or wagons society needs, or when they are needed. No one consciously divides up and assigns society's labor to the various tasks of producing all that society requires over any given period of time.15 And yet out of the unconscious "mindlessness" of this system, a spontaneous order emerges. Society seems to be "guided by an invisible hand" to produce more or less of these goods so that we can carry on from day-to-day to ensure social reproduction. By the developing 18th-century capitalist economy of Adam Smith's era, most producers no longer possessed their own means of subsistence, or at least full subsistence. Masses of peasant farmers had been cleared off the land and proletarianized by centuries of enclosure movements. Peasant subsistence farms, with all their variety of produce, had been replaced with wheat farms or sheep folds. The hand loom weaver, village blacksmith and most small-scale hand manufacturers were giving way to large-scale factory production with a specialized division of labor and, increasingly in the late 18th century, mechanization. Without full access to the means of subsistence, everyone in capitalist society must specialize to produce a commodity for market or sell their labor power to work for an employer who does possess the means of production.16 So to win one's own bread in the capitalist organization of production, virtually everyone, including the capitalists, must continuously sell their specialized commodity on the market in order to continuously purchase their own means of subsistence and the means of production to re-enter production.17 In this way, all commodity producers/sellers are dependent upon the labor of others.18 How do these specialist commodity producers/sellers know in advance how much of their particular commodity-wheat, cloth, bricks, horseshoes, board feet of lumber, barrels, etc.-society "needs" in any given year or how much they will sell? They don't. Typically they estimate from what they sold the previous year, and hope to sell their product for at least as low a price as others offering the same commodity. Thus, society's "need" for any particular commodity is determined after the fact by the price at which it sells, what Smith called "effectual demand." If demand and prices are high for some particular commodity, Smith says producers will "employ more labor and stock in preparing and bringing it to market." If demand falls, producers will "withdraw a part of their labor or stock from this employment" and redeploy those resources in some other line of production.19 So if the market is glutted with wheat, but wool is in short supply and prices are high, some farmers will turn to raising sheep. If demand is low for ships but high for houses, some carpenters will switch from building ships to building houses. And so on, until the supply and demand come roughly into balance, what economists today call "equilibrium."20 That's the beauty and efficiency of the market system, as mainstream economists never tire of telling us. Engine of Development: Production for Exchange and its Imperatives This mutual dependence of each and every person through the market entrains a number of powerful implications. Foremost among these are the implications that flow from competition in the marketplace. Commodity sellers don't have the freedom to charge what they wish, because they must be able to sell at prices close to the competition if they are to compete. The specific strategies and methods producers must adopt to survive against the competition shape the overall pattern of economic development of capitalism as a system and also distinguish it from every other economic system: Producers must strive to cut the cost of inputs, which means seeking out ever-cheaper sources of raw materials and labor. Producers must continuously increase the efficiency of their units of production by innovating, bringing in more advanced labor-saving machinery to boost productivity, and substituting newer and cheaper raw materials inputs. So unlike the ruling classes of pre-capitalist economies, capitalists are not free to consume their surpluses in conspicuous consumption but must reinvest much of their profits back into productivity-enhancing technologies and skills to develop the forces of production. Competition compels producers to strive to grow by maximizing sales, expanding existing markets, seeking out and creating new markets and commodities-or see them developed by the competition, and thus see their stock value fall as the penalty for complacency. As eloquent as Adam Smith was, no one captured the broader developmental implications of capitalist economics better than Karl Marx. In some of the most prescient phrases in all of economic literature, Marx wrote in his Communist Manifesto: The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society ... Constant revolutionizing of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned . . . The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together. Subjection of Nature's forces to man, machinery, application of chemistry to industry and agriculture, steam-navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents for cultivation, canalization of rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground - what earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces slumbered in the lap of social labor?21 By comparison, pre-capitalist modes of production contained no such engine of development or drive to "constantly revolutionize" the instruments and relations of production. Technological advance under slavery and feudalism was agonizingly slow, and economic stagnation was the norm. When productivity growth could not keep pace with population growth, economic collapse and famine followed. Even the Stalinist bureaucratic mode of production in Russia and China contained no such built-in drive to development. Post-revolutionary Russia and China rapidly developed and industrialized to a considerable extent, but the bureaucratic system was not powered by any self-active motor. Development depended entirely on the conscious actions and direction of central planners, but for the same reason, it was also severely limited and handicapped by the bureaucracy's inability to push development beyond certain limits. In particular, these bureaucrats lacked the weapons of unemployment and bankruptcy to discipline producers, force productivity increases, or generate innovation and development.22 Without competition to force producers to innovate and become more efficient, top-down bureaucratically driven development was no match for the dynamic growth of global capitalism. This engine of development has brought the most prodigious development of the forces of production of any mode of production in history, lifting the living standards of billions of people the world over. So it was no surprise that since the spectacular collapse of communism and the global triumph of capitalism in the 1990s, Smithian economics has been crowned with a sacred halo, unquestioned and self-evident to the churched.23 Today, Smith's theory, rebranded for today's market under the neoclassical and neoliberal labels, is entrenched in every economics department from Berkeley to Beijing. Engine of Planetary Eco-collapse: The Collective Irrationality of Individualist Economics In his 1996 book The Future of Capitalism, Lester Thurow lucidly captured the socially suicidal aggregate impact of individualistic economic decision-making: Nowhere is capitalism's time horizon problem more acute than in the area of global environmentalism .. . What should a capitalistic society do about long-run environmental problems such as global warming or ozone depletion? . .. Using capitalist decision rules, the answer to what should be done today to prevent such problems is very clear-do nothing. However large the negative effects fifty to one hundred years from now might be, their current discounted net present value is zero. If the current value of the future negative consequences are zero, then nothing should be spent today to prevent those distant problems from emerging. But if the negative effects are very large fifty to one hundred years from now, by then it will be too late to do anything to make the situation any better, since anything done at that time could only improve the situation another fifty to one hundred years into the future. So being good capitalists, those who live in the future, no matter how bad their problems are, will also decide to do nothing. Eventually a generation will arrive which cannot survive in the earth's altered environment, but by then it will be too late for them to do anything to prevent their own extinction. Each generation makes good capitalist decisions, yet the net effect is collective social suicide.24 Lester Thurow, virtually alone among mainstream economists as near as I can tell, has recognized this potentially fatal contradiction of capitalism-even though he is no anti-capitalist and wrote the book from which this excerpt is drawn in the hopes of finding a future for capitalism. Until very recently, the standard economics textbooks ignored the problem of the environment altogether. Even today, the standard Economics 101 textbooks of Baro, Mankiv and other mainstream economists contain almost no mention of environment or ecology.25 This reflects the increasingly rightward drift of the discipline since the 1970s. The American economics profession has long since abandoned the practice of critical scientific thought and seriously considering dissenting views. Today, an almost totalitarian "neoliberal" religious dogma rules the discipline. Keynesianism, social democracy, and Marxism are dismissed as hopelessly antiquated. Ecological economics is considered suspect. And the prudent graduate student is well advised to steer clear of all such interests if he or she wants to find a job.26 As Francis Fukuyama put it some years back, history has reached its penultimate apogee in free market capitalism and liberal democracy. The science of economics, Fukuyama pronounced, was "settled" with Adam Smith's accomplishment. The future would bring no more than "endless technical adjustments;" thus no further theoretical thought is required."27

The alternative – the judge should vote negative to reject neoliberal knowledge production and endorse globalization from below.
5
Economic engagement is only trade and financial transactions
Haass 00 – Richard Haass and Meghan O’Sullivan, Senior Fellows in the Brookings Institution Foreign Policy Studies Program, Honey and Vinegar: Incentives, Sanctions, and Foreign Policy, p. 5-6
Architects of engagement strategies have a wide variety of incentives from which to choose. Economic engagement might offer tangible incentives such as export credits, investment insurance or promotion, access to technology, loans, and economic aid.’2 Other equally useful economic incentives involve the removal of penalties, whether they be trade embargoes, investment bans, or high tariffs that have impeded economic relations between the United States and the target country. In addition, facilitated entry into the global economic arena and the institutions that govern it rank among the most potent incentives in today’s global market.’ ¶ Similarly, political engagement can involve the lure of diplomatic recognition, access to regional or international institutions, or the scheduling of summits between leaders—or the termination of these benefits. Military engagement could involve the extension of International Military Educational Training (IMET) both to strengthen respect for civilian authority and human rights among a country’s armed forces and, more feasibly, to establish relationships between Americans and young foreign mffitary officers.’4 These areas of engagement are likely to involve, working with state institutions, while cultural or civil society engagement is likely to entail building people-to-people contacts. Funding nongovernmental organizations, facilitating the flow of remittances, establishing postal and telephone links between the United States and the target country, and promoting the exchange of students, tourists, and other nongovernmental people between the countries are some of the incentives that might be offered under a policy of cultural engagement.¶ This brief overview of the various forms of engagement illuminates the choices open to policymakers. The plethora of options signals the flexibility of engagement as a foreign policy strategy and, in doing so, reveals one of the real strengths of engagement. At the same time, it also suggests the urgent need for considered analysis of this strategy. The purpose of this book is to address this need by deriving insights and lessons from past episodes of engagement and proposing guidelines for the future use of engagement strategies. Throughout the book, two critical questions are entertained. First, when should policymakers consider engagement? A strategy of engagement may serve certain foreign policy objectives better than others. Specific characteristics of a target country may make it more receptive to a strategy of engagement and the incentives offered under it; in other cases, a country's domestic politics may effectively exclude the use of engagement strategies. Second, how should engagement strategies be managed to maximize the chances of success? Shedding light on how policymakers achieved, or failed, in these efforts in the past is critical in an evaluation of engagement strategies. By focusing our analysis, these questions and concerns help produce a framework to guide the use of engagement strategies in the upcoming decades.
Engagement requires DIRECT talks – means both governments must be involved
Crocker ‘9 9/13/09, Chester A. Crocker is a professor of strategic studies at the Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, was an assistant secretary of state for African affairs from 1981 to 1989. “Terms of Engagement,” http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/opinion/14crocker.html?_r=1and
PRESIDENT OBAMA will have a hard time achieving his foreign policy goals until he masters some key terms and better manages the expectations they convey. Given the furor that will surround the news of America’s readiness to hold talks with Iran, he could start with “engagement” — one of the trickiest terms in the policy lexicon The Obama administration has used this term to contrast its approach with its predecessor’s resistance to talking with adversaries and troublemakers. His critics show that they misunderstand the concept of engagement when they ridicule it as making nice with nasty or hostile regimes. Let’s get a few things straight. Engagement in statecraft is not about sweet talk. Nor is it based on the illusion that our problems with rogue regimes can be solved if only we would talk to them. Engagement is not normalization, and its goal is not improved relations. It is not akin to détente, working for rapprochement, or appeasement. So how do you define an engagement strategy? It does require direct talks. There is simply no better way to convey authoritative statements of position or to hear responses. But establishing talks is just a first step. The goal of engagement is to change the other country’s perception of its own interests and realistic options and, hence, to modify its policies and its behavior.
Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to promote the integration of China into the global trading and financial systems; and security engagement, to encourage compliance with the ten principles by diplomatic and military means when economic incentives do not suffice, in order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent to using carrots and sticks in response to foreign policy actions by China. Economic engagement calls for what is described as symmetric tit-for-tat and security engagement for asymmetric tit-for-tat. A symmetric response is one that counters a move by China in the same place, time, and manner; an asymmetric response might occur in another place at another time, and perhaps in another manner. A symmetric tit-for-tat would be for Washington to counter a Chinese tariff of 10 percent on imports for the United States with a tariff of 10 percent on imports from China. An asymmetric tit-for-tat would be for the United States to counter a Chines shipment of missiles to Iran with an American shipment of F-16s to Vietnam (John Lewis Gaddis, Strategies of Containment: A critical Appraisal of Postwar American National Security Policy. New York: Oxford University Press, (1982). This is also cited in FareedZakaria, “The Reagan Strategy of Containment,” Political Science Quarterly 105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).
 x

Violation – the AFF increases diplomatic engagement without using the federal government and the reparations they give is from the Mexican government not the US

1. Limits – they open the floodgates to involvement of  thousands of international organizations, non governmental actors, and private companies – hurts the negative’s ability to prepare, which is key to competitiveness and clash

2. Ground – direct engagement with the government is necessary for links to international politics and relations based DAs as well as competition for privatization CPs – these generics are key to negative preparation on an international topic with few common linkages
Case
The aff’s claim to emancipation collapses the real material difference between our position as debaters and oppressed individuals for whom resistance is not a simple language-game---their deployment of an unproblematic posture of victimization spotlights the aff’s righteousness while robbing the oppressed of protest
Chow 93—Anne Firor Scott Professor of Literature at Trinity College of Arts and Sciences, Duke University (Rey, Writing Diaspora, 11-5) 

Until the very end of the novel, Jane is always excluded from every available form of social power. Her survival seems to depend on renouncing what power might come to her as teacher, mistress, cousin, heiress, or missionary's wife. She repeatedly flees from such forms of inclusion in the field of power, as if her status as an exemplary subject, like her authority as narrator, depends entirely on her claim to a kind of truth which can only be made from a position of powerlessness. By creating such an unlovely heroine and subjecting her to one form of harassment after another, Brontë demonstrates the power of words alone. 18¶ This reading of Jane Eyre highlights her not simply as the female underdog who is often identified by feminist and Marxist critics, but as the intellectual who acquires power through a moral rectitude that was to become the flip side of Western imperialism's ruthlessness. Lying at the core of Anglo¬American liberalism, this moral rectitude would accompany many territorial and economic conquests overseas with a firm sense of social mission. When Jane Eyre went to the colonies in the nineteenth century, she turned into the Christian missionary. It is this understanding—that Brontë's depiction of a socially marginalized English woman is, in terms of ideological production, fully complicit with England's empire¬building ambition rather than opposed to it—that prompted Gayatri Spivak to read Jane Eyre as a text in the service of imperialism. Referring to Brontë's treatment of the "madwoman" Bertha Mason, the white Jamaican Creole character, Spivak charges Jane Eyre for, precisely, its humanism, in which the "native subject" is not created as an animal but as "the object of what might be termed the terrorism of¶ 12¶ the categorical imperative." This kind of creation is imperialism's use/travesty of the Kantian metaphysical demand to "make the heathen into a human so that he can be treated as an end in himself." 19 In the twentieth century, as Europe's former colonies became independent, Jane Eyre became the Maoist. Michel de Certeau describes the affinity between her two major reincarnations, one religious and the other political, this way:¶ The place that was formerly occupied by the Church or Churches vis¬à¬vis the established powers remains recognizable, over the past two centuries, in the functioning of the opposition known as leftist….¶ There is vis¬à¬vis the established order, a relationship between the Churches that defended an other world and the parties of the left which, since the nineteenth century, have promoted a different future. In both cases, similar functional characteristics can be discerned….20¶ The Maoist retains many of Jane's awesome features, chief of which are a protestant passion to turn powerlessness into "truth" and an idealist intolerance of those who may think differently from her. Whereas the great Orientalist blames the living "third world" natives for the loss of the ancient non¬Western civilization, his loved object, the Maoist applauds the same natives for personifying and fulfilling her ideals. For the Maoist in the 1970s, the mainland Chinese were, in spite of their "backwardness," a puritanical alternative to the West in human form—a dream come true.¶ In the 1980s and 1990s, however, the Maoist is disillusioned to watch the China they sanctified crumble before their eyes. This is the period in which we hear disapproving criticisms of contemporary Chinese people for liking Western pop music and consumer culture, or for being overly interested in sex. In a way that makes her indistinguishable from what at first seems a political enemy, the Orientalist, the Maoist now mourns the loss of her loved object—Socialist China—by pointing angrily at living "third world" natives. For many who have built their careers on the vision of Socialist China, the grief is tremendous. In the "cultural studies" of the American academy in the 1990s, the Maoist is reproducing with prowess. We see this in the way¶ 13¶ terms such as "oppression," "victimization," and "subalternity" are now being used. Contrary to Orientalist disdain for contemporary native cultures of the non¬West, the Maoist turns precisely the "disdained'' other into the object of his/her study and, in some cases, identification. In a mixture of admiration and moralism, the Maoist sometimes turns all people from non¬Western cultures into a generalized "subaltern" that is then used to flog an equally generalized "West." 21¶ Because the representation of "the other" as such ignores (1) the class and intellectual hierarchies within these other cultures, which are usually as elaborate as those in the West, and (2) the discursive power relations structuring the Maoist's mode of inquiry and valorization, it produces a way of talking in which notions of lack, subalternity, victimization, and so forth are drawn upon indiscriminately, often with the intention of spotlighting the speaker's own sense of alterity and political righteousness. A comfortably wealthy white American intellectual I know claimed that he was a "third world intellectual," citing as one of his credentials his marriage to a Western European woman of part¬Jewish heritage? a professor of English complained about being "victimized" by the structured time at an Ivy League institution, meaning that she needed to be on time for classes? a graduate student of upper¬class background from one of the world's poorest countries told his American friends that he was of poor peasant stock in order to authenticate his identity as a radical "third world" representative? male and female academics across the U.S. frequently say they were "raped" when they report experiences of professional frustration and conflict. Whether sincere or delusional, such cases of self¬dramatization all take the route of self¬subalternization, which has increasingly become the assured means to authority and power. What these intellectuals are doing is robbing the terms of oppression of their critical and oppositional import, and thus depriving the oppressed of even the vocabulary of protest and rightful demand. The oppressed, whose voices we seldom hear, are robbed twice—the first time of their economic chances, the second time of their language, which is now no longer distinguishable from those of us who have had our consciousnesses "raised."¶ In their analysis of the relation between violence and representation, Armstrong and Tennenhouse write: "The idea of violence ¶ 14¶ as representation is not an easy one for most academics to accept. It implies that whenever we speak for someone else we are inscribing her with our own (implicitly masculine) idea of order." 22 At present, this process of "inscribing" often means not only that we "represent" certain historic others because they are/were ''oppressed"? it often means that there is interest in representation only when what is represented can in some way be seen as lacking. Even though the Maoist is usually contemptuous of Freudian psychoanalysis because it is "bourgeois," her investment in oppression and victimization fully partakes of the Freudian and Lacanian notions of "lack." By attributing "lack," the Maoist justifies the "speaking for someone else" that Armstrong and Tennenhouse call "violence as representation."¶ As in the case of Orientalism, which does not necessarily belong only to those who are white, the Maoist does not have to be racially "white" either. The phrase "white guilt" refers to a type of discourse which continues to position power and lack against each other, while the narrator of that discourse, like Jane Eyre, speaks with power but identifies with powerlessness. This is how even those who come from privilege more often than not speak from/of/as its "lack." What the Maoist demonstrates is a circuit of productivity that draws its capital from others' deprivation while refusing to acknowledge its own presence as endowed. With the material origins of her own discourse always concealed, the Maoist thus speaks as if her charges were a form of immaculate conception.¶ The difficulty facing us, it seems to me, is no longer simply the "first world" Orientalist who mourns the rusting away of his treasures, but also students from privileged backgrounds Western and non¬Western, who conform behaviorally in every respect with the elitism of their social origins (e.g., through powerful matrimonial alliances, through pursuit of fame, or through a contemptuous arrogance toward fellow students) but who nonetheless proclaim dedication to "vindicating the subalterns." My point is not that they should be blamed for the accident of their birth, nor that they cannot marry rich, pursue fame, or even be arrogant. Rather, it is that they choose to see in others' powerlessness an idealized image of themselves and refuse to hear in the dissonance between the content and manner of their speech their own complicity with violence. Even though these descendents of the Maoist may be quick to point¶ 15¶ out the exploitativeness of Benjamin Disraeli's "The East is a career," 23 they remain blind to their own exploitativeness as they make "the East" their career. How do we intervene in the productivity of this overdetermined circuit?

By creating defining circumstances in which racism exists, the AFF not only contributes to the problem, but can't solve it
KAPPELER 1995 Susanne Kappeler, The Will To Violence: The Politics of Personal Behavior, pg 1-4
What is striking is that the violence which is talked about is always the violence committed by someone else: women talk about the violence of men, adults about the violence of young people; the left, liberals and the centre about the violence of right extremists; the right, centre and liberals about the violence of leftist extremists; political activists talk about structural violence, police and politicians about violence in the `street', and all together about the violence in our society. Similarly, Westerners talk about violence in the Balkans, Western citizens together with their generals about the violence of the Serbian army. Violence is recognized and measured by its visible effects, the spectacular blood of wounded bodies, the material destruction of objects, the visible damage left in the world of `objects'. In its measurable damage we see the proof that violence has taken place, the violence being reduced to this damage. The violation as such, or invisible forms of violence - the non-physical violence of threat and terror, of insult and humiliation, the violation of human dignity - are hardly ever the issue except to some extent in feminist and anti-racist analyses, or under the name of psychological violence. Here violence is recognized by the victims and defined from their perspective - an important step away from the catalogue of violent acts and the exclusive evidence of material traces in the object. Yet even here the focus tends to be on the effects and experience of violence, either the objective and scientific measure of psychological damage, or the increasingly subjective definition of violence as experience. Violence is perceived as a phenomenon for science to research and for politics to get a grip on. But violence is not a phenomenon: it is the behaviour of people, human action which may be analysed. What is missing is an analysis of violence as action - not just as acts of violence, or the cause of its effects, but as the actions of people in relation to other people and beings or things. Feminist critique, as well as other political critiques, has analysed the preconditions of violence, the unequal power relations which enable it to take place. However, under the pressure of mainstream science and a sociological perspective which increasingly dominates our thinking, it is becoming standard to argue as if it were these power relations which cause the violence. Underlying is a behaviourist model which prefers to see human action as the exclusive product of circumstances, ignoring the personal decision of the agent to act, implying in turn that circumstances virtually dictate certain forms of behaviour. Even though we would probably not underwrite these propositions in their crass form, there is nevertheless a growing tendency, not just in social science, to explain violent behaviour by its circumstances. (Compare the question, `Does pornography cause violence?') The circumstances identified may differ according to the politics of the explainers, but the method of explanation remains the same. While consideration of mitigating circumstances has its rightful place in a court of law trying (and defending) an offender, this does not automatically make it an adequate or sufficient practice for political analysis. It begs the question, in particular, `What is considered to be part of the circumstances (and by whom)?' Thus in the case of sexual offenders, there is a routine search - on the part of the tabloid press or professionals of violence - for experiences of violence in the offender's own past, an understanding which is rapidly solidifying in scientific model of a `cycle of violence'. That is, the relevant factors are sought in the distant past and in other contexts of action, e a crucial factor in the present context is ignored, namely the agent's decision to act as he did. Even politically oppositional groups are not immune to this mainstream sociologizing. Some left groups have tried to explain men's sexual violence as the result of class oppression, while some Black theoreticians have explained the violence of Black men as the result of racist oppression. The ostensible aim of these arguments may be to draw attention to the pervasive and structural violence of classism and racism, yet they not only fail to combat such inequality, they actively contribute to it. Although such oppression is a very real part of an agent's life context, these `explanations' ignore the fact that not everyone experiencing the same oppression uses violence, that is, that these circumstances do not `cause' violent behaviour. They overlook, in other words, that the perpetrator has decided to violate, even if this decision was made in circumstances of limited choice. To overlook this decision, however, is itself a political decision, serving particular interests. In the first instance it serves to exonerate the perpetrators, whose responsibility is thus transferred to circumstances and a history for which other people (who remain beyond reach) are responsible. Moreover, it helps to stigmatize all those living in poverty and oppression; because they are obvious victims of violence and oppression, they are held to be potential perpetrators themselves.' This slanders all the women who have experienced sexual violence, yet do not use violence against others, and libels those experiencing racist and class oppression, yet do not necessarily act out violence. Far from supporting those oppressed by classist, racist or sexist oppression, it sells out these entire groups in the interest of exonerating individual members. It is a version of collective victim-blaming, of stigmatizing entire social strata as potential hotbeds of violence, which rests on and perpetuates the mainstream division of society into so-called marginal groups - the classic clienteles of social work and care politics (and of police repression) - and an implied `centre' to which all the speakers, explainers, researchers and careers themselves belong, and which we are to assume to be a zone of non-violence.  Explaining people's violent behaviour by their circumstances also has the advantage of implying that the `solution' lies in a change to circumstances. Thus it has become fashionable among socially minded politicians and intellectuals in Germany to argue that the rising neo-Nazi violence of young people (men), especially in former East Germany, needs to be countered by combating poverty and unemployment in these areas. Likewise anti-racist groups like the Anti. Racist Alliance or the Anti-Nazi League in Britain argue that `the causes of racism, like poverty and unemployment, should be tackled and that it is `problems like unemployment and bad housing which lead to racism'.' Besides being no explanation at all of why (white poverty and unemployment should lead specifically to racist violence (and what would explain middle- and upper-class racism), it is more than questionable to combat poverty only (but precisely) when and where violence is exercised. It not only legitimates the violence (by `explaining' it), but constitutes an incentive to violence, confirming that social problems will be taken seriously when and where `they attract attention by means of violence - just as the most unruly children in schools (mostly boys) tend to get more attention from teachers than well-behaved and quiet children (mostly girls). Thus if German neo-Nazi youths and youth groups, since their murderous assaults on refugees and migrants in Hoyerswerda, Rostock, Dresden etc., are treated to special youth projects and social care measures (to the tune of DM 20 million per year), including `educative' trips to Morocco and Israel,' this is am unmistakable signal to society that racist violence does indeed 'pay off'.

The result is terminal failure.  Impositions can't solve, localized politics are key  
KAPPELER 1995 Susanne Kappeler, The Will To Violence: The Politics of Personal Behavior, pg 4-5
If we nevertheless continue to explain violence by its 'circumstances' and attempt to counter it by changing these circumstances, it is also because in this way we stay in command of the problem. In particular, we do not complicate the problem by any suggestion that it might be people who need to change. Instead, we turn the perpetrators of violence into the victims of circumstances, who as victims by definition cannot act sensibly (but in changed circumstances will behave differently). `We', on the other hand, are the subjects able to take in hand the task of changing the circumstances. Even if changing the circumstances - combating poverty, unemployment, injustice etc. - may not be easy, it nevertheless remains within `our' scope, at least theoretically and by means of state power. Changing people, on the other hand, is neither within our power nor, it seems, ultimately in our interest: we prefer to keep certain people under control, putting limits on their violent behaviour, but we apparently have no interest in a politics that presupposes people's ability to change and aims at changing attitudes and behaviour. For changing (as opposed to restricting) other people's behaviour is beyond the range and influence of our own power; only they themselves can change it. It requires their will to change, their will not to abuse power and not to use violence. A politics aiming at a change in people's behaviour would require political work that is very much more cumbersome and very much less promising of success than is the use of state power and social control. It would require political consciousness-raising - politicizing the way we think - which cannot be imposed on others by force or compulsory educational measures. It would require a view of people which takes seriously and reckons with their will, both their will to violence or their will to change. To take seriously the will of others however would mean recognizing one's own, and putting people's will, including our own, at the centre of political reflection.''

Tournament: St Marks | Round: 2 | Opponent: Damien LL | Judge: Ana Nikolic
1
Immigration reform will pass, is top of the docket, and Obama will use PC which is key to passage
Sink 10-15 – Staff writer for The Hill (Justin, “Obama to push immigration reform 'day after' budget deal, October 15 f 2013, http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/328747-obama-to-push-immigration-reform-day-after-budget-deal-reached
President Obama vowed Tuesday that he would pursue an immigration reform vote in the House
AND
a partisan pursuit" and passing a bill "would benefit both parties."
TTIP saps political capital
AICGS 5/6/13 American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, “Resetting Transatlantic Trade Negotiations”, http://www.aicgs.org/2013/05/resetting-transatlantic-trade-negotiations/
In a report that triggered the joint initiative of U.S. and EU
AND
trade and ensuring that regulatory processes are streamlined and based on sound science.”
Visas are key to cybersecurity preparedness
McLarty 9 (Thomas F. III, President – McLarty Associates and Former White House Chief of Staff and Task Force Co-Chair, “U.S. Immigration Policy: Report of a CFR-Sponsored Independent Task Force”, 7-8, http://www.cfr.org/ publication/19759/us_immigration_policy.html)
We have seen, when you look at the table of the top 20 firms
AND
going to strengthen, I think, our system, our security needs.
Cyber-vulnerability causes great power nuclear war
Fritz 9 Researcher for International Commission on Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament Jason, researcher for International Commission on Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament, former Army officer and consultant, and has a master of international relations at Bond University, “Hacking Nuclear Command and Control,” July,  http://www.icnnd.org/latest/research/Jason_Fritz_Hacking_NC2.pdf
This paper will analyse the threat of cyber terrorism in regard to nuclear weapons.
AND
its own, without the need for compromising command and control centres directly.
2

Text: The European Union ought to include the United Mexican States in the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership

Their Siekierski evidence is our solvency advocate – it ONLY says that Mexico needs to be invited
3

Discourses of danger reproduces an American identity – that posits the US as a the defender of global freedom and liberty
Campbell, 98- Professor of International Politics University of Newcastle (David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity) 

The crisis of representation the United States faces is unique only in the particularities of
AND
the idea that foreign policy/Foreign Policy is constitutive of political identity.
That makes extinction inevitable
Willson, 02- Ph.D New College San Fransisco, Humanities, JD, American University (Brian, “Armageddon or Quantum Leap? U.S. Imperialism and?Human Consciousness from?an Evolutionary Perspective”, http://www.brianwillson.com/quantum.html)
Awaiting the impending U.S. government's concocted "preventive" war against Iraq (indeed, against the world), this is perhaps one of the most frightening moments in human history. In a surreal scenario, the U.S. government is renewing active threats of using nuclear weapons and reviving use of anti-personnel land mines, and is introducing new technological weapons of death we can only imagine, and some we cannot. As grim as this scene is, I believe it must be the inevitable and logical extension of the continued growth ad nauseum of the American Way Of Life (AWOL) in particular, and the Western Way Of Life in general. Premeditated murder of thousands--perhaps millions--of innocents is the price for AWOL's insatiable consumption and its bloodthirsty vengeance, totally abdicating responsibility for lethal consequences to the planet and its species, including, ironically, our own. Perhaps Gaia is presenting the current transparent dangers to us as like a cosmic gift so that we might actually be able to see the extraordinary folly of our ways in time to creatively "storm the Bastille."U.S. Terrorist Roots U.S. civilization was founded on and has been sustained by terrorism, facilitated by Eurocentric racism, classism, and arrogant ethnocentrism. The grossest irony of all, of course, is that the "War on Terror," to be successful, must focus on our own civilization, the most egregious proponent of terror the world has even known. Terror was systematically utilized since our country's beginnings in the 1600s. The following instructions, facilitated by a cruel racism, are part of the historic record: "burning and spoiling the Indian country," (Captain John Underhill, Massachusetts Bay Colony, 1636); "put to death the Pequot Indian men of Block Island" (Massachusetts Bay Governor John Winthrop's order to Captain John Endecott, 1637); "laying waste," and instilling "terror...by any means" among the Indians (General George Washington, 1779); "with malice enough in our hearts to destroy everything that contributes to their support" (General John Sullivan, 1779).
In a prominent history book published in 1906 (The History of the United States
AND
cyclical, indicate that we are dangerously near the end of our evolutionary branch

Alternative text – reject the affirmative to desecuritize the Political. Vote negative to challenge securitization itself in favor of a political ethic that approaches problems in non-security terms and exposes the limits of their methodology.
Security is a communicative action that requires discursive justification – there is an ethical responsibility to justify securitization in political discussion. The role of the ballot is to interrogate methodologies – to weigh their case the Aff has to legitimize securitization first
Williams, 03 Michael – IR Prof @ University of Ottawa, “Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics,” International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 4 (Dec., 2003), pp. 511-53, Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The International Studies Association, JSTOR http://www.jstor.org/stable/3693634
A second major criticism of the Copenhagen School concerns the ethics of securitization. Simply
AND
questioning the policies, or by disputing the threat, or both.36

4
Economic engagement must be a direct trade transaction – NOT a trade agreement
Resnick 1 – Dr. Evan Resnick, Ph.D. in Political Science from Columbia University, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yeshiva University, “Defining Engagement”, Journal of International Affairs, Spring, 54(2), Ebsco
Scholars have limited the concept of engagement in a third way by unnecessarily restricting the
AND
will be shown below, permits the elucidation of multiple types of positive sanctions
Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to promote the integration of China into the global trading and financial systems; and security engagement, to encourage compliance with the ten principles by diplomatic and military means when economic incentives do not suffice, in order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent
AND
105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate
Pharma
Status quo solves manufacturing – US and Mexico cooperate on petro-chemical and auto manufacturing – solves their internal link
There is no bioterrorist threat. The most sophisticated terrorist group ever tried attacking with a biological agent 9 times and the attacks were so bad no one even noticed they were happening.
Mueller, 05 (John, Professor of Political Science at OhioState. May 2005. International Studies Perspectives, Volume 6 Issue 2 Page 208-234, Simplicity and Spook: Terrorism and the Dynamics of Threat Exaggeration)
Properly developed and deployed, biological weapons could indeed, if thus far only in
AND
—in fact, nobody even noticed that the attacks had taken place. 

No reason their tech innovation is unique to their AFF – their evidence is in the context of nuclear technology which is not intrinsic to their AFF
No chance of war from economic decline-~--best and most recent data
Daniel W. Drezner 12, Professor, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, October 2012, “The Irony of Global Economic Governance: The System Worked,” http://www.globaleconomicgovernance.org/wp-content/uploads/IR-Colloquium-MT12-Week-5_The-Irony-of-Global-Economic-Governance.pdf
The final outcome addresses a dog that hasn’t barked: the effect of the Great
AND
II – and not even worse – must be regarded as fortunate.”42
Chemical weapons are extremely hard to disperse or use effectively – no way terrorists could manage it
Rothstein, Auer, and Siegel, 04 (Linda, editor, Catherine, managing editor, and Jonas, assistant editor of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, BAS, November/December, http://www.thebulletin.org/article.php?art_ofn=nd04rothstein)
In "The Dew of Death," Joel Vilensky and Pandy Sinish recounted the strange
AND
Some tiny amount of worry should probably be devoted to leaking chemical munitions.
Attempting to save the global economy from disaster is a liberal order-building method of security
Mark Neocleous, Professor of Critique of Political Economy, Brunel University, 08 (“Critique of Security”, McGill-Queen’s University, pp. 94-97, Published 2008)
But 'social security' was clearly an inadequate term for this, associated as it now
AND
bringing 'security' political, social and economic - from the communist threat.  
EU Relations

Protectionism won’t spiral out of control—interdependence
Marshall, 09 (Andrew – asia political risk correspondent, Assault on free trade a key political risk, Reuters, 1/21/2009, p. lexis)
PREVENTING DISASTER Despite the risks, many analysts argue that a wholesale retreat into protectionism
AND
markets that are highly dependent on exports," the Economist Intelligence Unit said.

1. Empirically denied – diseases have been around forever and haven’t caused extinction. Plus, genetic diversity ensures that some humans will always survive.

2. No disease can kill us all – it would have to be everything at once
Gladwell, 95 (Malcolm, The New Republic, 7/17/95 and 7/24/95, “The Plague Year”, Lexis)

What would a real Andromeda Strain look like? It would be highly infectious like
AND
, but they neglect to point out the limitations of microscopic life forms.

3. Multiple alternate causalities to disease
Brower, 03 (Jennifer, science/technology policy analyst, and Peter Chalk, political scientist, Summer 2003, Rand Review, Vol. 27, No. 2, “Vectors Without Borders,”  http://www.rand.org/publications/randreview/issues/summer2003/vectors.html)
This year's outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in Beijing, Hong
AND
increase the likelihood that people will come into contact with potentially fatal diseases.

1. No extinction
   Easterbrook, 03 – senior fellow at the New Republic, 03 “We're All Gonna Die!”, http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.07/doomsday.html?pg=1andtopic=andtopic_set=
   If we're talking about doomsday - the end of human civilization - many scenarios simply
   AND
   as he was, wrote Remembrance of Things Past while lying in bed.

2. Environmental alarmism isn’t a justification for taking action
Kaleita, 07, PHD, Assistant Professor Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Amy, “Hysteria’s History” Environmental Alarmism in Context”, http://www.pacificresearch.org/docLib/20070920_Hysteria_History.pdf
Apocalyptic stories about the irreparable, catastrophic damage that humans are doing to the natural
AND
real problem exists, solutions should be based on reality, not hysteria. 

No impact to regionalism
Polaski, 06 – director of the Trade, Equity, and Development Project at Carnegie, Secretary of State’s Special Representative for International Labor Affairs (Sandra, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, “The future of the WTO”, http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/Polaski_WTO_final_formatted.pdf, WEA)
The Alternatives to the Doha Round While there is broad recognition that the Doha Round
AND
little reason to think that any big agreements will be easy to achieve.

Tournament: ToC | Round: 2 | Opponent: Dowling Catholic ZW | Judge: Chris Thiele
1
The Asia pivot is the top of obamas agenda
Ewing 4-20 – POLITICO Pro's senior defense reporter. Previously, he was POLITICO's Pentagon correspondent (Philip, “Obama’s Asia pivot: A work in progress”, April 20 of 2014, http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/barack-obama-asia-pivot-105842.html)
Administration officials bristle at the suggestion that they’re less than committed to the strategic shift
AND
he argued, might only have taken more attention away from the pivot.
The plan destabilizes Obama’s ability to handle the pivot and burns political capital.
Walt, 3/18 (Stephen, Professor of International Affairs @ Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, “The Solve-Everything, Do-Nothing White House,” 3/18/14, Foreign Policy, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/18/the_solve_everything_do_nothing_obama_white_house)
Contrary to the critical overreaction to Obama in the wake of events in Ukraine,
AND
to advance your aims in one area may undermine your efforts somewhere else.
Effective strategic pivot to Asia is key to contain China`s rise and prevent several scenarios for nuclear conflict
Colby 11 – Elbridge Colby, research analyst at the Center for Naval Analyses, served as policy advisor to the Secretary of Defense’s Representative to the New START talks, expert advisor to the Congressional Strategic Posture Commission, August 10, 2011, “Why the U.S. Needs its Liberal Empire,” The Diplomat, online: http://the-diplomat.com/2011/08/10/why-us-needs-its-liberal-empire/2/?print=yes
But the pendulum shouldn’t be allowed to swing too far toward an incautious retrenchment.
AND
The ability and will to intervene is too important to be so wasted.
Unchecked Chinese rise causes great power nuclear war
Walton 7 – C. Dale Walton, Lecturer in International Relations and Strategic Studies at the University of Reading, 2007, Geopolitics and the Great Powers in the 21st Century, p. 49
Obviously, it is of vital importance to the United States that the PRC does
AND
a healthy multipolar system that is not marked by close great power alliances.
2
Engagement isn’t appeasement
Resnick 1 (Evan, Assistant Professor and coordinator of the United States Programme at RSIS, “Defining Engagement,” Journal of International Affairs, 0022197X, Spring2001, Vol. 54, Issue 2, http://web.ebscohost.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/ehost/detail?sid=1b56e6b4-ade2-4052-9114-7d107fdbd01940sessionmgr12andvid=2andhid=24andbdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ3d3d#db=mthandAN=4437301)
Thus, a rigid conceptual distinction can be drawn between engagement and appeasement. Whereas
AND
or in exchange for certain concessions on the part of the target state.
The AFF is appeasement
Barros et. al 9 (Andrew, Associate Professor of History at the University of Quebec in Montreal, Canada, Debating British Decisionmaking toward Nazi Germany in the 1930s, 2009, http://fas-polisci.rutgers.edu/levy/200920IS201930s20correspondence.pdf)
Conventional definitions of appeasement generally emphasize the use of concessions to satisfy the adversary’s grievances
AND
of British appeasement policy toward Nazi Germany from a standard resolving grievances interpretation.
 “Increase” means net increase
Words and Phrases 8 (v. 20a, p. 264-265)
Cal.App.2 Dist. 1991.  Term “increase,” as used
AND
.  West’s Ann.Cal.Pub.Res.Code § 25123.

Vote NEG

1. Limits – justifies removing small restrictions on all countries which explodes limits – theyre key to clash
   2. Ground – not increasing economic engagement means we don’t have any DA links because they aren’t specific to economic and they don’t increase it
   3
   Obama administration is hard-lining Cuba
   Haven 13 (Paul, Associated Prices, NY Times, “Cuba, US try talking, but face many obstacles”, 6/21/13 http://www.timesherald.com/article/20130621/NEWS05/130629930/cuba-us-try-talking-but-face-many-obstacles#full_story)
   To be sure, there is still far more that separates the long-time
   AND
   against the Cuban people, and respect basic human rights,” he said.
   The plan is appeasement.
   Walser 12 – Ph.D. and a Senior Policy Analyst at The Heritage Foundation (Ray, “Cuban-American Leaders: “No Substitute for Freedom” in Cuba”, June 25 of 2012, http://blog.heritage.org/2012/06/25/cuban-american-leaders-no-substitute-for-freedom-in-cuba/)
   However, these pleasing liberal assumptions are negated on a daily basis by hard-
   AND
   tyranny of the Castro regime, there is “no substitute for freedom.”
   Appeasement triggers multiple scenarios for nuclear– it is only a question of perception
   Hanson 9 - American military historian, columnist and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution (Victor, “Change, Weakness, Disaster, Obama: Answers from Victor Davis Hanson”, December 7 of 2009, Interview between Bernard Chapin and Hanson, http://pjmedia.com/blog/change-weakness-disaster-obama-answers-from-victor-davis-hanson/)
   BC: Are we currently sending a message of weakness to our foes and allies
   AND
   tiger and now no one quite knows whom it will bite or when.
   4
   The plan kills the friend/enemy distinction – that causes war and extinction
   Strong 7-Distinguished Professor of Political Science @ Harvard, PhD in Political Science @ Harvard Tracy, Foreword: Dimensions of the New Debate about Carl Schmitt, from The Concept of the Political, 2007, pg. xx-xxiii, DKP Gender edited
   In The Concept of the Political, Schmitt identifies as the "high points of
   AND
   no outcome except an end to politics and the elimination of all difference.
   The alternative is to reject the affirmative’s ethics of obligation and inclusion. Only endorsement of enmity opens political space for pluralization of political difference, ending the perpetuation of violence.

The war on terror is only possible by denying authentic relations of enmity between ourselves and the terrorist -~--they have legitimate political grievances, so the proper solution is the alternative’s level political playing field that allows for the productive expression of opposition between “us and them”
Prozorov 6 – Sergei Prozorov, collegium fellow at the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, University of Helsinki, Professor of International Relations in the Department of International Relations, Faculty of Politics and Social Sciences, Petrozavodsk State University, Russia, 2006, “Liberal Enmity: The Figure of the Foe in the Political Ontology of Liberalism,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 75-99
The present hegemony of liberal ultra-politics is well illustrated by the contemporary phenomenon
AND
of an ontological critique of liberalism, hence the present importance of Schmitt.
5
Text: The United States federal government should eliminate the enforcement of all restrictions on economic engagement between the U.S. and Cuba mandated by Cuba’s inclusion on the ‘state sponsors of terrorism’ list, other than restrictions related to U.S. arms sales to Cuba. The United States federal government should clarify that it no longer considers Cuba a state sponsor of terrorism, and that it retains legal restrictions related to such designation only as a means to restrain its own arms sales.
Competes-~--the CP doesn’t take Cuba off the list, it just eliminates all the economic restrictions that are caused by their inclusion on the list, other than the ban on arms sales.
Removing Cuba from the list would include lifting restrictions on U.S. arms sales
AP 13 – Associated Press, 3/23/13, “US on verge of momentous Cuba decision: Whether to take island off controversial terror list,” http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/03/23/us-on-verge-momentous-cuba-decision-whether-to-take-island-off-controversial/
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry must decide within a few weeks
AND
by the World Bank or other international lending institutions, among other measures.
Net-Beneficial-~--arms sales sustain global U.S. militarism and invisible structural violence-~--enforcing legal restrictions is key
Andrew Gavin Marshall 13, head of the Geopolitics division of the Hampton Institute, 3/26/13, “In the Arms of Dictators: America the Great… Global Arms Dealer,” http://andrewgavinmarshall.com/2013/03/26/in-the-arms-of-dictators-america-the-great-global-arms-dealer/
The American imperial system incorporates much more than supporting the occasional coup or undertaking the
AND
of arms, having to apply for a license from the State Department.

Case
Security threats real – US must hardline Cuba after weapons sales to North Korea discovered
Miami Herald 13
(Miami Herald, Editorial, July 21 2013, http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/21/3512459/cuba-north-korea-and-the-chong.html, Accessed July 21, 2013, JD)
The seizure in Panama of the Chong Chon Gang, a rusty old North Korean
AND
to the membership because both countries have demonstrated that they cannot be trusted.

Cuba sponsors terrorist organizations.
Claver-Carone 13
(Mauricio Claver-Carone, former US Treasury Department Attorney-advisor, “Cuba Sees an Opening,” The American, April 4 2013, www.american.com/archive/2013/april/cuba-should-remain-designated-as-a-state-sponsor-of-terrorism, Accessed July 22, 2013, JD)
The United States designates ETA and the FARC as foreign terrorist organizations and Cuba continues
AND
no peace agreement or peace in Colombia and ETA continues to threaten Spain.
Reps of terror in the real world are accurate depictions – prefer scholars
Michael J. Boyle 8, School of International Relations, University of St. Andrews, and John Horgan, International Center for the Study of Terrorism, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, April 2008, “A Case Against Critical Terrorism Studies,” Critical Studies On Terrorism, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 51-64
 Jackson (2007c) calls for the development of an explicitly CTS on the
AND
community of scholars does not produce such scathing indictments of its own work.
Consequences matter – the tunnel vision of moral absolutism generates evil and political irrelevance
Issac, 2002 (Jeffery, Professor of Political Science at Indiana University, Dissent, Vol. 49 No. 2, Spring)
Politics, in large part, involves contests over the distribution and use of power
AND
not true believers.  It promotes arrogance.  And it undermines political effectiveness.  
Violence is proximately caused – root cause logic is poor scholarship
Sharpe 10, lecturer, philosophy and psychoanalytic studies, and Goucher, senior lecturer, literary and psychoanalytic studies – Deakin University, ‘10
(Matthew and Geoff, Žižek and Politics: An Introduction, p. 231 – 233)
We realise that this argument, which we propose as a new ‘quilting’ framework
AND
whom todaypointedly reject Theory’s legitimacy, neither reading it nor taking it seriously.

Ideology breeds terrorism and will continue to indefinitely – only way to prevent future acts of violence is hard-line militarism by the United States
Alex Epstein, Graduate of Duke University, BA Philosophy, Junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute, “Fight the Root of Terrorism With Bombs, Not Bread,” San Francisco Chronicle, August 14, 2005, http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticleandid=11243,
The pernicious idea that poverty causes terrorism has been a popular claim since the attacks
AND
is the only way for our government to attack terrorism at its root.

Predictive models good—prevents future catastrophe
Kurasawa, 2004 – Associate Professor of Sociology at York University (Fuyuki, “Cautionary Tales: The Global Culture of Prevention and the Work of Foresight”, Constellations Volume 11, Issue 4, December 2004)
In the twenty-first century, the lines of political cleavage are being drawn
AND
to public deliberation about the construction of an alternative world order (IV).

Tournament: ToC | Round: 2 | Opponent: Dowling Catholic ZW | Judge: Chris Thiele
1
The Asia pivot is the top of obamas agenda
Ewing 4-20 – POLITICO Pro's senior defense reporter. Previously, he was POLITICO's Pentagon correspondent (Philip, “Obama’s Asia pivot: A work in progress”, April 20 of 2014, http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/barack-obama-asia-pivot-105842.html)
Administration officials bristle at the suggestion that they’re less than committed to the strategic shift
AND
he argued, might only have taken more attention away from the pivot.
The plan destabilizes Obama’s ability to handle the pivot and burns political capital.
Walt, 3/18 (Stephen, Professor of International Affairs @ Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, “The Solve-Everything, Do-Nothing White House,” 3/18/14, Foreign Policy, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/18/the_solve_everything_do_nothing_obama_white_house)
Contrary to the critical overreaction to Obama in the wake of events in Ukraine,
AND
to advance your aims in one area may undermine your efforts somewhere else.
Effective strategic pivot to Asia is key to contain China`s rise and prevent several scenarios for nuclear conflict
Colby 11 – Elbridge Colby, research analyst at the Center for Naval Analyses, served as policy advisor to the Secretary of Defense’s Representative to the New START talks, expert advisor to the Congressional Strategic Posture Commission, August 10, 2011, “Why the U.S. Needs its Liberal Empire,” The Diplomat, online: http://the-diplomat.com/2011/08/10/why-us-needs-its-liberal-empire/2/?print=yes
But the pendulum shouldn’t be allowed to swing too far toward an incautious retrenchment.
AND
The ability and will to intervene is too important to be so wasted.
Unchecked Chinese rise causes great power nuclear war
Walton 7 – C. Dale Walton, Lecturer in International Relations and Strategic Studies at the University of Reading, 2007, Geopolitics and the Great Powers in the 21st Century, p. 49
Obviously, it is of vital importance to the United States that the PRC does
AND
a healthy multipolar system that is not marked by close great power alliances.
2
Engagement isn’t appeasement
Resnick 1 (Evan, Assistant Professor and coordinator of the United States Programme at RSIS, “Defining Engagement,” Journal of International Affairs, 0022197X, Spring2001, Vol. 54, Issue 2, http://web.ebscohost.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/ehost/detail?sid=1b56e6b4-ade2-4052-9114-7d107fdbd01940sessionmgr12andvid=2andhid=24andbdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ3d3d#db=mthandAN=4437301)
Thus, a rigid conceptual distinction can be drawn between engagement and appeasement. Whereas
AND
or in exchange for certain concessions on the part of the target state.
The AFF is appeasement
Barros et. al 9 (Andrew, Associate Professor of History at the University of Quebec in Montreal, Canada, Debating British Decisionmaking toward Nazi Germany in the 1930s, 2009, http://fas-polisci.rutgers.edu/levy/200920IS201930s20correspondence.pdf)
Conventional definitions of appeasement generally emphasize the use of concessions to satisfy the adversary’s grievances
AND
of British appeasement policy toward Nazi Germany from a standard resolving grievances interpretation.
 “Increase” means net increase
Words and Phrases 8 (v. 20a, p. 264-265)
Cal.App.2 Dist. 1991.  Term “increase,” as used
AND
.  West’s Ann.Cal.Pub.Res.Code § 25123.

Vote NEG

1. Limits – justifies removing small restrictions on all countries which explodes limits – theyre key to clash
   2. Ground – not increasing economic engagement means we don’t have any DA links because they aren’t specific to economic and they don’t increase it
   3
   Obama administration is hard-lining Cuba
   Haven 13 (Paul, Associated Prices, NY Times, “Cuba, US try talking, but face many obstacles”, 6/21/13 http://www.timesherald.com/article/20130621/NEWS05/130629930/cuba-us-try-talking-but-face-many-obstacles#full_story)
   To be sure, there is still far more that separates the long-time
   AND
   against the Cuban people, and respect basic human rights,” he said.
   The plan is appeasement.
   Walser 12 – Ph.D. and a Senior Policy Analyst at The Heritage Foundation (Ray, “Cuban-American Leaders: “No Substitute for Freedom” in Cuba”, June 25 of 2012, http://blog.heritage.org/2012/06/25/cuban-american-leaders-no-substitute-for-freedom-in-cuba/)
   However, these pleasing liberal assumptions are negated on a daily basis by hard-
   AND
   tyranny of the Castro regime, there is “no substitute for freedom.”
   Appeasement triggers multiple scenarios for nuclear– it is only a question of perception
   Hanson 9 - American military historian, columnist and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution (Victor, “Change, Weakness, Disaster, Obama: Answers from Victor Davis Hanson”, December 7 of 2009, Interview between Bernard Chapin and Hanson, http://pjmedia.com/blog/change-weakness-disaster-obama-answers-from-victor-davis-hanson/)
   BC: Are we currently sending a message of weakness to our foes and allies
   AND
   tiger and now no one quite knows whom it will bite or when.
   4
   The plan kills the friend/enemy distinction – that causes war and extinction
   Strong 7-Distinguished Professor of Political Science @ Harvard, PhD in Political Science @ Harvard Tracy, Foreword: Dimensions of the New Debate about Carl Schmitt, from The Concept of the Political, 2007, pg. xx-xxiii, DKP Gender edited
   In The Concept of the Political, Schmitt identifies as the "high points of
   AND
   no outcome except an end to politics and the elimination of all difference.
   The alternative is to reject the affirmative’s ethics of obligation and inclusion. Only endorsement of enmity opens political space for pluralization of political difference, ending the perpetuation of violence.

The war on terror is only possible by denying authentic relations of enmity between ourselves and the terrorist -~--they have legitimate political grievances, so the proper solution is the alternative’s level political playing field that allows for the productive expression of opposition between “us and them”
Prozorov 6 – Sergei Prozorov, collegium fellow at the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, University of Helsinki, Professor of International Relations in the Department of International Relations, Faculty of Politics and Social Sciences, Petrozavodsk State University, Russia, 2006, “Liberal Enmity: The Figure of the Foe in the Political Ontology of Liberalism,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 75-99
The present hegemony of liberal ultra-politics is well illustrated by the contemporary phenomenon
AND
of an ontological critique of liberalism, hence the present importance of Schmitt.
5
Text: The United States federal government should eliminate the enforcement of all restrictions on economic engagement between the U.S. and Cuba mandated by Cuba’s inclusion on the ‘state sponsors of terrorism’ list, other than restrictions related to U.S. arms sales to Cuba. The United States federal government should clarify that it no longer considers Cuba a state sponsor of terrorism, and that it retains legal restrictions related to such designation only as a means to restrain its own arms sales.
Competes-~--the CP doesn’t take Cuba off the list, it just eliminates all the economic restrictions that are caused by their inclusion on the list, other than the ban on arms sales.
Removing Cuba from the list would include lifting restrictions on U.S. arms sales
AP 13 – Associated Press, 3/23/13, “US on verge of momentous Cuba decision: Whether to take island off controversial terror list,” http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/03/23/us-on-verge-momentous-cuba-decision-whether-to-take-island-off-controversial/
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry must decide within a few weeks
AND
by the World Bank or other international lending institutions, among other measures.
Net-Beneficial-~--arms sales sustain global U.S. militarism and invisible structural violence-~--enforcing legal restrictions is key
Andrew Gavin Marshall 13, head of the Geopolitics division of the Hampton Institute, 3/26/13, “In the Arms of Dictators: America the Great… Global Arms Dealer,” http://andrewgavinmarshall.com/2013/03/26/in-the-arms-of-dictators-america-the-great-global-arms-dealer/
The American imperial system incorporates much more than supporting the occasional coup or undertaking the
AND
of arms, having to apply for a license from the State Department.

Case
Security threats real – US must hardline Cuba after weapons sales to North Korea discovered
Miami Herald 13
(Miami Herald, Editorial, July 21 2013, http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/21/3512459/cuba-north-korea-and-the-chong.html, Accessed July 21, 2013, JD)
The seizure in Panama of the Chong Chon Gang, a rusty old North Korean
AND
to the membership because both countries have demonstrated that they cannot be trusted.

Cuba sponsors terrorist organizations.
Claver-Carone 13
(Mauricio Claver-Carone, former US Treasury Department Attorney-advisor, “Cuba Sees an Opening,” The American, April 4 2013, www.american.com/archive/2013/april/cuba-should-remain-designated-as-a-state-sponsor-of-terrorism, Accessed July 22, 2013, JD)
The United States designates ETA and the FARC as foreign terrorist organizations and Cuba continues
AND
no peace agreement or peace in Colombia and ETA continues to threaten Spain.
Reps of terror in the real world are accurate depictions – prefer scholars
Michael J. Boyle 8, School of International Relations, University of St. Andrews, and John Horgan, International Center for the Study of Terrorism, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, April 2008, “A Case Against Critical Terrorism Studies,” Critical Studies On Terrorism, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 51-64
 Jackson (2007c) calls for the development of an explicitly CTS on the
AND
community of scholars does not produce such scathing indictments of its own work.
Consequences matter – the tunnel vision of moral absolutism generates evil and political irrelevance
Issac, 2002 (Jeffery, Professor of Political Science at Indiana University, Dissent, Vol. 49 No. 2, Spring)
Politics, in large part, involves contests over the distribution and use of power
AND
not true believers.  It promotes arrogance.  And it undermines political effectiveness.  
Violence is proximately caused – root cause logic is poor scholarship
Sharpe 10, lecturer, philosophy and psychoanalytic studies, and Goucher, senior lecturer, literary and psychoanalytic studies – Deakin University, ‘10
(Matthew and Geoff, Žižek and Politics: An Introduction, p. 231 – 233)
We realise that this argument, which we propose as a new ‘quilting’ framework
AND
whom todaypointedly reject Theory’s legitimacy, neither reading it nor taking it seriously.

Ideology breeds terrorism and will continue to indefinitely – only way to prevent future acts of violence is hard-line militarism by the United States
Alex Epstein, Graduate of Duke University, BA Philosophy, Junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute, “Fight the Root of Terrorism With Bombs, Not Bread,” San Francisco Chronicle, August 14, 2005, http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticleandid=11243,
The pernicious idea that poverty causes terrorism has been a popular claim since the attacks
AND
is the only way for our government to attack terrorism at its root.

Predictive models good—prevents future catastrophe
Kurasawa, 2004 – Associate Professor of Sociology at York University (Fuyuki, “Cautionary Tales: The Global Culture of Prevention and the Work of Foresight”, Constellations Volume 11, Issue 4, December 2004)
In the twenty-first century, the lines of political cleavage are being drawn
AND
to public deliberation about the construction of an alternative world order (IV).

Tournament: ToC | Round: 2 | Opponent: Dowling Catholic ZW | Judge: Chris Thiele
1
The Asia pivot is the top of obamas agenda
Ewing 4-20 – POLITICO Pro's senior defense reporter. Previously, he was POLITICO's Pentagon correspondent (Philip, “Obama’s Asia pivot: A work in progress”, April 20 of 2014, http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/barack-obama-asia-pivot-105842.html)
Administration officials bristle at the suggestion that they’re less than committed to the strategic shift
AND
he argued, might only have taken more attention away from the pivot.
The plan destabilizes Obama’s ability to handle the pivot and burns political capital.
Walt, 3/18 (Stephen, Professor of International Affairs @ Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, “The Solve-Everything, Do-Nothing White House,” 3/18/14, Foreign Policy, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/18/the_solve_everything_do_nothing_obama_white_house)
Contrary to the critical overreaction to Obama in the wake of events in Ukraine,
AND
to advance your aims in one area may undermine your efforts somewhere else.
Effective strategic pivot to Asia is key to contain China`s rise and prevent several scenarios for nuclear conflict
Colby 11 – Elbridge Colby, research analyst at the Center for Naval Analyses, served as policy advisor to the Secretary of Defense’s Representative to the New START talks, expert advisor to the Congressional Strategic Posture Commission, August 10, 2011, “Why the U.S. Needs its Liberal Empire,” The Diplomat, online: http://the-diplomat.com/2011/08/10/why-us-needs-its-liberal-empire/2/?print=yes
But the pendulum shouldn’t be allowed to swing too far toward an incautious retrenchment.
AND
The ability and will to intervene is too important to be so wasted.
Unchecked Chinese rise causes great power nuclear war
Walton 7 – C. Dale Walton, Lecturer in International Relations and Strategic Studies at the University of Reading, 2007, Geopolitics and the Great Powers in the 21st Century, p. 49
Obviously, it is of vital importance to the United States that the PRC does
AND
a healthy multipolar system that is not marked by close great power alliances.
2
Engagement isn’t appeasement
Resnick 1 (Evan, Assistant Professor and coordinator of the United States Programme at RSIS, “Defining Engagement,” Journal of International Affairs, 0022197X, Spring2001, Vol. 54, Issue 2, http://web.ebscohost.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/ehost/detail?sid=1b56e6b4-ade2-4052-9114-7d107fdbd01940sessionmgr12andvid=2andhid=24andbdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ3d3d#db=mthandAN=4437301)
Thus, a rigid conceptual distinction can be drawn between engagement and appeasement. Whereas
AND
or in exchange for certain concessions on the part of the target state.
The AFF is appeasement
Barros et. al 9 (Andrew, Associate Professor of History at the University of Quebec in Montreal, Canada, Debating British Decisionmaking toward Nazi Germany in the 1930s, 2009, http://fas-polisci.rutgers.edu/levy/200920IS201930s20correspondence.pdf)
Conventional definitions of appeasement generally emphasize the use of concessions to satisfy the adversary’s grievances
AND
of British appeasement policy toward Nazi Germany from a standard resolving grievances interpretation.
 “Increase” means net increase
Words and Phrases 8 (v. 20a, p. 264-265)
Cal.App.2 Dist. 1991.  Term “increase,” as used
AND
.  West’s Ann.Cal.Pub.Res.Code § 25123.

Vote NEG

1. Limits – justifies removing small restrictions on all countries which explodes limits – theyre key to clash
   2. Ground – not increasing economic engagement means we don’t have any DA links because they aren’t specific to economic and they don’t increase it
   3
   Obama administration is hard-lining Cuba
   Haven 13 (Paul, Associated Prices, NY Times, “Cuba, US try talking, but face many obstacles”, 6/21/13 http://www.timesherald.com/article/20130621/NEWS05/130629930/cuba-us-try-talking-but-face-many-obstacles#full_story)
   To be sure, there is still far more that separates the long-time
   AND
   against the Cuban people, and respect basic human rights,” he said.
   The plan is appeasement.
   Walser 12 – Ph.D. and a Senior Policy Analyst at The Heritage Foundation (Ray, “Cuban-American Leaders: “No Substitute for Freedom” in Cuba”, June 25 of 2012, http://blog.heritage.org/2012/06/25/cuban-american-leaders-no-substitute-for-freedom-in-cuba/)
   However, these pleasing liberal assumptions are negated on a daily basis by hard-
   AND
   tyranny of the Castro regime, there is “no substitute for freedom.”
   Appeasement triggers multiple scenarios for nuclear– it is only a question of perception
   Hanson 9 - American military historian, columnist and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution (Victor, “Change, Weakness, Disaster, Obama: Answers from Victor Davis Hanson”, December 7 of 2009, Interview between Bernard Chapin and Hanson, http://pjmedia.com/blog/change-weakness-disaster-obama-answers-from-victor-davis-hanson/)
   BC: Are we currently sending a message of weakness to our foes and allies
   AND
   tiger and now no one quite knows whom it will bite or when.
   4
   The plan kills the friend/enemy distinction – that causes war and extinction
   Strong 7-Distinguished Professor of Political Science @ Harvard, PhD in Political Science @ Harvard Tracy, Foreword: Dimensions of the New Debate about Carl Schmitt, from The Concept of the Political, 2007, pg. xx-xxiii, DKP Gender edited
   In The Concept of the Political, Schmitt identifies as the "high points of
   AND
   no outcome except an end to politics and the elimination of all difference.
   The alternative is to reject the affirmative’s ethics of obligation and inclusion. Only endorsement of enmity opens political space for pluralization of political difference, ending the perpetuation of violence.

The war on terror is only possible by denying authentic relations of enmity between ourselves and the terrorist -~--they have legitimate political grievances, so the proper solution is the alternative’s level political playing field that allows for the productive expression of opposition between “us and them”
Prozorov 6 – Sergei Prozorov, collegium fellow at the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, University of Helsinki, Professor of International Relations in the Department of International Relations, Faculty of Politics and Social Sciences, Petrozavodsk State University, Russia, 2006, “Liberal Enmity: The Figure of the Foe in the Political Ontology of Liberalism,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 75-99
The present hegemony of liberal ultra-politics is well illustrated by the contemporary phenomenon
AND
of an ontological critique of liberalism, hence the present importance of Schmitt.
5
Text: The United States federal government should eliminate the enforcement of all restrictions on economic engagement between the U.S. and Cuba mandated by Cuba’s inclusion on the ‘state sponsors of terrorism’ list, other than restrictions related to U.S. arms sales to Cuba. The United States federal government should clarify that it no longer considers Cuba a state sponsor of terrorism, and that it retains legal restrictions related to such designation only as a means to restrain its own arms sales.
Competes-~--the CP doesn’t take Cuba off the list, it just eliminates all the economic restrictions that are caused by their inclusion on the list, other than the ban on arms sales.
Removing Cuba from the list would include lifting restrictions on U.S. arms sales
AP 13 – Associated Press, 3/23/13, “US on verge of momentous Cuba decision: Whether to take island off controversial terror list,” http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/03/23/us-on-verge-momentous-cuba-decision-whether-to-take-island-off-controversial/
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry must decide within a few weeks
AND
by the World Bank or other international lending institutions, among other measures.
Net-Beneficial-~--arms sales sustain global U.S. militarism and invisible structural violence-~--enforcing legal restrictions is key
Andrew Gavin Marshall 13, head of the Geopolitics division of the Hampton Institute, 3/26/13, “In the Arms of Dictators: America the Great… Global Arms Dealer,” http://andrewgavinmarshall.com/2013/03/26/in-the-arms-of-dictators-america-the-great-global-arms-dealer/
The American imperial system incorporates much more than supporting the occasional coup or undertaking the
AND
of arms, having to apply for a license from the State Department.

Case
Security threats real – US must hardline Cuba after weapons sales to North Korea discovered
Miami Herald 13
(Miami Herald, Editorial, July 21 2013, http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/21/3512459/cuba-north-korea-and-the-chong.html, Accessed July 21, 2013, JD)
The seizure in Panama of the Chong Chon Gang, a rusty old North Korean
AND
to the membership because both countries have demonstrated that they cannot be trusted.

Cuba sponsors terrorist organizations.
Claver-Carone 13
(Mauricio Claver-Carone, former US Treasury Department Attorney-advisor, “Cuba Sees an Opening,” The American, April 4 2013, www.american.com/archive/2013/april/cuba-should-remain-designated-as-a-state-sponsor-of-terrorism, Accessed July 22, 2013, JD)
The United States designates ETA and the FARC as foreign terrorist organizations and Cuba continues
AND
no peace agreement or peace in Colombia and ETA continues to threaten Spain.
Reps of terror in the real world are accurate depictions – prefer scholars
Michael J. Boyle 8, School of International Relations, University of St. Andrews, and John Horgan, International Center for the Study of Terrorism, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, April 2008, “A Case Against Critical Terrorism Studies,” Critical Studies On Terrorism, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 51-64
 Jackson (2007c) calls for the development of an explicitly CTS on the
AND
community of scholars does not produce such scathing indictments of its own work.
Consequences matter – the tunnel vision of moral absolutism generates evil and political irrelevance
Issac, 2002 (Jeffery, Professor of Political Science at Indiana University, Dissent, Vol. 49 No. 2, Spring)
Politics, in large part, involves contests over the distribution and use of power
AND
not true believers.  It promotes arrogance.  And it undermines political effectiveness.  
Violence is proximately caused – root cause logic is poor scholarship
Sharpe 10, lecturer, philosophy and psychoanalytic studies, and Goucher, senior lecturer, literary and psychoanalytic studies – Deakin University, ‘10
(Matthew and Geoff, Žižek and Politics: An Introduction, p. 231 – 233)
We realise that this argument, which we propose as a new ‘quilting’ framework
AND
whom todaypointedly reject Theory’s legitimacy, neither reading it nor taking it seriously.

Ideology breeds terrorism and will continue to indefinitely – only way to prevent future acts of violence is hard-line militarism by the United States
Alex Epstein, Graduate of Duke University, BA Philosophy, Junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute, “Fight the Root of Terrorism With Bombs, Not Bread,” San Francisco Chronicle, August 14, 2005, http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticleandid=11243,
The pernicious idea that poverty causes terrorism has been a popular claim since the attacks
AND
is the only way for our government to attack terrorism at its root.

Predictive models good—prevents future catastrophe
Kurasawa, 2004 – Associate Professor of Sociology at York University (Fuyuki, “Cautionary Tales: The Global Culture of Prevention and the Work of Foresight”, Constellations Volume 11, Issue 4, December 2004)
In the twenty-first century, the lines of political cleavage are being drawn
AND
to public deliberation about the construction of an alternative world order (IV).

Tournament: St Marks | Round: 2 | Opponent: Damien LL | Judge: Ana Nikolic
1

Immigration reform will pass now but itll be close
Le 10/17 Van, B.A. in Communications from Harvard University, Writer for America’s Voice, 2013, “When will Speaker Boehner Allow a Vote so Immigration Reform can Pass?” http://americasvoiceonline.org/blog/when-will-speaker-boehner-allow-a-vote-so-immigration-reform-can-pass/
The thing is, if John Boehner wanted to, passing immigration reform through the
AND
and turns out massive rallies. The opposition is distracted and lacking support.
Obama is spending PC and it is key
Sink 10-15 – Staff writer for The Hill (Justin, “Obama to push immigration reform 'day after' budget deal, October 15 f 2013, http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/328747-obama-to-push-immigration-reform-day-after-budget-deal-reached
President Obama vowed Tuesday that he would pursue an immigration reform vote in the House
AND
a partisan pursuit" and passing a bill "would benefit both parties."
Plan drains political capital
LeoGrande, 12
William M. LeoGrande School of Public Affairs American University, Professor of Government and a specialist in Latin American politics and U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America, Professor LeoGrande has been a frequent adviser to government and private sector agencies, 12/18/12, http://www.american.edu/clals/upload/LeoGrande-Fresh-Start.pdf
The Second Obama Administration Where in the executive branch will control over Cuba policy lie
AND
rarely happen unless the urgency of the problem forces policymakers to take action.

Visas are key to cybersecurity preparedness
McLarty 9 (Thomas F. III, President – McLarty Associates and Former White House Chief of Staff and Task Force Co-Chair, “U.S. Immigration Policy: Report of a CFR-Sponsored Independent Task Force”, 7-8, http://www.cfr.org/ publication/19759/us_immigration_policy.html)
We have seen, when you look at the table of the top 20 firms
AND
going to strengthen, I think, our system, our security needs.
Cyber-vulnerability causes great power nuclear war
Fritz 9 Researcher for International Commission on Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament Jason, researcher for International Commission on Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament, former Army officer and consultant, and has a master of international relations at Bond University, “Hacking Nuclear Command and Control,” July,  http://www.icnnd.org/latest/research/Jason_Fritz_Hacking_NC2.pdf
This paper will analyse the threat of cyber terrorism in regard to nuclear weapons.
AND
its own, without the need for compromising command and control centres directly.
2
Discourses of danger reproduces an American identity – that posits the US as a the defender of global freedom and liberty
Campbell, 98- Professor of International Politics University of Newcastle (David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity)
The crisis of representation the United States faces is unique only in the particularities of
AND
the idea that foreign policy/Foreign Policy is constitutive of political identity.

That makes extinction inevitable
Willson, 02- Ph.D New College San Fransisco, Humanities, JD, American University (Brian, “Armageddon or Quantum Leap? U.S. Imperialism and?Human Consciousness from?an Evolutionary Perspective”, http://www.brianwillson.com/quantum.html)
Awaiting the impending U.S. government's concocted "preventive" war against Iraq
AND
everything that contributes to their support" (General John Sullivan, 1779).
In a prominent history book published in 1906 (The History of the United States
AND
cyclical, indicate that we are dangerously near the end of our evolutionary branch

Alternative text – reject the affirmative to desecuritize the Political. Vote negative to challenge securitization itself in favor of a political ethic that approaches problems in non-security terms and exposes the limits of their methodology.

security is a communicative action that requires discursive justification – there is an ethical responsibility to justify securitization in political discussion. The role of the ballot is to interrogate methodologies – to weigh their case the Aff has to legitimize securitization first
Williams, 03 Michael – IR Prof @ University of Ottawa, “Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics,” International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 4 (Dec., 2003), pp. 511-53, Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The International Studies Association, JSTOR http://www.jstor.org/stable/3693634

A second major criticism of the Copenhagen School concerns the ethics of securitization. Simply
AND
questioning the policies, or by disputing the threat, or both.36

3

Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to
• AND
• order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion
• AND
• efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent
AND
105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate
4

The United States federal government should
- ask the governments of Brazil and Mexico to diplomatically engage Cuba on its behalf
- inform Brazil and Mexico that it will abide by the results of negotiations
- implement any policy changes that negotiations between Brazil, Mexico, and Cuba recommend and
- establish an embassy in the Republic of Cuba

Solves the case and preserves US soft power
Iglesias 12 – Commander of the US Navy (Carlos, “United States Security Policy
Implications of a Post-Fidel Cuba”, 2012, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA560408~~)
Unlike the policy implications above, the major hurdle to this interest does not ¶
AND
with whom to act or just watching from ¶ across the Florida Straits.
Ag

The impact is exaggerated – Cuban ag isn’t sustainable
Thompson and Stephens, 12 – * Ph.D. Curriculum and Education Director @ Duke University AND  Marian Cheek Jackson Center (Charles D. and Alexander, “Visions for Sustainable Agriculture in Cuba and the United States: Changing Minds and Models through Exchange”, Southern States, March 22 2013, http://www.southernspaces.org/2012/visions-sustainable-agriculture-cuba-and-united-states-changing-minds-and-models-through-exchan) SP
Following the Cuban Revolution (1953–59), the Soviet Union’s (USSR)
AND
time during the year in 2010, up from 11 in 2005. 

Zero chance the US adopts the Cuban model
Pfeiffer, 3 – energy editor for From the Wilderness (Dale, “Cuba-A Hope”, From the Wilderness,
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/120103_korea_2.html.
Resistance to Cuban-style agricultural reform would be particularly stiff in the United States
AND
to turn a profit is effectively drowned out by the overproduction of agribusiness.

Cuban sustainable ag is a myth
Avery, 9 - Dennis T. Avery, is a senior fellow with the Hudson Institute in Washington.  Dennis is the Director for Global Food Issues cgfi.org. He was formerly a senior analyst for the Department of State (“Cubans Starve on Diet of Lies” Canadian Free Press, 3/23, http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/9571)
The Cubans told the world they had heroically learned to feed themselves without fuel or
AND
helps to have a nearby neighbor with a million or so industrial farmers.”
No extinction
Easterbrook, 03 – senior fellow at the New Republic, 03 “We're All Gonna Die!”, http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.07/doomsday.html?pg=1andtopic=andtopic_set=
If we're talking about doomsday - the end of human civilization - many scenarios simply
AND
as he was, wrote Remembrance of Things Past while lying in bed.

Environmental alarmism isn’t a justification for taking action
Kaleita, 07, PHD, Assistant Professor Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Amy, “Hysteria’s History” Environmental Alarmism in Context”, http://www.pacificresearch.org/docLib/20070920_Hysteria_History.pdf
Apocalyptic stories about the irreparable, catastrophic damage that humans are doing to the natural
AND
real problem exists, solutions should be based on reality, not hysteria. 

Species extinction won't cause human extinction – humans and the environment are adaptable
Doremus, 2K (Holly,  Professor of Law at UC Davis Washington and Lee Law Review, Winter 57 Wash and Lee L. Rev. 11, lexis)  
In recent years, this discourse frequently has taken the form of the ecological horror
AND
that a high proportion of species can be lost without precipitating a collapse.
Multilat

No impact to hegemonic decline
MacDonald, 11 - Assistant Professor of Political Science at Williams College (Paul K, Spring 2011, "Graceful Decline?: The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchment", International Security, Vol. 35, No. 4, UTD McDermitt Library, KONTOPOULOS)
How do great powers respond to acute decline? The erosion of the relative power
AND
none of the declining powers that failed to retrench recovered their relative position.

No Asian war
Friedberg, 05 (Aaron L. Friedberg, Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University. International Security, Vol. 30, No. 2 (Fall 2005) http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/is3002_pp007-045_friedberg.pdf)
Liberal optimists believe that, although it is still far from finished, the process  
AND
as war among the members of  the European Union appears to be today.

The world is moving to pluralism, not multipolarity – the US can still maintain unipolar leadership because most challengers are regional
Etzioni, 13 - served as a senior advisor to the Carter White House; taught at Columbia University, Harvard University and The University of California at Berkeley; and is currently a university professor and professor of international relations at The George Washington University (Amitai, “The Devolution of American Power” 37 Fletcher F. World Aff. 13, lexis)
The theory that the world is moving from a unipolar order, dominated by the United States, to a multipolar distribution of power has led to a robust debate concerning the consequences of this change on the international order. However, the global power distribution is currently following a different pattern. Instead of what is conventionally addressed as a global unipolar to multipolar shift, in fact rising powers are mainly regional powers, not global ones, although they may have global reach. This pattern should be expected to continue in the near future and should be accounted for in order to make sound policy. It follows that the movement away from a unipolar world should not be equated with one in which more global powers contend with each other; nor should it be equated with a world in which new powers take over from an old, declining power. Moreover, it should not be assumed that the world will be less ordered. Instead, to a significant extent, the change seems to be toward more regional autonomy, or increased devolution, and greater variety in the relationships between the United States and regional powers. These relationships may see regional powers serve as junior partners to the global power and assume some of the global power's regional responsibilities. Or these relationships may produce junior adversarial regional powers that seek greater relative regional control in defiance of the United States, but seek at most limited realignment of power on the global stage. In the process of devolution, the increase in regional self-government and pluralism are much less challenging to the global power than *14 the redistribution of power implied by multipolarity. Indeed, as junior regional powers increasingly act as partners and assume regional responsibilities, they enable the global power to scale back its global commitments without losing much of its weight in international developments. Similarly, the desire for regional control among rising powers can be more readily accommodated than aspirations to challenge the United States as a global superpower. It must be noted that the notion of devolution as used here is that of an ideal, n1 and as such there will be significant variation in its real-world instantiations. However, the process of devolution suggests a logical pattern of behavior for all actors involved, upon which various powers can construct a viable strategy. While the movement from a uni- to a multipolar distribution of global power is considered by some to be "positive" and more supportive of international institutions, n2 others consider it as "negative" and likely to lead to confrontation between the declining power and the rising ones. n3 In truth, the move to a higher level of regional pluralism is a double-edged sword. The effect of the transformation depends on the particular accommodation pattern that develops between each regional power and the global power. As indicated previously, this pattern can vary from that of a junior partner to that of a regional antagonist. Stated in other terms, if unipolarity is compared to hierarchy and multipolarity is compared to flat systems or networks, regional pluralism is analogous to increased subsidiarity. Importantly, the accommodation pattern between the global superpower and regional powers is fundamentally different from the one between declining and rising global powers. In the former case, the regional powers do not seek to modify or replace the global rules or change the global distribution of public goods. Instead, they aim merely to gain local exemptions from the rules, variants in the ways they are applied, or increases in their share of distributed benefits. Superpowers may prove unwilling to accommodate such regional challenges and regional challengers may hold that they have been insufficiently accommodated. *15 However, such global/regional accommodations are, in general, easier to reach than the global/global accommodations between declining and rising global powers, and thus are less likely to lead to outright conflicts. With devolution, the central power yields, therefore risking much less when pluralism increases than when a transition from uni- to multipolarity takes place. This is one of the principle strengths of
Unilateralism is what sustains primacy – other states bandwagon with the US for fear of other rising powers.  Moving towards multilateralism makes it unsustainable
Seldena, 13 – assistant professor of political science at the University of Florida (Zachary, “Balancing Against or Balancing With? The Spectrum of Alignment and the Endurance of American Hegemony” Security Studies Volume 22, Issue 2, 2013, Taylor and Francis)
Understanding which of these choices—soft balancing against the hegemon or alignment with the
AND
an increased reluctance to use its power in support of its national interests.

Tournament: Ba-Lah-Kay | Round: 5 | Opponent: Niles West XX | Judge: Michael McGrath
1
Trade promotion authority will pass – bipartisan support
Reuters 12-12 – (“Congress could OK trade promotion bill in early 2014”, December 12 of 2013, http://www.agprofessional.com/news/Congress-could-OK-trade-promotion-bill-in-early-2014-235387181.html)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Three top U.S. lawmakers on key congressional
AND
the House Ways and Means Committee, which is also oversees trade issues.
Plan saps PC
Leising, Berkley journalism graduate school, No date
Matt, “EL PASO: NADBANK”, http://journalism.berkeley.edu/projects/border/elpasonadbank.html, accessed 7/15, CC
That bank is the North American Development Bank (NADBank). Along with its sister
AND
environmental and labor side agreement - was passed on November 17, 1993 .
Political capital is essential for TPA, which maintains US trade leadership
Riley and Kim, 13 (Bryan, Jay Van Andel senior policy analyst in trade policy for the Center for International Trade and Economics, and Anthony, senior policy analyst Center for International Trade and Economics, “Advancing Trade Freedom: Key Objective of Trade Promotion Authority Renewal,” http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/04/advancing-trade-freedom-key-objective-of-trade-promotion-authority-renewal)
Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) has been a critical tool for advancing free trade
AND
that accrue from such policies. It should not let the opportunity pass.

Collapse of trade causes great power war and US economic decline in the short term
PANITCHPAKDI ‘4 (Supachai Panitchpakdi, secretary-general of the UN Conference on Trade and Development, 2/26/2004, American Leadership and the World Trade Organization, p. http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/spsp_e/spsp22_e.htm)
The second point is that strengthening the world trading system is essential to America's wider
AND
constrained, not by multilateral rules, but by the absence of rules.

2
The 1AC is a construction of false threats lingering on the horizon – that makes extinction inevitable
Zenko and Cohen 12(Michael and Micah,senior fellow at the New America Foundation where he helms the Privatization of Foreign Policy Initiative and an adjunct lecturer at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs—AND—worked for five years at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, and at the Brookings Institution, Congressional Research Service, and State Department's Office of Policy Planning.   Clear and Present Safety, www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137279/micah-zenko-and-michael-a-cohen/clear-and-present-safety?page=show)
Last August, the Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney performed what has become a quadrennial
AND
result, they are given short shrift in national security discourse and policymaking.
Symptom focus makes all aff impacts inevitable—self reflexivity is a prerequisite to solvency.
Ahmed 11—Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed is an international security analyst. He is Executive Director at the Institute for Policy Research and Development, and Associate Tutor at the Department of IR, University of Sussex, where he obtained his DPhil. “The international relations of crisis and the crisis of international relations: from the securitisation of scarcity to the militarisation of society,” Global Change, Peace and Security, Volume 23, Issue 3, 2011, Taylor and Francis Online
2.4 The socio-historical evacuation of the political ecology of power¶
AND
‘security’ ends up becoming an unwitting accomplice in the intensification of insecurity.
Vote negative to de-securitize the political
3
Text: The United States federal government should pass H.R. 2216, the NADBank Enhancement Act.

NADBank restrictions prevent investment – counter plan solves.
Balido, 11 (Nelson, President of the Border Trade Alliance, “Bill to expand NADBank projects holds potential to make big impact for border,”  August 29, http://www.thebta.org/btanews/bill-to-expand-nadbank-projects-holds-potential-to-make-big-impact-for-border.html)
Over the past sixteen years of operation, the NADBank has been vitally important to
AND
area’s quality of life and provide a needed boost to the region’s economy.
4
Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to promote the integration of China into the global trading and financial systems; and security engagement, to encourage compliance with the ten principles by diplomatic and military means when economic incentives do not suffice, in order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent to using carrots and sticks in response to foreign policy actions by China. Economic engagement calls for what is described as symmetric tit-for-tat and security engagement for asymmetric tit-for-tat. A symmetric response is one that counters a move by China in the same place, time, and manner; an asymmetric response might occur in another place at another time, and perhaps in another manner. A symmetric tit-for-tat would be for Washington to counter a Chinese tariff of 10 percent on imports for the United States with a tariff of 10 percent on imports from China. An asymmetric tit-for-tat would be for the United States to counter a Chines shipment of missiles to Iran with an American shipment of F-16s to Vietnam (John Lewis Gaddis, Strategies of Containment: A critical Appraisal of Postwar American National Security Policy. New York: Oxford University Press, (1982). This is also cited in FareedZakaria, “The Reagan Strategy of Containment,” Political Science Quarterly 105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

“Increase” means 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
AND
car five or ten years ago when the engine was in perfect condition.

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate

Econ
No chance of war from economic decline---best and most recent data
Daniel W. Drezner 12, Professor, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, October 2012, “The Irony of Global Economic Governance: The System Worked,” http://www.globaleconomicgovernance.org/wp-content/uploads/IR-Colloquium-MT12-Week-5_The-Irony-of-Global-Economic-Governance.pdf
The final outcome addresses a dog that hasn’t barked: the effect of the Great
AND
II – and not even worse – must be regarded as fortunate.”42

investment in infrastructure is manipulated by project managers who cook the data to win project approval – exaggerates AFF benefits and causes massive cost overruns
Flyvbjerg, 10 - Professor of Major Programme Management at Oxford University's Saïd Business School and is Founding Director of the University's BT Centre for Major Programme Management. He was previously Professor of Planning at Aalborg University, Denmark and Chair of Infrastructure Policy and Planning at Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands (Bent, “Survival of the un?ttest: why the worst infrastructure gets built—and what we can do about it,” Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 25, Number 3, 2009, pp.344–367, Oxford Journals Online)DH
This situation may need some explication, because it may sound to many like an
AND
signi?cant social and environmental impacts, as is common with major infrastructure projects. 

Data cooking creates economic disasters – the worst projects are approved, and necessary infrastructure loses out – this turns the case
Flyvbjerg, 10 - Professor of Major Programme Management at Oxford University's Saïd Business School and is Founding Director of the University's BT Centre for Major Programme Management. He was previously Professor of Planning at Aalborg University, Denmark and Chair of Infrastructure Policy and Planning at Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands (Bent, “Survival of the un?ttest: why the worst infrastructure gets built—and what we can do about it,” Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 25, Number 3, 2009, pp.344–367, Oxford Journals Online)DH
In sum, the UK study shows that strong interests and strong incentives exist at
AND
. They have been designed like that, as disasters waiting to happen.

No impact to hegemonic decline – their studies are wrong
MacDonald, 11 - Assistant Professor of Political Science at Williams College (Paul K, Spring 2011, "Graceful Decline?: The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchment", International Security, Vol. 35, No. 4, UTD McDermitt Library, KONTOPOULOS)
How do great powers respond to acute decline? The erosion of the relative power
AND
none of the declining powers that failed to retrench recovered their relative position.

Protectionism won’t spiral out of control – interdependence
Marshall, 09 (Andrew – asia political risk correspondent, Assault on free trade a key political risk, Reuters, 1/21/2009, p. lexis)

PREVENTING DISASTER Despite the risks, many analysts argue that a wholesale retreat into protectionism
AND
markets that are highly dependent on exports," the Economist Intelligence Unit said.

Drug violence is declining – most recent ev
WSJ 6-28-13 (Wall Street Journal, “Mexico Sees Decline in Drug-Related Killings”, June 28th, 2013, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324328204578573760968965312.html)
Drug-related killings that turned parts of Mexico into the bloodiest spots on the
AND
to 20,000 or 25,000 people getting killed every year."
Warming
No impact to warming
Goklany 11 - a science and technology policy analyst for the United States Department of the Interior (Indur M., “Misled on Climate Change: How the UN IPCC (and others) Exaggerate the Impacts of Global Warming” December 2011, http://goklany.org/library/Reason20CC20and20Development202011.pdf, PZ)
A third approach would be to fix the root cause of why developing countries are
AND
while cellular phone users went from 0 per 100 to 33 per 100.

Even if all industrialized countries magically stopped emitting CO2, we’d still all die
Ravi Jain, Dean and Professor of the School of Engineering and Computer Science, University of the Pacific, February 2008
(“Global climate change: impacts and policy options” Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, Vol. 10, No. 1, p. 1-5)
Clearly, since industrialized and developing countries share the same environmental commons (atmosphere,
AND
Thus, active involvement of emerging economies like China and India is crucial.

The aff is way too small—every country in the world needs to cut emissions by 80 to solve
David D. Doniger et al., Policy Director of the Climate Center for the Natural Resources Defense Council, 11/03/2006
(David D. Doniger, Antonia V. Herzog, and Daniel A. Lashof, “An Ambitious, Centrist Approach to Global Warming Legislation” Science, Vol. 314, No.5800, p. 764-5)
There is growing concern that global warming of more than 2°C from pre
AND
developing countries limit emissions growth and impose similar reductions later in the century.

Tournament: HoFlo | Round: 6 | Opponent: Iowa City West MY | Judge: Sydney Doe
1

Obama’s political capital is effectively holding off passage of the Iran sanctions bill now – but it’s still a fight
Delmore 2/5/14 (Erin, Political Analyst @ MSNBC, "Democrats split over Syria, Iran," http://www.msnbc.com/all/democrats-split-over-syria-iran)
Over strong objections from the president, 16 Senate Democrats support a bill that would impose new sanctions on Iran should the country fail to reach a permanent agreement with international negotiators to roll back its nuclear program. Those senators, along with 43 Republicans, argue that tough sanctions brought Iran to the negotiating table in the first place and further pressure would flex American muscle in the 6-month talks toward crafting a permanent solution. The bill drew support from Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y, and Harry Reid, D-Nev., both close allies of Obama’s but also leading supporters of policies favoring Israel. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, America’s most powerful pro-Israel advocacy group, has lobbied members of Congress from both parties to support the sanctions.¶ Other Democrats are siding with the Obama administration, which argues that imposing new sanctions damaged “good-faith” negotiations while empowering Iran’s hard-liners rooting for the talks to fail. (A National Security Council spokeswoman charged last month that the sanctions bill could end negotiations and bring the U.S. closer to war.) ¶ The Senate bill has been losing steam ever since the White House ratcheted up pressure on Senate Democrats to abandon the it. Introduced in December by Democrat Robert Menendez, D-N.J. and Sen. Mark Kirk. R-Ill., the legislation was backed by 59 members – but now Senate leaders say they will hold off bringing the legislation to a vote until the six-month negotiation process ends.¶ Adam Sharon, a spokesman for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which Menendez chairs, said the New Jersey Senator stands behind the bill that bears his name. ¶ Menendez and 58 other senators support the bill, Sharon said. “It’s his bill, three or four senators say they wouldn’t call for a vote now. His position has been, having a bill, having this in place is an extremely effective and necessary tool when negotiating with the Iranians that we need to have to avoid Iran crossing the nuclear threshold. He stands behind this bill and the whole essence of the bill is to have sanctions in waiting, but you have to move on them now to make it happen.”¶ The movement is still alive in the House with enough votes to pass, despite a letter signed by at least 70 Democrats opposing the measure, and a letter of criticism by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Obama reiterated in last week’s State of the Union address a promise to veto any attempt to impose new sanctions on Iran.
Plan drains PC.
Shear, 13
(Michael, NYT White house correspondent, 5/5,  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/05/world/americas/in-latin-america-us-shifts-focus-from-drug-war-to-economy.html?pagewanted=all)

Last week, Mr. Obama returned to capitals in Latin America with a vastly different message. Relationships with countries racked by drug violence and organized crime should focus more on economic development and less on the endless battles against drug traffickers and organized crime capos that have left few clear victors. The countries, Mexico in particular, need to set their own course on security, with the United States playing more of a backing role. That approach runs the risk of being seen as kowtowing to governments more concerned about their public image than the underlying problems tarnishing it. Mexico, which is eager to play up its economic growth, has mounted an aggressive effort to play down its crime problems, going as far as to encourage the news media to avoid certain slang words in reports. “The problem will not just go away,” said Michael Shifter, president of the Inter-American Dialogue. “It needs to be tackled head-on, with a comprehensive strategy that includes but goes beyond stimulating economic growth and alleviating poverty. “Obama becomes vulnerable to the charge of downplaying the region’s overriding issue, and the chief obstacle to economic progress,” he added. “It is fine to change the narrative from security to economics as long as the reality on the ground reflects and fits with the new story line.” Administration officials insist that Mr. Obama remains cleareyed about the security challenges, but the new emphasis corresponds with a change in focus by the Mexican government. The new Mexican president, Enrique Peña Nieto, took office in December vowing to reduce the violence that exploded under the militarized approach to the drug war adopted by his predecessor, Felipe Calderón. That effort left about 60,000 Mexicans dead and appears not to have significantly damaged the drug-trafficking industry. In addition to a focus on reducing violence, which some critics have interpreted as taking a softer line on the drug gangs, Mr. Peña Nieto has also moved to reduce American involvement in law enforcement south of the border. With friction and mistrust between American and Mexican law enforcement agencies growing, Mr. Obama suggested that the United States would no longer seek to dominate the security agenda. “It is obviously up to the Mexican people to determine their security structures and how it engages with other nations, including the United States,” he said, standing next to Mr. Peña Nieto on Thursday in Mexico City. “But the main point I made to the president is that we support the Mexican government’s focus on reducing violence, and we look forward to continuing our good cooperation in any way that the Mexican government deems appropriate.” In some ways, conceding leadership of the drug fight to Mexico hews to a guiding principle of Mr. Obama’s foreign policy, in which American supremacy is played down, at least publicly, in favor of a multilateral approach. But that philosophy could collide with the concerns of lawmakers in Washington, who have expressed frustration with what they see as a lack of clarity in Mexico’s security plans. And security analysts say the entrenched corruption in Mexican law enforcement has long clouded the partnership with their American counterparts. Putting Mexico in the driver’s seat on security marks a shift in a balance of power that has always tipped to the United States and, analysts said, will carry political risk as Congress negotiates an immigration bill that is expected to include provisions for tighter border security. “If there is a perception in the U.S. Congress that security cooperation is weakening, that could play into the hands of those who oppose immigration reform,” said Vanda Felbab-Brown, a counternarcotics expert at the Brookings Institution in Washington. “Realistically, the border is as tight as could be and there have been few spillovers of the violence from Mexico into the U.S.,” she added, but perceptions count in Washington “and can be easily distorted.” “Drugs today are not very important to the U.S. public over all,” she added, “but they are important to committed drug warriors who are politically powerful.” Representative Michael T. McCaul, a Texas Republican who is chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, has warned against the danger of drug cartels forming alliances with terrorist groups. “While these threats exist, you would be surprised to find that the administration thinks its work here is done,” he wrote in an opinion article for Roll Call last month, pressing for more border controls in the bill. The Obama administration has said any evidence of such cooperation is very thin, but even without terrorist connections, drug gangs pose threats to peace and security. Human rights advocates said they feared the United States would ease pressure on Mexico to investigate disappearances and other abuses at the hands of the police and military, who have received substantial American support. The shift in approach “suggests that the Obama administration either doesn’t object to these abusive practices or is only willing to raise such concerns when it’s politically convenient,” said José Miguel Vivanco, director of Human Rights Watch’s Americas division. Still, administration officials have said there may have been an overemphasis on the bellicose language and high-profile hunts for cartel leaders while the real problem of lawlessness worsens. American antidrug aid is shifting more toward training police and shoring up judicial systems that have allowed criminals to kill with impunity in Mexico and Central America. United States officials said Mr. Obama remains well aware of the region’s problems with security, even as he is determined that they not overshadow the economic opportunities. It is clear Mr. Obama, whatever his words four years ago, now believes there has been too much security talk. In a speech to Mexican students on Friday, Mr. Obama urged people in the two countries to look beyond a one-dimensional focus on what he called real security concerns, saying it is “time for us to put the old mind-sets aside.” And he repeated the theme later in the day in Costa Rica, lamenting that when it comes to the United States and Central America, “so much of the focus ends up being on security.” “We also have to recognize that problems like narco-trafficking arise in part when a country is vulnerable because of poverty, because of institutions that are not working for the people, because young people don’t see a brighter future ahead,” Mr. Obama said in a news conference with Laura Chinchilla, the president of Costa Rica.
 
Causes Israel strikes
Perr 12/24 (Jon Perr 12/24/13, B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University; technology marketing consultant based in Portland, Oregon, has long been active in Democratic politics and public policy as an organizer and advisor in California and Massachusetts. His past roles include field staffer for Gary Hart for President (1984), organizer of Silicon Valley tech executives backing President Clinton's call for national education standards (1997), recruiter of tech executives for Al Gore's and John Kerry's presidential campaigns, and co-coordinator of MassTech for Robert Reich (2002). (Jon, “Senate sanctions bill could let Israel take U.S. to war against Iran” Daily Kos, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/24/1265184/-Senate-sanctions-bill-could-let-Israel-take-U-S-to-war-against-Iran#)
As 2013 draws to close, the negotiations over the Iranian nuclear program have entered a delicate stage. But in 2014, the tensions will escalate dramatically as a bipartisan group of Senators brings a new Iran sanctions bill to the floor for a vote. As many others have warned, that promise of new measures against Tehran will almost certainly blow up the interim deal reached by the Obama administration and its UN/EU partners in Geneva. But Congress' highly unusual intervention into the President's domain of foreign policy doesn't just make the prospect of an American conflict with Iran more likely. As it turns out, the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act essentially empowers Israel to decide whether the United States will go to war against Tehran.¶ On their own, the tough new sanctions imposed automatically if a final deal isn't completed in six months pose a daunting enough challenge for President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry. But it is the legislation's commitment to support an Israeli preventive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities that almost ensures the U.S. and Iran will come to blows. As Section 2b, part 5 of the draft mandates:¶ If the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in legitimate self-defense against Iran's nuclear weapon program, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide, in accordance with the law of the United States and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force, diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.¶ Now, the legislation being pushed by Senators Mark Kirk (R-IL), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ) does not automatically give the President an authorization to use force should Israel attack the Iranians. (The draft language above explicitly states that the U.S. government must act "in accordance with the law of the United States and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force.") But there should be little doubt that an AUMF would be forthcoming from Congressmen on both sides of the aisle. As Lindsey Graham, who with Menendez co-sponsored a similar, non-binding "stand with Israel" resolution in March told a Christians United for Israel (CUFI) conference in July:¶ "If nothing changes in Iran, come September, October, I will present a resolution that will authorize the use of military force to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb."¶ Graham would have plenty of company from the hardest of hard liners in his party. In August 2012, Romney national security adviser and pardoned Iran-Contra architect Elliott Abrams called for a war authorization in the pages of the Weekly Standard. And just two weeks ago, Norman Podhoretz used his Wall Street Journal op-ed to urge the Obama administration to "strike Iran now" to avoid "the nuclear war sure to come."¶ But at the end of the day, the lack of an explicit AUMF in the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act doesn't mean its supporters aren't giving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu de facto carte blanche to hit Iranian nuclear facilities. The ensuing Iranian retaliation against to Israeli and American interests would almost certainly trigger the commitment of U.S. forces anyway.¶ Even if the Israelis alone launched a strike against Iran's atomic sites, Tehran will almost certainly hit back against U.S. targets in the Straits of Hormuz, in the region, possibly in Europe and even potentially in the American homeland. Israel would face certain retaliation from Hezbollah rockets launched from Lebanon and Hamas missiles raining down from Gaza.¶ That's why former Bush Defense Secretary Bob Gates and CIA head Michael Hayden raising the alarms about the "disastrous" impact of the supposedly surgical strikes against the Ayatollah's nuclear infrastructure. As the New York Times reported in March 2012, "A classified war simulation held this month to assess the repercussions of an Israeli attack on Iran forecasts that the strike would lead to a wider regional war, which could draw in the United States and leave hundreds of Americans dead, according to American officials." And that September, a bipartisan group of U.S. foreign policy leaders including Brent Scowcroft, retired Admiral William Fallon, former Republican Senator (now Obama Pentagon chief) Chuck Hagel, retired General Anthony Zinni and former Ambassador Thomas Pickering concluded that American attacks with the objective of "ensuring that Iran never acquires a nuclear bomb" would "need to conduct a significantly expanded air and sea war over a prolonged period of time, likely several years." (Accomplishing regime change, the authors noted, would mean an occupation of Iran requiring a "commitment of resources and personnel greater than what the U.S. has expended over the past 10 years in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.") The anticipated blowback?¶ Serious costs to U.S. interests would also be felt over the longer term, we believe, with problematic consequences for global and regional stability, including economic stability. A dynamic of escalation, action, and counteraction could produce serious unintended consequences that would significantly increase all of these costs and lead, potentially, to all-out regional war.
Impact is nuclear war
Reuveny 10 (Rafael – professor in the School of Public and Environmental affairs at Indiana University, Unilateral strike on Iran could trigger world depression, p. http://www.indiana.edu/~spea/news/speaking_out/reuveny_on_unilateral_strike_Iran.shtml)
A unilateral Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities would likely have dire consequences, including a regional war, global economic collapse and a major power clash. For an Israeli campaign to succeed, it must be quick and decisive. This requires an attack that would be so overwhelming that Iran would not dare to respond in full force. Such an outcome is extremely unlikely since the locations of some of Iran’s nuclear facilities are not fully known and known facilities are buried deep underground. All of these widely spread facilities are shielded by elaborate air defense systems constructed not only by the Iranians, but also the Chinese and, likely, the Russians as well. By now, Iran has also built redundant command and control systems and nuclear facilities, developed early-warning systems, acquired ballistic and cruise missiles and upgraded and enlarged its armed forces. Because Iran is well-prepared, a single, conventional Israeli strike — or even numerous strikes — could not destroy all of its capabilities, giving Iran time to respond. A regional war Unlike Iraq, whose nuclear program Israel destroyed in 1981, Iran has a second-strike capability comprised of a coalition of Iranian, Syrian, Lebanese, Hezbollah, Hamas, and, perhaps, Turkish forces. Internal pressure might compel Jordan, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority to join the assault, turning a bad situation into a regional war. During the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, at the apex of its power, Israel was saved from defeat by President Nixon’s shipment of weapons and planes. Today, Israel’s numerical inferiority is greater, and it faces more determined and better-equipped opponents. Despite Israel’s touted defense systems, Iranian coalition missiles, armed forces, and terrorist attacks would likely wreak havoc on its enemy, leading to a prolonged tit-for-tat. In the absence of massive U.S. assistance, Israel’s military resources may quickly dwindle, forcing it to use its alleged nuclear weapons, as it had reportedly almost done in 1973. An Israeli nuclear attack would likely destroy most of Iran’s capabilities, but a crippled Iran and its coalition could still attack neighboring oil facilities, unleash global terrorism, plant mines in the Persian Gulf and impair maritime trade in the Mediterranean, Red Sea and Indian Ocean. Middle Eastern oil shipments would likely slow to a trickle as production declines due to the war and insurance companies decide to drop their risky Middle Eastern clients. Iran and Venezuela would likely stop selling oil to the United States and Europe. The world economy would head into a tailspin; international acrimony would rise; and Iraqi and Afghani citizens might fully turn on the United States, immediately requiring the deployment of more American troops. Russia, China, Venezuela, and maybe Brazil and Turkey — all of which essentially support Iran — could be tempted to form an alliance and openly challenge the U.S. hegemony. Replaying Nixon’s nightmare Russia and China might rearm their injured Iranian protege overnight, just as Nixon rearmed Israel, and threaten to intervene, just as the U.S.S.R. threatened to join Egypt and Syria in 1973. President Obama’s response would likely put U.S. forces on nuclear alert, replaying Nixon’s nightmarish scenario. Iran may well feel duty-bound to respond to a unilateral attack by its Israeli archenemy, but it knows that it could not take on the United States head-to-head. In contrast, if the United States leads the attack, Iran’s response would likely be muted. If Iran chooses to absorb an American-led strike, its allies would likely protest and send weapons, but would probably not risk using force. While no one has a crystal ball, leaders should be risk-averse when choosing war as a foreign policy tool. If attacking Iran is deemed necessary, Israel must wait for an American green light. A unilateral Israeli strike could ultimately spark World War III.
2
Interpretation - Engagement requires DIRECT talks – means both governments must be involved
Crocker ‘9 9/13/09, Chester A. Crocker is a professor of strategic studies at the Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, was an assistant secretary of state for African affairs from 1981 to 1989. “Terms of Engagement,” http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/opinion/14crocker.html?_r=1and
PRESIDENT OBAMA will have a hard time achieving his foreign policy goals until he masters some key terms and better manages the expectations they convey. Given the furor that will surround the news of America’s readiness to hold talks with Iran, he could start with “engagement” — one of the trickiest terms in the policy lexicon The Obama administration has used this term to contrast its approach with its predecessor’s resistance to talking with adversaries and troublemakers. His critics show that they misunderstand the concept of engagement when they ridicule it as making nice with nasty or hostile regimes. Let’s get a few things straight. Engagement in statecraft is not about sweet talk. Nor is it based on the illusion that our problems with rogue regimes can be solved if only we would talk to them. Engagement is not normalization, and its goal is not improved relations. It is not akin to détente, working for rapprochement, or appeasement. So how do you define an engagement strategy? It does require direct talks. There is simply no better way to convey authoritative statements of position or to hear responses. But establishing talks is just a first step. The goal of engagement is to change the other country’s perception of its own interests and realistic options and, hence, to modify its policies and its behavior.

Violation – The affirmative is doesn’t engage in both governments.
Voting Issue - 

1. Limits – they open the floodgates to involvement of  thousands of international organizations, non governmental actors, and private companies
   2. Ground – direct engagement with the government is necessary for links to international politics and relations based DAs as well as competition for privatization CPs
   3
   The creation of enemies is purely psychological – that creates a self-fulfilling prophecy
   Stein 03 Howard, Fall. Professor Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of Oklahoma, psychoanalytic anthropologist and psychohistorian. “Days of Awe: September 11, 2001 and its Cultural Psychodynamics,” Journal for the Psychoanalysis of Culture and Society 8.2, Project Muse.

We not only need enemies (Volkan, "Need," "Blood Lines"), but we also create enemies by provoking them. We (each "we") project aggression, provoke aggression, and then justify our own aggression as defense. In a world of true believers and infidels, David Levine writes of the fatal psychological symbiosis of faithful and infidel: When the unfaithful self is projected onto external objects, the aggression we attribute to it becomes their aggression directed at us, their desire to destroy our faith. We must now mobilize aggression to protect ourselves against the infidel, notwithstanding the fact that the threat he poses is the threat of connection with our own split off and disavowed faithless selves. Since the infidel's rejection of the good object is also our own, the aggression we attribute to him is also our own aggression outside and experienced as a threat to us. ("Tolerating" 52) Coninues...  If there is some historical truth to the accusation of American abandonment and exploitation of the Near East, does the U.S. not also play an unconscious and symbolic role (a Durkheimian "collective representation"), one which now generates and provokes its own reality? Put differently, what is the interplay between what we do to others and what we represent to others, between what we actually do (achieved status) and what we projectively are (ascribed status)? Do not cultures often "get what they unconsciously desire"—which often differs from conscious agendas and interests? Do not groups "dance" in some kind of reciprocal unconscious adversary symbiosis (Stein, "Adversary")? Further, can this dance with our enemies—who do bad things to us—be separated from the bad things we do within our own national group? Such a split is common. In the Soviet Union, Stalin was a master of this displacement of his own terror onto the Nazi menace and the Great Patriotic War (World War II) against Fascism. Furthermore, do not the leaders and followers of currently warring groups have childhoods and families of origin, as well as political-economic realities, that affect decision-making? What do these warring groups represent to each other, and what are the overdetermined roots of these symbolisms? Finally, what good are borders (psychological, geographic) if they cannot keep their promises? I leave this interpretive paper and its subject with an overwhelming sense of incompleteness. I accept this void in knowing as necessary. Conventional and stylized accounts are at worst defenses against understanding the meaning of the attack, and at best they are partial truths. What we can know now is limited by the complicated process of mourning (Volkan, Need, Blood Lines; Stein, "Mourning"). Yet, it is often unbearable to mourn, so we flee into violent action. As America focuses exclusively on "what they the enemy did and do to us," we have failed to pay attention to "what we Americans did and do to ourselves." Long before September 11, the decade-and-a-half long legacy of "managed social change" from downsizing and restructuring, to outsourcing and reengineering, have symbolically disposed of millions of Americans in the service of instant bottom-line inflation and a surge in shareholder value. The "Enron Scandal," in which company officials took millions of dollars from a collapsing corporation, while prohibiting workers from selling shares, thereby losing their entire retirement savings, emerged in early 2002 as internal American self-destructiveness on an unprecedented economic scale. What and who the United States becomes now as a culture, and what we do in the world, after September 11, 2001 rests upon what and who we value, and not only what and who we oppose. There is so much more to be known, and felt, beyond culturally stylized sentiment and sentimentality, ideologically right thinking, nationalistic jingoism, and obligatory action. People died on that terrible day because people could not be recognized as people. They could only be recognized as symbols, embodiments, part objects. People were killed and people killed others because who and what they represented consumed their existence as distinct, differentiated, and integrated persons. Many more will die, will be killed, in the name of heaven and nation. The psychoanalytic work of comprehending September 11, 2001 is scarcely begun.
Their security representations are inaccurate and cause action-reaction cycles – that’s the root of violence and make extinction inevitable. Even if they win their impacts are true, they must justify that apocalypticism is a good method to approach crises stability.
Calkivik 10 (Emine, A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA, “DISMANTLING SECURITY”, October 2010,  http://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/99479/1/Calkivik_umn_0130E_11576.pdf)

Poultry and peasants may seem unlikely subjects to begin narrating international relations. Yet, as I argue throughout my dissertation, this episode is not marginal but symptomatic of a broader transformation: the consolidation of the empire of security across the global bio-political horizon. The empire at issue is one that is dedicated to protecting life from wars, from hunger, from addiction, from ideological excess, from environmental catastrophes, from corrupt governments, and from its own practices. In this empire, security as bio-politics is charged with the task of producing and transforming social life at its most general and global level. In this empire—as citizens, scholars, experts and politicians—we are called upon to be at constant war to secure life against poverty, against rogues, against ignorance and destruction. In this empire, lack of security informs massive efforts devoted to humanitarian interventions and scholarly investigations; it breathes life into innumerous civilizing organizations. Although the so-called Global War on Terror has become a privileged point in the ongoing debates about the changing nature of insecurities and the concomitant reevaluation of the adequacy of existing frameworks to analyze contemporary security landscapes, it is important to notice that long before this war made its way to the top of the agenda of the international community, security had already firmly established itself as a primary value and an omnipresent end in itself. Through discourses and practices entailed in humanitarian interventions, through the ever-expanding domains and objects to be secured—from environment to information, from health to food, from the nation to the human—security emerges as the primary objective toward which politics aspires and the ground upon which politics is built. As the idea that we are living in an increasingly dangerous world proliferates, security reaches far beyond official discourses and formal politics. It infuses the mundane, the everyday life, and colonizes the global social and political imaginary. It enacts a value order produced and reproduced through discourses, practices, and networks that weave together state apparatuses, international organizations, civil society actors, academics, experts, and private companies. Perhaps just as alarming is the proliferation of the phenomenon of vigilante citizens, as subjects around the globe take the law into their hands to secure themselves against gangs, drugs, and “illegal aliens.” One of the paradigmatic examples of this “statecraft from below” is civilian border patrol groups such as the Minutemen Project, founded in California in 2004 by a retired businessman to police the U.S.-Mexico border against the so-called invasion by immigrants. 9 As Doty explains, with undocumented migration becoming an increasingly prominent issue and the filling up of media outlets with news of humans referred to as “aliens” being trafficked across borders, ordinary citizens respond to calls from private groups to take action and form their own unofficial, unauthorized, but not necessarily illegal patrolling of borders. The global army that security enlists in its service is not situated merely at the borders of national territories and identities, however. Across the globe, there are many private patrol groups that are formed to clamp down on local crime, monitor other illicit and unwanted behavior. Depicting this trend as “both a logical response and an integral aspect” of the global political order wrought by neoliberalism, Pratten and Sen provide ample proof of the rising tide of vigilante-style justice and violence as a global phenomenon. 10 It could be said that the obsession with security is democratized to the extent that it has become a common language, a “vernacular” 11 shared across topographies of global hierarchies. The post-Cold War jubilation in countries that have witnessed political liberation and economic liberalization has been accompanied by the emergence of an overwhelming fear of crime and a desire for security. 12 As the global security agenda was transmogrifying toward an obsession with securing the life of the species, 13 eagerness to criminalize dystopic social phenomenon such as poverty became a global phenomenon: zero tolerance policies turned into wars on urban squatters, practically evolving into an active “dictatorship over the poor.” 14 Security has become a medium through which we relate to —orient ourselves towards— life, politics, and the world. As I discuss below, with the logic of preemption and precautionary principles becoming definitive of contemporary politics of security, not merely the fear of what exists, but also the danger of what might be — not only one’s chances today, but also one’s fortunes tomorrow— has become the stock and trade of security discourse and practices. What is paradoxical is that this “will to secure” saturates life at a time when a constant state of terror emerges as the defining condition of life. It is a terror underwritten by monstrous inequalities and oppression affecting unprecedented numbers of human beings on earth as systemic and non-systemic violence casts its shadow on everyday life around the globe. It is a terror that afflicts not only the “wretched of the earth,” but liberal societies as well—societies that have taken upon themselves the task of securing of common humanity through a temporally, spatially limitless War on Terror. 15 This paradoxical co-existence of the hegemony of security amidst ever proliferating dangers and intensifying insecurities provides the intellectual focus and central question of my dissertation. Against the reigning passion to secure, my argument is that what is needed is not more security, but to dismantle the whole architecture of security. Rather than writing security, I suggest, critical inquiry needs to be “untimely” 16 and reflect upon the meaning, content, and political implications of producing and reproducing for security so as to open a space for dismantling it. Taking as my starting point the way in which the global passion to secure disavows the violence and insecurity it renders, I ask: what would it mean to dismantle security rather than reproduce its imperial gaze? What political imaginaries are available, which we can draw upon? How might those political imaginaries alternatively be deployed, and with what effects? What would the political and ethical implications of such an undertaking be? How could they help us envision a new ethics, a new politics? 

Vote negative to reject the dominant framing of security. A focus on the epistemological and representational security lens of the AFF is a prerequisite to effective policy solutions
Bruce ‘96
(Robert, Associate Professor in Social Science – Curtin University and Graeme Cheeseman, Senior Lecturer – University of New South Wales, Discourses of Danger and Dread Frontiers, p. 5-9)

This goal is pursued in ways which are still unconventional in the intellectual milieu of international relations in Australia, even though they are gaining influence worldwide as traditional modes of theory and practice are rendered inadequate by global trends that defy comprehension, let alone policy. The inability to give meaning to global changes reflects partly the enclosed, elitist world of professional security analysts and bureaucratic experts, where entry is gained by learning and accepting to speak a particular, exclusionary language. The contributors to this book are familiar with the discourse, but accord no privileged place to its ‘knowledge form as reality’ in debates on defence and security. Indeed, they believe that debate will be furthered only through a long overdue critical re-evaluation of elite perspectives. Pluralistic, democratically-oriented perspectives on Australia’s identity are both required and essential if Australia’s thinking on defence and security is to be invigorated. This is not a conventional policy book; nor should it be, in the sense of offering policy-makers and their academic counterparts sets of neat alternative solutions, in familiar language and format, to problems they pose. This expectation is in itself a considerable part of the problem to be analysed. It is, however, a book about policy, one that questions how problems are framed by policy-makers. It challenges the proposition that irreducible bodies of real knowledge on defence and security exist independently of their ‘context in the world’, and it demonstrates how security policy is articulated authoritatively by the elite keepers of that knowledge, experts trained to recognize enduring, universal wisdom. All others, from this perspective, must accept such wisdom or remain outside the expert domain, tainted by their inability to comply with the ‘rightness’ of the official line. But it is precisely the official line, or at least its image of the world, that needs to be problematised. If the critic responds directly to the demand for policy alternatives, without addressing this image, he or she is tacitly endorsing it. Before engaging in the policy debate the critics need to reframe the basic terms of reference. This book, then, reflects and underlines the importance of Antonio Gramsci and Edward Said’s ‘critical intellectuals’.15 The demand, tacit or otherwise, that the policy-maker’s frame of reference be accepted as the only basis for discussion and analysis ignores a three thousand year old tradition commonly associated with Socrates and purportedly integral to the Western tradition of democratic dialogue. More immediately, it ignores post-seventeenth century democratic traditions which insist that a good society must have within it some way of critically assessing its knowledge and the decisions based upon that knowledge which impact upon citizens of such a society. This is a tradition with a slightly different connotation in contemporary liberal democracies which, during the Cold War, were proclaimed different and superior to the totalitarian enemy precisely because there were institutional checks and balances upon power. In short, one of the major differences between ‘open societies’ and their (closed) counterparts behind the Iron Curtain was that the former encouraged the critical testing of the knowledge and decisions of the powerful and assessing them against liberal democratic principles. The latter tolerated criticism only on rare and limited occasions. For some, this represented the triumph of rational-scientific methods of inquiry and techniques of falsification. For others, especially since positivism and rationalism have lost much of their allure, it meant that for society to become open and liberal, sectors of the population must be independent of the state and free to question its knowledge and power. Though we do not expect this position to be accepted by every reader, contributors to this book believe that critical dialogue is long overdue in Australia and needs to be listened to. For all its liberal democratic trappings, Australia’s security community continues to invoke closed monological narratives on defence and security. This book also questions the distinctions between policy practice and academic theory that inform conventional accounts of Australian security. One of its major concerns, particularly in chapters 1 and 2, is to illustrate how theory is integral to the practice of security; analysis and policy prescription. The book also calls on policy-makers, academics and students of defence and security to think critically about what they are reading, writing and saying; to begin to ask, of their work and study, difficult and searching questions raised in other disciplines; to recognise, no matter how uncomfortable it feels, that what is involved in theory and practice is not the ability to identify a replacement for failed models, but a realisation that terms and concepts – state sovereignty, balance of power, security, and so on – are contested and problematic, and that the world is indeterminate, always becoming what is written about it. Critical analysis which shows how particular kinds of theoretical presumptions can effectively exclude vital areas of political life from analysis has direct practical implications for policy-makers, academics and citizens who face the daunting task of steering Australia through some potentially choppy international waters over the next few years. There is also much of interest in the chapters for those struggling to give meaning to a world where so much that has long been taken for granted now demands imaginative, incisive reappraisal. The contributors, too, have struggled to find meaning, often despairing at the terrible human costs of international violence. This is why readers will find no single, fully formed panacea for the world’s ills in general, or Australia’s security in particular. There are none. Every chapter, however, in its own way, offers something more than is found in orthodox literature, often by exposing ritualistic Cold War defence and security mind-sets that are dressed up as new thinking. Chapters 7 and 9, for example, present alternative ways of engaging in security and defence practice. Others (chapters 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8) seek to alert policy-makers, academics and students to alternative theoretical possibilities which might better serve an Australian community pursuing security and prosperity in an uncertain world. All chapters confront the policy community and its counterparts in the academy with a deep awareness of the intellectual and material constraints imposed by dominant traditions of realism, but they avoid dismissive and exclusionary terms which often in the past characterized exchanges between policy-makers and their critics. This is because, as noted earlier, attention needs to be paid to the words and the thought processes of those being criticized. A close reading of this kind draws attention to underlying assumptions, showing they need to be recognized and questioned. A sense of doubt (in place of confident certainty) is a necessary prelude to a genuine search for alternative policies. First comes an awareness of the need for new perspectives, then specific policies may follow. As Jim George argues in the following chapter, we need to look not so much at contending policies as they are made for us but at challenging ‘the discursive process which gives favoured interpretations of “reality” their meaning and which direct Australia’s policy/analytical/military responses’. This process is not restricted to the small, official defence and security establishment huddled around the US-Australian War Memorial in Canberra. It also encompasses much of Australia’s academic defence and security community located primarily though not exclusively within the Australian National University and the University College of the University of New South Wales. These discursive processes are examined in detail in subsequent chapters as authors attempt to make sense of a politics of exclusion and closure which exercises disciplinary power over Australia’s security community. They also question the discourse of ‘regional security’, ‘security cooperation’, ‘peacekeeping’ and ‘alliance politics’ that are central to Australia’s official and academic security agenda in the 1990s. This is seen as an important task especially when, as is revealed, the disciplines of International Relations and Strategic Studies are under challenge from critical and theoretical debates ranging across the social sciences and humanities; debates that are nowhere to be found in Australian defence and security studies. The chapters graphically illustrate how Australia’s public policies on defence and security are informed, underpinned and legitimised by a narrowly-based intellectual enterprise which draws strength from contested concepts of realism and liberalism, which in turn seek legitimacy through policy-making processes. Contributors ask whether Australia’s policy-makers and their academic advisors are unaware of broader intellectual debates, or resistant to them, or choose not to understand them, and why?
4
Simulating images of death and violence anesthetizes us to real death and produces a culture of structural violence that makes infinite destruction appear desirable- vote neg to embrace a pedagogy of debate outside of violent spectacles.
Giroux ’12 Henry A Giroux, Frequent author on pedagogy in the public sphere, Truthout, “Youth in Revolt: The Plague of State-Sponsored Violence,” March 14, 2012, http://truth-out.org/index.php?option=com_k2andview=itemandid=7249:youth-in-revolt-the-plague-of-statesponsored-violence
One consequence is that "the sheer numbers and monotony of images may have a 'wearing off' impact and to stave off the 'viewing fatigue,' they must be increasingly gory, shocking and otherwise 'inventive' to arouse any sentiments at all or indeed draw attention. The level of 'familiar' violence, below which the cruelty of cruel acts escapes attention, is constantly rising."(23) Hyper-violence and spectacular representations of cruelty disrupt and block our ability to respond politically and ethically to the violence as it is actually happening on the ground. In this instance, unfamiliar violence such as extreme images of torture and death become banally familiar, while familiar violence that occurs daily is barely recognized relegated to the realm of the unnoticed and unnoticeable. How else to explain the public indifference to the violence waged by the state against nonviolent youthful protesters, who are rebelling against a society in which they have been excluded from any claim on hope, prosperity and democracy. As an increasing volume of violence is pumped into the culture, yesterday's spine-chilling and nerve-wrenching violence loses its shock value. As the need for more intense images of violence accumulates, the moral indifference and desensitization to violence grows while matters of cruelty and suffering are offered up as fodder for sports, entertainment, news media, and other outlets for seeking pleasure.

5
The United States federal government should condition offering Mexico a requirement that the North American Development Bank finance transportation infrastructure projects, including that the North American Development Bank issue bi-national bonds for transportation infrastructure projects on the federal government of Mexico meeting the four human rights requirements of the Mérida Initiative. The United States federal government should decide if the federal government of Mexico meets these requirements based off the findings of Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos.
Solves the AFF and boosts our human rights cred
WOLA 10 - (Washington Office of Latin America- contains multiple experts on human rights abuse in latin america and quotes the state department's report "Congress: Withhold Funds for Mexico Tied to Human Rights Performance" 9/14/10, http://www.wola.org/publications/congress_withhold_funds_for_mexico_tied_to_human_rights_performance)
The US government significantly strengthened its partnership with Mexico in combating organized crime in 2007 when it announced the Merida Initiative, a multi-year US security assistance package for Mexico. To date, the US government has allocated roughly $1.5 billion in Merida funding to Mexico. From the outset, the US Congress recognized the importance of ensuring that the Mexican government respect human rights in its public security efforts, mandating by law that 15 percent of select Merida funds be withheld until the State Department issued a report to the US Congress which showed that Mexico had demonstrated it was meeting four human rights requirements. ¶ ¶ On September 2, 2010, the State Department issued its second report to Congress concluding that Mexico is meeting the Merida Initiative’s human rights requirements, and it stated its intention to obligate roughly $36 million in security assistance that had been withheld from the 2009 supplemental and the 2010 omnibus budgets. ¶ However, research conducted by our respective organizations, Mexico’s National Human Rights Commission, and even the State Department’s own reports, demonstrates conclusively that Mexico has failed to meet the four human rights requirements set out by law. As a result, Congress should not release these select Merida funds. Releasing these funds would send the message that the United States condones the grave human rights violations committed in Mexico, including torture, rape, killings, and enforced disappearances.¶ We recognize that Mexico is facing a severe public security crisis, and that the United States can play a constructive role in strengthening Mexico’s ability to confront organized crime in an effective manner. However, human rights violations committed by Mexican security forces are not only deplorable in their own right, but also significantly undermine the effectiveness of Mexico’s public security efforts. Building trust between the Mexican people and the government is essential to gathering information to dismantle organized crime. When security forces commit grave human rights violations and they are not held accountable for their actions, they lose that trust, alienating key allies and leaving civilians in a state of terror and defenselessness. It is thus in the interest of both of our countries to help Mexico curb systematic human rights violations, ensure that violations are effectively investigated and those responsible held accountable, and assess candidly the progress Mexico is making towards improving accountability and transparency. ¶ Evidence demonstrates that Mexico is not fulfilling effectively any of the requirements established by Congress, particularly those dealing with prosecuting military abuses and torture: 

HR cred solves conflict
Burke-White 4 (William W., Lecturer in Public and International Affairs and Senior Special Assistant to the Dean, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University The Harvard Environmental Law Review Spring, 2004 LN,https://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/wburkewh/workingpapers/17HarvHumRtsJ249(2004).pdf)
This Article presents a strategic--as opposed to ideological or normative--argument that the promotion of human rights should be given a more prominent place in U.S. foreign policy. It does so by suggesting a correlation between the domestic human rights practices of states and their propensity to engage in aggressive international conduct. Among the chief threats to U.S. national security are acts of aggression by other states. Aggressive acts of war may directly endanger the United States, as did the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941, or they may require U.S. military action overseas, as in Kuwait fifty years later. Evidence from the post-Cold War period  *250  indicates that states that systematically abuse their own citizens' human rights are also those most likely to engage in aggression. To the degree that improvements in various states' human rights records decrease the likelihood of aggressive war, a foreign policy informed by human rights can significantly enhance U.S. and global security.¶ Since 1990, a state's domestic human rights policy appears to be a telling indicator of that state's propensity to engage in international aggression. A central element of U.S. foreign policy has long been the preservation of peace and the prevention of such acts of aggression. n2 If the correlation discussed herein is accurate, it provides U.S. policymakers with a powerful new tool to enhance national security through the promotion of human rights. A strategic linkage between national security and human rights would result in a number of important policy modifications. First, it changes the prioritization of those countries U.S. policymakers have identified as presenting the greatest concern. Second, it alters some of the policy prescriptions for such states. Third, it offers states a means of signaling benign international intent through the improvement of their domestic human rights records. Fourth, it provides a way for a current government to prevent future governments from aggressive international behavior through the institutionalization of human rights protections. Fifth, it addresses the particular threat of human rights abusing states obtaining weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Finally, it offers a mechanism for U.S.-U.N. cooperation on human rights issues.
Manu

Overwhelming Mexican opposition to the AFF – the plan is an insurmountable obstacle which kills Nieto’s credibility
Starr 12 - Director, U.S.-Mexico Network Associate Professor (NTT) University Fellow, Center on Public Diplomacy University of Southern California (Pamela, “U.S.-Mexico Relations and Mexican Domestic Politics”, October 6 of 2012, https://www.google.com/url?sa=tandrct=jandq=andesrc=sandsource=webandcd=3andcad=rjaandved=0CD4QFjACandurl=http3A2F2Fcollege.usc.edu2Fusmexnet2Fwp-content2Fuploads2F20102F102FCamp-Oxford-paper-final.docandei=mTLYUZTDMbOLyQGT14GwCQandusg=AFQjCNH_cqiYTQRo7SFmpfWugH9ABshhCgandsig2=_M2KmLNnt3e8v4vVshc_fQ)
The final implication of Mexican nationalism for U.S.-Mexico relations is the nearly insurmountable obstacle it erected to political alliances between Mexican actors and their U.S. counterparts, which has broken down only gradually and incompletely since the mid-1990s. For decades, the fear of being tarred as a traitor to the nation prevented Mexican leaders from seeking allies to their cause in the United States and thereby deprived U.S. actors of an easy point of entry into Mexican politics. Mexicans who ignored this taboo paid the price even in the final years of the twentieth century. In the 1980s, the then opposition National Action Party openly elicited U.S. backing for its charges of electoral fraud and associated actions of civil disobedience, producing a nationalist backlash in Mexico that sharply undercut the legitimacy of its claims. In the early 1990s, Mexican opponents of the North American Free Trade Agreement formed an alliance with their U.S. and Canadian counterparts, leading to accusations of having organized traitorous “campaigns against Mexico in the United States.” ¶ Carlos Salinas’ 1990 decision to summon U.S. assistance to lock in his domestic economic reform agenda through a bilateral trade treaty and his active lobbying to gain U.S. congressional approval of the treaty dealt a blow to this long-standing taboo. As a result, cross-border alliances are now increasingly common and accepted, but they are heavily concentrated among civil society actors. Mexico’s continuing anxiety about U.S. political domination, however, means that tolerance for cross-border political alliances is much less developed. While Mexican policy makers and analysts of the bilateral relationship have significantly more freedom of action to work with their U.S. counterparts in the early twenty-first century than did their predecessors, they still must watch their step or risk having their reputation sullied for being excessively “pro-gringo.” Mexicans remain uneasy living next door to a superpower; they continue to worry that the United States might get the notion to translate its power into domination of Mexico, its politics, policy, and culture, and they thus still approach their neighbor with trepidation. As a result, Mexican politicians and policy makers still must take care to avoid the appearance of being too willing to accept support and guidance from north of the border.

Nieto credibility is key the Mexican economy – turns the entire AFF
Ruelas-Gossi 12 - professor of strategy at the Santiago, Chile-based Universidad Adolfo Ibañez (Alejandro, “Peña Nieto's Plans for Mexico's Economy”, October 15 of 2012, Harvard Business Review, http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/10/mexico_is_the_perfect_dictator.html)
For one, Peña Nieto will likely bring about major reforms in the energy sector soon after he takes office. The new laws should enable Mexico, one of the world's top 10 producers, to follow Brazil in developing a successful oil and gas industry in South America. That will attract several potential investors from abroad.¶ Two, fiscal and labor reforms will enable Mexico to become more competitive. The former will help the government switch from volatile sources of revenue, such as oil prices, to more stable ones. Fiscal stability will also create a more competitive environment and eliminate subsidies, such as those on gasoline. An economy without subsidies will undoubtedly attract more foreign investment.¶ The changes in the labor laws are also linked to fiscal reforms since the current tax regime doesn't provide incentives for the informal economy to change. Mexico is the only OECD economy that doesn't offer unemployment insurance; health insurance for informal workers; or short-term contracts that will attract more women to the workforce.¶ Many of these reforms have been on the agenda for the last decade, so the PAN will have to support policies that it promoted when it was in power. Moreover, allies and adversaries alike concede that Peña Nieto showed a knack for working with opposition parties when he was the governor of the state of Mexico, but lacked a majority in the legislature.¶ Three, Peña Nieto wants to develop closer links between the Mexican economy and those of the Spanish-speaking countries in Latin America. That's a step in the right direction.¶ Historically, Mexico hasn't taken advantage of the three most important predictors of trade: A shared history, a common language, and regional trade agreements. As a result, big Mexican companies haven't moved into Latin America while American multinational corporations have done so, and Mexico depends on NAFTA for more than 80 of its exports.¶ Finally, Peña Nieto's economic slogan during the election campaign was Para Que Ganes Mas (You Will Earn More). He hasn't quite explained how his government will ensure that, but the message sends the signal that the PRI wishes not just to create jobs, but jobs that will pay higher salaries.¶ That's a major shift from the ideas of a previous PRI president, Ernesto Zedillo, who firmly believed that "the best industrial policy is one that doesn't exist." Instead, Mexico must grow by developing policies that will augment the value of the products and services produced in the country -- just like some other countries in Latin America.

Economic collapse doesn’t cause war
Ferguson, 06 – M.A., Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University, Resident faculty member of the Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies, Senior Research Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford University, and a Senior Fellow of the Hoover Institution, Stanford University (Niall, “The Next War of the World”, Foreign Affairs, September-October 2006, May 21st 2010, KONTOPOULOS)
Nor can economic crises explain the bloodshed. What may be the most familiar causal chain in modern historiography links the Great Depression to the rise of fascism and the outbreak of World War II. But that simple story leaves too much out. Nazi Germany started the war in Europe only after its economy had recovered. Not all the countries affected by the Great Depression were taken over by fascist regimes, nor did all such regimes start wars of aggression. In fact, no general relationship between economics and conflict is discernible for the century as a whole. Some wars came after periods of growth, others were the causes rather than the consequences of economic catastrophe, and some severe economic crises were not followed by wars.

Heg makes war inevitable
Layne, 06 - Robert M. Gates Chair in Intelligence and National Security at the George Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas AandM University and Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of  California at Berkeley (Christopher, 2006, “The Peace of Illusions: American Grand Strategy from 1940 to the Present”, p. 169, KONTOPOULOS) PDF
Proponents of U.S. hegemony like to say that America’s military commit¬ments in Eurasia are an insurance policy against the purportedly damaging consequences of a Eurasian great power war by preventing it from happen¬ing in the first place or limiting its harmful effects if it does happen. This is a dubious analogy, because insurance policies neither prevent, nor limit, damage to policyholders. Rather, they compensate the policyholder for dam¬age incurred. Even on its own terms, however, the insurance policy argu¬ment is not persuasive. Both Californians and Floridians know that some types of insurance are either unaffordable or unobtainable at any price. The chances of the “Big One”—a catastrophic earthquake on the San Andreas Fault—jolting Los Angeles or San Francisco, or a Force 5 hurricane making a direct hit on Miami, are small. But if either were to happen the conse¬quences could be catastrophic, which is why insurance companies don’t want to offer earthquake and hurricane insurance. Prospective great power wars in Eurasia represent a similar dynamic: the risk of such a war breaking out may be low, but if it does it could be prohibitively expensive for the United States to be involved. Rather than being instruments of regional pacification, today America’s alliances are transmission belts for war that ensure that the U.S. would be embroiled in Eurasian wars. In deciding whether to go war in Eurasia, the United States should not allow its hands to be tied in advance. For example, a non—great power war on the Korean Peninsula—even if nuclear weapons were not involved—would be very costly. The dangers of being entangled in a great power war in Eurasia, of course, are even greater, and could expose the American homeland to nuclear attack. An offshore balancing grand strat¬egy would extricate the United States from the danger of being entrapped in Eurasian conflicts by its alliance commitments.

No impact to hegemonic decline – their studies are wrong
MacDonald, 11 - Assistant Professor of Political Science at Williams College (Paul K, Spring 2011, "Graceful Decline?: The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchment", International Security, Vol. 35, No. 4, UTD McDermitt Library, KONTOPOULOS)
How do great powers respond to acute decline? The erosion of the relative power of the United States has scholars and policymakers reexamining this question. The central issue is whether prompt retrenchment is desirable or probable. Some pessimists counsel that retrenchment is a dangerous policy, because it shows weakness and invites attack. Robert Kagan, for example, warns, "A reduction in defense spending . . . would unnerve American allies and undercut efforts to gain greater cooperation. There is already a sense around the world, fed by irresponsible pundits here at home, that the United States is in terminal decline. Many fear that the economic crisis will cause the United States to pull back from overseas commitments. The announcement of a defense cutback would be taken by the world as evidence that the American retreat has begun."1 Robert Kaplan likewise argues, "Husbanding our power in an effort to slow America's decline in a post-Iraq and post-Afghanistan world would mean avoiding debilitating land entanglements and focusing instead on being more of an offshore balancer. . . . While this may be in America's interest, the very signaling of such an aloof intention may encourage regional bullies. . . . Lessening our engagement with the world would have devastating consequences for humanity. The disruptions we witness today are but a taste of what is to come should our country flinch from its international responsibilities."2 The consequences of these views are clear: retrenchment should be avoided and forward defenses maintained into the indefinite future.3 Other observers advocate retrenchment policies, but they are pessimistic End Page 7 about their prospects.4 Christopher Layne, for instance, predicts, "Even as the globe is being turned upside down by material factors, the foreign policies of individual states are shaped by the ideas leaders hold about their own nations' identity and place in world politics. More than most, America's foreign policy is the product of such ideas, and U.S. foreign-policy elites have constructed their own myths of empire to justify the United States' hegemonic role."5 Stephen Walt likewise advocates greater restraint in U.S. grand strategy, but cautions, "The United States . . . remains a remarkably immature great power, one whose rhetoric is frequently at odds with its conduct and one that tends to treat the management of foreign affairs largely as an adjunct to domestic politics. . . . Seemingly secure behind its nuclear deterrent and oceanic moats, and possessing unmatched economic and military power, the United States allowed its foreign policy to be distorted by partisan sniping, hijacked by foreign lobbyists and narrow domestic special interests, blinded by lofty but unrealistic rhetoric, and held hostage by irresponsible and xenophobic members of Congress."6 Although retrenchment is a preferable policy, these arguments suggest that great powers often cling to unprofitable foreign commitments for parochial reasons of national culture or domestic politics.7 These arguments have grim implications for contemporary international politics. With the rise of new powers, such as China, the international pecking order will be in increasing flux in the coming decades.8 Yet, if the pessimists are correct, politicians and interests groups in the United States will be unwilling or unable to realign resources with overseas commitments. Perceptions of weakness and declining U.S. credibility will encourage policymakers to hold on to burdensome overseas commitments, despite their high costs in blood and treasure.9 Policymakers in Washington will struggle to retire from profitless military engagements and restrain ballooning current accounts and budget deficits.10 For some observers, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan represent the ill-advised last gasps of a declining hegemon seeking to bolster its plummeting position.11 In this article, we question the logic and evidence of the retrenchment pessimists. To date there has been neither a comprehensive study of great power retrenchment nor a study that lays out the case for retrenchment as a practical or probable policy. This article fills these gaps by systematically examining the relationship between acute relative decline and the responses of great powers. We examine eighteen cases of acute relative decline since 1870 and advance three main arguments. First, we challenge the retrenchment pessimists' claim that domestic or international constraints inhibit the ability of declining great powers to retrench. In fact, when states fall in the hierarchy of great powers, peaceful retrenchment is the most common response, even over short time spans. Based on the empirical record, we find that great powers retrenched in no less than eleven and no more than fifteen of the eighteen cases, a range of 61-83 percent. When international conditions demand it, states renounce risky ties, increase reliance on allies or adversaries, draw down their military obligations, and impose adjustments on domestic populations. Second, we find that the magnitude of relative decline helps explain the extent of great power retrenchment. Following the dictates of neorealist theory, great powers retrench for the same reason they expand: the rigors of great power politics compel them to do so.12 Retrenchment is by no means easy, but End Page 9 necessity is the mother of invention, and declining great powers face powerful incentives to contract their interests in a prompt and proportionate manner. Knowing only a state's rate of relative economic decline explains its corresponding degree of retrenchment in as much as 61 percent of the cases we examined. Third, we argue that the rate of decline helps explain what forms great power retrenchment will take. How fast great powers fall contributes to whether these retrenching states will internally reform, seek new allies or rely more heavily on old ones, and make diplomatic overtures to enemies. Further, our analysis suggests that great powers facing acute decline are less likely to initiate or escalate militarized interstate disputes. Faced with diminishing resources, great powers moderate their foreign policy ambitions and offer concessions in areas of lesser strategic value. Contrary to the pessimistic conclusions of critics, retrenchment neither requires aggression nor invites predation. Great powers are able to rebalance their commitments through compromise, rather than conflict. In these ways, states respond to penury the same way they do to plenty: they seek to adopt policies that maximize security given available means. Far from being a hazardous policy, retrenchment can be successful. States that retrench often regain their position in the hierarchy of great powers. Of the fifteen great powers that adopted retrenchment in response to acute relative decline, 40 percent managed to recover their ordinal rank. In contrast, none of the declining powers that failed to retrench recovered their relative position.
BNB

No motivation, no access and vaccines check the impact
Clark ‘8 – Emeritus Professor in Immunology at UCLA
William R. Clark, emeritus professor in Immunology at UCLA. Bracing for Armageddon?: The Science and Politics of Bioterrorism in America, 2008, pg. 183
In the end, what may well stop groups like Al-Qaeda from using bioweapons to achieve their aims against us is that it is just too much trouble.  Not only are biological weapons exceedingly difficult to build and operate, the United States has now developed vaccines or drugs to counter most known conventional pathogens.  Countermeasures for the rest should be available over the next few years.  We have the Strategic National Stockpile, Push Packages, and vendor-managed inventories, as well as the ability to deliver these materials and more to an attack site within a matter of hours.  We could suffer casualties, yes, but not mass casualties.  Conventional bombs and chemicals are must easier to obtain and use, and can achieve much the same ends with less risk.  Sophisticated terrorist groups may well agree with virtually all professional of the military establishments around the world that actually had effective bioweapons in hand: they are simply not worth the bother.  For at least the near future, bioterrorism for Al-Qaeda and its ilk may be a non-starter.
No extinction impact.
Britt ‘1
Robert Roy Britt, Senior Space Writer/Space.com. “Survival of the Elitist: Bioterrorism May Spur Space Colonies”. October 30 2001. http://www.space4peace.org/articles/moving.htm
Many scientists argue that there is no need to worry about the mortality of civilization right now. Eric Croddy is an expert on chemical and biological weapons at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. Croddy said the threat of a virus wiping out the entire human species is simply not real. Even the most horrific virus outbreak in history, the 1918 Spanish Flu epidemic that killed between 20 million and 40 million people, including hundreds of thousands in the United States, eventually stopped. Experts say new strains of the influenza virus emerge every few decades and catch the human immune system unprepared, but prevention measures and ever-evolving medical treatments overcome the outbreaks. "I'd be much more concerned about an asteroid hitting the planet," Croddy said.

No water wars
Katz 11—Director of the Akirov Institute for Business and Environment at Tel Aviv University. PhD (David, Hydro-Political Hyperbole, Global Environmental Politics, 11; 1; Feb 2011)

A number critiques have been leveled against both the theory and the empirical evidence behind the water wars hypothesis. One critique of the environmental security literature, of which much of the published material on water wars is guilty, is that warnings and threats of future violence are often considered as evidence.28 Statements from the 1980s that the next war in the Middle East will be over water have already proven false. Research has shown, however, that even the more general predictions of imminent water wars that are based on comments by officials may be suspect. Leng, for instance, found no correlation between the frequency of threats of war and the onset of war.29 Examining conflict and cooperation over water resources, Yoffe and colleagues noted over 400 incidents of water-related verbal exchanges by political figures between 1948 and 1999 that were conflictual in nature, but only 37 instances of violent conflict of varying levels of intensity. Thirty of these were from the Middle East, none were End Page 15 more recent than 1970, none were all-out wars, and in none was water the central cause of conflict.30
Proponents of water war scenarios often premise their dire conclusions on the fact that water is essential for life and non-substitutable.31 Yet water for basic needs represents a small share of total water use, even in arid countries.32 Economists and others point out that over 80 percent of world freshwater withdrawals are for the agricultural sector, a relatively low-value use and one in which large gains in efficiency could be made by changes in irrigation techniques and choice of crops. Thus, economic critiques of the water war hypothesis stress that the value of water that would be gained from military conflict is unlikely to outweigh the economic costs of military preparation and battle, much less the loss of life.33
Some authors have even questioned the empirical basis for the conclusion that freshwater is increasingly scarce, 34 an assumption on which the water war hypothesis relies. Such a “cornucopian” view claims that people adapt to scarcity through improvements in technology, pricing, and efficiency—rendering water less scarce, not more so.
Perhaps the strongest case against the likelihood of water wars is the lack of empirical evidence of precedents. Wolf found only one documented case of war explicitly over water, and this took place over 4500 years ago.35 Moreover, he could document only seven cases of acute conflict over water. Yoffe and colleagues also find that armed conflict over water resources has been uncommon.36 They found that cooperation was much more common than conflict, both globally and in all world regions except the Middle East/North Africa. This pattern may explain why only a limited number of case studies of water conflict are presented in the water wars literature.
Analysts have criticized environmental security arguments that are based on case studies because such works tend to have no variation in the dependent variable.37 Many large sample statistical studies have attempted to address such shortcomings, however, in several cases these studies too have come under fire. For instance, a number of large-sample statistical studies find correlations between water-related variables and conflict, however, few, if any, provide convincing support for causal relationships. Moreover, several studies found that water availability had no impact on the likelihood of either domestic or international conflict, 38 including at least one study that attempted to replicate earlier studies End Page 16 that claimed to have found such correlations.39 Moreover, the results of several studies that do find correlations between water and conflict are either not robust or are contrasted by other findings. For instance, Raleigh and Urdal find that the statistical significance of water scarcity variables is highly dependent on one or two observations, leading them to conclude that actual effects of water scarcity “are weak, negligible or insignificant.”40 Jensen and Gleditsch find that the results of Miguel and colleagues are less robust when using a recoding of the original dataset.41 Gleditsch and colleagues found that shared basins do predict an increased propensity for conflict, but found no correlation between conflict and drought, the number of river crossings, or the share of the basin upstream, leading them to state that “support for a scarcity theory of water conflict is somewhat ambiguous.”42

The term terror is a rhetorical tool to paper over the violence of US militarism that occurs on a daily basis. The terror expert industry is not academic but political—view their evidence with skepticism.
Greenwald 8/15/12 (Glenn, Glenn Greenwald is a former Constitutional and civil rights litigator and is the author of three New York Times Bestselling books: two on the Bush administration's executive power and foreign policy abuses, and his latest book, With Liberty and Justice for Some, an indictment of America's¶ two-tiered system of justice. Greenwald was named by The Atlantic as one of the 25 most influential political commentators in the nation. He is the recipient of the first annual I.F. Stone Award for Independent Journalism, and is the winner of the 2010 Online Journalism Association Award for his investigative work on the arrest and oppressive detention of Bradley Manning. “The sham “terrorism expert” industry”, http://www.salon.com/2012/08/15/the_sham_terrorism_expert_industry/) 

But the most pernicious attribute of this “terror expert” industry, the aspect that requires much more attention, is its pretense to non-ideological, academic objectivity. In reality, these “terror experts”, almost uniformly, have a deeply ideological view — a jingoistic, highly provincial understanding — of what Terrorism is and is not. They generally fixate on Muslims to the exclusion of all other forms of Terror. In particular, the idea that the U.S. or its allies now commit Terrorism is taboo, unthinkable. Their views on what Terrorism is track the U.S. Government’s and, by design, justify U.S. government actions. They are not “experts” as much as they are ideologues, rank propagandists, and servants of America’s establishment power centers.¶ The reason the term “terrorism experts” deserves to be put in quotation marks is not as some ad hominem insult (something the mavens of the “terror expert” clique are incapable of understanding, as they demonstrated with their ludicrously personalized outrage when I applied this critique to one of their industry’s most cherished Patron Saints, Will McCants). Rather, it’s because — as I’ve written about many times before — the very concept of Terrorism is inherently empty, illegitimate, meaningless. “Terrorism” itself is not an objective term or legitimate object of study, but was conceived of as a highly politicized instrument 

and has been used that way ever since.¶ The best scholarship on this issue, in my view, comes from Remi Brulin, who teaches at NYU and wrote his PhD dissertation at the Sorbonne in Paris on the discourse of Terrorism. When I interviewed him in 2010, he described the history of the term — it was pushed by Israel in the 1960s and early 1970s as a means of universalizing its conflicts (this isn’t our fight against our enemies over land; it’s the Entire World’s Fight against The Terrorists!). The term was then picked up by the neocons in the Reagan administration to justify their covert wars in Central America (in a test run for what they did after 9/11, they continuously exclaimed: we’re fighting against The Terrorists in Central America, even as they themselves armed and funded classic Terror groups in El Salvador and Nicaragua). From the start, the central challenge was how to define the term so as to include the violence used by the enemies of the U.S. and Israel, while excluding the violence the U.S., Israel and their allies used, both historically and presently. That still has not been figured out, which is why there is no fixed, accepted definition of the term, and certainly no consistent application.¶ Brulin details the well-known game-playing with the term: in the 1980s, Iraq was put on the U.S. list of Terror states when the U.S. disliked Saddam for being aligned with the Soviets; then Iraq was taken off when the U.S. wanted to arm Saddam to fight Iran; then they were put back on again when the U.S. wanted to attack Iraq. The same thing is happening now with the MEK: now that they’re a pro-U.S. and pro-Israel Terror group rather than a Saddam-allied one, they are magically no longer going to be deemed Terrorists. That is what Terrorism is: a term of propaganda, a means of justifying one’s own state violence — not some objective field of discipline in which one develops “expertise.”¶ This flaw in the concept of “terrorism expertise” is not a discrete indictment of specific “scholars,” but is a fundamental flaw plaguing the entire field. Even the most decorated and honored “terrorism experts” are little more than ideological propagandists, because that’s what the term necessarily entails. Today, Brulin wrote the following to me regarding U.S. Reagan-era policy in Central America — namely, supporting Terror groups (death squads) while denouncing Terrorism — and the specific “terrorism expert” often held up as the field’s most prestigious, Bruce Hoffman:¶ One obvious question comes to mind: how do “terrorism experts” deal with US policies in Salvador during the 1980s?¶ A comprehensive analysis of the two major “terrorism studies” journals, “Studies on Conflict and Terrorism” (simply titled “Terrorism” until 1992) and “Terrorism and Political Violence” shows that overall these journals have dealt with this issue by … being silent about it. More precisely, several authors in fact absolutely accept that the concept of “state terrorism” is a valid one, and that acts by “death squads” clearly fall under that definition also. They simply never deal with this issue in the context of the real world policies of the United States and of the Reagan years in particular, a silence all the more surprising than Reagan was the first American President to develop a “discourse on terrorism”.¶ Reacting to Glenn Greenwald, Andrew Exum wrote: “Greenwald makes it seem as if states are never mentioned as terrorist actors, but there is a lot of literature on the use of coercive violence by states and state terrorism”. This is true of course, but at least when it comes to the conflict of El Salvador studied here, and to US policies in that country, those who did write about this issue have never been published in the major “terrorism studies journals.”¶ Exum then adds: “Bruce Hoffman published this book in 1999. I’m pretty sure those two guys are terrorism experts without the scare quotes.”¶ In “Inside Terrorism”, to his merit, Hoffman devotes a full chapter to the question of the “definition of terrorism.” What follows in the rest of his book is naturally dependent on what he decides to include and not include in his definition of “terrorism”. Here is, in full, how Hoffman deals with the issue of “death squads” (emphasis added):¶ “The use of so-called ‘death squads’ (often off-duty or plain-clothes security or police officers) in conjunction with blatant intimidation of political opponents, human rights and aid workers, student groups, labor organizers, journalists and others has been a prominent feature of the right-wing military dictatorships that took power in Argentina, Chile and Greece during the 1970s and even of elected governments in El Salvador, Guatemala, Colombia and Peru since the mid-1980s. But these state-sanctioned or explicitly ordered acts of internal political violence directed mostly against domestic populations — that is, rule by violence and intimidation by those already in power against their own citizenry — are generally termed ‘terror’ in order to distinguish that phenomenon from ‘terrorism’, which is understood to be violence committed by non-state entities. (Bruce Hoffman, Inside Terrorism, 27).¶ Sadly, Hoffman does not tell his readers who at the time “termed acts by death squads ‘terror’”, or who wishes to do so “in order to distinguish this phenomenon from ‘terrorism.’”¶ Not only is this argument rather less than convincing, but most crucially no one in Washington, at the time, ever used this argument, and this for obvious reasons. Indeed, as Hoffman himself notes, the “death squads”, “even in elected governments like El Salvador”, were “state-sanctioned”, precisely what the Reagan administration kept denying at the time. Furthermore, Hoffman’s argument makes no sense in the historical context: can one imagine the Reagan administration defending US aid to El Salvador as part of the “fight against terrorism” while stating that the ties between that State and the “death squad” posed no problem because they merely fell under the concept of “terror”?¶ Thus, the role of “terrorism experts” cannot simply be described as blindly accepting of the official “discourse on terrorism”, although this is already a strong critique. As the case of El Salvador demonstrates, what they have done is to invent arguments aimed at excluding from discussion specific issues, while hiding or being completely silent about the actual debates that took place on this topic at the very heart of Washington. In so doing, they have allowed a “terrorism discourse” to developed and become hegemonic despite the many internal inconsistencies that have been at its heart from the very beginning.¶ Finally, one will note that Hoffman, in Inside Terrorism, makes no mention of the Contras and their support by the Reagan administration. This is a difficult decision to explain, since aid to the Contras falls under the concept of “state sponsored terrorism”, the validity of which is accepted by all experts. Here, Hoffman uses the technique used by so many other “terrorism experts” in this case: he simply decides to not write about it, with no explanation given.¶ The entire field is one huge effort to legitimize U.S. state violence and delegitimize the violence by its enemies (along those lines: the court-martial of accused Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan began today, and I asked earlier today on Twitter whether this attack constituted Terrorism given that it targeted a military base and soldiers of a nation at war. My mere asking of this question sparked all sorts of intense outrage from the predictable “natsec” D.C. mavens: Of course it’s Terrorism, as Hasan killed unarmed people including one civilian, exclaimed people who would never, ever dare apply the Terrorism label to the civilian-devastating U.S. attack on Iraq or the use of American drones and cluster bombs to kill innocent civilians by the dozens; that is the discourse of Terrorism: violence by Muslims against a U.S. military base during a time of war qualifies, but violence by the U.S. Government against thousands of innocent Muslim civilians never could).¶ Brulin is far from alone among scholars in recognizing the true purpose of this sham discipline. Harvard’s Lisa Stampnitzky, whom I interviewed several months ago, is also a leading scholar on the exploitation of Terrorism and the field that calls itself “terrorism experts.” In a superb journal article in Qualitative Sociology, she documents that “‘Terrorism’ has proved to be a highly problematic object of expertise”; in particular, “Terrorism studies fails to conform to the most common sociological notions of what a field of intellectual production ought to look like, and has been described by participants and observers alike as a failure.” She notes that the harshest condemnations have come from those who work in this academic discipline: “Terrorism researchers have characterized their field as stagnant, poorly conceptualized, lacking in rigor, and devoid of adequate theory, data, and methods.” That includes Bruce Hoffman himself, who, she notes, wrote:¶ Fifteen years ago, the study of terrorism was described by perhaps the world’s preeminent authority on modern warfare as a ’huge and ill-defined subject that has probably been responsible for more incompetent and unnecessary books than any other outside the field of sociology. It attracts phonies and amateurs…as a candle attracts moths’… Terrorism research arguably has failed miserably.¶ Stampnitzky adds: “More than 15 years after this assessment, descriptions of the field are rife with similar claims.” Indeed, her forthcoming book from Cambridge University Press is entitled “Disciplining Terror: How Experts Invented Terrorism” and, in her words, it “explains how political violence became ‘terrorism,’ and how this transformation led to the current ‘war on terror’.” For that reason, she argues in her dissertation, “those who would address terrorism as a rational object, subject to scientific analysis and manipulation, produce a discourse which they are unable to control, as attempts at scientific discourse are continually hybridized by the moral discourse of the public sphere, in which terrorism is conceived as a problem of evil and pathology.” Indeed, she explains in her journal article, “One of the most oft-noted difficulties has been the inability of researchers to establish a suitable definition of the concept of ‘terrorism’ itself.”¶ In a recently published journal article in International Security, entitled “The Terrorism Delusion,” Professors John Mueller and Mark G. Stewart (cited by Walt) extensively document what a fraud the concept of “Terrorism” has become over the last decade. Specifically, ”the exaggerations of the threat presented by terrorism and then on the distortions of perspective these exaggerations have inspired— distortions that have in turn inspired a determined and expensive quest to ferret out, and even to create, the nearly nonexistent.”¶ Richard Jackson is a Professor at the The National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies in New Zealand. He has written volumes on the fraud of “terrorism expertise” and the propagandistic purpose of this field of discipline. He has documented that most self-proclaimed “terrorism experts” simply ignore the primary cause of the violence they claim to study: “most terrorism scholars, politicians and the media don’t seem to ‘know’ that terrorism is most often caused by military intervention overseas, and not religion, radicalization, insanity, ideology, poverty or such like” — even though “the Pentagon has known it for years.” In one article entitled “10 Things More Likely to Kill You Than Terrorism,” he notes that “The chances of you dying in a terrorist attack are in the range of 1 in 80,000, or about the same chance of being killed by a meteor,” and that bathtubs, vending machines, and lightning all pose a greater risk of death.¶ In a book critiquing the “terrorism expert” field, Jackson argued that “most of what is accepted as well-founded ’knowledge’ in terrorism studies is, in fact, highly debatable and unstable.“ He therefore scorns almost four decades of so-called Terrorism scholarship as ”based on a series of ‘virulent myths’, ’half-truths’ and contested claims” that are plainly “biased towards Western state priorities.” To Jackson, terrorism is “a social fact rather than a brute fact” and “does not exist outside of the definitions and practices which seek to enclose it, including those of the terrorism studies field.” In sum, it means whatever the wielder of the term wants it to mean: something that cannot be the subject of legitimate “expertise.”¶ * * * * *¶ There is no term more potent in our political discourse and legal landscape than “Terrorism.” It shuts down every rational thought process and political debate the minute it is uttered. It justifies torture (we have to get information from the Terrorists); due-process-free-assassinations even of our own citizens (Obama has to kill the Terrorists); and rampant secrecy (the Government can’t disclose what it’s doing or have courts rule on its legality because the Terrorists will learn of it), and it sends people to prison for decades (material supporters of Terrorism).¶ It is a telling paradox indeed that this central, all-justifying word is simultaneously the most meaningless and therefore the most manipulated. It is, as I have noted before, a word that simultaneously means nothing yet justifies everything. Indeed, that’s the point: it is such a useful concept precisely because it’s so malleable, because it means whatever those with power to shape discourse want it to mean. And no faction has helped this process along as much as the group of self-proclaimed “terrorism experts” that has attached itself to think tanks, academia, and media outlets. They enable pure political propaganda to masquerade as objective fact, shining brightly with the veneer of scholarly rigor. The industry itself is a fraud, as are those who profit from and within it.

Tournament: Cal | Round: 2 | Opponent: Timberline BH | Judge: Michael Kurtenbach
1
?
Obama’s political capital is effectively holding off passage of the Iran sanctions bill now – but it’s still a fight
Delmore 2/5/14 (Erin, Political Analyst @ MSNBC, "Democrats split over Syria, Iran," http://www.msnbc.com/all/democrats-split-over-syria-iran)
Over strong objections from the president, 16 Senate Democrats support a bill that would impose new sanctions on Iran should the country fail to reach a permanent agreement with international negotiators to roll back its nuclear program. Those senators, along with 43 Republicans, argue that tough sanctions brought Iran to the negotiating table in the first place and further pressure would flex American muscle in the 6-month talks toward crafting a permanent solution. The bill drew support from Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y, and Harry Reid, D-Nev., both close allies of Obama’s but also leading supporters of policies favoring Israel. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, America’s most powerful pro-Israel advocacy group, has lobbied members of Congress from both parties to support the sanctions.¶ Other Democrats are siding with the Obama administration, which argues that imposing new sanctions damaged “good-faith” negotiations while empowering Iran’s hard-liners rooting for the talks to fail. (A National Security Council spokeswoman charged last month that the sanctions bill could end negotiations and bring the U.S. closer to war.) ¶ The Senate bill has been losing steam ever since the White House ratcheted up pressure on Senate Democrats to abandon the it. Introduced in December by Democrat Robert Menendez, D-N.J. and Sen. Mark Kirk. R-Ill., the legislation was backed by 59 members – but now Senate leaders say they will hold off bringing the legislation to a vote until the six-month negotiation process ends.¶ Adam Sharon, a spokesman for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which Menendez chairs, said the New Jersey Senator stands behind the bill that bears his name. ¶ Menendez and 58 other senators support the bill, Sharon said. “It’s his bill, three or four senators say they wouldn’t call for a vote now. His position has been, having a bill, having this in place is an extremely effective and necessary tool when negotiating with the Iranians that we need to have to avoid Iran crossing the nuclear threshold. He stands behind this bill and the whole essence of the bill is to have sanctions in waiting, but you have to move on them now to make it happen.”¶ The movement is still alive in the House with enough votes to pass, despite a letter signed by at least 70 Democrats opposing the measure, and a letter of criticism by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Obama reiterated in last week’s State of the Union address a promise to veto any attempt to impose new sanctions on Iran.

New nuclear initiatives sap tons of PC---the link independently turns the case---reject ev from before 2011
Trembath 11 Alex Trembath is a policy associate in the Energy and Climate Program at Breakthrough. “Nuclear Power and the Future of Post-Partisan Energy Policy,” 2/4, Americans for Energy Leadership, http://leadenergy.org/2011/02/the-nuclear-option-in-a-post-partisan-approach-on-energy/
If there is one field of the energy sector for which certainty of political will and government policy is essential, it is nuclear power. High up front costs for the private industry, extreme regulatory oversight and public wariness necessitate a committed government partner for private firms investing in nuclear technology. In a new report on the potential for a “nuclear renaissance,” Third Way references the failed cap-and-trade bill, delaying tactics in the House vis-a-vis EPA regulations on CO?, and the recent election results to emphasize the difficult current political environment for advancing new nuclear policy. The report, “The Future of Nuclear Energy,” makes the case for political certainty:¶ “It is difficult for energy producers and users to estimate the relative price for nuclear-generated energy compared to fossil fuel alternatives (e.g. natural gas)–an essential consideration in making the major capital investment decision necessary for new energy production that will be in place for decades.”¶ Are our politicians willing to match the level of certainty that the nuclear industry demands? Lacking a suitable price on carbon that may have been achieved by a cap-and-trade bill removes one primary policy instrument for making nuclear power more cost-competitive with fossil fuels. The impetus on Congress, therefore, will be to shift from demand-side “pull” energy policies (that increase demand for clean tech by raising the price of dirty energy) to supply-side “push” policies, or industrial and innovation policies. Fortunately, there are signals from political and thought leaders that a package of policies may emerge to incentivize alternative energy sources that include nuclear power.¶ One place to start is the recently deceased American Power Act, addressed above, authored originally by Senators Kerry, Graham and Lieberman. Before its final and disappointing incarnation, the bill included provisions to increase loan guarantees for nuclear power plant construction in addition to other tax incentives. Loan guarantees are probably the most important method of government involvement in new plant construction, given the high capital costs of development. One wonders what the fate of the bill, or a less ambitious set of its provisions, would have been had Republican Senator Graham not abdicated and removed any hope of Republican co-sponsorship.¶ But that was last year. The changing of the guard in Congress makes this a whole different game, and the once feasible support for nuclear technology on either side of the aisle must be reevaluated. A New York Times piece in the aftermath of the elections forecast a difficult road ahead for nuclear energy policy, but did note Republican support for programs like a waste disposal site and loan guarantees.¶ Republican support for nuclear energy has roots in the most significant recent energy legislation, the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which passed provisions for nuclear power with wide bipartisan support. Reaching out to Republicans on policies they have supported in the past should be a goal of Democrats who wish to form a foundational debate on moving the policy forward. There are also signals that key Republicans, notably Lindsey Graham and Richard Lugar, would throw their support behind a clean energy standard that includes nuclear and CCS.¶ Republicans in Congress will find intellectual support from a group that AEL’s Teryn Norris coined “innovation hawks,” among them Steven Hayward, David Brooks and George Will. Will has been particularly outspoken in support of nuclear energy, writing in 2010 that “it is a travesty that the nation that first harnessed nuclear energy has neglected it so long because fads about supposed ‘green energy’ and superstitions about nuclear power’s dangers.”¶ The extreme reluctance of Republicans to cooperate with Democrats over the last two years is only the first step, as any legislation will have to overcome Democrats’ traditional opposition to nuclear energy. However, here again there is reason for optimism. Barbara Boxer and John Kerry bucked their party’s long-time aversion to nuclear in a precursor bill to APA, and Kerry continued working on the issue during 2010. Jeff Bingaman, in a speech earlier this week, reversed his position on the issue by calling for the inclusion of nuclear energy provisions in a clean energy standard. The Huffington Post reports that “the White House reached out to his committee Senate Energy to help develop the clean energy plan through legislation.” This development in itself potentially mitigates two of the largest obstacle standing in the way of progress on comprehensive energy legislation: lack of a bill, and lack of high profile sponsors. Democrats can also direct Section 48C of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 towards nuclear technology, which provides a tax credit for companies that engage in clean tech manufacturing.¶ Democrats should not give up on their policy goals simply because they no longer enjoy broad majorities in both Houses, and Republicans should not spend all their time holding symbolic repeal votes on the Obama Administration’s accomplishments. The lame-duck votes in December on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the tax cut deal and START indicate that at least a few Republicans are willing to work together with Democrats in a divided Congress, and that is precisely what nuclear energy needs moving forward. It will require an aggressive push from the White House, and a concerted effort from both parties’ leadership, but the road for forging bipartisan legislation is not an impassable one.
Causes Israel strikes
Perr 12/24 (Jon Perr 12/24/13, B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University; technology marketing consultant based in Portland, Oregon, has long been active in Democratic politics and public policy as an organizer and advisor in California and Massachusetts. His past roles include field staffer for Gary Hart for President (1984), organizer of Silicon Valley tech executives backing President Clinton's call for national education standards (1997), recruiter of tech executives for Al Gore's and John Kerry's presidential campaigns, and co-coordinator of MassTech for Robert Reich (2002). (Jon, “Senate sanctions bill could let Israel take U.S. to war against Iran” Daily Kos, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/24/1265184/-Senate-sanctions-bill-could-let-Israel-take-U-S-to-war-against-Iran#)
As 2013 draws to close, the negotiations over the Iranian nuclear program have entered a delicate stage. But in 2014, the tensions will escalate dramatically as a bipartisan group of Senators brings a new Iran sanctions bill to the floor for a vote. As many others have warned, that promise of new measures against Tehran will almost certainly blow up the interim deal reached by the Obama administration and its UN/EU partners in Geneva. But Congress' highly unusual intervention into the President's domain of foreign policy doesn't just make the prospect of an American conflict with Iran more likely. As it turns out, the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act essentially empowers Israel to decide whether the United States will go to war against Tehran.¶ On their own, the tough new sanctions imposed automatically if a final deal isn't completed in six months pose a daunting enough challenge for President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry. But it is the legislation's commitment to support an Israeli preventive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities that almost ensures the U.S. and Iran will come to blows. As Section 2b, part 5 of the draft mandates:¶ If the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in legitimate self-defense against Iran's nuclear weapon program, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide, in accordance with the law of the United States and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force, diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.¶ Now, the legislation being pushed by Senators Mark Kirk (R-IL), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ) does not automatically give the President an authorization to use force should Israel attack the Iranians. (The draft language above explicitly states that the U.S. government must act "in accordance with the law of the United States and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force.") But there should be little doubt that an AUMF would be forthcoming from Congressmen on both sides of the aisle. As Lindsey Graham, who with Menendez co-sponsored a similar, non-binding "stand with Israel" resolution in March told a Christians United for Israel (CUFI) conference in July:¶ "If nothing changes in Iran, come September, October, I will present a resolution that will authorize the use of military force to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb."¶ Graham would have plenty of company from the hardest of hard liners in his party. In August 2012, Romney national security adviser and pardoned Iran-Contra architect Elliott Abrams called for a war authorization in the pages of the Weekly Standard. And just two weeks ago, Norman Podhoretz used his Wall Street Journal op-ed to urge the Obama administration to "strike Iran now" to avoid "the nuclear war sure to come."¶ But at the end of the day, the lack of an explicit AUMF in the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act doesn't mean its supporters aren't giving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu de facto carte blanche to hit Iranian nuclear facilities. The ensuing Iranian retaliation against to Israeli and American interests would almost certainly trigger the commitment of U.S. forces anyway.¶ Even if the Israelis alone launched a strike against Iran's atomic sites, Tehran will almost certainly hit back against U.S. targets in the Straits of Hormuz, in the region, possibly in Europe and even potentially in the American homeland. Israel would face certain retaliation from Hezbollah rockets launched from Lebanon and Hamas missiles raining down from Gaza.¶ That's why former Bush Defense Secretary Bob Gates and CIA head Michael Hayden raising the alarms about the "disastrous" impact of the supposedly surgical strikes against the Ayatollah's nuclear infrastructure. As the New York Times reported in March 2012, "A classified war simulation held this month to assess the repercussions of an Israeli attack on Iran forecasts that the strike would lead to a wider regional war, which could draw in the United States and leave hundreds of Americans dead, according to American officials." And that September, a bipartisan group of U.S. foreign policy leaders including Brent Scowcroft, retired Admiral William Fallon, former Republican Senator (now Obama Pentagon chief) Chuck Hagel, retired General Anthony Zinni and former Ambassador Thomas Pickering concluded that American attacks with the objective of "ensuring that Iran never acquires a nuclear bomb" would "need to conduct a significantly expanded air and sea war over a prolonged period of time, likely several years." (Accomplishing regime change, the authors noted, would mean an occupation of Iran requiring a "commitment of resources and personnel greater than what the U.S. has expended over the past 10 years in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.") The anticipated blowback?¶ Serious costs to U.S. interests would also be felt over the longer term, we believe, with problematic consequences for global and regional stability, including economic stability. A dynamic of escalation, action, and counteraction could produce serious unintended consequences that would significantly increase all of these costs and lead, potentially, to all-out regional war.
Impact is nuclear war
Reuveny 10 (Rafael – professor in the School of Public and Environmental affairs at Indiana University, Unilateral strike on Iran could trigger world depression, p. http://www.indiana.edu/~spea/news/speaking_out/reuveny_on_unilateral_strike_Iran.shtml)
A unilateral Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities would likely have dire consequences, including a regional war, global economic collapse and a major power clash. For an Israeli campaign to succeed, it must be quick and decisive. This requires an attack that would be so overwhelming that Iran would not dare to respond in full force. Such an outcome is extremely unlikely since the locations of some of Iran’s nuclear facilities are not fully known and known facilities are buried deep underground. All of these widely spread facilities are shielded by elaborate air defense systems constructed not only by the Iranians, but also the Chinese and, likely, the Russians as well. By now, Iran has also built redundant command and control systems and nuclear facilities, developed early-warning systems, acquired ballistic and cruise missiles and upgraded and enlarged its armed forces. Because Iran is well-prepared, a single, conventional Israeli strike — or even numerous strikes — could not destroy all of its capabilities, giving Iran time to respond. A regional war Unlike Iraq, whose nuclear program Israel destroyed in 1981, Iran has a second-strike capability comprised of a coalition of Iranian, Syrian, Lebanese, Hezbollah, Hamas, and, perhaps, Turkish forces. Internal pressure might compel Jordan, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority to join the assault, turning a bad situation into a regional war. During the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, at the apex of its power, Israel was saved from defeat by President Nixon’s shipment of weapons and planes. Today, Israel’s numerical inferiority is greater, and it faces more determined and better-equipped opponents. Despite Israel’s touted defense systems, Iranian coalition missiles, armed forces, and terrorist attacks would likely wreak havoc on its enemy, leading to a prolonged tit-for-tat. In the absence of massive U.S. assistance, Israel’s military resources may quickly dwindle, forcing it to use its alleged nuclear weapons, as it had reportedly almost done in 1973. An Israeli nuclear attack would likely destroy most of Iran’s capabilities, but a crippled Iran and its coalition could still attack neighboring oil facilities, unleash global terrorism, plant mines in the Persian Gulf and impair maritime trade in the Mediterranean, Red Sea and Indian Ocean. Middle Eastern oil shipments would likely slow to a trickle as production declines due to the war and insurance companies decide to drop their risky Middle Eastern clients. Iran and Venezuela would likely stop selling oil to the United States and Europe. The world economy would head into a tailspin; international acrimony would rise; and Iraqi and Afghani citizens might fully turn on the United States, immediately requiring the deployment of more American troops. Russia, China, Venezuela, and maybe Brazil and Turkey — all of which essentially support Iran — could be tempted to form an alliance and openly challenge the U.S. hegemony. Replaying Nixon’s nightmare Russia and China might rearm their injured Iranian protege overnight, just as Nixon rearmed Israel, and threaten to intervene, just as the U.S.S.R. threatened to join Egypt and Syria in 1973. President Obama’s response would likely put U.S. forces on nuclear alert, replaying Nixon’s nightmarish scenario. Iran may well feel duty-bound to respond to a unilateral attack by its Israeli archenemy, but it knows that it could not take on the United States head-to-head. In contrast, if the United States leads the attack, Iran’s response would likely be muted. If Iran chooses to absorb an American-led strike, its allies would likely protest and send weapons, but would probably not risk using force. While no one has a crystal ball, leaders should be risk-averse when choosing war as a foreign policy tool. If attacking Iran is deemed necessary, Israel must wait for an American green light. A unilateral Israeli strike could ultimately spark World War III.
2
Environmental apocalypticism causes eco-authoritarianism and mass violence against those deemed environmental threats
Buell 3 (Frederick Buell, cultural critic on the environmental crisis and a Professor of English at Queens College and the author of five books; “From Apocalypse To Way of Life,” pg. 185-186)
Looked at critically, then, crisis discourse thus suffers from a number of  liabilities. First, it seems to have become a political liability almost as much  as an asset. It calls up a fierce and effective opposition with its predictions;  worse, its more specific predictions are all too vulnerable to refutation by  events. It also exposes environmentalists to being called grim doomsters  and antilife Puritan extremists. Further, concern with crisis has all too often  tempted people to try to find a “total solution” to the problems involved—  a phrase that, as an astute analyst of the limitations of crisis discourse,  John Barry, puts it, is all too reminiscent of the Third Reich’s infamous  “final solution.”55 A total crisis of society—environmental crisis at its  gravest—threatens to translate despair into inhumanist authoritarianism;  more often, however, it helps keep merely dysfunctional authority in place.  It thus leads, Barry suggests, to the belief that only elite- and expert-led  solutions are possible.56 At the same time it depoliticizes people, inducing  them to accept their impotence as individuals; this is something that has  made many people today feel, ironically and/or passively, that since it  makes no difference at all what any individual does on his or her own, one  might as well go along with it. Yet another pitfall for the full and sustained elaboration of  environmental crisis is, though least discussed, perhaps the most deeply  ironic. A problem with deep cultural and psychological as well as social  effects, it is embodied in a startlingly simple proposition: the worse one  feels environmental crisis is, the more one is tempted to turn one’s back on  the environment. This means, preeminently, turning one’s back on  “nature”—on traditions of nature feeling, traditions of knowledge about  nature (ones that range from organic farming techniques to the different  departments of ecological science), and traditions of nature-based activism.  If nature is thoroughly wrecked these days, people need to delink from  nature and live in postnature—a conclusion that, as the next chapter  shows, many in U.S. society drew at the end of the millenium. Explorations  of how deeply “nature” has been wounded and how intensely vulnerable to  and dependent on human actions it is can thus lead, ironically, to further  indifference to nature-based environmental issues, not greater concern with  them. But what quickly becomes evident to any reflective consideration of the  difficulties of crisis discourse is that all of these liabilities are in fact  bound tightly up with one specific notion of environmental crisis—with 1960s- and 1970s-style environmental apocalypticism. Excessive concern  about them does not recognize that crisis discourse as a whole has  significantly changed since the 1970s. They remain inducements to look  away from serious reflection on environmental crisis only if one does not  explore how environmental crisis has turned of late from apocalypse to  dwelling place.  The apocalyptic mode had a number of prominent features: it was  preoccupied with running out and running into walls; with scarcity and  with the imminent rupture of limits; with actions that promised and  temporally predicted imminent total meltdown; and with (often, though not  always) the need for immediate “total solution.” Thus doomsterism was its  reigning mode; eco-authoritarianism was a grave temptation; and as crisis  was elaborated to show more and more severe deformations of nature,  temptation increased to refute it, or give up, or even cut off ties to clearly  terminal “nature.”
That securitization militarizes environmental politics and causes war
Brzoska 8 —Director of the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg Michael Brzoska, 2008, “The Securitization Of Climate Change And The Power Of Conceptions Of Security,” Paper Prepared for the International Studies Association Convention in San Francisco, March 26-29, Available Online via All Academic at http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p253887_index.html
In the literature on securitization it is implied that when a problem is securitized it is difficult to limit this to an increase in attention and resources devoted to mitigating the problem (Brock 1997, Waever 1995). Securitization regularly leads to all-round ‘exceptionalism’ in dealing with the issue as well as to a shift in institutional localization towards ‘security experts’ (Bigot 2006), such as the military and police. Methods and instruments associated with these security organizations – such as more use of arms, force and violence – will gain in importance in the discourse on ‘what to do’. A good example of securitization was the period leading to the Cold War (Guzzini 2004). Originally a political conflict over the organization of societies, in the late 1940s, the East-West confrontation became an existential conflict that was overwhelmingly addressed with military means, including the potential annihilation of humankind. Efforts to alleviate the political conflict were, throughout most of the Cold War, secondary to improving military capabilities. Climate change could meet a similar fate. An essentially political problem concerning the distribution of the costs of prevention and adaptation and the losses and gains in income arising from change in the human environment might be perceived as intractable, thus necessitating the build-up of military and police forces to prevent it from becoming a major security problem. The portrayal of climate change as a security problem could, in particular, cause the richer countries in the global North, which are less affected by it, to strengthen measures aimed at protecting them from the spillover of violent conflict from the poorer countries in the global South that will be most affected by climate change. It could also be used by major powers as a justification for improving their military preparedness against the other major powers, thus leading to arms races.
The alternative is to analyze the framing of the 1AC – small momentum and change in language is the basis for large-scales social change.
Princen 10—Thomas Princen School of Natural Resources and Environment @ Michigan Treading Softly p. 50-53
A Crisis People won't change until there's a crisis. They're stuck in their ways. They're comfortable. They won't do anything, even with daily reports of melting ice and starving children. That's just human nature-selfish, greedy, short-sighted. It is true that when there is a crisis people come together. When the town floods, everyone pitches in to stack sandbags and evacuate the elderly. But to conclude that people will only act when there's a crisis defies logic-and a whole lot of history. I will give an example of such history, but first let's put the general point right up front: Fundamental social change starts with (1) a few committed people, (2) new understandings, and (3) small acts that eventually confront the structures of power. And for motive, fundamental change draws on people's basic need for meaning, engagement, and fairness. Take slavery. For the great bulk of human history, across cultures, from India and China to Europe and the Americas and Africa, slavery was a perfectly normal practice. Indeed, it was an institution-a set of widely shared norms and principles, rules and procedures. And what people back then shared-rulers and commoners alike-was the idea that some people, by virtue of birth or race or nationality, would be slaves. That's just the way it was, and everyone knew it; it was beyond questioning. Always has been, always will be. Then a dozen shopkeepers and clergy got together in a print shop in London in 1787 and said, in effect, no more; this is wrong; it must stop. So they set about gathering information on what was really happening on slave ships and on the plantations. They distributed brochures and pamphlets and lectured across England and abroad. And they introduced legislation in Parliament and lobbied parliamentarians. Maybe most significantly, they systematically undercut arguments defending the normalcy and necessity of slavery-the economic arguments (the British Empire and all who depend on it around the world will collapse), the political arguments (this is just an attempt by the opposition party to take control of the government), the moral arguments (the slaves rejoice when they leave the Dark Continent).1 Today we take the abolition of slavery to be perfectly reasonable, moral, inevitable. But notice that for the early abolitionists, there was no crisis: They were quite comfortable. Their country was riding high. Life was good. Those shopkeepers and clergy and a few noblemen simply concluded that slavery was wrong. Others might have foreseen slavery's demise due to economic trends or movements for democracy and individual rights. But for much of this early history of abolition, there was no crisis. Instead, a few people acquired new understandings, took a strong moral stance, and confronted power. They took on one of the most pervasive, most accepted, most "necessary" structures in human history-slavery. And they did not back down when defenders ridiculed them, when some claimed that the economy would collapse and people would be thrown out of work, that the empire required it. The abolitionists spoke truth to power. And the truth was that Britain and the world as a whole would do quite well without slavery. In fact, if one accepts the maxim that slavery degrades slave and slaveholder alike, Britain and the world did better without slavery. But notice: there was nothing normal or inevitable, and certainly nothing moral, about slavery. Today there is nothing normal or inevitable about unending growth on a finite planet. There is nothing normal or inevitable about 10 percent of the world's population holding 85 percent of global household wealth 2 while a billion or two struggle day to day just to survive. There is nothing normal or inevitable about knowingly degrading ecosystems, permanently extinguishing entire species, causing irreversible changes in climate, or dislocating millions of people by failing to stop the resultant rise in sea levels. And there is nothing normal or inevitable about justifying all this in the name of "economic growth" or "progress" or "consumer demand" or "efficiency" or "jobs" or "return on investment" or "global competitiveness." So yes, many people in advanced industrial countries are comfortable. They appear unlikely to change until a crisis affects them personally. They have done well by the current structures, economic and political. But just a bit of reflection, a glimmer of foresight, a glance at the biophysical trends, not to mention at financial trends where mounting debt threatens the entire confidence game, and the path's end point is clear: collapse. All the market forces and technological wizardry will not change some basic facts: we have one planet, one set of ecosystems, and one hydrologic cycle; and each of us has just one brain, one body, and one lifetime. Limits are real. If the current system cannot continue on one planet, just as slavery could not continue with trends in democracy and free markets and religious rights and human rights, then the action is with those with a bit of foresight, those with a vision of a different way of living on the planet, of living with nature, not against nature. The action is with those who can accept limits indeed, embrace them. So readers of this book, I assume, may be comfortable, but they are not content. They are looking ahead, they are concerned, they are looking for change. And they know that a fundamental shift is inevitable. They know that all systems, from organisms to ecosystems, from household economies to global economies, have limits. They are the ones preparing the way, laying the groundwork, devising the principles and, yes, the technologies and markets that will allow everyone to live within immutable ecological constraints. They are the ones making sure the sand and the sandbags are on hand so that others can pitch in when the time comes. They are the ones building the compost piles, collecting the information, experimenting with new forms of community, speaking truth to power. The others, the people who need a crisis to act, are not the leaders. They will eventually act, to be sure; they will act when personally threatened. But they will need guidance. They will need role models, concrete examples, opportunities to engage and do good as they protect themselves. And they will need enabling language. That's where the real leaders come in. And now is the time to prepare-not when the crisis hits home and hits hard. So make no mistake, some people will act when there's a crisis. But many others will be getting ready now. These are the concerned and committed, the "moral entrepreneurs" who are already discovering that acting now is very satisfying, very engaging. It's hard, yet at times quite simple.
3

The United States federal government should condition plan on the federal government of Mexico meeting the four human rights requirements of the Mérida Initiative. The United States federal government should decide if the federal government of Mexico meets these requirements based off the findings of Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos.
Solves the AFF and boosts our human rights cred
WOLA 10 - (Washington Office of Latin America- contains multiple experts on human rights abuse in latin america and quotes the state department's report "Congress: Withhold Funds for Mexico Tied to Human Rights Performance" 9/14/10, http://www.wola.org/publications/congress_withhold_funds_for_mexico_tied_to_human_rights_performance)
The US government significantly strengthened its partnership with Mexico in combating organized crime in 2007 when it announced the Merida Initiative, a multi-year US security assistance package for Mexico. To date, the US government has allocated roughly $1.5 billion in Merida funding to Mexico. From the outset, the US Congress recognized the importance of ensuring that the Mexican government respect human rights in its public security efforts, mandating by law that 15 percent of select Merida funds be withheld until the State Department issued a report to the US Congress which showed that Mexico had demonstrated it was meeting four human rights requirements. ¶ ¶ On September 2, 2010, the State Department issued its second report to Congress concluding that Mexico is meeting the Merida Initiative’s human rights requirements, and it stated its intention to obligate roughly $36 million in security assistance that had been withheld from the 2009 supplemental and the 2010 omnibus budgets. ¶ However, research conducted by our respective organizations, Mexico’s National Human Rights Commission, and even the State Department’s own reports, demonstrates conclusively that Mexico has failed to meet the four human rights requirements set out by law. As a result, Congress should not release these select Merida funds. Releasing these funds would send the message that the United States condones the grave human rights violations committed in Mexico, including torture, rape, killings, and enforced disappearances.¶ We recognize that Mexico is facing a severe public security crisis, and that the United States can play a constructive role in strengthening Mexico’s ability to confront organized crime in an effective manner. However, human rights violations committed by Mexican security forces are not only deplorable in their own right, but also significantly undermine the effectiveness of Mexico’s public security efforts. Building trust between the Mexican people and the government is essential to gathering information to dismantle organized crime. When security forces commit grave human rights violations and they are not held accountable for their actions, they lose that trust, alienating key allies and leaving civilians in a state of terror and defenselessness. It is thus in the interest of both of our countries to help Mexico curb systematic human rights violations, ensure that violations are effectively investigated and those responsible held accountable, and assess candidly the progress Mexico is making towards improving accountability and transparency. ¶ Evidence demonstrates that Mexico is not fulfilling effectively any of the requirements established by Congress, particularly those dealing with prosecuting military abuses and torture: 

HR cred solves conflict
Burke-White 4 (William W., Lecturer in Public and International Affairs and Senior Special Assistant to the Dean, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University The Harvard Environmental Law Review Spring, 2004 LN,https://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/wburkewh/workingpapers/17HarvHumRtsJ249(2004).pdf)
This Article presents a strategic--as opposed to ideological or normative--argument that the promotion of human rights should be given a more prominent place in U.S. foreign policy. It does so by suggesting a correlation between the domestic human rights practices of states and their propensity to engage in aggressive international conduct. Among the chief threats to U.S. national security are acts of aggression by other states. Aggressive acts of war may directly endanger the United States, as did the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941, or they may require U.S. military action overseas, as in Kuwait fifty years later. Evidence from the post-Cold War period  *250  indicates that states that systematically abuse their own citizens' human rights are also those most likely to engage in aggression. To the degree that improvements in various states' human rights records decrease the likelihood of aggressive war, a foreign policy informed by human rights can significantly enhance U.S. and global security.¶ Since 1990, a state's domestic human rights policy appears to be a telling indicator of that state's propensity to engage in international aggression. A central element of U.S. foreign policy has long been the preservation of peace and the prevention of such acts of aggression. n2 If the correlation discussed herein is accurate, it provides U.S. policymakers with a powerful new tool to enhance national security through the promotion of human rights. A strategic linkage between national security and human rights would result in a number of important policy modifications. First, it changes the prioritization of those countries U.S. policymakers have identified as presenting the greatest concern. Second, it alters some of the policy prescriptions for such states. Third, it offers states a means of signaling benign international intent through the improvement of their domestic human rights records. Fourth, it provides a way for a current government to prevent future governments from aggressive international behavior through the institutionalization of human rights protections. Fifth, it addresses the particular threat of human rights abusing states obtaining weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Finally, it offers a mechanism for U.S.-U.N. cooperation on human rights issues.
4

Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to promote the integration of China into the global trading and financial systems; and security engagement, to encourage compliance with the ten principles by diplomatic and military means when economic incentives do not suffice, in order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent to using carrots and sticks in response to foreign policy actions by China. Economic engagement calls for what is described as symmetric tit-for-tat and security engagement for asymmetric tit-for-tat. A symmetric response is one that counters a move by China in the same place, time, and manner; an asymmetric response might occur in another place at another time, and perhaps in another manner. A symmetric tit-for-tat would be for Washington to counter a Chinese tariff of 10 percent on imports for the United States with a tariff of 10 percent on imports from China. An asymmetric tit-for-tat would be for the United States to counter a Chines shipment of missiles to Iran with an American shipment of F-16s to Vietnam (John Lewis Gaddis, Strategies of Containment: A critical Appraisal of Postwar American National Security Policy. New York: Oxford University Press, (1982). This is also cited in FareedZakaria, “The Reagan Strategy of Containment,” Political Science Quarterly 105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate
5
The AFF lowers the expected future demand for oil—that causes an immediate decline in price and increase in consumption
Feldstein, 08 – George F. Baker Professor of Economics at Harvard University and Economic Advisor to Mitt Romney (Martin, 7/1/08, “We Can Lower Oil Prices Now”, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121486800837317581.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries, KONTOPOULOS)
Unlike perishable agricultural products, oil can be stored in the ground. So when will an owner of oil reduce production or increase inventories instead of selling his oil and converting the proceeds into investible cash? A simplified answer is that he will keep the oil in the ground if its price is expected to rise faster than the interest rate that could be earned on the money obtained from selling the oil. The actual price of oil may rise faster or slower than is expected, but the decision to sell (or hold) the oil depends on the expected price rise. There are of course considerations of risk, and of the impact of price changes on long-term consumer behavior, that complicate the oil owner's decision – and therefore the behavior of prices. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (the OPEC cartel), with its strong pricing power, still plays a role. But the fundamental insight is that owners of oil will adjust their production and inventories until the price of oil is expected to rise at the rate of interest, appropriately adjusted for risk. If the price of oil is expected to rise faster, they'll keep the oil in the ground. In contrast, if the price of oil is not expected to rise as fast as the rate of interest, the owners will extract more and invest the proceeds. The relationship between future and current oil prices implies that an expected change in the future price of oil will have an immediate impact on the current price of oil. Thus, when oil producers concluded that the demand for oil in China and some other countries will grow more rapidly in future years than they had previously expected, they inferred that the future price of oil would be higher than they had previously believed. They responded by reducing supply and raising the spot price enough to bring the expected price rise back to its initial rate. Hence, with no change in the current demand for oil, the expectation of a greater future demand and a higher future price caused the current price to rise. Similarly, credible reports about the future decline of oil production in Russia and in Mexico implied a higher future global price of oil – and that also required an increase in the current oil price to maintain the initial expected rate of increase in the price of oil. Once this relation is understood, it is easy to see how news stories, rumors and industry reports can cause substantial fluctuations in current prices – all without anything happening to current demand or supply. Of course, a rise in the spot price of oil triggered by a change in expectations about future prices will cause a decline in the current quantity of oil that consumers demand. If current supply and demand were initially in balance, the OPEC countries and other oil producers would respond by reducing sales to bring supply into line with the temporary reduction in demand. A rise in the expected future demand for oil thus causes a current decline in the amount of oil being supplied. This is what happened as the Saudis and others cut supply in 2007. Now here is the good news. Any policy that causes the expected future oil price to fall can cause the current price to fall, or to rise less than it would otherwise do. In other words, it is possible to bring down today's price of oil with policies that will have their physical impact on oil demand or supply only in the future. For example, increases in government subsidies to develop technology that will make future cars more efficient, or tighter standards that gradually improve the gas mileage of the stock of cars, would lower the future demand for oil and therefore the price of oil today. Similarly, increasing the expected future supply of oil would also reduce today's price. That fall in the current price would induce an immediate rise in oil consumption that would be matched by an increase in supply from the OPEC producers and others with some current excess capacity or available inventories. Any steps that can be taken now to increase the future supply of oil, or reduce the future demand for oil in the U.S. or elsewhere, can therefore lead both to lower prices and increased consumption today.
Low oil prices wreck the Russian economy—high prices create a window for sustained growth
IMF, 11 - International Monetary Fund (9/27/11, "Russia Should Leverage Commodity Boom to Boost Growth", http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2011/int092711a.htm, KONTOPOULOS)
Russia’s economy grew by 4 percent in 2010, aided by the boom in commodity prices, in particular oil. For 2011, the IMF is projecting growth of 4.3 percent. But Russia could do much better. Before the global financial crisis, the economy was growing at more than 7 percent per year, and it could take off again if economic policies and the supporting policy institutions are strengthened. Russia also remains overly reliant on oil revenues, which makes it vulnerable to a slowdown in economic growth and a sudden drop in commodity prices. In an interview, IMF mission chief for Russia Juha Kähkönen and deputy mission chief Daria Zakharova discuss the outlook for Russia’s economy, and weigh risks such as continued crisis in the euro area or a pronounced slowdown in the global economy. IMF Survey online: What is the outlook for Russia’s economy? Kähkönen: Russia is still benefiting from high oil prices, but its post-crisis economic performance has been disappointing, with only moderate growth and high inflation. Russia saw a major decline in output of about 8 percent of GDP during the global crisis, and is still catching up. The economy grew by 4 percent in 2010 and is projected to grow by 4.3 percent this year. Growth has suffered as a result of a bad harvest in 2010 brought on by drought. The economy is also slowing down now because of the ongoing turmoil in advanced countries. Going forward, Russia’s outlook will depend not just on the external environment but also on economic policies. If current policies—a high nonoil fiscal deficit and no clear medium-term anchor for fiscal policy, monetary policy that is insufficiently focused on reducing inflation, a financial sector lacking adequate oversight, and stalled structural reforms—are maintained, the result will be muddling through, with growth tapering off to below 4 percent in the medium term. But if there is a major strengthening of the economic policies, Russia’s potential is huge. The country could easily grow by an annual rate of 6 percent or more on a sustained basis if the right policies are put in place. IMF Survey online: How vulnerable is the economy to ongoing turmoil in Europe and the slowdown in global growth? Zakharova: If the crisis in the euro area intensifies and leads to another global downturn and a precipitous fall in oil prices, Russia’s economy could be severely affected. Russia could also be impacted through the financial channel. Although Russia’s direct exposure to European sovereign debt is limited, a severe distress in a large bank in a core euro area country could have serious repercussions for Russia’s banking system. IMF Survey online: What are your main recommendations to the Russian authorities on the macroeconomic policy mix? Kähkönen: High oil prices give Russia a window of opportunity to put the economy on a higher growth path. Policies should be strengthened in four main policy areas: monetary policy, fiscal policy, structural reforms to improve the business climate, and banking sector supervision. We think it would be most beneficial to have action simultaneously in all of these areas because the reforms would be mutually reinforcing. Russia’s macroeconomic policies would also benefit from more stable and predictable frameworks. Right now, there are too many ad hoc policy decisions. In terms of monetary policy, we think the central bank should focus squarely on inflation. In the past, the bank has had multiple targets, which has diluted the emphasis on price stability. Russia’s underlying inflation currently is high at about 8 percent. Zakharova: The fiscal policy framework should also be strengthened. Right now, policy focus is on the overall fiscal balance. But because Russia is an oil producer, it is more appropriate to look at the nonoil deficit—the size of the deficit before taking oil revenues into account. This deficit increased by 9 percent of GDP during the crisis, with Russia implementing one of the largest fiscal stimuli in the Group of 20 (G-20) leading industrial and emerging market countries. Our advice is to refocus fiscal policy on the nonoil balance and introduce an ambitious, credible, and growth-friendly fiscal consolidation that aims at reaching a nonoil deficit of 4.7 percent, the current long-term fiscal target of the government. We also recommend that Russia refrain from enacting further supplementary budgets, which in the past have been used to spend excess oil revenues. Supplementary budgets make fiscal policy pro-cyclical, thus undermining macroeconomic stability. IMF Survey online: Russia has been riding high on the commodity boom, but what will happen if prices start to falter? Zakharova: Russia has been rescued from the recent financial crisis by a strong recovery in oil prices, but in the process the economy has become much more vulnerable to a sudden drop in commodity prices. Russia’s nonoil deficit has almost tripled following the crisis. Just to put this in perspective, if oil prices were to fall to $40 per barrel as they did during the most recent financial crisis, Russia would be running deficits in the order of 8 percent of GDP. At the same time, the Oil Reserve Fund, which Russia successfully used to cushion the economy in the most recent downturn, has been almost exhausted. This means that the government would have to borrow from the markets—and possibly at high rates—if there is a precipitous drop in oil prices. The external current account would also be severely affected by a decline in oil prices. We would expect that the current high surplus would turn into a deficit fairly quickly, putting pressure on the exchange rate.
Causes multiple scenarios for CBW conflict
Oliker and Charlick-Paley 02 (Olga and Tanya, RAND Corporation Project Air Force, “Assessing Russia’s Decline,” www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1442/)
The preceding chapters have illustrated the ways in which Russia’s decline affects that country and may evolve into challenges and dangers that extend well beyond its borders. The political factors of decline may make Russia a less stable international actor and other factors may increase the risk of internal unrest. Together and separately, they increase the risk of conflict and the potential scope of other imaginable disasters. The trends of regionalization, particularly the disparate rates of economic growth among regions, combined with the politicization of regional economic and military interests, will be important to watch. The potential for locale, or possibly ethnicity, to serve as a rallying point for internal conflict is low at present, but these factors have the potential to feed into precisely the cycle of instability that political scientists have identified as making states in transition to democracy more likely to become involved in war. These factors also increase the potential for domestic turmoil, which further increases the risk of international conflict, for instance if Moscow seeks to united a divided nation and/or demonstrate globally that its waning power remains something to be reckoned with. Given Russia’s conventional weakness, an increased risk of conflict carries with it an increased risk of nuclear weapons use, and Russia’s demographic situation increases the potential for a major epidemic with possible implications for Europe and perhaps beyond. The dangers posed by Russia’s civilian and military nuclear weapons complex, aside from the threat of nuclear weapons use, create a real risk of proliferation of weapons or weapons materials to terrorist groups, as well as perpetuating an increasing risk of accident at one of Russia’s nuclear power plants or other facilities. These elements touch upon key security interests, thus raising serious concerns for the United States. A declining Russia increases the likelihood of conflict—internal or otherwise—and the general deterioration that Russia has in common with “failing” states raises serious questions about its capacity to respond to an emerging crisis. A crisis in large, populous, and nuclear-armed Russia can easily affect the interests of the United States and its allies. In response to such a scenario, the United States, whether alone or as part of a larger coalition, could be asked to send military forces to the area in and around Russia. This chapter will explore a handful of scenarios that could call for U.S. involvement. A wide range of crisis scenarios can be reasonably extrapolated from the trends implicit in Russia’s decline. A notional list includes: Authorized or unauthorized belligerent actions by Russia troops in trouble-prone Russian regions or in neighboring states could lead to armed conflict. Border clashes with China in the Russian Far East or between Russia and Ukraine, the Baltic states, Kazakhstan, or another neighbor could escalate into interstate combat. Nuclear-armed terrorists based in Russia or using weapons or materials diverted from Russian facilities could threaten Russia, Europe, Asia, or the United States. Civil war in Russia could involve fighting near storage sites for nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons and agents, risking large-scale contamination and humanitarian disaster. A nuclear accident at a power plant or facility could endanger life and health in Russia and neighboring states. A chemical accident at a plant or nuclear or nuclear-related facility could endanger life and health in Rusisa and neighboring states. Ethnic pogrom in south Russia could force refugees into Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and/or Ukraine. Economic and ethnic conflicts in Caucasus could erupt into armed clashes, which would endanger oil and gas pipelines in the region. A massive ecological disaster such as an earthquake, famine, or epidemic could spawn refugees and spread illness and death across borders. An increasingly criminalized Russian economy could create a safe haven for crime or even terrorist-linked groups. From this base, criminals, drug traders, and terrorists could threaten the people and economies of Europe, Asia, and the United States. Accelerated Russian weapons and technology sales or unauthorized diversion could foster the proliferation of weapons and weapon materials to rogue states and nonstate terrorist actors, increasing the risk of nuclear war.
Warming
Empirical trends disprove warming impacts
Goklany 11 - a science and technology policy analyst for the United States Department of the Interior (Indur M., “Misled on Climate Change: How the UN IPCC (and others) Exaggerate the Impacts of Global Warming” December 2011, http://goklany.org/library/Reason20CC20and20Development202011.pdf, PZ)
Discussion and Conclusions Despite claims that GW will reduce human well-being in poor countries, there is no evidence that this is actually happening. Empirical trends show that by any objective climate-sensitive measure, human well-being in such countries has improved remarkably over the last several decades. Specifically, agricultural productivity has increased; the proportion of people suffering from chronic hunger has declined; the rate of extreme poverty has been more than halved; rates of death and disease from malaria, other vector-borne diseases and extreme weather events have declined. Together, these improvements correspond with life expectancy in poor countries more than doubling since 1900. The fact that these improvements have occurred in spite of GW indicates that economic and technological development has been, overall, a very significant benefit to people in poor countries.

Nuclear power trades off with other alternative energy and efficiency programs---that increases overall emissions
Roche 9 - Pete Roche, Energy and Environment consultant working mainly for Greenpeace and the Nuclear-Free Local Authorities, June 2009, “Building New Reactors Damages Attempts to Tackle Climate Change,” NO2Nuclear Power Briefing, online: http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/reports/NewNuclearDamagesClimate.pdf
But, in fact the risk associated with building new reactors is much worse than simply increasing the risks associated with nuclear power. As The Independent highlighted in an editorial after the 2007 Energy White Paper, the danger is that nuclear investment will crowd out investment in renewables and undermine energy efficiency. (4) If we divert attention political effort and resources from the urgent programmes needed to effectively tackle climate change not only will we miss our targets, but as past experience suggests we could end up with carbon emissions still rising in 2025 because the nuclear programme has been hit by the problems and delays we have seen in the past and by then it will be too late to start implementing alternative strategies.
In February 2003 the Government itself had similar concerns. After the 2003 Energy White Paper (5) was published, Patricia Hewitt, the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry at the time, said:
“It would have been foolish to announce …a new generation of nuclear power stations, because that would have guaranteed we would not make the necessary investments in energy efficiency and renewables.” (6)

No offense---their authors assume nuclear solves warming by replacing coal plants---but it’ll actually displace decentralized renewables which are far more likely to solve warming
Squassoni  9 – Sharon Squassoni, senior associate in the Nonproliferation Program at the Carnegie Endowment, former director of Policy Coordination in the Nonproliferation Bureau of the State Department, 2009, “Nuclear Energy: Rebirth or Resuscitation?,” online: http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/nuclear_energy_rebirth_resuscitation.pdf
Many of the estimates of nuclear energy’s future carbon savings assume that nuclear power plants would be built in place of new coal electric plants. It is unlikely that nuclear power plants will displace just new coal plants, however. Nuclear energy that displaces natural gas, wind, solar, or renewables would have less impact on reducing carbon emissions. Ultimately, decisions about investing in large versus small generation facilities and centralized versus distributed generation will affect the extent to which nuclear energy might displace other zerocarbon options.41 This is important because smaller, distributed electricity generation may be a more favorable option for developing countries, where 70 percent of the projected growth in electricity demand is expected by 2050.
Their authors are biased
Ferrara 11 – Heartland Institute senior fellow, senior fellow at the Social Security Institute, graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, general counsel of the American Civil Rights Union, Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under the first President Bush, author of The Obamacare Disaster, President Obama's Tax Piracy, and America's Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb: How the Looming Debt Crisis Threatens the American Dream-and How We Can Turn the Tide Before It's Too Late (Peter, “Packing Heat,” The American Spectator, 9/7/11, http://spectator.org/archives/2011/09/07/packing-heat)//PC
The theory that human activity is causing potentially catastrophic global warming is not science. It is politics, driven by special interests with ideological, political and economic stakes in the theory. For environmentalists, global warming corresponds with the authoritarian goal at the core of their movement: repeal of the industrial revolution (which President Obama's EPA has begun to implement). For governments, it presents an opportunity to vastly expand their power and control through taxes, regulation and bureaucracy. The theory also presents an opportunity for the United Nations to vastly expand its power and control. As an organization of world governments who would also gain enormously from acceptance of the theory, the UN is doubly corrupted as an honest broker on the issue. Yet, perversely, governments across the globe have delegated authoritative inquiry on the issue to the UN through its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Wily environmentalists have also successfully weaved economic stakes in the theory for some in the business community, starting with tens of billions -- growing into hundreds of billions -- of government subsidies for businesses that will pose as potential producers of the "green energy of tomorrow." This enables wily politicians to attempt to snooker voters with promises of "green jobs." Of course, those jobs would only become available if self-supporting producers of abundant low cost energy are replaced with an entire "green" industry that can survive on corporate welfare while producing unreliable high cost energy for the economy (resulting in job loss and a decline in America's standard of living). What is so shocking is the way formerly objective, reliable Western science has been seduced by all these interests into intellectual corruption in service of the global warming fraud (less shocking when you consider the tens of billions in "research" funding provided by the above special interests). But don't forget that scientists live and breathe in the far left environment of the academic world. Thus, many of them have social and ideological interests in advancing the global warming charade. The confluence of all these special interests and their money has now corrupted the broader scientific community. Formerly venerable, objective, respected scientific bodies such as the National Academy of Sciences have been taken over by politicians in scientific drag. Formerly independent scientific journals and publications have gone the same route rather than suffer the social and financial opprobrium that service to the truth will entail. This growing intellectual corruption is greatly magnified by our thoroughly politicized Old Media, which operates today only in service of politically correct causes. Consequently, so much of the public discussion on global warming that we see is actually "play acting," with supposed scientists, journalists, media commentators, politicians and others posing as if objective science actually demonstrates the danger of human caused global warming. One day Al Gore will receive an Oscar for his role in posing as savior of the planet, which actually reflects delusional mental illness in the man who almost became our president. But the politicization of Western science means the decline of Western science as well. That in turn augurs the decline of Western civilization, as objective science was a foundation of the rise of the West for centuries.
Poverty

1. Poverty down now
   Chen and Ravillion, 07- *Senior Statistician in Development Economics Research Group at the World Bank, Director of World Bank’s Development Research Group (Shaohua and Martin, “The Changing Profile of Poverty in the World”, October 2007, http://www.ifpri.org/2020Chinaconference/pdf/beijingbrief_ravallion2.pdf)
   In absolute terms, the number of people in the developing world living on less than US$1 a day fell from slightly less than 1.5 billion in 1981 to 970 million in 2004, which marks the first time the poverty count has gone below 1 billion (Figure 1a). The choice of poverty line, however, matters. The number living on less than US$2 a day actually rose by about 100 million over this period, to 2.5 billion in 2004. As a share of the population, global US$1-a-day poverty fell from 40 percent in 1981 to 18 percent in 2004, and US$2-a-day poverty fell from 67 percent in 1981 to 48 percent in 2004 (Figure 1b). For both poverty lines, the trend of poverty reduction is about 0.8 percentage points per year over 1981–2004. This rate exceeds the rate of poverty reduction of 0.6 percentage points per year that would be required to halve the 1990 US$1-a-day poverty rate by 2015— the first of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG1). So, in the aggregate, the world is on track to achieve MDG1.
   The status quo is structurally improving
   Dash 13 Co-Founder and Managing Director at Activate, a new kind of strategy consultancy that advises companies about the opportunities at the intersection of technology and media co-founder and CEO of ThinkUp, which shows you how to be better at using your social networks, publisher, editor and owner of Dashes.com, my personal blog where I've been publishing continuously since 1999, entrepreneur, writer and geek living in New York City (Anil Dash, 4 February 2013, “THE WORLD IS GETTING BETTER. QUICKLY.,” http://dashes.com/anil/2013/02/the-world-is-getting-better-quickly.html)
   The world is getting better, faster, than we could ever have imagined. For those of us who are fortunate enough to live in wealthy communities or countries, we have a common set of reference points we use to describe the world's most intractable, upsetting, unimaginable injustices. Often, we only mention these horrible realities in minimizing our own woes: "Well, that's annoying, but it's hardly as bad as children starving in Africa." Or "Yeah, this is important, but it's not like it's the cure for AIDS." Or the omnipresent description of any issue as a "First World Problem". But let's, for once, look at the actual data around developing world problems. Not our condescending, world-away displays of emotion, or our slacktivist tendencies to see a retweet as meaningful action, but the actual numbers and metrics about how progress is happening for the world's poorest people. Though metrics and measurements are always fraught and flawed, Gates' single biggest emphasis was the idea that measurable progress and metrics are necessary for any meaningful improvements to happen in the lives of the world's poor. So how are we doing? THE WORLD HAS CHANGED The results are astounding. Even if we caveat that every measurement is imprecise, that billionaire philanthropists are going to favor data that strengthens their points, and that some of the most significant problems are difficult to attach metrics to, it's inarguable that the past two decades have seen the greatest leap forward in the lives of the global poor in the history of humanity. Some highlights: Children are 1/3 less likely to die before age five than they were in 1990. The global childhood mortality rate for kids under 5 has dropped from 88 in 1000 in 1990 to 57 in 1000 in 2010. The global infant mortality rate for kids dying before age one has plunged from 61 in 1000 to 40 in 1000. Now, any child dying is of course one child too many, but this is astounding progress to have made in just twenty years. In the past 30 years, the percentage of children who receive key immunizations such as the DTP vaccine has quadrupled. The percentage of people in the world living on less than $1.25 per day has been cut in half since 1990, ahead of the schedule of the Millennium Development Goals which hoped to reach this target by 2015. The number of deaths to tuberculosis has been cut 40 in the past twenty years. The consumption of ozone-depleting substances has been cut 85 globally in the last thirty years. The percentage of urban dwellers living in slums globally has been cut from 46.2 to 32.7 in the last twenty years. And there's more progress in hunger and contraception, in sustainability and education, against AIDS and illiteracy. After reading the Gates annual letter and following up by reviewing the UN's ugly-but-data-rich Millennium Development Goals statistics site, I was surprised by how much progress has been made in the years since I've been an adult, and just how little I've heard about the big picture despite the fact that I'd like to keep informed about such things. I'm not a pollyanna — there's a lot of work to be done. But I can personally attest to the profound effect that basic improvements like clean drinking water can have in people's lives. Today, we often use the world's biggest problems as metaphors for impossibility. But the evidence shows that, actually, we're really good at solving even the most intimidating challenges in the world. What we're lacking is the ability to communicate effectively about how we make progress, so that we can galvanize even more investment of resources, time and effort to tackling the problems we have left.
   Meltdowns
   No deaths from nuclear meltdowns
   Drum 11 Kevin, political blogger for Mother Jones, "Nukes and the Free Market", March 14, www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/03/nukes-and-free-market
   We’re currently told that the death toll in Japan will be at least 10,000 people of whom approximately zero seem to have perished in nuclear accidents. What happens when a tsunami hits an offshore drilling platform or a natural gas pipeline? What happens to a coal mine in an earthquake? How much environmental damage is playing out in Japan right now because of gasoline from cars pushed around? The main lesson is “try not to put critical infrastructure near a fault line” but Japan is an earthquakey country, so what are they really supposed to do about this?¶ This is a good point: energy sources of all kind cause problems. Sometimes the problems create screaming headlines (nuke meltdowns, offshore oil explosions, mining disasters) and sometimes they don't (increased particulate pollution, global warming, devastation of salmon runs). But the dangers are there for virtually every type of energy production.¶ Still, it's worth pointing out that the problem with nuclear power isn't so much its immediate capacity to kill people. As Matt points out, no one has died in Japan from the partial meltdowns at its damaged nuclear plants, and it's unlikely anyone ever will. The control rods are in place, and even in the worst case the containment vessels will almost certainly restrict the worst damage.
   Chernobyl proves meltdowns don’t cause lasting damage
   Bosselman 7 (Professor of Law Emeritus, Chicago-Kent College of Law. Fred, “THE NEW POWER GENERATION: ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND ELECTRICITY INNOVATION: COLLOQUIUM ARTICLE: THE ECOLOGICAL ADVANTAGES OF NUCLEAR POWER,” 15 N.Y.U. Envtl. L.J. 1, 2007)
   C. "But What About Chernobyl?" In 1986, an explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in the Ukraine caused the release of large amounts of radiation into the atmosphere. 247 Initially, the Soviet government released little information about the explosion and tried to play down its seriousness, but this secrecy caused great nervousness throughout Europe, and fed the public's fears of nuclear power all over the  *46  world. 248 Now a comprehensive analysis of the event and its aftermath has been made: In 2005, a consortium of United Nations agencies called the Chernobyl Forum released its analysis of the long-term effects of the Chernobyl explosion. 249 The U.N. agencies' study found that the explosion caused fewer deaths than had been expected. 250 Although the Chernobyl reactor was poorly designed and badly operated 251 and lacked the basic safety protections found outside the Soviet Union, 252 fewer than seventy deaths so far have been attributed to the explosion, mostly plant employees and firefighters who suffered acute radiation sickness. 253 The Chernobyl reactor, like many Soviet reactors, was in the open rather than in an American type of pressurizable containment structure, which would have prevented the release of radiation to the environment if a similar accident had occurred. 254  *47  Perhaps the most surprising finding of the U.N. agencies' study was that "the ecosystems around the Chernobyl site are now flourishing. The Chernobyl exclusion zone has become a wildlife sanctuary, and it looks like the nature park it has become." 255 Jeffrey McNeely, the chief scientist of the World Conservation Union, has made similar observations: Chernobyl has now become the world's first radioactive nature reserve... . 200 wolves are now living in the nature reserve, which has also begun to support populations of reindeer, lynx and European bison, species that previously were not found in the region. While the impact on humans was strongly negative, the wildlife is adapting and even thriving on the site of one of the 20th century's worst environmental disasters. 256 Mary Mycio, the Kiev correspondent for the Los Angeles Times, has written a fascinating book based on her many visits to the exclusion zone and interviews with people in the area. 257 She notes that the fear that radiation would produce permanent deformities in animal species has not been borne out after twenty years; the population and diversity of animals in even some of the most heavily radiated parts of the exclusion zone is similar to comparable places that are less radioactive.

Tournament: Cal | Round: 3 | Opponent: Green Valley YS | Judge: Joseph Flores
Method K
The Affirmative’s method of changing our relationship towards borders is incorrect – only engaging in federal institutions can resolve the harms of the 1AC
Understanding trade-offs, budget decisions, and opportunity costs are vital to organizational decision making.
De Vita, et al, 1 (Carol J., senior research associate, with Cory Fleming, center administrator, and Eric C. Twombly, research associate @ Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy, The Urban Institute, Building Capacity in Nonprofit Organizations, The Urban Institute, ed. Carol J. De Vita and Cory Fleming, April, Chapter 2: Building Nonprofit Capacity: A Framework for Addressing the Problem, p. 5-33)
The literature on organizational and management theory emphasizes the operational decisions and trade-offs that groups face when building their financial and political capacity. Decisions concerning the use of staff, choice of products and services, fundraising and marketing strategies, and even the selection of a board of directors can significantly impact the success or failure of an organization. Decision making involves foregoing one option in favor of another. In short, organizational management decisions produce trade-offs that may be either beneficial or detrimental to the short-run or long-term viability of the organization. All types of organizations face pressures from other groups when attempting to meet their goals. Institutions such as government and for-profit firms may either cooperate or conflict with one another in their efforts to promote community decision making— each with a specific view on what constitutes economic and social balance. Nonprofits also play a key role in affecting local decision making, particularly by representing less popular and competing views in the political process. However, to be effective players, nonprofit organizations must build and sustain financial and political capacity.
That skill set is vital to actualizing change outside the confines of the debate space.
Algoso, 11 (Dave, Director of Programs at Reboot, MPA, International Development Blogger, “Why I got an MPA: Because organizations matter,” 5/31, http://algoso.org/2011/05/31/why-i-got-an-mpa-because-organizations-matter/)
Because organizations matter. Forget the stories of heroic individuals written in your middle school civics textbook. Nothing of great importance is ever accomplished by a single person. Thomas Edison had lab assistants, George Washington’s army had thousands of troops, and Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity had over a million staff and volunteers when she passed away. Even Jesus had a 12-man posse. In different ways and in vastly different contexts, these were all organizations. Pick your favorite historical figure or contemporary hero, and I can almost guarantee that their greatest successes occurred as part of an organization. Even the most charismatic, visionary and inspiring leaders have to be able to manage people, or find someone who can do it for them. International development work is no different. Regardless of your issue of interest — whether private sector investment, rural development, basic health care, government capacity, girls’ education, or democracy promotion — your work will almost always involve operating within an organization. How well or poorly that organization functions will have dramatic implications for the results of your work. A well-run organization makes better decisions about staffing and operations; learns more from its mistakes; generates resources and commitment from external stakeholders; and structures itself to better promote its goals. None of this is easy or straightforward. We screw it up fairly often. Complaints about NGO management and government bureaucracy are not new. We all recognize the need for improvement. In my mind, the greatest challenges and constraints facing international development are managerial and organizational, rather than technical. Put another way: the greatest opportunities and leverage points lie in how we run our organizations. Yet our discourse about the international development industry focuses largely on how much money donors should commit to development and what technical solutions (e.g. deworming, elections, roads, whatever) deserve the funds. We give short shrift to the questions around how organizations can actually turn those funds into the technical solutions. The closest we come is to discuss the incentives facing organizations due to donor or political requirements. I think we can go deeper in addressing the management and organizational issues mentioned above. This thinking led me to an MPA degree because it straddles that space between organizations and issues. A degree in economics or international affairs could teach you all about the problems in the world, and you may even learn how to address them. But if you don’t learn how to operate in an organization, you may not be able to channel the resources needed to implement solutions. On the flip side, a typical degree in management offers relevant skills, but without the content knowledge necessary to understand the context and the issues. I think the MPA, if you choose the right program for you and use your time well, can do both.

There’s a youth crisis of civic engagement.
Zwarensteyn, 12 (Ellen, Masters of Science, Communications thesis, “High School Policy Debate as an Enduring Pathway to Political Education: Evaluating Possibilities for Political Learning,” Grand Valley State University, August, http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1034andcontext=theses)
A lack of political learning opportunities reveals how difficult it may be for students to discover or find themselves in politics. As a result, many students are separated and isolated from connections to political worlds and policy analysis. Studies demonstrate how students entering college do not have a firm grasp on political education. Colby (2008) cites an overall decline in political learning despite more students attending college. Moreover, Galston (2001) advances how despite overall advancements in education since the 1950s, political knowledge levels remain stagnant. “If we compare generations rather than cohorts—that is, if we compare today’s young adults not with today’s older adults but with the young adults of the past—we find evidence of diminished civic attachment” (Galston, 2001, p. 219). Specific measures regarding willingness to talk about the news, caring about current events, voting, watching the news or reading the paper, and other traditional forms of political involvement have declined with each generation (Galston, 2001, p. 220-221). The most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress Report documents one consequence to this rote approach to government. Even after a historic presidential election in 2008, students are less involved in political learning and demonstrate less proficiency in 2010 than even in 2006 (National Center, 2011, p. 34). Moreover, “…individuals emerge from the educational system with a lower level of knowledge about current political figures and alignments than 30 or 40 years ago. And individuals of all ages are less able to answer questions about current politics than their counterparts with similar education backgrounds in the past” (Delli Carpinin and Keeter, 1991, p. 607). Schools seem to focus on teaching facts as the end goal of a political education rather than how facts are necessary to understand the fluidity and complexity of current events. Together, the prospects for enduring and thoughtful political engagement are dim in light of these facts.

Fragmenting social dialogue through the critique exacerbates social ills – destroying civic engagement.
Block, 5 (Peter, author of Flawless Consulting: A Guide to Getting Your Experience Used, Stewardship: Choosing Service over Self-Interest, and others, consultant at Designed Learning, Masters Degree in Industrial Administration from Yale University, “Civic Engagement and the Restoration of Community,” http://www.peterblock.com/_assets/downloads/Civic.pdf)
Civic engagement as used here is about a shift in the language and conversation we use to make our community better. We treat civic engagement as something more than voting, volunteering, and supporting events designed to bring people together. While civic engagement is about action, it is not about community action and community development as we normally think of it. The conventional view of community action and development addresses what we usually call problems; areas such as public safety, jobs and local economy, affordable housing, universal health care, education. In the context of civic engagement, these are really symptoms. The deeper cause is in the un-reconciled and fragmented nature of our community. This fragmentation creates a context for solving the symptoms that only sustains them. Otherwise why have we been working on these symptoms for so long, and so hard, and even with so many successful programs, seen too little fundamental change? The real intent of civic engagement is to shift the context within which traditional problem solving, investment, and social and community action takes place. It is aimed at the restoration of the experience and vitality of community. It is this shift in context, expressed through a shift in language, that creates the condition where traditional forms of action can make a difference.

Civic engagement is vital to solving collective action problems
Choi, 14 (Young Whan, Civic Engagement Coordinator @ Oakland Unified School District, BA in History from Brown University, Masters Degree in Education from the Teachers College of Columbia University, “Why Does Civic Engagement Matter in Schools?” 1/29, Educating for Democracy in the Digital Age, http://eddaoakland.org/2014/01/29/why-does-civic-engagement-matter-in-schools/)
These academic benefits cannot be overstressed, but there is still another compelling reason for schools to care about civic engagement. Civic engagement promotes social and political development. One of the great criticisms of the United States is that we, as a country, prize individualism above the needs of the larger society. The push for students to strive for their own individual success and achievement begs for the countervailing balance of a healthy sense of connection and community. Students must also learn that they are an integral part of a larger society and that they have both rights and responsibilities within that society. They cannot develop a sense that they belong to a larger society or live within a political system through theory alone; they must experience society and they must experience that political system. For example, learning about the three branches of government must be coupled with opportunities to effect change through action taken at the local, state, and/or national level. In her government class, Maryann Wolfe has asked her students to do just that. Similarly, being told that they should be compassionate takes on new meaning when students experience what it feels like to care for others through a service learning project. Michelle Espino’s students are acting with care and developing their sense of responsibility to the ecosystem through their recycling project. Finally, instead of banning smartphones and other devices that connect students with the world, schools can provide students with guidance on how to use these powerful tools to take actions that benefits others. Jo Paraiso’s students see themselves as part of an online community, engaging in respectful dialogue with students and adults via their social issue research blogs.

DA

the liberal democratic state will gradually give way to a cosmopolitan global political community---but a radical change in border policy towards openness would derail the democratic processes required to transition towards cosmopolitanism
Christiano 8 – Thomas Christiano, Professor of Philosophy and Law at the University of Arizona, Fall 2008, “Immigration, Political Community, and Cosmopolitanism,” San Diego Law Reiew, 45 San Diego L. Rev. 933, p. lexis
Is there any good reason from within moral cosmopolitanism to limit immigration into political societies? A morally cosmopolitan view asserts that the fundamental norms of justice that ground the legitimacy and justice of the political communities of modern states are ones that hold for the whole world community. And whether one holds to liberal egalitarian or classical liberal cosmopolitan principles, the initial impulse of cosmopolitans is to assert that political societies do not have a right to limit immigration into political communities. Each person is entitled on these views to equality of opportunity or freedom of movement respectively and thereby is entitled to move into, or avail themselves of the opportunities in, any political society. Hence cosmopolitanism would appear, on its face, to imply that open borders are required by justice.  *934   And yet, though we do not know what the consequences of such policies would be, many find the prospect of such policies to be unsettling or even frightening. Many citizens of liberal democracies are unsettled by even the modest immigration flows they see into their societies. The reasons for this anxiety are presumably many. One is fear of loss of control over the community, of living in a society of mutually uncomprehending strangers. Some are concerned that open immigration would leave unfinished the project of bringing social justice to their own society. Another may be simple xenophobia. The first two of these considerations are legitimate ones, though they may not be decisive; others are illegitimate. What place do these kinds of considerations have within a moral cosmopolitan view?
In this paper, I want to suggest one important way to take the above issues seriously that is consistent with a thoroughgoing cosmopolitanism. The idea develops a consideration that has been discussed, but not sufficiently explored, by some cosmopolitans. n1 It starts from the observation that one can be a moral cosmopolitan without being a political cosmopolitan in the sense of advocating for a global political community in the near-term future. To be sure, given the role of the political community in establishing justice among persons, it seems clear that in the long term, moral cosmopolitans must hope for a global political community. In the near-to-medium term, however, efforts to establish a global political community would be quite premature and would probably lead to the kinds of oppression and anomie that Kant worried about. n2 Still, the aspiration to a global political community in the long run and the steps necessary to achieve this aim may give us some guidance as to how to think about the migration of peoples from the point of view of moral cosmopolitanism.
The basic idea of this paper starts from the observation that the modern liberal democratic state represents an essential achievement in the attempts of human beings to realize justice and the common good among themselves. Its achievements are not all we want them to be, and they are limited to the scope of people brought into its jurisdiction. But considering the long and wretched history of human oppression, they are achievements that must attract our respect. Furthermore, the modern democratic state embodies the best hope we have of ultimately bringing justice to the whole of humanity. It is an essential example for global  *935  institutions and the basic building block on which such global institutions can be created. Liberal democratic states are responsible for the modern development of international institutions that protect and regulate international trade, provide for collective security, and aspire to realize some collective goods such as the protection of the environment and the relief of poverty and disease. And international institutions are maintained by such democratic states through their example and practices. My surmise is that these institutions would not last long without the sponsorship of liberal democratic states. This leads me to argue that, insofar as the development of global political institutions and ultimately the development of a global political community are essential to the realization of the aims of the moral cosmopolitan, the modern liberal democratic state must play a central role. And to the extent that it is necessary to this development, we must protect such states from forces that would undermine their democratic character and the normal functioning of their political systems. Immigration policy should therefore be in part evaluated in terms of whether it undermines the existence and normal practices of liberal democratic states. To the extent that open borders would undermine the existence or normal functioning of liberal democratic states, such a policy should be rejected from a cosmopolitan standpoint because it derails the very institutions that give us some hope for realizing cosmopolitan justice in the future.

Sudden expansions of the notion of citizenship and borders destroy the transition to cosmopolitanism---that prevents the development of global justice
Christiano 8 – Thomas Christiano, Professor of Philosophy and Law at the University of Arizona, Fall 2008, “Immigration, Political Community, and Cosmopolitanism,” San Diego Law Reiew, 45 San Diego L. Rev. 933, p. lexis
For these reasons, in my view, the ultimate political aim for humanity as a whole must be a global political community. Only a global political  *951  community can realize justice as much as possible among all the persons in the world. Only it can create a just global order. But this ultimate aim is very far off, to say the least. Those who worry that such an order would be tyrannical are right to worry about it in the short run. Such an order must be constructed very slowly and carefully. A premature construction of a global political community would probably be a disaster. But we do not have reason to think that a global political community, when constitutionally limited and federally structured, could not be a success in the long run. We have seen the development of very large and reasonably successful democratic states. We are witnessing the gestation period of what may become a very large political community in Europe, and we are seeing the development of large-scale regional economic associations in every part of the globe. There are some reasons for hope here, but we must not hurry these developments lest we undermine this progress.
To be sure, a global political community is not necessary to start on the most pressing problems of global poverty and inequality. The development of more partial global institutions can help with these. The World Trade Organization helps with the alleviation of poverty through the expansion of trade. And for those many cases in which trade is not sufficient for the relief of poverty and disease, some modest redistribution of wealth may be possible through international institutions in the short run. But this is only a start, and these more modest institutions in general require democratic states for their sustenance. n32
From a cosmopolitan standpoint, there are two main limitations to even the best democratic states. First, democratic states are mostly pretty imperfectly democratic, and they are certainly imperfectly just. Second, the scope within which each contemporary state establishes justice is limited to a small proportion of the population of the world.  *952  Still, this is no mean achievement when we consider what most of human history has been like for people.
Again, an understandable cosmopolitan impulse is to try to extend as far as possible the justice establishing powers of states, or at least to make reasonably just and prosperous states open to everyone. But the question we must focus on here is whether these are feasible aims in the near term. It has taken a great deal of time just to develop the reasonably prosperous and moderately just states that exist, and it has taken a great deal of time to turn these into democratic states. Any sudden and very substantial expansion of powers, population, and citizenship would not constitute trivial changes and could do great damage to the states as we know them and their modest capacities to bring justice.

Successful transition to global cosmopolitanism is necessary to avert global suffering and war---the liberal-democratic state must be the transition vehicle towards a global political community
Shaw 1 – Martin Shaw, professorial fellow in international relations and human rights at Roehampton University, London, and an honorary research professor of international relations at the University of Sussex, October 2001, “The unfinished global revolution: intellectuals and the new politics of international relations,” Review of International Studies, Vol. 27, No. 3, online: http://www.martinshaw.org/unfinished.pdf
The most fundamental problem with both claims is this. The idea that we have an international system characterised by order jars badly with our understanding of modern history. The extreme violence routinely inflicted by states – through their international relations – on society worldwide is sufficient to bring this notion into question. It is more plausible to see international anarchy as problem than as solution. Recently, international scholarship has increasingly prioritised individual human rights against the claims of states, and has argued for cosmopolitan frameworks for political community.55 In these contexts, as Ken Booth has argued, states should be seen more as the source of ‘human wrongs’ than of order.56
However the answers to this problem are often sought in bypassing the state, in a position which echoes classical anarchism rather than its international realist mutation. For Booth, for example, in own his inaugural lecture (at Aberystwyth in 1991), 'No central government deserves much trust. … Even decent governments are not necessarily mindful of the interests and diversity of all their citizens.' World government is dismissed as an almost totalitarian nightmare: 'The idea of centralising all power on a world scale is a fearful prospect, and not likely to work.' Security will be created, he proposes, through 'an anarchical, global "community of communities"’, but the mechanisms for this remain obscure.57
Hence anarchism proves to be even more deep-rooted in international relations than first appears. Indeed a similar trend is evident in the Gramscian literature on social movements and civil society. Thus Robert Cox argues for a ‘two track’ strategy: ‘first, continued participation in electoral politics and industrial action as a means of defensive resistance against the further onslaught of globalisation; and secondly, but ultimately more importantly, pursuit of the primary goal of resurrecting a spirit of association in civil society together with a continuing effort by organic intellectuals of social forces to think through and act towards an alternative social order at local, regional and global levels.’ 58
The mistakes in this passage are also twofold. First, the myth of globalisation as threat or onslaught – which can only be resisted – is combined with the myth of the weakening of the state.59 Second, hopes for ‘an alternative social order’ are vested in the ‘resurrection’ of civil society, but Cox himself identifies a fundamental difficulty with this scenario, the ‘the still small development of civil society.’60 The expansion of civil society is indeed crucial to the long-term consolidation of a worldwide democratic order. But civil society is not only too weak to take the full weight of global transformation, it is also still too national in form.61 Moreover, it is theoretically and practically inconceivable that we can advance emancipation without simultaneously transforming state power.62
While Booth explicitly rejects world government, Cox largely avoids the role of internationalised state organisations. He sees nation-states as playing ‘the role of agencies of the global economy’63 and seems incapable either of understanding the global transformations of state power, or envisaging a constructive role for them. Critical international theorists have dug themselves into a hole over this issue. In committing themselves to ‘globalization from below’, as Richard Falk64 calls it, they are simply missing political battles that matter in today’s world. Falk is certainly moving towards a new position when he writes:
An immediate goal of those disparate social forces that constitute globalization-from-below is to reinstrumentalize the state to the extent that it redefines its role as mediating between the logic of capital and the priorities of its peoples, including their short-term and longer-term goals.65
But this tortuous language is hardly necessary. People’s movements have been on the streets throughout the last decade, trying to make both national and international state organisations responsive and accountable. The real question is how could this question ever have been marginalised in any serious radical project?
It sometimes seems that critical international theorists have left the state aside.66 Critics evacuate the harsher edges of world politics for the soft ‘non-realist’ territory of political economy, gender and civil society. No such refuge is possible, however. Economic and gender inequalities will not be solved so long as the repressive state is untamed. The new international relations will have to formulate its response the continuing role of organised violence in the world order.
A loose ‘governance without government’67 is too easily supported. While Booth is obviously right that all government is imperfect, the differences between 'relatively decent' and tyrannical government, both nationally and globally, are absolutely critical. Without addressing the nature of contemporary global state networks, and a serious discussion of the ways in which they can be developed into an adequate global authority framework sustained by and sustaining local democracies, we have hardly begun to fashion a new agenda.
‘Yesterday’s visions’ and the old radicalism
World events repeatedly thrust these issues into our faces, but in the wider public debate too, many – lacking an understanding of the new situation – fall back on old ways of thought. The idea of absolute state sovereignty is resurrected by many who should know better, to defend the autonomy of repressive, even genocidal states. Louse Arbour, retiring Chief Prosecutor of the International War Crimes Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, provided a terse comment on this move. ‘Since the creation of this Tribunal, the Rwanda Tribunal, the Rome statute’, she says, ‘… there is now a much more ambitious agenda: the one of peace with justice, where no one can hijack the concept of state sovereignty and use it to guarantee his own impunity. These are yesterday’s visions of a peaceful world.’68
That these are indeed ‘yesterday’s visions’ is clear from the selective way in which they are used. It is a curious anti-imperialism that attacks the so-called ‘imperialism of human rights’69 but provides the defence of sovereignty to the imperialism of genocidal oppression. 70 Something is wrong with the radical tradition, when as distinguished a representative as Edward Said could write of the Kosovo war that what he found ‘most distressing’ was the ‘destruction from the air’ wrought by American power71 – not the genocidal massacres by Serbian forces that prompted NATO's (admittedly problematic) response.
Said has reminded us recently of what Thompson called the ‘Natopolitan’ world, in which many intellectuals were indirectly on the payroll of the CIA.72 What he did not acknowledge was its Stalinist counterpart, in which intellectuals sold their souls to the KGB and the Stasi. And there was an anti-Cold War world, in which those who refused the choice of NATO and the Warsaw Pact elaborated their ideas. Although those of us in this intellectual third world turned down the lucre of the blocs, this did not guarantee lasting validity to our ideas.
In the new global era, many characteristic assumptions of the old anti-Cold War left appear increasingly as prejudices. A whole generation has not let go of a mindset, four elements of which are problematic in the new situation. Most fundamental is a residual Third Worldist ideology. According to this, Western, especially American, imperialism is the touchstone for all world politics. Said’s anachronistic conclusion about Kosovo was to ask: ‘When will the smaller, lesser, weaker peoples realize that this America is to be resisted at all costs, not pandered to or given in to naively?’73 There are strong criticisms to be made of American and NATO policies in Kosovo. However a systematic blindness lies behind the continuing belief that America is the principal problem, coupled with the failure to recognise the need for international action against genocide.74
From this viewpoint, non-Western states are potential sites of resistance, organisers of ‘underdeveloped political economies’75 which can contest the dominant form. While sovereignty in general may be regarded as a political form of capitalist social relations76, the sovereignty of non-Western states must be defended from Western power. Yet to support Serbian sovereignty over Kosovo, or Chinese over Tibet, gives sustenance to forms of colonial domination deeply mired in blood. Critics find themselves in an inversion of the double standard of which they accuse NATO: if it is right to support Timorese self-determination against Indonesian claims to sovereignty, how can the same right be denied to the Kosovans or Tibetans?77
Second, there are echoes of the intellectual left’s ambiguous attitudes to Communism itself. A residual affinity for post-Communist states makes NATO’s attack on rump Yugoslavia particularly shocking.78 Left-wing critics were especially offended by NATO’s sidelining of Russia, but ignored how the unstable and self-serving character of the Yeltsin government’s positions made it a unreliable partner. 79 Indeed Russia's imperial role in the former Soviet area, reflected in a reluctance to support international justice, makes it a problematic player, however necessary is its participation in European and world security systems.
Third, there is a rather pious attitude to the United Nations, seen as requiring a consensus of the world’s major states to act as a legitimate world centre. Thus leftwing critics were often disingenuous in their criticisms of NATO’s failure to seek UN authorisation – ignoring Russian and Chinese determination to veto any action against Yugoslavia, in the light of their own imperial repression in Chechnya, Tibet, etc. They also ignored, of course, the anachronistic character of the Security Council veto itself.
Finally, there is the generalised pacifism of anti-Cold War politics. To my mind, this is the element of this position with by far the greatest continuing salience. The horror at aerial bombardment has deep roots in modern history – for many older people based on childhood experience80, for others resonating from the nuclear threat. Objections to the use of airpower are compounded by complaints about ‘the fastidiousness articulated about the loss of American lives’, which Said was not alone in finding ‘positively revolting’.81
Nevertheless, this concern too often remains at the level of abstract criticism, and fails to specify the kinds of alternative power-projection that might address the dire situations of people like the Kosovans or Timorese. Indeed critics of bombing also often reject not only other forms of military power, but international political and legal interventions, as mere Western power-projection.82 A simple pacifism was only partially viable during the Cold War (even then there were reasonable demands for ‘alternative defence policies’). It does little to address the realities of global politics, in which a relatively modest use of military power may protect a threatened civilian population.
Underlying these specific positions, of course, is the continuing socialist critique of a capitalist world. Democratisation is also often seen as a new form of Western or American power.83 Ironically, this functionalist approach attributes too much power to the West, and too little to the movements that are forging global-democratic change. It is a very limited sort of socialist understanding that fails to grasp the potential of democracy to open up social reform. This socialism has not learnt the fundamental lesson of its twentieth-century failures: no genuine social change is possible without political democracy and individual freedom.
The new politics of international relations
The new politics of international relations require us, therefore, to go beyond the anti-imperialism of the intellectual left as well as of the semi-anarchist traditions of the academic discipline. We need to recognise three fundamental truths. First, in the twenty-first century people struggling for democratic liberties across the non-Western world are likely to make constant demands on our solidarity. Courageous academics, students and other intellectuals will be in the forefront of these movements. They deserve the unstinting support of intellectuals in the West. Second, the old international thinking in which democratic movements are seen as purely internal to states no longer carries conviction – despite the lingering nostalgia for it on both the American right and the anti-American left. The idea that global principles can and should be enforced worldwide is firmly established in the minds of hundreds of millions of people. This consciousness will a powerful force in the coming decades. Third, global state-formation is a fact. International institutions are being extended, and (like it or not) they have a symbiotic relation with the major centre of state power, the increasingly internationalised Western conglomerate. The success of the global-democratic revolutionary wave depends first on how well it is consolidated in each national context – but second, on how thoroughly it is embedded in international networks of power, at the centre of which, inescapably, is the West.
From these political fundamentals, strategic propositions can be derived. First, democratic movements cannot regard non-governmental organisations and civil society as ends in themselves. They must aim to civilise local states, rendering them open, accountable and pluralistic, and curtail the arbitrary and violent exercise of power. Second, democratising local states is not a separate task from integrating them into global and often Western-centred networks. Reproducing isolated local centres of power carries with it classic dangers of states as centres of war.84 Embedding global norms and integrating new state centres with global institutional frameworks are essential to the control of violence. (To put this another way: the proliferation of purely national democracies is not a recipe for peace.)
Third, while the global revolution cannot do without the West and the UN, neither can it rely on them unconditionally. We need these power networks, but we need to tame them too, to make their messy bureaucracies enormously more accountable and sensitive to the needs of society worldwide. This will involve the kind of ‘cosmopolitan democracy’ argued for by David Held85. It will also require us to advance a global social-democratic agenda, to address the literally catastrophic scale of world social inequalities. This is not a separate problem: social and economic reform is an essential ingredient of alternatives to warlike and genocidal power; these feed off and reinforce corrupt and criminal political economies. Fourth, if we need the global-Western state, if we want to democratise it and make its institutions friendlier to global peace and justice, we cannot be indifferent to its strategic debates. It matters to develop international political interventions, legal institutions and robust peacekeeping as strategic alternatives to bombing our way through zones of crisis. It matters that international intervention supports pluralist structures, rather than ratifying Bosnia-style apartheid.86
As political intellectuals in the West, we need to have our eyes on the ball at our feet, but we also need to raise them to the horizon. We need to grasp the historic drama that is transforming worldwide relationships between people and state, as well as between state and state. We need to think about how the turbulence of the global revolution can be consolidated in democratic, pluralist, international networks of both social relations and state authority. We cannot be simply optimistic about this prospect. Sadly, it will require repeated violent political crises to push Western and other governments towards the required restructuring of world institutions.87 What I have outlined is a huge challenge; but the alternative is to see the global revolution splutter into partial defeat, or degenerate into new genocidal wars - perhaps even nuclear conflicts. The practical challenge for all concerned citizens, and the theoretical and analytical challenges for students of international relations and politics, are intertwined. 

Vote negative to embrace a gradual rethinking of borders. 

A gradual approach towards opening the border is imperative---only laying the groundwork for open borders gradually can create a sustainable commitment to openness  
Appel 9 – Jacob M. Appel, Adjunct Assistant Professor of Community Health at Brown University, May 4, 2009, “The Ethical Case for an Open Immigration Policy,” online: http://www.opposingviews.com/i/the-ethical-case-for-an-open-immigration-policy
As the issue of immigration returns to our national agenda, policy makers should remember that there is a third alternative to either deportation or amnesty for so-called “illegal” aliens: a return to the “open door” policy that built our nation. I do not have the professional expertise to speak to the economics of such an approach—although my personal intuition tells me that new immigrants will generate jobs rather than consume them—but the ethics of open borders are strikingly clear. Treating human beings differently, simply because they were born on the opposite side of a national boundary, is hard to justify under any mainstream philosophical, religious or ethical theory.
That is not to say that all “birthrights” are unjust. For example, while being born into a particular family is the result of chance, the right to inherit some of one’s parents’ property serves useful and meaningful social purposes—such as encouraging mothers and fathers to work and save for their offspring. The “birthright” of nationality serves no such social purpose. In contrast, the freedom to travel and to settle where one wishes, in pursuit of political freedom or economic opportunity, is among the most basic of human rights. I am grateful that my grandfather was admitted to this country, fleeing Belgium in the days before World War II. I am horrified by the sealed borders that prevented boatloads other Jewish refugees from following him. From an ethical point of view, however, it is difficult to distinguish such political refugees—to whom we do grant asylum today—from the millions of economic refugees who seek freedom from abject poverty.The principal difference between the Irish peasants who once fled the potato blight on coffin ships, and the desperate Haitian rafters that our navy forcibly repatriates today, is bad timing.
Any reasonable “open door” immigration policy should still exclude those who pose a danger to our current citizenry: would-be terrorists, wanted felons, tuberculosis patients unwilling to accept treatment, etc. From an ethical standpoint, a liberal democracy might also restrict immigration should newcomers threaten to use the political process to dismantle existing freedoms—if, for example, ten million advocates of Taliban-style fundamentalism were to demand entrance into Luxembourg. Considering the size and diversity of our nation, any meaningful threat to American democracy from immigrants seems highly far-fetched.
This is not a policy proposal. I acknowledge that developing a functional, open borders regime could take several years, and might even require the progressive elevation of existing immigration quotas over time until the point where supply exceeded demand. That does not mean that open borders should not be the long-term goal of any ethical immigration policy. The modern version of Martin Luther King Jr’s “dream” is that any child, born into the poorest slums of Africa, Asia or Latin America, should have a right to claim those same freedoms and opportunities of American citizenship that far too many of us take for granted. In an era when we are divided in so many ways as a nation, this should be the sort of visionary policy to which all people—religious and secular, traditional and progressive, Native Americans and descendants of immigrants—can say, Yes We Can!  

Case
The aff’s claim to emancipation collapses the real material difference between our position as debaters and oppressed individuals for whom resistance is not a simple language-game---their deployment of an unproblematic posture of victimization spotlights the aff’s righteousness while robbing the oppressed of protest
Chow 93—Anne Firor Scott Professor of Literature at Trinity College of Arts and Sciences, Duke University (Rey, Writing Diaspora, 11-5)
Until the very end of the novel, Jane is always excluded from every available form of social power. Her survival seems to depend on renouncing what power might come to her as teacher, mistress, cousin, heiress, or missionary's wife. She repeatedly flees from such forms of inclusion in the field of power, as if her status as an exemplary subject, like her authority as narrator, depends entirely on her claim to a kind of truth which can only be made from a position of powerlessness. By creating such an unlovely heroine and subjecting her to one form of harassment after another, Brontë demonstrates the power of words alone. 18¶ This reading of Jane Eyre highlights her not simply as the female underdog who is often identified by feminist and Marxist critics, but as the intellectual who acquires power through a moral rectitude that was to become the flip side of Western imperialism's ruthlessness. Lying at the core of Anglo¬American liberalism, this moral rectitude would accompany many territorial and economic conquests overseas with a firm sense of social mission. When Jane Eyre went to the colonies in the nineteenth century, she turned into the Christian missionary. It is this understanding—that Brontë's depiction of a socially marginalized English woman is, in terms of ideological production, fully complicit with England's empire¬building ambition rather than opposed to it—that prompted Gayatri Spivak to read Jane Eyre as a text in the service of imperialism. Referring to Brontë's treatment of the "madwoman" Bertha Mason, the white Jamaican Creole character, Spivak charges Jane Eyre for, precisely, its humanism, in which the "native subject" is not created as an animal but as "the object of what might be termed the terrorism of¶ 12¶ the categorical imperative." This kind of creation is imperialism's use/travesty of the Kantian metaphysical demand to "make the heathen into a human so that he can be treated as an end in himself." 19 In the twentieth century, as Europe's former colonies became independent, Jane Eyre became the Maoist. Michel de Certeau describes the affinity between her two major reincarnations, one religious and the other political, this way:¶ The place that was formerly occupied by the Church or Churches vis¬à¬vis the established powers remains recognizable, over the past two centuries, in the functioning of the opposition known as leftist….¶ There is vis¬à¬vis the established order, a relationship between the Churches that defended an other world and the parties of the left which, since the nineteenth century, have promoted a different future. In both cases, similar functional characteristics can be discerned….20¶ The Maoist retains many of Jane's awesome features, chief of which are a protestant passion to turn powerlessness into "truth" and an idealist intolerance of those who may think differently from her. Whereas the great Orientalist blames the living "third world" natives for the loss of the ancient non¬Western civilization, his loved object, the Maoist applauds the same natives for personifying and fulfilling her ideals. For the Maoist in the 1970s, the mainland Chinese were, in spite of their "backwardness," a puritanical alternative to the West in human form—a dream come true.¶ In the 1980s and 1990s, however, the Maoist is disillusioned to watch the China they sanctified crumble before their eyes. This is the period in which we hear disapproving criticisms of contemporary Chinese people for liking Western pop music and consumer culture, or for being overly interested in sex. In a way that makes her indistinguishable from what at first seems a political enemy, the Orientalist, the Maoist now mourns the loss of her loved object—Socialist China—by pointing angrily at living "third world" natives. For many who have built their careers on the vision of Socialist China, the grief is tremendous. In the "cultural studies" of the American academy in the 1990s, the Maoist is reproducing with prowess. We see this in the way¶ 13¶ terms such as "oppression," "victimization," and "subalternity" are now being used. Contrary to Orientalist disdain for contemporary native cultures of the non¬West, the Maoist turns precisely the "disdained'' other into the object of his/her study and, in some cases, identification. In a mixture of admiration and moralism, the Maoist sometimes turns all people from non¬Western cultures into a generalized "subaltern" that is then used to flog an equally generalized "West." 21¶ Because the representation of "the other" as such ignores (1) the class and intellectual hierarchies within these other cultures, which are usually as elaborate as those in the West, and (2) the discursive power relations structuring the Maoist's mode of inquiry and valorization, it produces a way of talking in which notions of lack, subalternity, victimization, and so forth are drawn upon indiscriminately, often with the intention of spotlighting the speaker's own sense of alterity and political righteousness. A comfortably wealthy white American intellectual I know claimed that he was a "third world intellectual," citing as one of his credentials his marriage to a Western European woman of part¬Jewish heritage? a professor of English complained about being "victimized" by the structured time at an Ivy League institution, meaning that she needed to be on time for classes? a graduate student of upper¬class background from one of the world's poorest countries told his American friends that he was of poor peasant stock in order to authenticate his identity as a radical "third world" representative? male and female academics across the U.S. frequently say they were "raped" when they report experiences of professional frustration and conflict. Whether sincere or delusional, such cases of self¬dramatization all take the route of self¬subalternization, which has increasingly become the assured means to authority and power. What these intellectuals are doing is robbing the terms of oppression of their critical and oppositional import, and thus depriving the oppressed of even the vocabulary of protest and rightful demand. The oppressed, whose voices we seldom hear, are robbed twice—the first time of their economic chances, the second time of their language, which is now no longer distinguishable from those of us who have had our consciousnesses "raised."¶ In their analysis of the relation between violence and representation, Armstrong and Tennenhouse write: "The idea of violence ¶ 14¶ as representation is not an easy one for most academics to accept. It implies that whenever we speak for someone else we are inscribing her with our own (implicitly masculine) idea of order." 22 At present, this process of "inscribing" often means not only that we "represent" certain historic others because they are/were ''oppressed"? it often means that there is interest in representation only when what is represented can in some way be seen as lacking. Even though the Maoist is usually contemptuous of Freudian psychoanalysis because it is "bourgeois," her investment in oppression and victimization fully partakes of the Freudian and Lacanian notions of "lack." By attributing "lack," the Maoist justifies the "speaking for someone else" that Armstrong and Tennenhouse call "violence as representation."¶ As in the case of Orientalism, which does not necessarily belong only to those who are white, the Maoist does not have to be racially "white" either. The phrase "white guilt" refers to a type of discourse which continues to position power and lack against each other, while the narrator of that discourse, like Jane Eyre, speaks with power but identifies with powerlessness. This is how even those who come from privilege more often than not speak from/of/as its "lack." What the Maoist demonstrates is a circuit of productivity that draws its capital from others' deprivation while refusing to acknowledge its own presence as endowed. With the material origins of her own discourse always concealed, the Maoist thus speaks as if her charges were a form of immaculate conception.¶ The difficulty facing us, it seems to me, is no longer simply the "first world" Orientalist who mourns the rusting away of his treasures, but also students from privileged backgrounds Western and non¬Western, who conform behaviorally in every respect with the elitism of their social origins (e.g., through powerful matrimonial alliances, through pursuit of fame, or through a contemptuous arrogance toward fellow students) but who nonetheless proclaim dedication to "vindicating the subalterns." My point is not that they should be blamed for the accident of their birth, nor that they cannot marry rich, pursue fame, or even be arrogant. Rather, it is that they choose to see in others' powerlessness an idealized image of themselves and refuse to hear in the dissonance between the content and manner of their speech their own complicity with violence. Even though these descendents of the Maoist may be quick to point¶ 15¶ out the exploitativeness of Benjamin Disraeli's "The East is a career," 23 they remain blind to their own exploitativeness as they make "the East" their career. How do we intervene in the productivity of this overdetermined circuit?

Critical theory fails as a mechanism of liberatory politics – the top critical theorists agree.
Eakin, 3 (Emily, writing for the New York Times, “The Latest Theory Is That Theory Doesn’t Matter,” New York Times, 4/19/03, http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/19/arts/19CRIT.html)
These are uncertain times for literary scholars. The era of big theory is over. The grand paradigms that swept through humanities departments in the 20th century — psychoanalysis, structuralism, Marxism, deconstruction, post-colonialism — have lost favor or been abandoned. Money is tight. And the leftist politics with which literary theorists have traditionally been associated have taken a beating. In the latest sign of mounting crisis, on April 11 the editors of Critical Inquiry, academe's most prestigious theory journal, convened the scholarly equivalent of an Afghan-style loya jirga. They invited more than two dozen of America's professorial elite, including Henry Louis Gates Jr., Homi Bhabha, Stanley Fish and Fredric Jameson, to the University of Chicago for what they called "an unprecedented meeting of the minds," an unusual two-hour public symposium on the future of theory. Understandably, expectations were high. More than 500 people, mostly students and faculty, squeezed into a lecture hall to hear what the mandarins had to say, while latecomers made do with a live video feed set up in the lobby. In his opening remarks, W. J. T. Mitchell, the journal's editor and a professor of English and art history at Chicago, set an upbeat tone for the proceedings. "We want to be the Starship Enterprise of criticism and theory," he told the audience. But any thought that this would be a gleeful strategy session with an eye toward extending theory's global reach, or an impassioned debate over the merits of, say, Derrida and Lacan, was quickly dispelled. When John Comaroff, a professor of anthropology and sociology at Chicago who was serving as the event's moderator, turned the floor over to the panelists, for several moments no one said a word. Then a student in the audience spoke up. What good is criticism and theory, he asked, if "we concede in fact how much more important the actions of Noam Chomsky are in the world than all the writings of critical theorists combined?" After all, he said, Mr. Fish had recently published an essay in Critical Inquiry arguing that philosophy didn't matter at all. Behind a table at the front of the room, Mr. Fish shook his head. "I think I'll let someone else answer the question," he said. So Sander L. Gilman, a professor of liberal arts and sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago, replied instead. "I would make the argument that most criticism — and I would include Noam Chomsky in this — is a poison pill," he said. "I think one must be careful in assuming that intellectuals have some kind of insight. In fact, if the track record of intellectuals is any indication, not only have intellectuals been wrong almost all of the time, but they have been wrong in corrosive and destructive ways." Mr. Fish nodded approvingly. "I like what that man said," he said. "I wish to deny the effectiveness of intellectual work. And especially, I always wish to counsel people against the decision to go into the academy because they hope to be effective beyond it." During the remainder of the session, the only panelist to venture a defense of theory — or mention a literary genre — was Mr. Bhabha. "There are a number of people around the table here and a number of people in the audience, in fact most of you here are evidence that intellectual work has its place and its uses," he insisted. "Even a poem in its own oblique way is deeply telling of the lives of the world we exist in. You can have poems that are intimately linked with political oppositional movements, poems that actually draw together people in acts of resistance." But no one spoke up to endorse this claim. In fact, for a conference officially devoted to theory, theory itself got very little airtime. For more than an hour, the panelists bemoaned the war in Iraq, the Bush administration, the ascendancy of the right-wing press and the impotence of the left. Afterward, Mr. Gates, who arrived late because he had been attending a conference in Wisconsin, said: "For a moment, I thought I was in the wrong room. I thought we would be talking about academic jargon. Instead, it was Al Qaeda and Iraq — not that there's anything wrong with that." Finally, a young man with dreadlocks who said he was a graduate student from Jamaica asked, "So is theory simply just a nice, simple intellectual exercise, or something that should be transformative?" Several speakers weighed in before Mr. Gates stood up. As far as he could tell, he said, theory had never directly liberated anyone. "Maybe I'm too young," he said. "I really didn't see it: the liberation of people of color because of deconstruction or poststructuralism." If theory's political utility is this dubious, why did the theorists spend so much time talking about current events? Catharine R. Stimpson, a panelist and dean of the Graduate School of Arts and Science at New York University, offered one, well, theory. "This particular group of intellectuals," she said, "has a terror of being politically irrelevant."

Metaphysical claims are non-verifiable abstractions fail to understand or solve specific instances of atrocity. Their link analysis proves their rose-colored lenses of universal theory application.
Fish, 3 (Stanley, Davidson-Kahn Distinguished University Professor of Humanities and Law @ Florida International University College of Law, “Truth but No Consequences: Why Philosophy Doesn’t Matter,” Critical Inquiry, 29, Spring, pp. 389-417)
That’s the first half of Kramer’s argument (and mine). The second half is simply, or not so simply, the flip side. If metaphysical theses and positions do not flow from mundane utterances and actions, the formulation by an actor of a metaphysical thesis commits him to no particular form of mundane utterance or action, nor does it rule out any form of mundane utterance or action. It has more than occasionally been said that the way one will behave in particular local contexts will be at least in part a function of one’s metaphysical commitments or anticommitments. Thus we are told on one side that those who make antifoundationalist arguments—arguments asserting the unavailability of independent grounds for the settling of factual or moral disputes—cannot without contradiction assert their views strongly or be trusted to mean what they say (on the model of the old saw “if there is no God, then everything is permitted”); and we are told on the other side that those who make foundational arguments—arguments identifying general and universal standards of judgment and measurement— are inflexible, incapable of responding to or even registering the nuances of particular contexts, and committed to the maintenance of the status quo. Kramer responds (and again I am with him) by warning against the confusion of two levels of consideration and against the mistake (resulting from the confusion) of drawing a direct line from one to the other. It is a mistake because on one level—the level of metaphysical or general propositions such as “all things are socially constructed” or “all things are presided over by a just and benevolent God”—the point is to describe the underlying bases of reality, those first principles that rather than arising from particulars confer on particulars their shape and meaning. Such principles or basic theses or all-embracing doctrines are, Kramer says, “ultimate in their reach and are thus fully detached from any specific circumstances and contexts.” 4 It is because they are fully detached from specific circumstances— that is how they are derived, by abstracting away from specifics—that metaphysical doctrines like the social constructedness of everything or the God-dependent status of everything can be neither confirmed nor disconfirmed by specifics: A metaphysical view can hardly undergo either confirmation or refutation through empirical methods. Precisely because a metaphysical doctrine must abstract itself from specifics . . . in an effort to probe what undergirds all specifics of any sort, it retains its lesser or greater cogency regardless of the ways any specific facts . . . have turned out. 5 The cogency it does have for those persuaded of it is a philosophical or theoretical cogency, a cogency fashioned in the course of philosophical argument where the typical questions are, What is the nature of reality? or, Where do facts come from? questions the answers to which will not be found in the observable facts; when the answers are found (to the satisfaction of one or more of the participants) the observable facts will have been explained (at least within the framework of particular general theses), but they will not have generated or confirmed or falsified the perspective that explains them. For example, the doctrine that a benevolent God presides over all things will not be disconfirmed by the existence of poverty, war, oppression, injustice, genocide, and so on; for it is precisely the claim of the doctrine to account for these and other facts in its own terms (which typically will include attendant doctrines like the doctrine of original sin and the doctrine of the mysteriousness of God’s ways), and that claim will be made good (if it is) by abstract theoretical arguments and not by empirical investigation. Someone defending the benevolence of God in the face of the Nazi Holocaust will be trafficking in theological concepts like sin, redemption, retribution, suffering, patience, the last days, and so on. He will not be considering whether its perpetrators were the unique products of a virulent German anti-Semitism or exemplars of a bureaucratic mentality found everywhere in the modern world; he will not be poring over diagrams of gas chambers or assessing the effects either of resistance movements or of the failure to resist. His is a thesis not about how a particular thing has happened but about how anything—of which this particular is an instantiation and an example—happens, and happens necessarily. His job is not to precipitate an explanation of the event out of the examination of documents and other sources but to bring the fact of the event into line with an explanation already assumed and firmly in place. (The master teacher of this skill is Augustine who, in his On Christian Doctrine, advises those who find biblical passages that seem subversive of the faith to subject those passages to “diligent scrutiny until an interpretation contributing to the reign of charity is produced.”)6 He is, in short, a theologian, maintaining and elaborating an ultimate perspective, and not a historian who has set himself the disciplinary task of relating a historical, mundane occurrence to its contingent and multiple causes. (I know that there are those who argue that the Holocaust is not an appropriate object of ordinary historical analysis; but this merely means that they have switched jobs and become philosopher/theologians rather than historians.)
the ballot is not a tool of emancipation, but rather a tool of revenge---it serves as a palliative that denies their investment in oppression as a means by which to claim the power of victory
Enns 12—Professor of Philosophy at McMaster University (Dianne, The Violence of Victimhood, 28-30)

Guilt and Ressentiment We need to think carefully about what is at stake here. Why is this perspective appealing, and what are its effects? At first glance, the argument appears simple: white, privileged women, in their theoretical and practical interventions, must take into account the experiences and conceptual work of women who are less fortunate and less powerful, have fewer resources, and are therefore more subject to systemic oppression. The lesson of feminism's mistakes in the civil rights era is that this “mainstream” group must not speak for other women. But such a view must be interrogated. Its effects, as I have argued, include a veneration of the other, moral currency for the victim, and an insidious competition for victimhood. We will see in later chapters that these effects are also common in situations of conflict where the stakes are much higher. ¶ We witness here a twofold appeal: otherness discourse in feminism appeals both to the guilt of the privileged and to the resentment, or ressentiment, of the other. Suleri's allusion to “embarrassed privilege” exposes the operation of guilt in the misunderstanding that often divides Western feminists from women in the developing world, or white women from women of color. The guilt of those who feel themselves deeply implicated in and responsible for imperialism merely reinforces an imperialist benevolence, polarizes us unambiguously by locking us into the categories of victim and perpetrator, and blinds us to the power and agency of the other. Many fail to see that it is embarrassing and insulting for those identified as victimized others not to be subjected to the same critical intervention and held to the same demands of moral and political responsibility. Though we are by no means equal in power and ability, wealth and advantage, we are all collectively responsible for the world we inhabit in common. The condition of victimhood does not absolve one of moral responsibility. I will return to this point repeatedly throughout this book.¶ Mohanty's perspective ignores the possibility that one can become attached to one's subordinated status, which introduces the concept of ressentiment, the focus of much recent interest in the injury caused by racism and colonization. Nietzsche describes ressentiment as the overwhelming sentiment of “slave morality,” the revolt that begins when ressentiment itself becomes creative and gives birth to values. 19 The sufferer in this schema seeks out a cause for his suffering—“ a guilty agent who is susceptible to suffering”— someone on whom he can vent his affects and so procure the anesthesia necessary to ease the pain of injury. The motivation behind ressentiment, according to Nietzsche, is the desire “to deaden, by means of a more violent emotion of any kind, a tormenting, secret pain that is becoming unendurable, and to drive it out of consciousness at least for the moment: for that one requires an affect, as savage an affect as possible, and, in order to excite that, any pretext at all.” 20 In its contemporary manifestation, Wendy Brown argues that ressentiment acts as the “righteous critique of power from the perspective of the injured,” which “delimits a specific site of blame for suffering by constituting sovereign subjects and events as responsible for the ‘injury’ of social subordination.” Identities are fixed in an economy of perpetrator and victim, in which revenge, rather than power or emancipation, is sought for the injured, making the perpetrator hurt as the sufferer does. 21¶ 30¶ Such a concept is useful for understanding why an ethics of absolute responsibility to the other appeals to the victimized. Brown remarks that, for Nietzsche, the source of the triumph of a morality rooted in ressentiment is the denial that it has any access to power or contains a will to power. Politicized identities arise as both product of and reaction to this condition; the reaction is a substitute for action— an “imaginary revenge,” Nietzsche calls it. Suffering then becomes a social virtue at the same time that the sufferer attempts to displace his suffering onto another. The identity created by ressentiment, Brown explains, becomes invested in its own subjection not only through its discovery of someone to blame, and a new recognition and revaluation of that subjection, but also through the satisfaction of revenge. 22¶ The outcome of feminism's attraction to theories of difference and otherness is thus deeply contentious. First, we witness the further reification reification of the very oppositions in question and a simple reversal of the focus from the same to the other. This observation is not new and has been made by many critics of feminism, but it seems to have made no serious impact on mainstream feminist scholarship or teaching practices in women's studies programs. Second, in the eagerness to rectify the mistakes of “white, middle-class, liberal, western” feminism, the other has been uncritically exalted, which has led in turn to simplistic designations of marginal, “othered” status and, ultimately, a competition for victimhood. Ultimately, this approach has led to a new moral code in which ethics is equated with the responsibility of the privileged Western woman, while moral immunity is granted to the victimized other. Ranjana Khanna describes this operation aptly when she writes that in the field of transnational feminism, the reification of the other has produced “separate ethical universes” in which the privileged experience paralyzing guilt and the neocolonized, crippling resentment. The only “overarching imperative” is that one does not comment on another's ethical context. An ethical response turns out to be a nonresponse. 23 Let us turn now to an exploration of this third outcome.

We should hear stories of victimization and acknowledge the multiplicities of privilege that exist within our identities---but you should not use your ballot to affirm them unless they are tied to a political proposition in terms of the resolution, shifting language from "I am" to the language of "I want” is crucial to prevent a psychology of constant conflict
Minow 96 (Martha Prof of Law and Dean @ Harvard University, “SPEECH: Not Only for Myself: Identity, Politics, and Law,” Oregon Law Review 75 Or. L. Rev. 647 Lexis)
To identify fluidity, change, border-crossing, and unstable categories is not to deny the real force and power that some people have accorded group labels and categories, to the clear detriment of others. 59 What else could explain a regime that, in historian Barbara Fields's words, "considers a white woman capable of giving birth to a black child but denies that a black woman can give birth to a white child"? 60 As another historian, David Hollinger, puts it in his recent book, Post-Ethnic America, "Racism is real, but races are not." 61 The power to create groups and oppress them is real, but the rationale for those groups or for the assignment of members is not. Benedict Anderson's book Imagined Communities artfully traces the creation of nations as official eff- *663 orts by dynastic regimes to control workers and peasants; in the process, colonial powers created census categories that in turn stamped racial categories to replace previous religious, status, and anonymous identities. 62 Thomas Scheff argues that these cognitive maps of difference join with emotions of pride and shame to fuel prejudice and oppression. 63 In this view, group-based differences need not have a foundation in biology, or anything but historic oppressions, to make them real enough to warrant recognition and mobilization. 64 We do not need refined understandings of identities to acknowledge how much people in power have hurt others along lines producing the harsh reality of identities. The Nazis resolved the question of who is a Jew in the most definitive way. 65 Similarly, "black means being identified by a white racist society as black." 66 Thus, Catharine MacKinnon locates gender difference not in biology but historic oppression when she asks, "Can you imagine elevating one half of a population and denigrating the other half *664 and producing a population in which everyone is the same?" 67 Judith Butler argues that the meaning of anyone's gender is troubled and unfixed except by exercises of convention and authority. 68 Marilyn Frye and Peggy MacIntosh, among others, have detailed the ways in which part of the comforts enjoyed by those with more power is the distance from other people's pain and the seeming invisibility of their own privileges. 69 Empirical studies of individuals' self-understandings highlight the impact of societal views about groups and discrimination by more powerful groups. 70 Regardless of the theoretical arguments against essentialism and for intersectionality, many people believe and perceive that their identities are bound up with experiences of subordination along simplistic group lines. 71 Experiences of mistreatment along group lines influence how individuals view people from their own groups, and people in other groups. Todd Gitlin's book, which is chiefly an attack - from the progressive left - on identity politics as a distraction from deeper issues of poverty and economic dislocation, nonetheless asserts confidently that "blacks are more likely than whites to doubt the promise of America; women more likely than men to care about children and fear rape; Jews more likely than Buddhists to study the Holocaust." 72 The racial divide in public responses to the verdict in the murder trial of O.J. Simpson is only one recent confirmation *665 of this perception. 73 Focusing on historical and ongoing oppression cannot, however, fully rehabilitate identity politics. 74 The problem here is less incoherence than the personal, psychological, and political costs of engaging in politics around group identifications. Individuals' experiences of membership in more than one group may produce complicated responses to discrimination. For example, a study suggests that some young African-American males develop an exaggerated conception of male power and devaluation of females, apparently as a coping response to racial and economic disadvantage. 75 Privilege and oppression both can mark a person's experience, even simultaneously. Simply validating experience affords no guarantee of ending a person's own role in dominating others. Mobilizing African-American males is a current development in identity politics, as in the Million Man March, but that strategy risks splintering men and women who could be working together. 76 That strategy also could seem to condone sexist attitudes that undermine the vision of equality and human liberation behind identity politics. Here, then, is a place where the errors of essentialism, the insights of intersectionality, and the basic incoherence of group identities run up against the case of adopting categories that were never designed to help those assigned to them. Mobilizing in resistance to oppression based on a group trait may strengthen that oppression and the conceptions that it unleashes. As one observer recently put it: This politics of being, essentializing or fixing who we are, is in actuality often an inversion or continuation of ascribed colonial identities, though stated as "difference." The stereotypi- *666 cal contents of Africanness or Indianness, for example, are in the end colonial constructs, harbouring the colonizer's gaze. We look at ourselves with his eyes and find ourselves both adorned and wanting. 77 The internalized sense of inferiority and the assumption that human relationships must be marked by hierarchy and domination are legacies of oppression. A piece of the oppressor, then, lies within each person, as Franz Fanon, Albert Memmi, George W. Hegel, and so many observers recount. 78 Paulo Freire has argued that the true focus of revolutionary change is never merely the oppressive situation, but also the piece of the oppressor which is implanted within each person and which knows only the oppressor's tactics and relationships. 79 This insight undergirds Jacques Ranciere's observation that emancipation is never the simple assertion of an identity; it is always, at the same time, the denial of an identity given by the ruling order. 80 Efforts to reclaim identities produced by oppression can express creative resistance, 81 but it is not clear they can extirpate either the specific category's origins or the reductionism of categorical thinking. Besides strengthening the categories and methods of oppression, identity politics may freeze people in pain and also fuel their dependence on their own victim status as a source of meaning. Wendy Brown has written powerfully about these dangers; she argues that identity-based claims re-enact subordination along the lines of historical subjugation. 82 This danger arises, in her view, not only because of the ready acceptance of those very *667 lines of distinction and oppression in a society that has used them, but also because people become invested in their pain and suffering, or in her terms, their "wounded attachments." 83 She writes: Politicized identity, premised on exclusion and fueled by the humiliation and suffering imposed by its historically structured impotence in the context of a discourse of sovereign individuals, is as likely to seek generalized political paralysis, to feast on generalized political impotence, as it is to seek its own or collective liberation through empowerment. Indeed, it is more likely to punish and reproach ... than to find venues of self-affirming action. 84 Brown urges efforts to shape a democratic political culture that would actually hear the stories of victimization while inciting victims to triumph over their experiences through political action. 85 Toward this end, she proposes shifting the focus from identity toward a focus on desires and wants, from the language of "I am" to the language of "I want." 86 In this way, perhaps politics could move beyond the artificially fixed and frozen identity positions and blame games toward expressive and engaged political action, but Brown has yet to sketch a language of solidarity rather than individual self-interest. Therapeutic understandings of trauma and recovery support this call to shift from what an individual lacks to what an individual, with others, can envision and seek. Judith Herman's work on child abuse, incest, rape, and war-time trauma emphasizes the crucial importance to individual psychological health of recovering memories and learning to speak about atrocity. 87 She also stresses the significance of moving on through mourning, acting *668 and fighting back, and reconnecting with others. 88 Identity politics risks directing all energy and time to pain without moving through recovery, action, and reconnection with larger communities. There remains a crucial place for anger and recrimination, as well as forgiveness and reconciliation. 89 But when identity politics takes the form of claiming excuses due to past victimization, it even makes it difficult for others to remember and acknowledge past wrongdoings and harms. 90

Tournament: Cal | Round: 5 | Opponent: Juan Diego CW | Judge: Zach Harbaeur
1NC

Obama’s political capital is effectively holding off passage of the Iran sanctions bill now – but it’s still a fight
Delmore 2/5/14 (Erin, Political Analyst @ MSNBC, "Democrats split over Syria, Iran," http://www.msnbc.com/all/democrats-split-over-syria-iran)
Over strong objections from the president, 16 Senate Democrats support a bill that would impose new sanctions on Iran should the country fail to reach a permanent agreement with international negotiators to roll back its nuclear program. Those senators, along with 43 Republicans, argue that tough sanctions brought Iran to the negotiating table in the first place and further pressure would flex American muscle in the 6-month talks toward crafting a permanent solution. The bill drew support from Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y, and Harry Reid, D-Nev., both close allies of Obama’s but also leading supporters of policies favoring Israel. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, America’s most powerful pro-Israel advocacy group, has lobbied members of Congress from both parties to support the sanctions.¶ Other Democrats are siding with the Obama administration, which argues that imposing new sanctions damaged “good-faith” negotiations while empowering Iran’s hard-liners rooting for the talks to fail. (A National Security Council spokeswoman charged last month that the sanctions bill could end negotiations and bring the U.S. closer to war.) ¶ The Senate bill has been losing steam ever since the White House ratcheted up pressure on Senate Democrats to abandon the it. Introduced in December by Democrat Robert Menendez, D-N.J. and Sen. Mark Kirk. R-Ill., the legislation was backed by 59 members – but now Senate leaders say they will hold off bringing the legislation to a vote until the six-month negotiation process ends.¶ Adam Sharon, a spokesman for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which Menendez chairs, said the New Jersey Senator stands behind the bill that bears his name. ¶ Menendez and 58 other senators support the bill, Sharon said. “It’s his bill, three or four senators say they wouldn’t call for a vote now. His position has been, having a bill, having this in place is an extremely effective and necessary tool when negotiating with the Iranians that we need to have to avoid Iran crossing the nuclear threshold. He stands behind this bill and the whole essence of the bill is to have sanctions in waiting, but you have to move on them now to make it happen.”¶ The movement is still alive in the House with enough votes to pass, despite a letter signed by at least 70 Democrats opposing the measure, and a letter of criticism by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Obama reiterated in last week’s State of the Union address a promise to veto any attempt to impose new sanctions on Iran.
Plan drains PC.
Shear, 13
(Michael, NYT White house correspondent, 5/5,  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/05/world/americas/in-latin-america-us-shifts-focus-from-drug-war-to-economy.html?pagewanted=all)

Last week, Mr. Obama returned to capitals in Latin America with a vastly different message. Relationships with countries racked by drug violence and organized crime should focus more on economic development and less on the endless battles against drug traffickers and organized crime capos that have left few clear victors. The countries, Mexico in particular, need to set their own course on security, with the United States playing more of a backing role. That approach runs the risk of being seen as kowtowing to governments more concerned about their public image than the underlying problems tarnishing it. Mexico, which is eager to play up its economic growth, has mounted an aggressive effort to play down its crime problems, going as far as to encourage the news media to avoid certain slang words in reports. “The problem will not just go away,” said Michael Shifter, president of the Inter-American Dialogue. “It needs to be tackled head-on, with a comprehensive strategy that includes but goes beyond stimulating economic growth and alleviating poverty. “Obama becomes vulnerable to the charge of downplaying the region’s overriding issue, and the chief obstacle to economic progress,” he added. “It is fine to change the narrative from security to economics as long as the reality on the ground reflects and fits with the new story line.” Administration officials insist that Mr. Obama remains cleareyed about the security challenges, but the new emphasis corresponds with a change in focus by the Mexican government. The new Mexican president, Enrique Peña Nieto, took office in December vowing to reduce the violence that exploded under the militarized approach to the drug war adopted by his predecessor, Felipe Calderón. That effort left about 60,000 Mexicans dead and appears not to have significantly damaged the drug-trafficking industry. In addition to a focus on reducing violence, which some critics have interpreted as taking a softer line on the drug gangs, Mr. Peña Nieto has also moved to reduce American involvement in law enforcement south of the border. With friction and mistrust between American and Mexican law enforcement agencies growing, Mr. Obama suggested that the United States would no longer seek to dominate the security agenda. “It is obviously up to the Mexican people to determine their security structures and how it engages with other nations, including the United States,” he said, standing next to Mr. Peña Nieto on Thursday in Mexico City. “But the main point I made to the president is that we support the Mexican government’s focus on reducing violence, and we look forward to continuing our good cooperation in any way that the Mexican government deems appropriate.” In some ways, conceding leadership of the drug fight to Mexico hews to a guiding principle of Mr. Obama’s foreign policy, in which American supremacy is played down, at least publicly, in favor of a multilateral approach. But that philosophy could collide with the concerns of lawmakers in Washington, who have expressed frustration with what they see as a lack of clarity in Mexico’s security plans. And security analysts say the entrenched corruption in Mexican law enforcement has long clouded the partnership with their American counterparts. Putting Mexico in the driver’s seat on security marks a shift in a balance of power that has always tipped to the United States and, analysts said, will carry political risk as Congress negotiates an immigration bill that is expected to include provisions for tighter border security. “If there is a perception in the U.S. Congress that security cooperation is weakening, that could play into the hands of those who oppose immigration reform,” said Vanda Felbab-Brown, a counternarcotics expert at the Brookings Institution in Washington. “Realistically, the border is as tight as could be and there have been few spillovers of the violence from Mexico into the U.S.,” she added, but perceptions count in Washington “and can be easily distorted.” “Drugs today are not very important to the U.S. public over all,” she added, “but they are important to committed drug warriors who are politically powerful.” Representative Michael T. McCaul, a Texas Republican who is chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, has warned against the danger of drug cartels forming alliances with terrorist groups. “While these threats exist, you would be surprised to find that the administration thinks its work here is done,” he wrote in an opinion article for Roll Call last month, pressing for more border controls in the bill. The Obama administration has said any evidence of such cooperation is very thin, but even without terrorist connections, drug gangs pose threats to peace and security. Human rights advocates said they feared the United States would ease pressure on Mexico to investigate disappearances and other abuses at the hands of the police and military, who have received substantial American support. The shift in approach “suggests that the Obama administration either doesn’t object to these abusive practices or is only willing to raise such concerns when it’s politically convenient,” said José Miguel Vivanco, director of Human Rights Watch’s Americas division. Still, administration officials have said there may have been an overemphasis on the bellicose language and high-profile hunts for cartel leaders while the real problem of lawlessness worsens. American antidrug aid is shifting more toward training police and shoring up judicial systems that have allowed criminals to kill with impunity in Mexico and Central America. United States officials said Mr. Obama remains well aware of the region’s problems with security, even as he is determined that they not overshadow the economic opportunities. It is clear Mr. Obama, whatever his words four years ago, now believes there has been too much security talk. In a speech to Mexican students on Friday, Mr. Obama urged people in the two countries to look beyond a one-dimensional focus on what he called real security concerns, saying it is “time for us to put the old mind-sets aside.” And he repeated the theme later in the day in Costa Rica, lamenting that when it comes to the United States and Central America, “so much of the focus ends up being on security.” “We also have to recognize that problems like narco-trafficking arise in part when a country is vulnerable because of poverty, because of institutions that are not working for the people, because young people don’t see a brighter future ahead,” Mr. Obama said in a news conference with Laura Chinchilla, the president of Costa Rica.
 
Causes Israel strikes
Perr 12/24 (Jon Perr 12/24/13, B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University; technology marketing consultant based in Portland, Oregon, has long been active in Democratic politics and public policy as an organizer and advisor in California and Massachusetts. His past roles include field staffer for Gary Hart for President (1984), organizer of Silicon Valley tech executives backing President Clinton's call for national education standards (1997), recruiter of tech executives for Al Gore's and John Kerry's presidential campaigns, and co-coordinator of MassTech for Robert Reich (2002). (Jon, “Senate sanctions bill could let Israel take U.S. to war against Iran” Daily Kos, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/24/1265184/-Senate-sanctions-bill-could-let-Israel-take-U-S-to-war-against-Iran#)
As 2013 draws to close, the negotiations over the Iranian nuclear program have entered a delicate stage. But in 2014, the tensions will escalate dramatically as a bipartisan group of Senators brings a new Iran sanctions bill to the floor for a vote. As many others have warned, that promise of new measures against Tehran will almost certainly blow up the interim deal reached by the Obama administration and its UN/EU partners in Geneva. But Congress' highly unusual intervention into the President's domain of foreign policy doesn't just make the prospect of an American conflict with Iran more likely. As it turns out, the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act essentially empowers Israel to decide whether the United States will go to war against Tehran.¶ On their own, the tough new sanctions imposed automatically if a final deal isn't completed in six months pose a daunting enough challenge for President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry. But it is the legislation's commitment to support an Israeli preventive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities that almost ensures the U.S. and Iran will come to blows. As Section 2b, part 5 of the draft mandates:¶ If the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in legitimate self-defense against Iran's nuclear weapon program, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide, in accordance with the law of the United States and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force, diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.¶ Now, the legislation being pushed by Senators Mark Kirk (R-IL), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ) does not automatically give the President an authorization to use force should Israel attack the Iranians. (The draft language above explicitly states that the U.S. government must act "in accordance with the law of the United States and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force.") But there should be little doubt that an AUMF would be forthcoming from Congressmen on both sides of the aisle. As Lindsey Graham, who with Menendez co-sponsored a similar, non-binding "stand with Israel" resolution in March told a Christians United for Israel (CUFI) conference in July:¶ "If nothing changes in Iran, come September, October, I will present a resolution that will authorize the use of military force to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb."¶ Graham would have plenty of company from the hardest of hard liners in his party. In August 2012, Romney national security adviser and pardoned Iran-Contra architect Elliott Abrams called for a war authorization in the pages of the Weekly Standard. And just two weeks ago, Norman Podhoretz used his Wall Street Journal op-ed to urge the Obama administration to "strike Iran now" to avoid "the nuclear war sure to come."¶ But at the end of the day, the lack of an explicit AUMF in the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act doesn't mean its supporters aren't giving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu de facto carte blanche to hit Iranian nuclear facilities. The ensuing Iranian retaliation against to Israeli and American interests would almost certainly trigger the commitment of U.S. forces anyway.¶ Even if the Israelis alone launched a strike against Iran's atomic sites, Tehran will almost certainly hit back against U.S. targets in the Straits of Hormuz, in the region, possibly in Europe and even potentially in the American homeland. Israel would face certain retaliation from Hezbollah rockets launched from Lebanon and Hamas missiles raining down from Gaza.¶ That's why former Bush Defense Secretary Bob Gates and CIA head Michael Hayden raising the alarms about the "disastrous" impact of the supposedly surgical strikes against the Ayatollah's nuclear infrastructure. As the New York Times reported in March 2012, "A classified war simulation held this month to assess the repercussions of an Israeli attack on Iran forecasts that the strike would lead to a wider regional war, which could draw in the United States and leave hundreds of Americans dead, according to American officials." And that September, a bipartisan group of U.S. foreign policy leaders including Brent Scowcroft, retired Admiral William Fallon, former Republican Senator (now Obama Pentagon chief) Chuck Hagel, retired General Anthony Zinni and former Ambassador Thomas Pickering concluded that American attacks with the objective of "ensuring that Iran never acquires a nuclear bomb" would "need to conduct a significantly expanded air and sea war over a prolonged period of time, likely several years." (Accomplishing regime change, the authors noted, would mean an occupation of Iran requiring a "commitment of resources and personnel greater than what the U.S. has expended over the past 10 years in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.") The anticipated blowback?¶ Serious costs to U.S. interests would also be felt over the longer term, we believe, with problematic consequences for global and regional stability, including economic stability. A dynamic of escalation, action, and counteraction could produce serious unintended consequences that would significantly increase all of these costs and lead, potentially, to all-out regional war.
Impact is nuclear war
Reuveny 10 (Rafael – professor in the School of Public and Environmental affairs at Indiana University, Unilateral strike on Iran could trigger world depression, p. http://www.indiana.edu/~spea/news/speaking_out/reuveny_on_unilateral_strike_Iran.shtml)
A unilateral Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities would likely have dire consequences, including a regional war, global economic collapse and a major power clash. For an Israeli campaign to succeed, it must be quick and decisive. This requires an attack that would be so overwhelming that Iran would not dare to respond in full force. Such an outcome is extremely unlikely since the locations of some of Iran’s nuclear facilities are not fully known and known facilities are buried deep underground. All of these widely spread facilities are shielded by elaborate air defense systems constructed not only by the Iranians, but also the Chinese and, likely, the Russians as well. By now, Iran has also built redundant command and control systems and nuclear facilities, developed early-warning systems, acquired ballistic and cruise missiles and upgraded and enlarged its armed forces. Because Iran is well-prepared, a single, conventional Israeli strike — or even numerous strikes — could not destroy all of its capabilities, giving Iran time to respond. A regional war Unlike Iraq, whose nuclear program Israel destroyed in 1981, Iran has a second-strike capability comprised of a coalition of Iranian, Syrian, Lebanese, Hezbollah, Hamas, and, perhaps, Turkish forces. Internal pressure might compel Jordan, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority to join the assault, turning a bad situation into a regional war. During the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, at the apex of its power, Israel was saved from defeat by President Nixon’s shipment of weapons and planes. Today, Israel’s numerical inferiority is greater, and it faces more determined and better-equipped opponents. Despite Israel’s touted defense systems, Iranian coalition missiles, armed forces, and terrorist attacks would likely wreak havoc on its enemy, leading to a prolonged tit-for-tat. In the absence of massive U.S. assistance, Israel’s military resources may quickly dwindle, forcing it to use its alleged nuclear weapons, as it had reportedly almost done in 1973. An Israeli nuclear attack would likely destroy most of Iran’s capabilities, but a crippled Iran and its coalition could still attack neighboring oil facilities, unleash global terrorism, plant mines in the Persian Gulf and impair maritime trade in the Mediterranean, Red Sea and Indian Ocean. Middle Eastern oil shipments would likely slow to a trickle as production declines due to the war and insurance companies decide to drop their risky Middle Eastern clients. Iran and Venezuela would likely stop selling oil to the United States and Europe. The world economy would head into a tailspin; international acrimony would rise; and Iraqi and Afghani citizens might fully turn on the United States, immediately requiring the deployment of more American troops. Russia, China, Venezuela, and maybe Brazil and Turkey — all of which essentially support Iran — could be tempted to form an alliance and openly challenge the U.S. hegemony. Replaying Nixon’s nightmare Russia and China might rearm their injured Iranian protege overnight, just as Nixon rearmed Israel, and threaten to intervene, just as the U.S.S.R. threatened to join Egypt and Syria in 1973. President Obama’s response would likely put U.S. forces on nuclear alert, replaying Nixon’s nightmarish scenario. Iran may well feel duty-bound to respond to a unilateral attack by its Israeli archenemy, but it knows that it could not take on the United States head-to-head. In contrast, if the United States leads the attack, Iran’s response would likely be muted. If Iran chooses to absorb an American-led strike, its allies would likely protest and send weapons, but would probably not risk using force. While no one has a crystal ball, leaders should be risk-averse when choosing war as a foreign policy tool. If attacking Iran is deemed necessary, Israel must wait for an American green light. A unilateral Israeli strike could ultimately spark World War III.
1NC
The United States federal government should condition plan on the federal government of Mexico meeting the four human rights requirements of the Mérida Initiative. The United States federal government should decide if the federal government of Mexico meets these requirements based off the findings of Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos.
Solves the AFF and boosts our human rights cred
WOLA 10 - (Washington Office of Latin America- contains multiple experts on human rights abuse in latin america and quotes the state department's report "Congress: Withhold Funds for Mexico Tied to Human Rights Performance" 9/14/10, http://www.wola.org/publications/congress_withhold_funds_for_mexico_tied_to_human_rights_performance)
The US government significantly strengthened its partnership with Mexico in combating organized crime in 2007 when it announced the Merida Initiative, a multi-year US security assistance package for Mexico. To date, the US government has allocated roughly $1.5 billion in Merida funding to Mexico. From the outset, the US Congress recognized the importance of ensuring that the Mexican government respect human rights in its public security efforts, mandating by law that 15 percent of select Merida funds be withheld until the State Department issued a report to the US Congress which showed that Mexico had demonstrated it was meeting four human rights requirements. ¶ ¶ On September 2, 2010, the State Department issued its second report to Congress concluding that Mexico is meeting the Merida Initiative’s human rights requirements, and it stated its intention to obligate roughly $36 million in security assistance that had been withheld from the 2009 supplemental and the 2010 omnibus budgets. ¶ However, research conducted by our respective organizations, Mexico’s National Human Rights Commission, and even the State Department’s own reports, demonstrates conclusively that Mexico has failed to meet the four human rights requirements set out by law. As a result, Congress should not release these select Merida funds. Releasing these funds would send the message that the United States condones the grave human rights violations committed in Mexico, including torture, rape, killings, and enforced disappearances.¶ We recognize that Mexico is facing a severe public security crisis, and that the United States can play a constructive role in strengthening Mexico’s ability to confront organized crime in an effective manner. However, human rights violations committed by Mexican security forces are not only deplorable in their own right, but also significantly undermine the effectiveness of Mexico’s public security efforts. Building trust between the Mexican people and the government is essential to gathering information to dismantle organized crime. When security forces commit grave human rights violations and they are not held accountable for their actions, they lose that trust, alienating key allies and leaving civilians in a state of terror and defenselessness. It is thus in the interest of both of our countries to help Mexico curb systematic human rights violations, ensure that violations are effectively investigated and those responsible held accountable, and assess candidly the progress Mexico is making towards improving accountability and transparency. ¶ Evidence demonstrates that Mexico is not fulfilling effectively any of the requirements established by Congress, particularly those dealing with prosecuting military abuses and torture: 

HR cred solves conflict
Burke-White 4 (William W., Lecturer in Public and International Affairs and Senior Special Assistant to the Dean, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University The Harvard Environmental Law Review Spring, 2004 LN,https://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/wburkewh/workingpapers/17HarvHumRtsJ249(2004).pdf)
This Article presents a strategic--as opposed to ideological or normative--argument that the promotion of human rights should be given a more prominent place in U.S. foreign policy. It does so by suggesting a correlation between the domestic human rights practices of states and their propensity to engage in aggressive international conduct. Among the chief threats to U.S. national security are acts of aggression by other states. Aggressive acts of war may directly endanger the United States, as did the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941, or they may require U.S. military action overseas, as in Kuwait fifty years later. Evidence from the post-Cold War period  *250  indicates that states that systematically abuse their own citizens' human rights are also those most likely to engage in aggression. To the degree that improvements in various states' human rights records decrease the likelihood of aggressive war, a foreign policy informed by human rights can significantly enhance U.S. and global security.¶ Since 1990, a state's domestic human rights policy appears to be a telling indicator of that state's propensity to engage in international aggression. A central element of U.S. foreign policy has long been the preservation of peace and the prevention of such acts of aggression. n2 If the correlation discussed herein is accurate, it provides U.S. policymakers with a powerful new tool to enhance national security through the promotion of human rights. A strategic linkage between national security and human rights would result in a number of important policy modifications. First, it changes the prioritization of those countries U.S. policymakers have identified as presenting the greatest concern. Second, it alters some of the policy prescriptions for such states. Third, it offers states a means of signaling benign international intent through the improvement of their domestic human rights records. Fourth, it provides a way for a current government to prevent future governments from aggressive international behavior through the institutionalization of human rights protections. Fifth, it addresses the particular threat of human rights abusing states obtaining weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Finally, it offers a mechanism for U.S.-U.N. cooperation on human rights issues.
1NC

Text: the United Mexican States should provide reparations to the Bracero Justice Movement and the Bracero proa alliance of Mexico
1NC
Nieto has to credibility to follow through with his reform efforts now – but he has to tread carefully
Thomson 4-24 - Adam Thomson is the FT's Mexico and Central America correspondent (Adam, “President Enrique Peña Nieto works to soothe Mexico tensions”, April 24 of 2013, Financial Times, http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/628aabae-acfa-11e2-9454-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2YVlziShn)
Mexico’s four-month-old administration on Wednesday appeared to overcome its first political crisis after opposition leaders said that they had largely settled their differences with the government.¶ The agreement, which came after an emergency meeting of party heads, appears to put the government’s economic reform back on track in a turnaround that will doubtless ease investor concerns.¶ Billions of dollars have flowed into Mexico in recent months on hopes that centrist President Enrique Peña Nieto of the Institutional Revolutionary Party will push a series of reforms aimed at transforming Latin America’s second-largest economy into a more vibrant emerging market.¶ The inflows have pushed the local stock market index to record highs. In one clear sign of investors’ new-found fascination with Mexico, the local currency this month strengthened against the US dollar, reaching an 18-month high.¶ Speaking after the meeting on Wednesday, Jesús Zambrano, leader of the leftwing Democratic Revolution Party, suggested that things were getting back to normal after a tense week. “At least we have laid the foundations for continuing along the reform path,” Reforma, the Mexican daily, quoted him as saying.¶ A statement by Mexico’s interior ministry, which organised the meeting, confirmed that the parties had agreed to keep working together to further the so-called Pact for Mexico, a list of economic, social and political reform pledges signed in December by party leaders.¶ “Everyone reaffirmed their conviction that the reform agenda laid out in the Pact comes before party interests,” said the statement.¶ In Lima, Luis Videgaray, Mexico’s finance minister, expressed optimism that a banking-reform bill, which the government had planned to unveil this week but postponed because of the political tension, would get back on track.¶ “I haven’t the slightest doubt the financial reform will be presented in the next few days,” he told Reuters. “I’m sure it’ll have strong support from the political forces and representatives in the Pact for Mexico.”¶ The latest events come after Democratic Revolution Party members and the conservative National Action Party, both signatories to the Pact, recently accused government officials of using social-assistance programmes in the state of Veracruz to gain an advantage in forthcoming elections.¶ Almost half of Mexico’s 31 states go to the polls in the coming months, and political rivalries have already started to surface in the run-up to voting day.¶ Roy Campos, a pollster in Mexico City, argues that Mr Peña Nieto’s swift and energetic response to the building storm – after initially underestimating the problem – went a long way to resolving what could have become much worse.¶ Not least, on Tuesday Mexico’s leader gave a rousing speech in the state of Puebla where he asked all the political parties to join him in helping to ensure that social programmes were protected from the threat of use for political gain “Let’s bulletproof them,” he said.¶ That, says Mr Campos, allowed everyone involved to claim some sort of victory – the opposition parties that they brought the administration to task, and Mr Peña Nieto that he was able to pull in the opposition in a joint crusade against corruption.¶ “Peña Nieto has recovered very quickly,” says Mr Campos. “The pact is far from broken.”¶ Yet it seems clear that the Veracruz scandal serves as a reminder of how carefully Mr Peña Nieto must tread in the coming months as he seeks to bring his economic reform agenda to fruition.¶
Overwhelming opposition to the AFF – the plan is an insurmountable obstacle which kills Nieto’s credibility
Starr 12 - Director, U.S.-Mexico Network Associate Professor (NTT) University Fellow, Center on Public Diplomacy University of Southern California (Pamela, “U.S.-Mexico Relations and Mexican Domestic Politics”, October 6 of 2012, https://www.google.com/url?sa=tandrct=jandq=andesrc=sandsource=webandcd=3andcad=rjaandved=0CD4QFjACandurl=http3A2F2Fcollege.usc.edu2Fusmexnet2Fwp-content2Fuploads2F20102F102FCamp-Oxford-paper-final.docandei=mTLYUZTDMbOLyQGT14GwCQandusg=AFQjCNH_cqiYTQRo7SFmpfWugH9ABshhCgandsig2=_M2KmLNnt3e8v4vVshc_fQ)
The final implication of Mexican nationalism for U.S.-Mexico relations is the nearly insurmountable obstacle it erected to political alliances between Mexican actors and their U.S. counterparts, which has broken down only gradually and incompletely since the mid-1990s. For decades, the fear of being tarred as a traitor to the nation prevented Mexican leaders from seeking allies to their cause in the United States and thereby deprived U.S. actors of an easy point of entry into Mexican politics. Mexicans who ignored this taboo paid the price even in the final years of the twentieth century. In the 1980s, the then opposition National Action Party openly elicited U.S. backing for its charges of electoral fraud and associated actions of civil disobedience, producing a nationalist backlash in Mexico that sharply undercut the legitimacy of its claims. In the early 1990s, Mexican opponents of the North American Free Trade Agreement formed an alliance with their U.S. and Canadian counterparts, leading to accusations of having organized traitorous “campaigns against Mexico in the United States.” ¶ Carlos Salinas’ 1990 decision to summon U.S. assistance to lock in his domestic economic reform agenda through a bilateral trade treaty and his active lobbying to gain U.S. congressional approval of the treaty dealt a blow to this long-standing taboo. As a result, cross-border alliances are now increasingly common and accepted, but they are heavily concentrated among civil society actors. Mexico’s continuing anxiety about U.S. political domination, however, means that tolerance for cross-border political alliances is much less developed. While Mexican policy makers and analysts of the bilateral relationship have significantly more freedom of action to work with their U.S. counterparts in the early twenty-first century than did their predecessors, they still must watch their step or risk having their reputation sullied for being excessively “pro-gringo.” Mexicans remain uneasy living next door to a superpower; they continue to worry that the United States might get the notion to translate its power into domination of Mexico, its politics, policy, and culture, and they thus still approach their neighbor with trepidation. As a result, Mexican politicians and policy makers still must take care to avoid the appearance of being too willing to accept support and guidance from north of the border.

Nieto credibility is key the Mexican economy – loss of cred guarantees collapse
Ruelas-Gossi 12 - professor of strategy at the Santiago, Chile-based Universidad Adolfo Ibañez (Alejandro, “Peña Nieto's Plans for Mexico's Economy”, October 15 of 2012, Harvard Business Review, http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/10/mexico_is_the_perfect_dictator.html)
For one, Peña Nieto will likely bring about major reforms in the energy sector soon after he takes office. The new laws should enable Mexico, one of the world's top 10 producers, to follow Brazil in developing a successful oil and gas industry in South America. That will attract several potential investors from abroad.¶ Two, fiscal and labor reforms will enable Mexico to become more competitive. The former will help the government switch from volatile sources of revenue, such as oil prices, to more stable ones. Fiscal stability will also create a more competitive environment and eliminate subsidies, such as those on gasoline. An economy without subsidies will undoubtedly attract more foreign investment.¶ The changes in the labor laws are also linked to fiscal reforms since the current tax regime doesn't provide incentives for the informal economy to change. Mexico is the only OECD economy that doesn't offer unemployment insurance; health insurance for informal workers; or short-term contracts that will attract more women to the workforce.¶ Many of these reforms have been on the agenda for the last decade, so the PAN will have to support policies that it promoted when it was in power. Moreover, allies and adversaries alike concede that Peña Nieto showed a knack for working with opposition parties when he was the governor of the state of Mexico, but lacked a majority in the legislature.¶ Three, Peña Nieto wants to develop closer links between the Mexican economy and those of the Spanish-speaking countries in Latin America. That's a step in the right direction.¶ Historically, Mexico hasn't taken advantage of the three most important predictors of trade: A shared history, a common language, and regional trade agreements. As a result, big Mexican companies haven't moved into Latin America while American multinational corporations have done so, and Mexico depends on NAFTA for more than 80 of its exports.¶ Finally, Peña Nieto's economic slogan during the election campaign was Para Que Ganes Mas (You Will Earn More). He hasn't quite explained how his government will ensure that, but the message sends the signal that the PRI wishes not just to create jobs, but jobs that will pay higher salaries.¶ That's a major shift from the ideas of a previous PRI president, Ernesto Zedillo, who firmly believed that "the best industrial policy is one that doesn't exist." Instead, Mexico must grow by developing policies that will augment the value of the products and services produced in the country -- just like some other countries in Latin America.

Global war
Royal 10 – Jedediah Royal, Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction at the U.S. Department of Defense, 2010, “Economic Integration, Economic Signaling and the Problem of Economic Crises,” in Economics of War and Peace: Economic, Legal and Political Perspectives, ed. Goldsmith and Brauer, p. 213-215
Less intuitive is how periods of economic decline may increase the likelihood of external conflict. Political science literature has contributed a moderate degree of attention to the impact of economic decline and the security and defence behaviour of interdependent states. Research in this vein has been considered at systemic, dyadic and national levels. Several notable contributions follow.
First, on the systemic level, Pollins (2008) advances Modelski and Thompson's (1996) work on leadership cycle theory, finding that rhythms in the global economy are associated with the rise and fall of a pre-eminent power and the often bloody transition from one pre-eminent leader to the next. As such, exogenous shocks such as economic crises could usher in a redistribution of relative power (see also Gilpin. 1981) that leads to uncertainty about power balances, increasing the risk of miscalculation (Feaver, 1995). Alternatively, even a relatively certain redistribution of power could lead to a permissive environment for conflict as a rising power may seek to challenge a declining power (Werner. 1999). Separately, Pollins (1996) also shows that global economic cycles combined with parallel leadership cycles impact the likelihood of conflict among major, medium and small powers, although he suggests that the causes and connections between global economic conditions and security conditions remain unknown.
Second, on a dyadic level, Copeland's (1996, 2000) theory of trade expectations suggests that 'future expectation of trade' is a significant variable in understanding economic conditions and security behaviour of states. He argues that interdependent states are likely to gain pacific benefits from trade so long as they have an optimistic view of future trade relations. However, if the expectations of future trade decline, particularly for difficult to replace items such as energy resources, the likelihood for conflict increases, as states will be inclined to use force to gain access to those resources. Crises could potentially be the trigger for decreased trade expectations either on its own or because it triggers protectionist moves by interdependent states.4
Third, others have considered the link between economic decline and external armed conflict at a national level. Blomberg and Hess (2002) find a strong correlation between internal conflict and external conflict, particularly during periods of economic downturn. They write:
The linkages between internal and external conflict and prosperity are strong and mutually reinforcing. Economic conflict tends to spawn internal conflict, which in turn returns the favour. Moreover, the presence of a recession tends to amplify the extent to which international and external conflicts self-reinforce each other. (Blomberg and Hess, 2002. p. 89)
Economic decline has also been linked with an increase in the likelihood of terrorism (Blomberg, Hess, and Weerapana, 2004), which has the capacity to spill across borders and lead to external tensions.
Furthermore, crises generally reduce the popularity of a sitting government. “Diversionary theory" suggests that, when facing unpopularity arising from economic decline, sitting governments have increased incentives to fabricate external military conflicts to create a 'rally around the flag' effect. Wang (1996), DeRouen (1995). and Blomberg, Hess, and Thacker (2006) find supporting evidence showing that economic decline and use of force are at least indirectly correlated. Gelpi (1997), Miller (1999), and Kisangani and Pickering (2009) suggest that the tendency towards diversionary tactics are greater for democratic states than autocratic states, due to the fact that democratic leaders are generally more susceptible to being removed from office due to lack of domestic support. DeRouen (2000) has provided evidence showing that periods of weak economic performance in the United States, and thus weak Presidential popularity, are statistically linked to an increase in the use of force.
In summary, recent economic scholarship positively correlates economic integration with an increase in the frequency of economic crises, whereas political science scholarship links economic decline with external conflict at systemic, dyadic and national levels.5 This implied connection between integration, crises and armed conflict has not featured prominently in the economic-security debate and deserves more attention.
This observation is not contradictory to other perspectives that link economic interdependence with a decrease in the likelihood of external conflict, such as those mentioned in the first paragraph of this chapter. Those studies tend to focus on dyadic interdependence instead of global interdependence and do not specifically consider the occurrence of and conditions created by economic crises. As such, the view presented here should be considered ancillary to those views.

1NC
Economic engagement is only trade and financial transactions
Haass 00 – Richard Haass and Meghan O’Sullivan, Senior Fellows in the Brookings Institution Foreign Policy Studies Program, Honey and Vinegar: Incentives, Sanctions, and Foreign Policy, p. 5-6
Architects of engagement strategies have a wide variety of incentives from which to choose. Economic engagement might offer tangible incentives such as export credits, investment insurance or promotion, access to technology, loans, and economic aid.’2 Other equally useful economic incentives involve the removal of penalties, whether they be trade embargoes, investment bans, or high tariffs that have impeded economic relations between the United States and the target country. In addition, facilitated entry into the global economic arena and the institutions that govern it rank among the most potent incentives in today’s global market.’ ¶ Similarly, political engagement can involve the lure of diplomatic recognition, access to regional or international institutions, or the scheduling of summits between leaders—or the termination of these benefits. Military engagement could involve the extension of International Military Educational Training (IMET) both to strengthen respect for civilian authority and human rights among a country’s armed forces and, more feasibly, to establish relationships between Americans and young foreign mffitary officers.’4 These areas of engagement are likely to involve, working with state institutions, while cultural or civil society engagement is likely to entail building people-to-people contacts. Funding nongovernmental organizations, facilitating the flow of remittances, establishing postal and telephone links between the United States and the target country, and promoting the exchange of students, tourists, and other nongovernmental people between the countries are some of the incentives that might be offered under a policy of cultural engagement.¶ This brief overview of the various forms of engagement illuminates the choices open to policymakers. The plethora of options signals the flexibility of engagement as a foreign policy strategy and, in doing so, reveals one of the real strengths of engagement. At the same time, it also suggests the urgent need for considered analysis of this strategy. The purpose of this book is to address this need by deriving insights and lessons from past episodes of engagement and proposing guidelines for the future use of engagement strategies. Throughout the book, two critical questions are entertained. First, when should policymakers consider engagement? A strategy of engagement may serve certain foreign policy objectives better than others. Specific characteristics of a target country may make it more receptive to a strategy of engagement and the incentives offered under it; in other cases, a country's domestic politics may effectively exclude the use of engagement strategies. Second, how should engagement strategies be managed to maximize the chances of success? Shedding light on how policymakers achieved, or failed, in these efforts in the past is critical in an evaluation of engagement strategies. By focusing our analysis, these questions and concerns help produce a framework to guide the use of engagement strategies in the upcoming decades.
Engagement requires DIRECT talks – means both governments must be involved
Crocker ‘9 9/13/09, Chester A. Crocker is a professor of strategic studies at the Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, was an assistant secretary of state for African affairs from 1981 to 1989. “Terms of Engagement,” http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/opinion/14crocker.html?_r=1and
PRESIDENT OBAMA will have a hard time achieving his foreign policy goals until he masters some key terms and better manages the expectations they convey. Given the furor that will surround the news of America’s readiness to hold talks with Iran, he could start with “engagement” — one of the trickiest terms in the policy lexicon The Obama administration has used this term to contrast its approach with its predecessor’s resistance to talking with adversaries and troublemakers. His critics show that they misunderstand the concept of engagement when they ridicule it as making nice with nasty or hostile regimes. Let’s get a few things straight. Engagement in statecraft is not about sweet talk. Nor is it based on the illusion that our problems with rogue regimes can be solved if only we would talk to them. Engagement is not normalization, and its goal is not improved relations. It is not akin to détente, working for rapprochement, or appeasement. So how do you define an engagement strategy? It does require direct talks. There is simply no better way to convey authoritative statements of position or to hear responses. But establishing talks is just a first step. The goal of engagement is to change the other country’s perception of its own interests and realistic options and, hence, to modify its policies and its behavior.
“Toward” means in the direction of --- most predictable interpretation
Taylor 6 – CJ Taylor, Supreme Court Justice on the Supreme Court of Michigan, “Supreme Court of Michigan. Grievance Administrator, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Geoffrey N. Fieger, Respondent-Appellee”, 7-31, http://faculty.law.wayne.edu/henning/ProfResp/Grievance20Administrator20v20Fieger.pdf
MRPC 3.5(c) provides that a lawyer shall not "engage in undignified or discourteous conduct toward the tribunal." (Emphasis added.) We note that the rule does not provide a definition of the word "toward." It is well established that if a term in a court rule is not defined, we interpret the term in accordance with its everyday, plain meaning. Random House Webster's College Dictionary (1997) lists several definitions of the preposition "toward," including "in the direction of" and "with respect to; as regards."
 x

Violation – the AFF increases diplomatic engagement without using the federal government and the reparations they give is from the Mexican government not the US

1. Limits – they open the floodgates to involvement of  thousands of international organizations, non governmental actors, and private companies – hurts the negative’s ability to prepare, which is key to competitiveness and clash

2. Ground – direct engagement with the government is necessary for links to international politics and relations based DAs as well as competition for privatization CPs – these generics are key to negative preparation on an international topic with few common linkages

Case

Consequences matter – the tunnel vision of moral absolutism generates evil and political irrelevance
Issac, 2002 (Jeffery, Professor of Political Science at Indiana University, Dissent, Vol. 49 No. 2, Spring)
Politics, in large part, involves contests over the distribution and use of power.  To accomplish anything in the political world one must attend to the means that are necessary to bring it about.  And to develop such means is to develop, and to exercise, power.  To say this is not to say that power is beyond morality.  It is to say that power is not reducible to morality.  As writers such as Niccolo Machiavelli, Max Weber, Reinhold Niebuhr, Hannah Arendt have taught, an unyielding concern with moral goodness undercuts political responsibility.  The concern may be morally laudable, reflecting a kind of personal integrity, but it suffers from three fatal flaws: (1) It fails to see that the purity of one’s intentions does not ensure the achievement of what one intends.  Abjuring violence or refusing to make common cause with morally comprised parties may seem like the right thing, but if such tactics entail impotence, then it is hard to view them as serving any moral good beyond the clean conscience of their supporters; (2) it fails to see that in a world of real violence and injustice, moral purity is not simply a form of powerlessness, it is often a form of complicity in injustice.  This is why, from the standpoint of politics-as opposed to religion-pacifism is always a potentially immoral stand.  In categorically repudiating violence, it refuses in principle to oppose certain violent injustices with any effect; and (3) it fails to see that politics is as much about unintended consequences as it is about intentions; it is the effects of action, rather than the motives of action, that is most significant.  Just as the alignment with “good” may engender impotence, it is often the pursuit of “good” that generates evil.  This is the lesson of communism in the twentieth century: it is not enough that one’s goals be sincere or idealistic; it is equally important, always, to ask about the effects of pursuing these goals and to judge these effects in pragmatic and historically contextualized ways.   Moral absolutism inhibits this judgment.  It alienates those who are not true believers.  It promotes arrogance.  And it undermines political effectiveness.  

By creating defining circumstances in which racism exists, the AFF not only contributes to the problem, but can't solve it
KAPPELER 1995 Susanne Kappeler, The Will To Violence: The Politics of Personal Behavior, pg 1-4
What is striking is that the violence which is talked about is always the violence committed by someone else: women talk about the violence of men, adults about the violence of young people; the left, liberals and the centre about the violence of right extremists; the right, centre and liberals about the violence of leftist extremists; political activists talk about structural violence, police and politicians about violence in the `street', and all together about the violence in our society. Similarly, Westerners talk about violence in the Balkans, Western citizens together with their generals about the violence of the Serbian army. Violence is recognized and measured by its visible effects, the spectacular blood of wounded bodies, the material destruction of objects, the visible damage left in the world of `objects'. In its measurable damage we see the proof that violence has taken place, the violence being reduced to this damage. The violation as such, or invisible forms of violence - the non-physical violence of threat and terror, of insult and humiliation, the violation of human dignity - are hardly ever the issue except to some extent in feminist and anti-racist analyses, or under the name of psychological violence. Here violence is recognized by the victims and defined from their perspective - an important step away from the catalogue of violent acts and the exclusive evidence of material traces in the object. Yet even here the focus tends to be on the effects and experience of violence, either the objective and scientific measure of psychological damage, or the increasingly subjective definition of violence as experience. Violence is perceived as a phenomenon for science to research and for politics to get a grip on. But violence is not a phenomenon: it is the behaviour of people, human action which may be analysed. What is missing is an analysis of violence as action - not just as acts of violence, or the cause of its effects, but as the actions of people in relation to other people and beings or things. Feminist critique, as well as other political critiques, has analysed the preconditions of violence, the unequal power relations which enable it to take place. However, under the pressure of mainstream science and a sociological perspective which increasingly dominates our thinking, it is becoming standard to argue as if it were these power relations which cause the violence. Underlying is a behaviourist model which prefers to see human action as the exclusive product of circumstances, ignoring the personal decision of the agent to act, implying in turn that circumstances virtually dictate certain forms of behaviour. Even though we would probably not underwrite these propositions in their crass form, there is nevertheless a growing tendency, not just in social science, to explain violent behaviour by its circumstances. (Compare the question, `Does pornography cause violence?') The circumstances identified may differ according to the politics of the explainers, but the method of explanation remains the same. While consideration of mitigating circumstances has its rightful place in a court of law trying (and defending) an offender, this does not automatically make it an adequate or sufficient practice for political analysis. It begs the question, in particular, `What is considered to be part of the circumstances (and by whom)?' Thus in the case of sexual offenders, there is a routine search - on the part of the tabloid press or professionals of violence - for experiences of violence in the offender's own past, an understanding which is rapidly solidifying in scientific model of a `cycle of violence'. That is, the relevant factors are sought in the distant past and in other contexts of action, e a crucial factor in the present context is ignored, namely the agent's decision to act as he did. Even politically oppositional groups are not immune to this mainstream sociologizing. Some left groups have tried to explain men's sexual violence as the result of class oppression, while some Black theoreticians have explained the violence of Black men as the result of racist oppression. The ostensible aim of these arguments may be to draw attention to the pervasive and structural violence of classism and racism, yet they not only fail to combat such inequality, they actively contribute to it. Although such oppression is a very real part of an agent's life context, these `explanations' ignore the fact that not everyone experiencing the same oppression uses violence, that is, that these circumstances do not `cause' violent behaviour. They overlook, in other words, that the perpetrator has decided to violate, even if this decision was made in circumstances of limited choice. To overlook this decision, however, is itself a political decision, serving particular interests. In the first instance it serves to exonerate the perpetrators, whose responsibility is thus transferred to circumstances and a history for which other people (who remain beyond reach) are responsible. Moreover, it helps to stigmatize all those living in poverty and oppression; because they are obvious victims of violence and oppression, they are held to be potential perpetrators themselves.' This slanders all the women who have experienced sexual violence, yet do not use violence against others, and libels those experiencing racist and class oppression, yet do not necessarily act out violence. Far from supporting those oppressed by classist, racist or sexist oppression, it sells out these entire groups in the interest of exonerating individual members. It is a version of collective victim-blaming, of stigmatizing entire social strata as potential hotbeds of violence, which rests on and perpetuates the mainstream division of society into so-called marginal groups - the classic clienteles of social work and care politics (and of police repression) - and an implied `centre' to which all the speakers, explainers, researchers and careers themselves belong, and which we are to assume to be a zone of non-violence.  Explaining people's violent behaviour by their circumstances also has the advantage of implying that the `solution' lies in a change to circumstances. Thus it has become fashionable among socially minded politicians and intellectuals in Germany to argue that the rising neo-Nazi violence of young people (men), especially in former East Germany, needs to be countered by combating poverty and unemployment in these areas. Likewise anti-racist groups like the Anti. Racist Alliance or the Anti-Nazi League in Britain argue that `the causes of racism, like poverty and unemployment, should be tackled and that it is `problems like unemployment and bad housing which lead to racism'.' Besides being no explanation at all of why (white poverty and unemployment should lead specifically to racist violence (and what would explain middle- and upper-class racism), it is more than questionable to combat poverty only (but precisely) when and where violence is exercised. It not only legitimates the violence (by `explaining' it), but constitutes an incentive to violence, confirming that social problems will be taken seriously when and where `they attract attention by means of violence - just as the most unruly children in schools (mostly boys) tend to get more attention from teachers than well-behaved and quiet children (mostly girls). Thus if German neo-Nazi youths and youth groups, since their murderous assaults on refugees and migrants in Hoyerswerda, Rostock, Dresden etc., are treated to special youth projects and social care measures (to the tune of DM 20 million per year), including `educative' trips to Morocco and Israel,' this is am unmistakable signal to society that racist violence does indeed 'pay off'.
The aff’s claim to emancipation collapses the real material difference between our position as debaters and oppressed individuals for whom resistance is not a simple language-game---their deployment of an unproblematic posture of victimization spotlights the aff’s righteousness while robbing the oppressed of protest
Chow 93—Anne Firor Scott Professor of Literature at Trinity College of Arts and Sciences, Duke University (Rey, Writing Diaspora, 11-5) 

Until the very end of the novel, Jane is always excluded from every available form of social power. Her survival seems to depend on renouncing what power might come to her as teacher, mistress, cousin, heiress, or missionary's wife. She repeatedly flees from such forms of inclusion in the field of power, as if her status as an exemplary subject, like her authority as narrator, depends entirely on her claim to a kind of truth which can only be made from a position of powerlessness. By creating such an unlovely heroine and subjecting her to one form of harassment after another, Brontë demonstrates the power of words alone. 18¶ This reading of Jane Eyre highlights her not simply as the female underdog who is often identified by feminist and Marxist critics, but as the intellectual who acquires power through a moral rectitude that was to become the flip side of Western imperialism's ruthlessness. Lying at the core of Anglo¬American liberalism, this moral rectitude would accompany many territorial and economic conquests overseas with a firm sense of social mission. When Jane Eyre went to the colonies in the nineteenth century, she turned into the Christian missionary. It is this understanding—that Brontë's depiction of a socially marginalized English woman is, in terms of ideological production, fully complicit with England's empire¬building ambition rather than opposed to it—that prompted Gayatri Spivak to read Jane Eyre as a text in the service of imperialism. Referring to Brontë's treatment of the "madwoman" Bertha Mason, the white Jamaican Creole character, Spivak charges Jane Eyre for, precisely, its humanism, in which the "native subject" is not created as an animal but as "the object of what might be termed the terrorism of¶ 12¶ the categorical imperative." This kind of creation is imperialism's use/travesty of the Kantian metaphysical demand to "make the heathen into a human so that he can be treated as an end in himself." 19 In the twentieth century, as Europe's former colonies became independent, Jane Eyre became the Maoist. Michel de Certeau describes the affinity between her two major reincarnations, one religious and the other political, this way:¶ The place that was formerly occupied by the Church or Churches vis¬à¬vis the established powers remains recognizable, over the past two centuries, in the functioning of the opposition known as leftist….¶ There is vis¬à¬vis the established order, a relationship between the Churches that defended an other world and the parties of the left which, since the nineteenth century, have promoted a different future. In both cases, similar functional characteristics can be discerned….20¶ The Maoist retains many of Jane's awesome features, chief of which are a protestant passion to turn powerlessness into "truth" and an idealist intolerance of those who may think differently from her. Whereas the great Orientalist blames the living "third world" natives for the loss of the ancient non¬Western civilization, his loved object, the Maoist applauds the same natives for personifying and fulfilling her ideals. For the Maoist in the 1970s, the mainland Chinese were, in spite of their "backwardness," a puritanical alternative to the West in human form—a dream come true.¶ In the 1980s and 1990s, however, the Maoist is disillusioned to watch the China they sanctified crumble before their eyes. This is the period in which we hear disapproving criticisms of contemporary Chinese people for liking Western pop music and consumer culture, or for being overly interested in sex. In a way that makes her indistinguishable from what at first seems a political enemy, the Orientalist, the Maoist now mourns the loss of her loved object—Socialist China—by pointing angrily at living "third world" natives. For many who have built their careers on the vision of Socialist China, the grief is tremendous. In the "cultural studies" of the American academy in the 1990s, the Maoist is reproducing with prowess. We see this in the way¶ 13¶ terms such as "oppression," "victimization," and "subalternity" are now being used. Contrary to Orientalist disdain for contemporary native cultures of the non¬West, the Maoist turns precisely the "disdained'' other into the object of his/her study and, in some cases, identification. In a mixture of admiration and moralism, the Maoist sometimes turns all people from non¬Western cultures into a generalized "subaltern" that is then used to flog an equally generalized "West." 21¶ Because the representation of "the other" as such ignores (1) the class and intellectual hierarchies within these other cultures, which are usually as elaborate as those in the West, and (2) the discursive power relations structuring the Maoist's mode of inquiry and valorization, it produces a way of talking in which notions of lack, subalternity, victimization, and so forth are drawn upon indiscriminately, often with the intention of spotlighting the speaker's own sense of alterity and political righteousness. A comfortably wealthy white American intellectual I know claimed that he was a "third world intellectual," citing as one of his credentials his marriage to a Western European woman of part¬Jewish heritage? a professor of English complained about being "victimized" by the structured time at an Ivy League institution, meaning that she needed to be on time for classes? a graduate student of upper¬class background from one of the world's poorest countries told his American friends that he was of poor peasant stock in order to authenticate his identity as a radical "third world" representative? male and female academics across the U.S. frequently say they were "raped" when they report experiences of professional frustration and conflict. Whether sincere or delusional, such cases of self¬dramatization all take the route of self¬subalternization, which has increasingly become the assured means to authority and power. What these intellectuals are doing is robbing the terms of oppression of their critical and oppositional import, and thus depriving the oppressed of even the vocabulary of protest and rightful demand. The oppressed, whose voices we seldom hear, are robbed twice—the first time of their economic chances, the second time of their language, which is now no longer distinguishable from those of us who have had our consciousnesses "raised."¶ In their analysis of the relation between violence and representation, Armstrong and Tennenhouse write: "The idea of violence ¶ 14¶ as representation is not an easy one for most academics to accept. It implies that whenever we speak for someone else we are inscribing her with our own (implicitly masculine) idea of order." 22 At present, this process of "inscribing" often means not only that we "represent" certain historic others because they are/were ''oppressed"? it often means that there is interest in representation only when what is represented can in some way be seen as lacking. Even though the Maoist is usually contemptuous of Freudian psychoanalysis because it is "bourgeois," her investment in oppression and victimization fully partakes of the Freudian and Lacanian notions of "lack." By attributing "lack," the Maoist justifies the "speaking for someone else" that Armstrong and Tennenhouse call "violence as representation."¶ As in the case of Orientalism, which does not necessarily belong only to those who are white, the Maoist does not have to be racially "white" either. The phrase "white guilt" refers to a type of discourse which continues to position power and lack against each other, while the narrator of that discourse, like Jane Eyre, speaks with power but identifies with powerlessness. This is how even those who come from privilege more often than not speak from/of/as its "lack." What the Maoist demonstrates is a circuit of productivity that draws its capital from others' deprivation while refusing to acknowledge its own presence as endowed. With the material origins of her own discourse always concealed, the Maoist thus speaks as if her charges were a form of immaculate conception.¶ The difficulty facing us, it seems to me, is no longer simply the "first world" Orientalist who mourns the rusting away of his treasures, but also students from privileged backgrounds Western and non¬Western, who conform behaviorally in every respect with the elitism of their social origins (e.g., through powerful matrimonial alliances, through pursuit of fame, or through a contemptuous arrogance toward fellow students) but who nonetheless proclaim dedication to "vindicating the subalterns." My point is not that they should be blamed for the accident of their birth, nor that they cannot marry rich, pursue fame, or even be arrogant. Rather, it is that they choose to see in others' powerlessness an idealized image of themselves and refuse to hear in the dissonance between the content and manner of their speech their own complicity with violence. Even though these descendents of the Maoist may be quick to point¶ 15¶ out the exploitativeness of Benjamin Disraeli's "The East is a career," 23 they remain blind to their own exploitativeness as they make "the East" their career. How do we intervene in the productivity of this overdetermined circuit?

The claim that ethics should be the basis for winning a debate round is a pretty good example of our link argument---the ballot is not a tool of emancipation, but rather a tool of revenge---it serves as a palliative that denies their investment in oppression as a means by which to claim the power of victory
Enns 12—Professor of Philosophy at McMaster University (Dianne, The Violence of Victimhood, 28-30)
Guilt and Ressentiment We need to think carefully about what is at stake here. Why is this perspective appealing, and what are its effects? At first glance, the argument appears simple: white, privileged women, in their theoretical and practical interventions, must take into account the experiences and conceptual work of women who are less fortunate and less powerful, have fewer resources, and are therefore more subject to systemic oppression. The lesson of feminism's mistakes in the civil rights era is that this “mainstream” group must not speak for other women. But such a view must be interrogated. Its effects, as I have argued, include a veneration of the other, moral currency for the victim, and an insidious competition for victimhood. We will see in later chapters that these effects are also common in situations of conflict where the stakes are much higher. ¶ We witness here a twofold appeal: otherness discourse in feminism appeals both to the guilt of the privileged and to the resentment, or ressentiment, of the other. Suleri's allusion to “embarrassed privilege” exposes the operation of guilt in the misunderstanding that often divides Western feminists from women in the developing world, or white women from women of color. The guilt of those who feel themselves deeply implicated in and responsible for imperialism merely reinforces an imperialist benevolence, polarizes us unambiguously by locking us into the categories of victim and perpetrator, and blinds us to the power and agency of the other. Many fail to see that it is embarrassing and insulting for those identified as victimized others not to be subjected to the same critical intervention and held to the same demands of moral and political responsibility. Though we are by no means equal in power and ability, wealth and advantage, we are all collectively responsible for the world we inhabit in common. The condition of victimhood does not absolve one of moral responsibility. I will return to this point repeatedly throughout this book.¶ Mohanty's perspective ignores the possibility that one can become attached to one's subordinated status, which introduces the concept of ressentiment, the focus of much recent interest in the injury caused by racism and colonization. Nietzsche describes ressentiment as the overwhelming sentiment of “slave morality,” the revolt that begins when ressentiment itself becomes creative and gives birth to values. 19 The sufferer in this schema seeks out a cause for his suffering—“ a guilty agent who is susceptible to suffering”— someone on whom he can vent his affects and so procure the anesthesia necessary to ease the pain of injury. The motivation behind ressentiment, according to Nietzsche, is the desire “to deaden, by means of a more violent emotion of any kind, a tormenting, secret pain that is becoming unendurable, and to drive it out of consciousness at least for the moment: for that one requires an affect, as savage an affect as possible, and, in order to excite that, any pretext at all.” 20 In its contemporary manifestation, Wendy Brown argues that ressentiment acts as the “righteous critique of power from the perspective of the injured,” which “delimits a specific site of blame for suffering by constituting sovereign subjects and events as responsible for the ‘injury’ of social subordination.” Identities are fixed in an economy of perpetrator and victim, in which revenge, rather than power or emancipation, is sought for the injured, making the perpetrator hurt as the sufferer does. 21¶ 30¶ Such a concept is useful for understanding why an ethics of absolute responsibility to the other appeals to the victimized. Brown remarks that, for Nietzsche, the source of the triumph of a morality rooted in ressentiment is the denial that it has any access to power or contains a will to power. Politicized identities arise as both product of and reaction to this condition; the reaction is a substitute for action— an “imaginary revenge,” Nietzsche calls it. Suffering then becomes a social virtue at the same time that the sufferer attempts to displace his suffering onto another. The identity created by ressentiment, Brown explains, becomes invested in its own subjection not only through its discovery of someone to blame, and a new recognition and revaluation of that subjection, but also through the satisfaction of revenge. 22¶ The outcome of feminism's attraction to theories of difference and otherness is thus deeply contentious. First, we witness the further reification reification of the very oppositions in question and a simple reversal of the focus from the same to the other. This observation is not new and has been made by many critics of feminism, but it seems to have made no serious impact on mainstream feminist scholarship or teaching practices in women's studies programs. Second, in the eagerness to rectify the mistakes of “white, middle-class, liberal, western” feminism, the other has been uncritically exalted, which has led in turn to simplistic designations of marginal, “othered” status and, ultimately, a competition for victimhood. Ultimately, this approach has led to a new moral code in which ethics is equated with the responsibility of the privileged Western woman, while moral immunity is granted to the victimized other. Ranjana Khanna describes this operation aptly when she writes that in the field of transnational feminism, the reification of the other has produced “separate ethical universes” in which the privileged experience paralyzing guilt and the neocolonized, crippling resentment. The only “overarching imperative” is that one does not comment on another's ethical context. An ethical response turns out to be a nonresponse. 23 Let us turn now to an exploration of this third outcome.
The result is terminal failure.  Impositions can't solve, localized politics are key  
KAPPELER 1995 Susanne Kappeler, The Will To Violence: The Politics of Personal Behavior, pg 4-5
If we nevertheless continue to explain violence by its 'circumstances' and attempt to counter it by changing these circumstances, it is also because in this way we stay in command of the problem. In particular, we do not complicate the problem by any suggestion that it might be people who need to change. Instead, we turn the perpetrators of violence into the victims of circumstances, who as victims by definition cannot act sensibly (but in changed circumstances will behave differently). `We', on the other hand, are the subjects able to take in hand the task of changing the circumstances. Even if changing the circumstances - combating poverty, unemployment, injustice etc. - may not be easy, it nevertheless remains within `our' scope, at least theoretically and by means of state power. Changing people, on the other hand, is neither within our power nor, it seems, ultimately in our interest: we prefer to keep certain people under control, putting limits on their violent behaviour, but we apparently have no interest in a politics that presupposes people's ability to change and aims at changing attitudes and behaviour. For changing (as opposed to restricting) other people's behaviour is beyond the range and influence of our own power; only they themselves can change it. It requires their will to change, their will not to abuse power and not to use violence. A politics aiming at a change in people's behaviour would require political work that is very much more cumbersome and very much less promising of success than is the use of state power and social control. It would require political consciousness-raising - politicizing the way we think - which cannot be imposed on others by force or compulsory educational measures. It would require a view of people which takes seriously and reckons with their will, both their will to violence or their will to change. To take seriously the will of others however would mean recognizing one's own, and putting people's will, including our own, at the centre of political reflection.''

Biopolitical modes of governance are no longer a threat to anyone – the crisis of the sovereign state has caused violent biopolitics to be abandoned entirely
Jonathan Short, Ph.D. candidate in the Graduate Programme in Social and Political Thought, York University, 2005, “Life and Law: Agamben and Foucault on Governmentality and Sovereignty,” Journal for the Arts, Sciences and Technology, Vol. 3, No. 1
Adding to the dangerousness of this logic of control, however, is that while there is a crisis of undecidability in the domain of life, it corresponds to a similar crisis at the level of law and the national state. It should be noted here that despite the new forms of biopolitical control in operation today, Rose believes that bio-politics has become generally less dangerous in recent times than even in the early part of the last century. At that time, bio- politics was linked to the project of the expanding national state in his opinion. In disciplinary-pastoral society, bio-politics involved a process of social selection of those characteristics thought useful to the nationalist project. Hence, according to Rose, "once each life has a value which may be calculated, and some lives have less value than others, such a politics has the obligation to exercise this judgement in the name of the race or the nation" (2001: 3). Disciplinary-pastoral bio- politics sets itself the task of eliminating "differences coded as defects", and in pursuit of this goal the most horrible programs of eugenics, forced sterilization, and outright extermination, were enacted (ibid.: 3). If Rose is more optimistic about bio-politics in 'advanced liberal' societies, it is because this notion of 'national fitness', in terms of bio- political competition among nation-states, has suffered a precipitous decline thanks in large part to a crisis of the perceived unity of the national state as a viable political project (ibid.: 5). To quote Rose once again, "the idea of 'society' as a single, if heterogeneous, domain with a national culture, a national population, a national destiny, co-extensive with a national territory and the powers of a national political government" no longer serves as premises of state policy (ibid.: 5). Drawing on a sequential reading of Foucault's theory of the governmentalization of the state here, Rose claims that the territorial state, the primary institution of enclosure, has become subject to fragmentation along a number of lines. National culture has given way to cultural pluralism; national identity has been overshadowed by a diverse cluster of identifications, many of them transcending the national territory on which they take place, while the same pluralization has affected the once singular conception of community (ibid.: 5). Under these conditions, Rose argues, the bio-political programmes of the molar enclosure known as the nation-state have fallen into disrepute and have been all but abandoned.

Tournament: Cal | Round: 7 | Opponent: University Prep DK | Judge: Jeremy Spiegel
1NC Procedurals

The affirmative’s failure to advance a topical defense of federal policy undermines debate’s transformative and intellectual potential

1. “Resolved” means debate should be a legislative forum
   Army Officer School ‘4
   (5-12, “# 12, Punctuation – The Colon and Semicolon”, http://usawocc.army.mil/IMI/wg12.htm)
   The colon introduces the following: a. A list, but only after "as follows," "the following," or a noun for which the list is an appositive: Each scout will carry the following: (colon) meals for three days, a survival knife, and his sleeping bag. The company had four new officers: (colon) Bill Smith, Frank Tucker, Peter Fillmore, and Oliver Lewis. b. A long quotation (one or more paragraphs): In The Killer Angels Michael Shaara wrote: (colon) You may find it a different story from the one you learned in school. There have been many versions of that battle Gettysburg and that war the Civil War. (The quote continues for two more paragraphs.) c. A formal quotation or question: The President declared: (colon) "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." The question is: (colon) what can we do about it? d. A second independent clause which explains the first: Potter's motive is clear: (colon) he wants the assignment. e. After the introduction of a business letter: Dear Sirs: (colon) Dear Madam: (colon) f. The details following an announcement For sale: (colon) large lakeside cabin with dock g. A formal resolution, after the word "resolved:"¶ Resolved: (colon) That this council petition the mayor.
   2. The United States is the country composed of the 50 states
   Encarta ‘7
   The Encarta Online Dictionary. “United States” 2007 encarta.msn.com
   U•nit•ed States  y? n?t?d stáyts  country in central North America, consisting of 50 states. Languages: English. Currency: dollar. Capital: Washington, D.C.. Population: 290,342,550 (2001). Area: 9,629,047 sq km (3,717,796 sq mi.) Official name United States of America
   3. The federal government is the government in Washington DC – not its individual members
   AHD ‘2
   The American Heritage Dictionary. 2002, Pg 647GBS-JV
   Of or relating to the central government of a federation as distinct from the governments of its member units.
   4. “Should” means the debate is solely about a policy established by governmental means
   Ericson ‘3
   (Jon M., Dean Emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts – California Polytechnic U., et al., The Debater’s Guide, Third Edition, p. 4)
   The Proposition of Policy: Urging Future Action In policy propositions, each topic contains certain key elements, although they have slightly different functions from comparable elements of value-oriented propositions. 1. An agent doing the acting ---“The United States” in “The United States should adopt a policy of free trade.” Like the object of evaluation in a proposition of value, the agent is the subject of the sentence. 2. The verb should—the first part of a verb phrase that urges action. 3. An action verb to follow should in the should-verb combination. For example, should adopt here means to put a program or policy into action though governmental means. 4. A specification of directions or a limitation of the action desired. The phrase free trade, for example, gives direction and limits to the topic, which would, for example, eliminate consideration of increasing tariffs, discussing diplomatic recognition, or discussing interstate commerce. Propositions of policy deal with future action. Nothing has yet occurred. The entire debate is about whether something ought to occur. What you agree to do, then, when you accept the affirmative side in such a debate is to offer sufficient and compelling reasons for an audience to perform the future action that you propose.

And independently a voting issue for limits and ground---our entire negative strategy is based on the “should” question of the resolution---there are an infinite number of reasons that the scholarship of their advocacy could be a reason to vote affirmative--- these all obviate the only predictable strategies based on topical action---they overstretch our research burden and undermine preparedness for all debates

5 net benefits to our interpretation
1NC – Organizational Decision-Making
First is organizational decision-making – Understanding trade-offs, budget decisions, and opportunity costs are vital to organizational decision making.
De Vita, et al, 1 (Carol J., senior research associate, with Cory Fleming, center administrator, and Eric C. Twombly, research associate @ Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy, The Urban Institute, Building Capacity in Nonprofit Organizations, The Urban Institute, ed. Carol J. De Vita and Cory Fleming, April, Chapter 2: Building Nonprofit Capacity: A Framework for Addressing the Problem, p. 5-33)
The literature on organizational and management theory emphasizes the operational decisions and trade-offs that groups face when building their financial and political capacity. Decisions concerning the use of staff, choice of products and services, fundraising and marketing strategies, and even the selection of a board of directors can significantly impact the success or failure of an organization. Decision making involves foregoing one option in favor of another. In short, organizational management decisions produce trade-offs that may be either beneficial or detrimental to the short-run or long-term viability of the organization. All types of organizations face pressures from other groups when attempting to meet their goals. Institutions such as government and for-profit firms may either cooperate or conflict with one another in their efforts to promote community decision making— each with a specific view on what constitutes economic and social balance. Nonprofits also play a key role in affecting local decision making, particularly by representing less popular and competing views in the political process. However, to be effective players, nonprofit organizations must build and sustain financial and political capacity.
That skill set is vital to actualizing change outside the confines of the debate space.
Algoso, 11 (Dave, Director of Programs at Reboot, MPA, International Development Blogger, “Why I got an MPA: Because organizations matter,” 5/31, http://algoso.org/2011/05/31/why-i-got-an-mpa-because-organizations-matter/)
Because organizations matter. Forget the stories of heroic individuals written in your middle school civics textbook. Nothing of great importance is ever accomplished by a single person. Thomas Edison had lab assistants, George Washington’s army had thousands of troops, and Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity had over a million staff and volunteers when she passed away. Even Jesus had a 12-man posse. In different ways and in vastly different contexts, these were all organizations. Pick your favorite historical figure or contemporary hero, and I can almost guarantee that their greatest successes occurred as part of an organization. Even the most charismatic, visionary and inspiring leaders have to be able to manage people, or find someone who can do it for them. International development work is no different. Regardless of your issue of interest — whether private sector investment, rural development, basic health care, government capacity, girls’ education, or democracy promotion — your work will almost always involve operating within an organization. How well or poorly that organization functions will have dramatic implications for the results of your work. A well-run organization makes better decisions about staffing and operations; learns more from its mistakes; generates resources and commitment from external stakeholders; and structures itself to better promote its goals. None of this is easy or straightforward. We screw it up fairly often. Complaints about NGO management and government bureaucracy are not new. We all recognize the need for improvement. In my mind, the greatest challenges and constraints facing international development are managerial and organizational, rather than technical. Put another way: the greatest opportunities and leverage points lie in how we run our organizations. Yet our discourse about the international development industry focuses largely on how much money donors should commit to development and what technical solutions (e.g. deworming, elections, roads, whatever) deserve the funds. We give short shrift to the questions around how organizations can actually turn those funds into the technical solutions. The closest we come is to discuss the incentives facing organizations due to donor or political requirements. I think we can go deeper in addressing the management and organizational issues mentioned above. This thinking led me to an MPA degree because it straddles that space between organizations and issues. A degree in economics or international affairs could teach you all about the problems in the world, and you may even learn how to address them. But if you don’t learn how to operate in an organization, you may not be able to channel the resources needed to implement solutions. On the flip side, a typical degree in management offers relevant skills, but without the content knowledge necessary to understand the context and the issues. I think the MPA, if you choose the right program for you and use your time well, can do both.

Solely exposing injustices fails – institutional participation is vital for social transformation.
Komesar 94 - professor of law at the University of Wisconsin
(Neil, “Imperfect Alternatives: Choosing Institutions in Law, Economics, and Public Policy,” p. 41-42)
Even the constitutions of totalitarian states have contained high-sounding announcements of rights.  The welfare of the populace depends on the presence of institutions capable of translating high-sounding principles into substance.  Issues of institutional representation and participation seem especially important for the least advantaged, who almost by definition have had difficulties with representation and participation in existing institutional processes.  If representation and participation are important for resolving the simpler version of the difference principle, they would seem even more important in confronting the more complicated standard that Michelman derives from Rawls.  They would seem more important yet when society faces the immense task of fulfilling a measure of justice that seeks to integrate this difference principle with the concepts of equal opportunity and liberty.  Determining the character of the legislature or agency given the task of this integration seems central here.  The real content of Rawlsian justice depends on such a determination.  Any theory of justice capable of even minimally capturing our basic sensibilities has many loosely defined components.  Because such loosely defined elements and complicated standards are inherent in goal choice and articulation, the character of institutions that will define and apply these goals becomes an essential – perhaps the essential – component in the realization of the just society.  The more complex and vaguely defined the conception of the good, the more central becomes the issue of who decides – the issue of instiutional choice.  The discussion of Boomer showed that these questions of institutional choice dominate issues of resource allocation efficiency—a definition of the social good more confined and better defined than broader conceptions of the good such as Rawls’s theory of justice.  The lessons about the importance and complexity of institutional choice derived from Boomer are even more appropriate with more complex definitions of the good.

1NC – Civic Engagement
Second is civic engagement – there is a youth crisis of it now
Zwarensteyn, 12 (Ellen, Masters of Science, Communications thesis, “High School Policy Debate as an Enduring Pathway to Political Education: Evaluating Possibilities for Political Learning,” Grand Valley State University, August, http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1034andcontext=theses)
A lack of political learning opportunities reveals how difficult it may be for students to discover or find themselves in politics. As a result, many students are separated and isolated from connections to political worlds and policy analysis. Studies demonstrate how students entering college do not have a firm grasp on political education. Colby (2008) cites an overall decline in political learning despite more students attending college. Moreover, Galston (2001) advances how despite overall advancements in education since the 1950s, political knowledge levels remain stagnant. “If we compare generations rather than cohorts—that is, if we compare today’s young adults not with today’s older adults but with the young adults of the past—we find evidence of diminished civic attachment” (Galston, 2001, p. 219). Specific measures regarding willingness to talk about the news, caring about current events, voting, watching the news or reading the paper, and other traditional forms of political involvement have declined with each generation (Galston, 2001, p. 220-221). The most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress Report documents one consequence to this rote approach to government. Even after a historic presidential election in 2008, students are less involved in political learning and demonstrate less proficiency in 2010 than even in 2006 (National Center, 2011, p. 34). Moreover, “…individuals emerge from the educational system with a lower level of knowledge about current political figures and alignments than 30 or 40 years ago. And individuals of all ages are less able to answer questions about current politics than their counterparts with similar education backgrounds in the past” (Delli Carpinin and Keeter, 1991, p. 607). Schools seem to focus on teaching facts as the end goal of a political education rather than how facts are necessary to understand the fluidity and complexity of current events. Together, the prospects for enduring and thoughtful political engagement are dim in light of these facts.
Fragmenting social dialogue through the critique exacerbates social ills – destroying civic engagement.
Block, 5 (Peter, author of Flawless Consulting: A Guide to Getting Your Experience Used, Stewardship: Choosing Service over Self-Interest, and others, consultant at Designed Learning, Masters Degree in Industrial Administration from Yale University, “Civic Engagement and the Restoration of Community,” http://www.peterblock.com/_assets/downloads/Civic.pdf)
Civic engagement as used here is about a shift in the language and conversation we use to make our community better. We treat civic engagement as something more than voting, volunteering, and supporting events designed to bring people together. While civic engagement is about action, it is not about community action and community development as we normally think of it. The conventional view of community action and development addresses what we usually call problems; areas such as public safety, jobs and local economy, affordable housing, universal health care, education. In the context of civic engagement, these are really symptoms. The deeper cause is in the un-reconciled and fragmented nature of our community. This fragmentation creates a context for solving the symptoms that only sustains them. Otherwise why have we been working on these symptoms for so long, and so hard, and even with so many successful programs, seen too little fundamental change? The real intent of civic engagement is to shift the context within which traditional problem solving, investment, and social and community action takes place. It is aimed at the restoration of the experience and vitality of community. It is this shift in context, expressed through a shift in language, that creates the condition where traditional forms of action can make a difference.

Civic engagement is vital to solving collective action problems
Choi, 14 (Young Whan, Civic Engagement Coordinator @ Oakland Unified School District, BA in History from Brown University, Masters Degree in Education from the Teachers College of Columbia University, “Why Does Civic Engagement Matter in Schools?” 1/29, Educating for Democracy in the Digital Age, http://eddaoakland.org/2014/01/29/why-does-civic-engagement-matter-in-schools/)
These academic benefits cannot be overstressed, but there is still another compelling reason for schools to care about civic engagement. Civic engagement promotes social and political development. One of the great criticisms of the United States is that we, as a country, prize individualism above the needs of the larger society. The push for students to strive for their own individual success and achievement begs for the countervailing balance of a healthy sense of connection and community. Students must also learn that they are an integral part of a larger society and that they have both rights and responsibilities within that society. They cannot develop a sense that they belong to a larger society or live within a political system through theory alone; they must experience society and they must experience that political system. For example, learning about the three branches of government must be coupled with opportunities to effect change through action taken at the local, state, and/or national level. In her government class, Maryann Wolfe has asked her students to do just that. Similarly, being told that they should be compassionate takes on new meaning when students experience what it feels like to care for others through a service learning project. Michelle Espino’s students are acting with care and developing their sense of responsibility to the ecosystem through their recycling project. Finally, instead of banning smartphones and other devices that connect students with the world, schools can provide students with guidance on how to use these powerful tools to take actions that benefits others. Jo Paraiso’s students see themselves as part of an online community, engaging in respectful dialogue with students and adults via their social issue research blogs.

1NC Roleplaying
Third, discussion of specific policy-questions is crucial for skills development---we control uniqueness: university students already have preconceived notions about how the world operates---government policy discussion is vital to force engagement with and resolution of competing perspectives to improve social outcomes, however those outcomes may be defined
Esberg and Sagan 12 *Jane Esberg is special assistant to the director at New York University's Center on. International Cooperation. She was the winner of 2009 Firestone Medal, AND Scott Sagan is a professor of political science and director of Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation “NEGOTIATING NONPROLIFERATION: Scholarship, Pedagogy, and Nuclear Weapons Policy,” 2/17 The Nonproliferation Review, 19:1, 95-108
These government or quasi-government think tank simulations often provide very similar lessons for high-level players as are learned by students in educational simulations. Government participants learn about the importance of understanding foreign perspectives, the need to practice internal coordination, and the necessity to compromise and coordinate with other governments in negotiations and crises. During the Cold War, political scientist Robert Mandel noted how crisis exercises and war games forced government officials to overcome ‘‘bureaucratic myopia,’’ moving beyond their normal organizational roles and thinking more creatively about how others might react in a crisis or conflict.6 The skills of imagination and the subsequent ability to predict foreign interests and reactions remain critical for real-world foreign policy makers. For example, simulations of the Iranian nuclear crisis*held in 2009 and 2010 at the Brookings Institution’s Saban Center and at Harvard University’s Belfer Center, and involving former US senior officials and regional experts*highlighted the dangers of misunderstanding foreign governments’ preferences and misinterpreting their subsequent behavior. In both simulations, the primary criticism of the US negotiating team lay in a failure to predict accurately how other states, both allies and adversaries, would behave in response to US policy initiatives.7 By university age, students often have a pre-defined view of international affairs, and the literature on simulations in education has long emphasized how such exercises force students to challenge their assumptions about how other governments behave and how their own government works.8 Since simulations became more common as a teaching tool in the late 1950s, educational literature has expounded on their benefits, from encouraging engagement by breaking from the typical lecture format, to improving communication skills, to promoting teamwork.9 More broadly, simulations can deepen understanding by asking students to link fact and theory, providing a context for facts while bringing theory into the realm of practice.10 These exercises are particularly valuable in teaching international affairs for many of the same reasons they are useful for policy makers: they force participants to ‘‘grapple with the issues arising from a world in flux.’’11 Simulations have been used successfully to teach students about such disparate topics as European politics, the Kashmir crisis, and US response to the mass killings in Darfur.12 Role-playing exercises certainly encourage students to learn political and technical facts* but they learn them in a more active style. Rather than sitting in a classroom and merely receiving knowledge, students actively research ‘‘their’’ government’s positions and actively argue, brief, and negotiate with others.13 Facts can change quickly; simulations teach students how to contextualize and act on information.14
1NC Limits – Generic
Fourth, a limited topic of discussion that provides for equitable ground is key to productive inculcation of decision-making and advocacy skills in every and all facets of life---even if their position is contestable that’s distinct from it being valuably debatable---this still provides room for flexibility, creativity, and innovation, but targets the discussion to avoid mere statements of fact
Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp45-
Debate is a means of settling differences, so there must be a difference of opinion or a conflict of interest before there can be a debate. If everyone is in agreement on a tact or value or policy, there is no need for debate: the matter can be settled by unanimous consent. Thus, for example, it would be pointless to attempt to debate "Resolved: That two plus two equals four," because there is simply no controversy about this statement. (Controversy is an essential prerequisite of debate. Where there is no clash of ideas, proposals, interests, or expressed positions on issues, there is no debate. In addition, debate cannot produce effective decisions without clear identification of a question or questions to be answered. For example, general argument may occur about the broad topic of illegal immigration. How many illegal immigrants are in the United States? What is the impact of illegal immigration and immigrants on our economy? What is their impact on our communities? Do they commit crimes? Do they take jobs from American workers? Do they pay taxes? Do they require social services? Is it a problem that some do not speak English? Is it the responsibility of employers to discourage illegal immigration by not hiring undocumented workers? Should they have the opportunity- to gain citizenship? Docs illegal immigration pose a security threat to our country? Do illegal immigrants do work that American workers are unwilling to do? Are their rights as workers and as human beings at risk due to their status? Are they abused by employers, law enforcement, housing, and businesses? I low are their families impacted by their status? What is the moral and philosophical obligation of a nation state to maintain its borders? Should we build a wall on the Mexican border, establish a national identification can!, or enforce existing laws against employers? Should we invite immigrants to become U.S. citizens? Surely you can think of many more concerns to be addressed by a conversation about the topic area of illegal immigration. Participation in this "debate" is likely to be emotional and intense. However, it is not likely to be productive or useful without focus on a particular question and identification of a line demarcating sides in the controversy. To be discussed and resolved effectively, controversies must be stated clearly. Vague understanding results in unfocused deliberation and poor decisions, frustration, and emotional distress, as evidenced by the failure of the United States Congress to make progress on the immigration debate during the summer of 2007. Someone disturbed by the problem of the growing underclass of poorly educated, socially disenfranchised youths might observe, "Public schools are doing a terrible job! They are overcrowded, and many teachers are poorly qualified in their subject areas. Even the best teachers can do little more than struggle to maintain order in their classrooms." That same concerned citizen, facing a complex range of issues, might arrive at an unhelpful decision, such as "We ought to do something about this" or. worse. "It's too complicated a problem to deal with." Groups of concerned citizens worried about the state of public education could join together to express their frustrations, anger, disillusionment, and emotions regarding the schools, but without a focus for their discussions, they could easily agree about the sorry state of education without finding points of clarity or potential solutions. A gripe session would follow. But if a precise question is posed—such as "What can be done to improve public education?"—then a more profitable area of discussion is opened up simply by placing a focus on the search for a concrete solution step. One or more judgments can be phrased in the form of debate propositions, motions for parliamentary debate, or bills for legislative assemblies. The statements "Resolved: That the federal government should implement a program of charter schools in at-risk communities" and "Resolved: That the state of Florida should adopt a school voucher program" more clearly identify specific ways of dealing with educational problems in a manageable form, suitable for debate. They provide specific policies to be investigated and aid discussants in identifying points of difference. To have a productive debate, which facilitates effective decision making by directing and placing limits on the decision to be made, the basis for argument should be clearly defined. If we merely talk about "homelessness" or "abortion" or "crime'* or "global warming" we are likely to have an interesting discussion but not to establish profitable basis for argument. For example, the statement "Resolved: That the pen is mightier than the sword" is debatable, yet fails to provide much basis for clear argumentation. If we take this statement to mean that the written word is more effective than physical force for some purposes, we can identify a problem area: the comparative effectiveness of writing or physical force for a specific purpose. Although we now have a general subject, we have not yet stated a problem. It is still too broad, too loosely worded to promote well-organized argument. What sort of writing are we concerned with—poems, novels, government documents, website development, advertising, or what? What does "effectiveness" mean in this context? What kind of physical force is being compared—fists, dueling swords, bazookas, nuclear weapons, or what? A more specific question might be. "Would a mutual defense treaty or a visit by our fleet be more effective in assuring Liurania of our support in a certain crisis?" The basis for argument could be phrased in a debate proposition such as "Resolved: That the United States should enter into a mutual defense treatv with Laurania." Negative advocates might oppose this proposition by arguing that fleet maneuvers would be a better solution. This is not to say that debates should completely avoid creative interpretation of the controversy by advocates, or that good debates cannot occur over competing interpretations of the controversy; in fact, these sorts of debates may be very engaging. The point is that debate is best facilitated by the guidance provided by focus on a particular point of difference, which will be outlined in the following discussion.
1NC SSD
Fifth, switch-side is key---Effective deliberation is crucial to the activation of personal agency and is only possible in a switch-side debate format where debaters divorce themselves from ideology to engage in political contestation
Patricia Roberts-Miller 3 is Associate Professor of Rhetoric at the University of Texas "Fighting Without Hatred:Hannah Ar endt ' s Agonistic Rhetoric" JAC 22.2 2003
Totalitarianism and the Competitive Space of Agonism¶ Arendt is probably most famous for her analysis of totalitarianism (especially her The Origins of Totalitarianism andEichmann in Jerusa¬lem), but the recent attention has been on her criticism of mass culture (The Human Condition). Arendt's main criticism of the current human condition is that the common world of deliberate and joint action is fragmented into solipsistic and unreflective behavior. In an especially lovely passage, she says that in mass society people are all imprisoned in the subjectivity of their own singular experience, which does not cease to be singular if the same experience is multiplied innumerable times. The end of the common world has come when it is seen only under one aspect and is permitted to present itself in only one perspective. (Human 58)¶ What Arendt so beautifully describes is that isolation and individualism are not corollaries, and may even be antithetical because obsession with one's own self and the particularities of one's life prevents one from engaging in conscious, deliberate, collective action. Individuality, unlike isolation, depends upon a collective with whom one argues in order to direct the common life. Self-obsession, even (especially?) when coupled with isolation from one' s community is far from apolitical; it has political consequences. Perhaps a better way to put it is that it is political precisely because it aspires to be apolitical. This fragmented world in which many people live simultaneously and even similarly but not exactly together is what Arendt calls the "social."¶ Arendt does not mean that group behavior is impossible in the realm of the social, but that social behavior consists "in some way of isolated individuals, incapable of solidarity or mutuality, who abdicate their human capacities and responsibilities to a projected 'they' or 'it,' with disastrous consequences, both for other people and eventually for themselves" (Pitkin 79). One can behave, butnot act. For someone like Arendt, a German-assimilated Jew, one of the most frightening aspects of the Holocaust was the ease with which a people who had not been extraordinarily anti-Semitic could be put to work industriously and efficiently on the genocide of the Jews. And what was striking about the perpetrators of the genocide, ranging from minor functionaries who facilitated the murder transports up to major figures on trial at Nuremberg, was their constant and apparently sincere insistence that they were not responsible. For Arendt, this was not a peculiarity of the German people, but of the current human and heavily bureaucratic condition of twentieth-century culture: we do not consciously choose to engage in life's activities; we drift into them, or we do them out of a desire to conform. Even while we do them, we do not acknowledge an active, willed choice to do them; instead, we attribute our behavior to necessity, and we perceive ourselves as determined—determined by circumstance, by accident, by what "they" tell us to do. We do something from within the anonymity of a mob that we would never do as an individual; we do things for which we will not take responsibility. Yet, whether or not people acknowledge responsibil¬ity for the consequences of their actions, those consequences exist. Refusing to accept responsibility can even make those consequences worse, in that the people who enact the actions in question, because they do not admit their own agency, cannot be persuaded to stop those actions. They are simply doing their jobs. In a totalitarian system, however, everyone is simply doing his or her job; there never seems to be anyone who can explain, defend, and change the policies. Thus, it is, as Arendt says, rule by nobody.¶ It is illustrative to contrast Arendt's attitude toward discourse to Habermas'. While both are critical of modern bureaucratic and totalitar¬ian systems, Arendt's solution is the playful and competitive space of agonism; it is not the rational-critical public sphere. The "actual content of political life" is "the joy and the gratification that arise out of being in company with our peers, out of acting together and appearing in public, out of inserting ourselves into the world by word and deed, thus acquiring and sustaining our personal identity and beginning something entirely new" ("Truth" 263). According to Seyla Benhabib, Arendt's public realm emphasizes the assumption of competition, and it "represents that space of appearances in which moral and political greatness, heroism, and preeminence are revealed, displayed, shared with others. This is a competitive space in which one competes for recognition, precedence, and acclaim" (78). These qualities are displayed, but not entirely for purposes of acclamation; they are not displays of one's self, but of ideas and arguments, of one's thought. When Arendt discusses Socrates' thinking in public, she emphasizes his performance: "He performed in the marketplace the way the flute-player performed at a banquet. It is sheer performance, sheer activity"; nevertheless, it was thinking: "What he actually did was to make public, in discourse, the thinking process" {Lectures 37). Pitkin summarizes this point: "Arendt says that the heroism associated with politics is not the mythical machismo of ancient Greece but something more like the existential leap into action and public exposure" (175-76). Just as it is not machismo, although it does have considerable ego involved, so it is not instrumental rationality; Arendt's discussion of the kinds of discourse involved in public action include myths, stories, and personal narratives.¶ Furthermore, the competition is not ruthless; it does not imply a willingness to triumph at all costs. Instead, it involves something like having such a passion for ideas and politics that one is willing to take risks. One tries to articulate the best argument, propose the best policy, design the best laws, make the best response. This is a risk in that one might lose; advancing an argument means that one must be open to the criticisms others will make of it. The situation is agonistic not because the participants manufacture or seek conflict, but because conflict is a necessary consequence of difference. This attitude is reminiscent of Kenneth Burke, who did not try to find a language free of domination but who instead theorized a way that the very tendency toward hierarchy in language might be used against itself (for more on this argument, see Kastely). Similarly, Arendt does not propose a public realm of neutral, rational beings who escape differences to live in the discourse of universals; she envisions one of different people who argue with passion, vehemence, and integrity.¶ Continued…¶ Eichmann perfectly exemplified what Arendt famously called the "banal¬ity of evil" but that might be better thought of as the bureaucratization of evil (or, as a friend once aptly put it, the evil of banality). That is, he was able to engage in mass murder because he was able not to think about it, especially not from the perspective of the victims, and he was able to exempt himself from personal responsibility by telling himself (and anyone else who would listen) that he was just following orders. It was the bureaucratic system that enabled him to do both. He was not exactly passive; he was, on the contrary, very aggressive in trying to do his duty. He behaved with the "ruthless, competitive exploitation" and "inauthen-tic, self-disparaging conformism" that characterizes those who people totalitarian systems (Pitkin 87).¶ Arendt's theorizing of totalitarianism has been justly noted as one of her strongest contributions to philosophy. She saw that a situation like Nazi Germany is different from the conventional understanding of a tyranny. Pitkin writes,¶ Totalitarianism cannot be understood, like earlier forms of domination, as the ruthless exploitation of some people by others, whether the motive be selfish calculation, irrational passion, or devotion to some cause. Understanding totalitarianism's essential nature requires solving the central mystery of the holocaust—the objectively useless and indeed dysfunctional, fanatical pursuit of a purely ideological policy, a pointless process to which the people enacting it have fallen captive. (87)¶ Totalitarianism is closely connected to bureaucracy; it is oppression by rules, rather than by people who have willfully chosen to establish certain rules. It is the triumph of the social.¶ Critics (both friendly and hostile) have paid considerable attention to Arendt's category of the "social," largely because, despite spending so much time on the notion, Arendt remains vague on certain aspects of it. Pitkin appropriately compares Arendt's concept of the social to the Blob, the type of monster that figured in so many post-war horror movies. That Blob was "an evil monster from outer space, entirely external to and separate from us that had fallen upon us intent on debilitating, absorb¬ing, and ultimately destroying us, gobbling up our distinct individuality and turning us into robots that mechanically serve its purposes" (4).¶ Pitkin is critical of this version of the "social" and suggests that Arendt meant (or perhaps should have meant) something much more complicated. The simplistic version of the social-as-Blob can itself be an instance of Blob thinking; Pitkin's criticism is that Arendt talks at times as though the social comes from outside of us and has fallen upon us, turning us into robots. Yet, Arendt's major criticism of the social is that it involves seeing ourselves as victimized by something that comes from outside our own behavior. I agree with Pitkin that Arendt's most powerful descriptions of the social (and the other concepts similar to it, such as her discussion of totalitarianism, imperialism, Eichmann, and parvenus) emphasize that these processes are not entirely out of our control but that they happen to us when, and because, we keep refusing to make active choices. We create the social through negligence. It is not the sort of force in a Sorcerer's Apprentice, which once let loose cannot be stopped; on the contrary, it continues to exist because we structure our world to reward social behavior. Pitkin writes, "From childhood on, in virtually all our institutions, we reward euphemism, salesmanship, slo¬gans, and we punish and suppress truth-telling, originality, thoughtful-ness. So we continually cultivate ways of (not) thinking that induce the social" (274). I want to emphasize this point, as it is important for thinking about criticisms of some forms of the social construction of knowledge: denying our own agency is what enables the social to thrive. To put it another way, theories of powerlessness are self-fulfilling prophecies.¶ Arendt grants that there are people who willed the Holocaust, but she insists that totalitarian systems result not so much from the Hitlers or Stalins as from the bureaucrats who may or may not agree with the established ideology but who enforce the rules for no stronger motive than a desire to avoid trouble with their superiors (see Eichmann and Life). They do not think about what they do. One might prevent such occurrences—or, at least, resist the modern tendency toward totalitarian¬ism—by thought: "critical thought is in principle anti-authoritarian" (Lectures 38).¶ By "thought" Arendt does not mean eremitic contemplation; in fact, she has great contempt for what she calls "professional thinkers," refusing herself to become a philosopher or to call her work philosophy. Young-Bruehl, Benhabib, and Pitkin have each said that Heidegger represented just such a professional thinker for Arendt, and his embrace of Nazism epitomized the genuine dangers such "thinking" can pose (see Arendt's "Heidegger"). "Thinking" is not typified by the isolated con¬templation of philosophers; it requires the arguments of others and close attention to the truth. It is easy to overstate either part of that harmony. One must consider carefully the arguments and viewpoints of others:¶ Political thought is representative. I form an opinion by considering a given issue from different viewpoints, by making present to my mind the standpoints of those who are absent; that is, I represent them. This process of representation does not blindly adopt the actual views of those who stand somewhere else, and hence look upon the world from a different perspective; this is a question neither of empathy, as though I tried to be or to feel like somebody else, nor of counting noses and joining a majority but of being and thinking in my own identity where actually I am not. The more people's standpoints I have present in my mind while I am ponder¬ing a given issue, and the better I can imagine how I would feel and think if I were in their place, the stronger will be my capacity for represen¬tative thinking and the more valid my final conclusions, my opinion. ("Truth" 241)¶ There are two points to emphasize in this wonderful passage. First, one does not get these standpoints in one's mind through imagining them, but through listening to them; thus, good thinking requires that one hear the arguments of other people. Hence, as Arendt says, "critical thinking, while still a solitary business, does not cut itself off from' all others.'" Thinking is, in this view, necessarily public discourse: critical thinking is possible "only where the standpoints of all others are open to inspection" (Lectures 43). Yet, it is not a discourse in which one simply announces one's stance; participants are interlocutors and not just speakers; they must listen. Unlike many current versions of public discourse, this view presumes that speech matters. It is not asymmetric manipulation of others, nor merely an economic exchange; it must be a world into which one enters and by which one might be changed.¶ Second, passages like the above make some readers think that Arendt puts too much faith in discourse and too little in truth (see Habermas). But Arendt is no crude relativist; she believes in truth, and she believes that there are facts that can be more or less distorted. She does not believe that reality is constructed by discourse, or that truth is indistinguishable from falsehood. She insists tha^ the truth has a different pull on us and, consequently, that it has a difficult place in the world of the political. Facts are different from falsehood because, while they can be distorted or denied, especially when they are inconvenient for the powerful, they also have a certain positive force that falsehood lacks: "Truth, though powerless and always defe ated in a head-on clash with the powers that be, possesses a strength of its own: whatever those in power may contrive, they are unable to discover or invent a viable substitute for it. Persuasion and violence can destroy truth, but they cannot replace it" ("Truth" 259).¶ Facts have a strangely resilient quality partially because a lie "tears, as it were, a hole in the fabric of factuality. As every historian knows, one can spot a lie by noticing incongruities, holes, or the j unctures of patched-up places" ("Truth" 253). While she is sometimes discouraging about our ability to see the tears in the fabric, citing the capacity of totalitarian governments to create the whole cloth (see "Truth" 252-54), she is also sometimes optimistic. InEichmann in Jerusalem, she repeats the story of Anton Schmidt—a man who saved the lives of Jews—and concludes that such stories cannot be silenced (230-32). For facts to exert power in the common world, however, these stories must be told. Rational truth (such as principles of mathematics) might be perceptible and demonstrable through individual contemplation, but "factual truth, on the contrary, is always related to other people: it concerns events and circumstances in which many are involved; it is established by witnesses and depends upon testimony; it exists only to the extent that it is spoken about, even if it occurs in the domain of privacy. It is political by nature" (23 8). Arendt is neither a positivist who posits an autonomous individual who can correctly perceive truth, nor a relativist who positively asserts the inherent relativism of all perception. Her description of how truth functions does not fall anywhere in the three-part expeditio so prevalent in bothrhetoric and philosophy: it is not expressivist, positivist, or social constructivist. Good thinking depends upon good public argument, and good public argument depends upon access to facts: "Freedom of opinion is a farce unless factual information is guaranteed" (238).¶ The sort of thinking that Arendt propounds takes the form of action only when it is public argument, and, as such, it is particularly precious: "For if no other test but the experience of being active, no other measure but the extent of sheer activity were to be applied to the various activities within the vita activa, it might well be that thinking as such would surpass them all" (Human 325). Arendt insists that it is "the same general rule— Do not contradict yourself (not your self but your thinking ego)—that determines both thinking and acting" (Lectures 3 7). In place of the mildly resentful conformism that fuels totalitarianism, Arendt proposes what Pitkin calls "a tough-minded, open-eyed readiness to perceive and judge reality for oneself, in terms of concrete experience and independent, critical theorizing" (274). The paradoxical nature of agonism (that it must involve both individuality and commonality) makes it difficult to maintain, as the temptation is great either to think one's own thoughts without reference to anyone else or to let others do one's thinking.¶ Arendt's Polemical Agonism¶ As I said, agonism does have its advocates within rhetoric—Burke, Ong, Sloane, Gage, and Jarratt, for instance—but while each of these theorists proposes a form of conflictual argument, not one of these is as adversarial as Arendt's. Agonism can emphasize persuasion, as does John Gage's textbook The Shape of Reason or William Brandt et al.'s The Craft of Writing. That is, the goal of the argument is to identify the disagreement and then construct a text that gains the assent of the audience. This is not the same as what Gage (citing Thomas Conley) calls "asymmetrical theories of rhetoric": theories that "presuppose an active speaker and a passive audience, a speaker whose rhetorical task is therefore to do something to that audience" ("Reasoned" 6). Asymmetric rhetoric is not and cannot be agonistic. Persuasive agonism still values conflict, disagreement, and equality among interlocutors, but it has the goal of reaching agreement, as when Gage says that the process of argument should enable one's reasons to be "understood and believed" by others (Shape 5; emphasis added).¶ Arendt's version is what one might call polemical agonism: it puts less emphasis on gaining assent, and it is exemplified both in Arendt's own writing and in Donald Lazere's "Ground Rules for Polemicists" and "Teaching the Political Conflicts." Both forms of agonism (persuasive and polemical) require substantive debate at two points in a long and recursive process. First, one engages in debate in order to invent one's argument; even silent thinking is a "dialogue of myself with myself (Lectures 40). The difference between the two approaches to agonism is clearest when one presents an argument to an audience assumed to be an opposition. In persuasive agonism, one plays down conflict and moves through reasons to try to persuade one's audience. In polemical agonism, however, one's intention is not necessarily to prove one's case, but to make public one' s thought in order to test it. In this way, communicability serves the same function in philosophy that replicability serves in the sciences; it is how one tests the validity of one's thought. In persuasive agonism, success is achieved through persuasion; in polemical agonism, success may be marked through the quality of subsequent controversy.¶ Arendt quotes from a letter Kant wrote on this point:¶ You know that I do not approach reasonable objections with the intention merely of refuting them, but that in thinking them over I always weave them into my judgments, and afford them the opportunity of overturning all my most cherished beliefs. I entertain the hope that by thus viewing my judgments impartially from the standpoint of others some third view that will improve upon my previous insight may be obtainable. {Lectures 42)¶ Kant's use of "impartial" here is interesting: he is not describing a stance that is free of all perspective; it is impartial only in the sense that it is not his own view. This is the same way that Arendt uses the term; she does not advocate any kind of positivistic rationality, but instead a "universal interdependence" ("Truth" 242). She does not place the origin of the "disinterested pursuit of truth" in science, but at "the moment when Homer chose to sing the deeds of the Trojans no less than those of the Achaeans, and to praise the glory of Hector, the foe and the defeated man, no less than the glory of Achilles, the hero of his kinfolk" ("Truth" 262¬63). It is useful to note that Arendt tends not to use the term "universal," opting more often for "common," by which she means both what is shared and what is ordinary, a usage that evades many of the problems associated with universalism while preserving its virtues (for a brief butprovocative application of Arendt's notion of common, see Hauser 100-03).¶ In polemical agonism, there is a sense in which one' s main goal is not to persuade one's readers; persuading one's readers, if this means that they fail to see errors and flaws in one' s argument, might actually be a sort of failure. It means that one wishes to put forward an argument that makes clear what one's stance is and why one holds it, but with the intention of provoking critique and counterargument. Arendt describes Kant's "hope" for his writings not that the number of people who agree with him would increase but "that the circle of his examiners would gradually be en¬larged" {Lectures 39); he wanted interlocutors, not acolytes.¶ This is not consensus-based argument, nor is it what is sometimes called "consociational argument," nor is this argument as mediation or conflict resolution. Arendt (and her commentators) use the term "fight," and they mean it. When Arendt describes the values that are necessary in our world, she says, "They are a sense of honor, desire for fame and glory, the spirit of fighting without hatred and 'without the spirit of revenge,' and indifference to material advantages" {Crises 167). Pitkin summarizes Arendt's argument: "Free citizenship presupposes the ability to fight— openly, seriously, with commitment, and about things that really mat¬ter—without fanaticism, without seeking to exterminate one's oppo¬nents" (266). My point here is two-fold: first, there is not a simple binary opposition between persuasive discourse and eristic discourse, the conflictual versus the collaborative, or argument as opposed to debate.¶ Second, while polemical agonismrequires diversity among interlocutors, and thus seems an extraordinarily appropriate notion, and while it may be a useful corrective to too much emphasis on persuasion, it seems to me that polemical agonism could easily slide into the kind of wrangling that is simply frustrating. Arendt does not describe just how one is to keep the conflict useful. Although she rejects the notion that politics is "no more than a battlefield of partial, conflicting interests, where nothing countfs but pleasure and profit, partisanship, and the lust for dominion," she does not say exactly how we are to know when we are engaging in the existential leap of argument versus when we are lusting for dominion ("Truth" 263).¶ Like other proponents of agonism, Arendt argues that rhetoric does not lead individuals or communities to ultimate Truth; it leads to decisions that will necessarily have to be reconsidered. Even Arendt, who tends to express a greater faith than many agonists (such as Burke, Sloane, or Kastely) in the ability of individuals to perceive truth, insists that self-deception is always a danger, so public discourse is necessary as a form of testing (see especially Lectures and "Truth"). She remarks that it is difficult to think beyond one's self-interest and that "nothing, indeed, is more common, even among highly sophisticated people, than the blind obstinacy that becomes manifest in lack of imagination and failure to judge" ("Truth" 242).¶ Agonism demands that one simultaneously trust and doubt one' s own perceptions, rely on one's own judgment and consider the judgments of others, think for oneself and imagine how others think. The question remains whether this is a kind of thought in which everyone can engage. Is the agonistic public sphere (whether political, academic, or scientific) only available to the few? Benhabib puts this criticism in the form of a question: "That is, is the 'recovery of the public space' under conditions of modernity necessarily an elitist and antidemocratic project that can hardly be reconciled with the demand for universal political emancipa¬tion and the universal extension of citizenship rights that have accompa¬nied modernity since the American and French Revolutions?" (75). This is an especially troubling question not only because Arendt's examples of agonistic rhetoric are from elitist cultures, but also because of com¬ments she makes, such as this one from The Human Condition: "As a living experience, thought has always been assumed, perhaps wrongly, to be known only to the few. It may not be presumptuous to believe that these few have not become fewer in our time" {Human 324).¶ Yet, there are important positive political consequences of agonism.¶ Arendt' s own promotion of the agonistic sphere helps to explain how the system could be actively moral. It is not an overstatement to say that a central theme in Arendt's work is the evil of conformity—the fact that the modern bureaucratic state makes possible extraordinary evil carried out by people who do not even have any ill will toward their victims. It does so by "imposing innumerable and various rules, all of which tend to 'normalize' its members, to make them behave, to exclude spontaneous action or outstanding achievement" (Human 40). It keeps people from thinking, and it keeps them behaving. The agonistic model's celebration of achievement and verbal skill undermines the political force of conformity, so it is a force against the bureaucratizing of evil. If people think for themselves, they will resist dogma; if people think of themselves as one of many, they will empathize; if people can do both, they will resist totalitarianism. And if they talk about what they see, tell their stories, argue about their perceptions, and listen to one another—that is, engage in rhetoric—then they are engaging in antitotalitarian action.¶ In post-Ramistic rhetoric, it is a convention to have a thesis, and one might well wonder just what mine is—whether I am arguing for or against Arendt's agonism. Arendt does not lay out a pedagogy for us to follow (although one might argue that, if she had, it would lookmuch like the one Lazere describes in "Teaching"), so I am not claiming that greater attention to Arendt would untangle various pedagogical problems that teachers of writing face. Nor am I claiming that applying Arendt's views will resolve theoretical arguments that occupy scholarly journals. I am saying, on the one hand, that Arendt's connection of argument and thinking, as well as her perception that both serve to thwart totalitarian¬ism, suggest that agonal rhetoric (despite the current preference for collaborative rhetoric) is the best discourse for a diverse and inclusive public sphere. On the other hand, Arendt's advocacy of agonal rhetoric is troubling (and, given her own admiration for Kant, this may be intentional), especially in regard to its potential elitism, masculinism, failure to describe just how to keep argument from collapsing into wrangling, and apparently cheerful acceptance of hierarchy. Even with these flaws, Arendt describes something we would do well to consider thoughtfully: a fact-based but not positivist, communally grounded but not relativist, adversarial but not violent, independent but not expressivist rhetoric.

Tournament: Cal | Round: Triples | Opponent: Houston Memorial MC | Judge: Duffy, Hammond, MacFarland
1NC Procedurals
The offcase is topicality—first page is procedurals

The affirmative’s failure to advance a topical defense of federal policy undermines debate’s transformative and intellectual potential

1. “Resolved” means debate should be a legislative forum
   Army Officer School ‘4
   (5-12, “# 12, Punctuation – The Colon and Semicolon”, http://usawocc.army.mil/IMI/wg12.htm)
   The colon introduces the following: a. A list, but only after "as follows," "the following," or a noun for which the list is an appositive: Each scout will carry the following: (colon) meals for three days, a survival knife, and his sleeping bag. The company had four new officers: (colon) Bill Smith, Frank Tucker, Peter Fillmore, and Oliver Lewis. b. A long quotation (one or more paragraphs): In The Killer Angels Michael Shaara wrote: (colon) You may find it a different story from the one you learned in school. There have been many versions of that battle Gettysburg and that war the Civil War. (The quote continues for two more paragraphs.) c. A formal quotation or question: The President declared: (colon) "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." The question is: (colon) what can we do about it? d. A second independent clause which explains the first: Potter's motive is clear: (colon) he wants the assignment. e. After the introduction of a business letter: Dear Sirs: (colon) Dear Madam: (colon) f. The details following an announcement For sale: (colon) large lakeside cabin with dock g. A formal resolution, after the word "resolved:"¶ Resolved: (colon) That this council petition the mayor.
   2. The United States is the country composed of the 50 states
   Encarta ‘7
   The Encarta Online Dictionary. “United States” 2007 encarta.msn.com
   U•nit•ed States  y? n?t?d stáyts  country in central North America, consisting of 50 states. Languages: English. Currency: dollar. Capital: Washington, D.C.. Population: 290,342,550 (2001). Area: 9,629,047 sq km (3,717,796 sq mi.) Official name United States of America
   3. The federal government is the government in Washington DC – not its individual members
   AHD ‘2
   The American Heritage Dictionary. 2002, Pg 647GBS-JV
   Of or relating to the central government of a federation as distinct from the governments of its member units.
   4. “Should” means the debate is solely about a policy established by governmental means
   Ericson ‘3
   (Jon M., Dean Emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts – California Polytechnic U., et al., The Debater’s Guide, Third Edition, p. 4)
   The Proposition of Policy: Urging Future Action In policy propositions, each topic contains certain key elements, although they have slightly different functions from comparable elements of value-oriented propositions. 1. An agent doing the acting ---“The United States” in “The United States should adopt a policy of free trade.” Like the object of evaluation in a proposition of value, the agent is the subject of the sentence. 2. The verb should—the first part of a verb phrase that urges action. 3. An action verb to follow should in the should-verb combination. For example, should adopt here means to put a program or policy into action though governmental means. 4. A specification of directions or a limitation of the action desired. The phrase free trade, for example, gives direction and limits to the topic, which would, for example, eliminate consideration of increasing tariffs, discussing diplomatic recognition, or discussing interstate commerce. Propositions of policy deal with future action. Nothing has yet occurred. The entire debate is about whether something ought to occur. What you agree to do, then, when you accept the affirmative side in such a debate is to offer sufficient and compelling reasons for an audience to perform the future action that you propose.

And independently a voting issue for limits and ground---our entire negative strategy is based on the “should” question of the resolution---there are an infinite number of reasons that the scholarship of their advocacy could be a reason to vote affirmative--- these all obviate the only predictable strategies based on topical action---they overstretch our research burden and undermine preparedness for all debates

5 net benefits to our interpretation
1NC – Civic Engagement
Second page is civic engagement – there is a youth crisis of it now
Zwarensteyn, 12 (Ellen, Masters of Science, Communications thesis, “High School Policy Debate as an Enduring Pathway to Political Education: Evaluating Possibilities for Political Learning,” Grand Valley State University, August, http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1034andcontext=theses)
A lack of political learning opportunities reveals how difficult it may be for students to discover or find themselves in politics. As a result, many students are separated and isolated from connections to political worlds and policy analysis. Studies demonstrate how students entering college do not have a firm grasp on political education. Colby (2008) cites an overall decline in political learning despite more students attending college. Moreover, Galston (2001) advances how despite overall advancements in education since the 1950s, political knowledge levels remain stagnant. “If we compare generations rather than cohorts—that is, if we compare today’s young adults not with today’s older adults but with the young adults of the past—we find evidence of diminished civic attachment” (Galston, 2001, p. 219). Specific measures regarding willingness to talk about the news, caring about current events, voting, watching the news or reading the paper, and other traditional forms of political involvement have declined with each generation (Galston, 2001, p. 220-221). The most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress Report documents one consequence to this rote approach to government. Even after a historic presidential election in 2008, students are less involved in political learning and demonstrate less proficiency in 2010 than even in 2006 (National Center, 2011, p. 34). Moreover, “…individuals emerge from the educational system with a lower level of knowledge about current political figures and alignments than 30 or 40 years ago. And individuals of all ages are less able to answer questions about current politics than their counterparts with similar education backgrounds in the past” (Delli Carpinin and Keeter, 1991, p. 607). Schools seem to focus on teaching facts as the end goal of a political education rather than how facts are necessary to understand the fluidity and complexity of current events. Together, the prospects for enduring and thoughtful political engagement are dim in light of these facts.
Fragmenting social dialogue through the critique exacerbates social ills – destroying civic engagement.
Block, 5 (Peter, author of Flawless Consulting: A Guide to Getting Your Experience Used, Stewardship: Choosing Service over Self-Interest, and others, consultant at Designed Learning, Masters Degree in Industrial Administration from Yale University, “Civic Engagement and the Restoration of Community,” http://www.peterblock.com/_assets/downloads/Civic.pdf)
Civic engagement as used here is about a shift in the language and conversation we use to make our community better. We treat civic engagement as something more than voting, volunteering, and supporting events designed to bring people together. While civic engagement is about action, it is not about community action and community development as we normally think of it. The conventional view of community action and development addresses what we usually call problems; areas such as public safety, jobs and local economy, affordable housing, universal health care, education. In the context of civic engagement, these are really symptoms. The deeper cause is in the un-reconciled and fragmented nature of our community. This fragmentation creates a context for solving the symptoms that only sustains them. Otherwise why have we been working on these symptoms for so long, and so hard, and even with so many successful programs, seen too little fundamental change? The real intent of civic engagement is to shift the context within which traditional problem solving, investment, and social and community action takes place. It is aimed at the restoration of the experience and vitality of community. It is this shift in context, expressed through a shift in language, that creates the condition where traditional forms of action can make a difference.

Civic engagement is vital to solving collective action problems
Choi, 14 (Young Whan, Civic Engagement Coordinator @ Oakland Unified School District, BA in History from Brown University, Masters Degree in Education from the Teachers College of Columbia University, “Why Does Civic Engagement Matter in Schools?” 1/29, Educating for Democracy in the Digital Age, http://eddaoakland.org/2014/01/29/why-does-civic-engagement-matter-in-schools/)
These academic benefits cannot be overstressed, but there is still another compelling reason for schools to care about civic engagement. Civic engagement promotes social and political development. One of the great criticisms of the United States is that we, as a country, prize individualism above the needs of the larger society. The push for students to strive for their own individual success and achievement begs for the countervailing balance of a healthy sense of connection and community. Students must also learn that they are an integral part of a larger society and that they have both rights and responsibilities within that society. They cannot develop a sense that they belong to a larger society or live within a political system through theory alone; they must experience society and they must experience that political system. For example, learning about the three branches of government must be coupled with opportunities to effect change through action taken at the local, state, and/or national level. In her government class, Maryann Wolfe has asked her students to do just that. Similarly, being told that they should be compassionate takes on new meaning when students experience what it feels like to care for others through a service learning project. Michelle Espino’s students are acting with care and developing their sense of responsibility to the ecosystem through their recycling project. Finally, instead of banning smartphones and other devices that connect students with the world, schools can provide students with guidance on how to use these powerful tools to take actions that benefits others. Jo Paraiso’s students see themselves as part of an online community, engaging in respectful dialogue with students and adults via their social issue research blogs.

1NC Roleplaying
Third page is roleplaying--discussion of specific policy-questions is crucial for skills development---we control uniqueness: university students already have preconceived notions about how the world operates---government policy discussion is vital to force engagement with and resolution of competing perspectives to improve social outcomes, however those outcomes may be defined
Esberg and Sagan 12 *Jane Esberg is special assistant to the director at New York University's Center on. International Cooperation. She was the winner of 2009 Firestone Medal, AND Scott Sagan is a professor of political science and director of Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation “NEGOTIATING NONPROLIFERATION: Scholarship, Pedagogy, and Nuclear Weapons Policy,” 2/17 The Nonproliferation Review, 19:1, 95-108
These government or quasi-government think tank simulations often provide very similar lessons for high-level players as are learned by students in educational simulations. Government participants learn about the importance of understanding foreign perspectives, the need to practice internal coordination, and the necessity to compromise and coordinate with other governments in negotiations and crises. During the Cold War, political scientist Robert Mandel noted how crisis exercises and war games forced government officials to overcome ‘‘bureaucratic myopia,’’ moving beyond their normal organizational roles and thinking more creatively about how others might react in a crisis or conflict.6 The skills of imagination and the subsequent ability to predict foreign interests and reactions remain critical for real-world foreign policy makers. For example, simulations of the Iranian nuclear crisis*held in 2009 and 2010 at the Brookings Institution’s Saban Center and at Harvard University’s Belfer Center, and involving former US senior officials and regional experts*highlighted the dangers of misunderstanding foreign governments’ preferences and misinterpreting their subsequent behavior. In both simulations, the primary criticism of the US negotiating team lay in a failure to predict accurately how other states, both allies and adversaries, would behave in response to US policy initiatives.7 By university age, students often have a pre-defined view of international affairs, and the literature on simulations in education has long emphasized how such exercises force students to challenge their assumptions about how other governments behave and how their own government works.8 Since simulations became more common as a teaching tool in the late 1950s, educational literature has expounded on their benefits, from encouraging engagement by breaking from the typical lecture format, to improving communication skills, to promoting teamwork.9 More broadly, simulations can deepen understanding by asking students to link fact and theory, providing a context for facts while bringing theory into the realm of practice.10 These exercises are particularly valuable in teaching international affairs for many of the same reasons they are useful for policy makers: they force participants to ‘‘grapple with the issues arising from a world in flux.’’11 Simulations have been used successfully to teach students about such disparate topics as European politics, the Kashmir crisis, and US response to the mass killings in Darfur.12 Role-playing exercises certainly encourage students to learn political and technical facts* but they learn them in a more active style. Rather than sitting in a classroom and merely receiving knowledge, students actively research ‘‘their’’ government’s positions and actively argue, brief, and negotiate with others.13 Facts can change quickly; simulations teach students how to contextualize and act on information.14
1NC Limits – Generic
Fourth page is limits--a limited topic of discussion that provides for equitable ground is key to productive inculcation of decision-making and advocacy skills in every and all facets of life---even if their position is contestable that’s distinct from it being valuably debatable---this still provides room for flexibility, creativity, and innovation, but targets the discussion to avoid mere statements of fact
Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp45-
Debate is a means of settling differences, so there must be a difference of opinion or a conflict of interest before there can be a debate. If everyone is in agreement on a tact or value or policy, there is no need for debate: the matter can be settled by unanimous consent. Thus, for example, it would be pointless to attempt to debate "Resolved: That two plus two equals four," because there is simply no controversy about this statement. (Controversy is an essential prerequisite of debate. Where there is no clash of ideas, proposals, interests, or expressed positions on issues, there is no debate. In addition, debate cannot produce effective decisions without clear identification of a question or questions to be answered. For example, general argument may occur about the broad topic of illegal immigration. How many illegal immigrants are in the United States? What is the impact of illegal immigration and immigrants on our economy? What is their impact on our communities? Do they commit crimes? Do they take jobs from American workers? Do they pay taxes? Do they require social services? Is it a problem that some do not speak English? Is it the responsibility of employers to discourage illegal immigration by not hiring undocumented workers? Should they have the opportunity- to gain citizenship? Docs illegal immigration pose a security threat to our country? Do illegal immigrants do work that American workers are unwilling to do? Are their rights as workers and as human beings at risk due to their status? Are they abused by employers, law enforcement, housing, and businesses? I low are their families impacted by their status? What is the moral and philosophical obligation of a nation state to maintain its borders? Should we build a wall on the Mexican border, establish a national identification can!, or enforce existing laws against employers? Should we invite immigrants to become U.S. citizens? Surely you can think of many more concerns to be addressed by a conversation about the topic area of illegal immigration. Participation in this "debate" is likely to be emotional and intense. However, it is not likely to be productive or useful without focus on a particular question and identification of a line demarcating sides in the controversy. To be discussed and resolved effectively, controversies must be stated clearly. Vague understanding results in unfocused deliberation and poor decisions, frustration, and emotional distress, as evidenced by the failure of the United States Congress to make progress on the immigration debate during the summer of 2007. Someone disturbed by the problem of the growing underclass of poorly educated, socially disenfranchised youths might observe, "Public schools are doing a terrible job! They are overcrowded, and many teachers are poorly qualified in their subject areas. Even the best teachers can do little more than struggle to maintain order in their classrooms." That same concerned citizen, facing a complex range of issues, might arrive at an unhelpful decision, such as "We ought to do something about this" or. worse. "It's too complicated a problem to deal with." Groups of concerned citizens worried about the state of public education could join together to express their frustrations, anger, disillusionment, and emotions regarding the schools, but without a focus for their discussions, they could easily agree about the sorry state of education without finding points of clarity or potential solutions. A gripe session would follow. But if a precise question is posed—such as "What can be done to improve public education?"—then a more profitable area of discussion is opened up simply by placing a focus on the search for a concrete solution step. One or more judgments can be phrased in the form of debate propositions, motions for parliamentary debate, or bills for legislative assemblies. The statements "Resolved: That the federal government should implement a program of charter schools in at-risk communities" and "Resolved: That the state of Florida should adopt a school voucher program" more clearly identify specific ways of dealing with educational problems in a manageable form, suitable for debate. They provide specific policies to be investigated and aid discussants in identifying points of difference. To have a productive debate, which facilitates effective decision making by directing and placing limits on the decision to be made, the basis for argument should be clearly defined. If we merely talk about "homelessness" or "abortion" or "crime'* or "global warming" we are likely to have an interesting discussion but not to establish profitable basis for argument. For example, the statement "Resolved: That the pen is mightier than the sword" is debatable, yet fails to provide much basis for clear argumentation. If we take this statement to mean that the written word is more effective than physical force for some purposes, we can identify a problem area: the comparative effectiveness of writing or physical force for a specific purpose. Although we now have a general subject, we have not yet stated a problem. It is still too broad, too loosely worded to promote well-organized argument. What sort of writing are we concerned with—poems, novels, government documents, website development, advertising, or what? What does "effectiveness" mean in this context? What kind of physical force is being compared—fists, dueling swords, bazookas, nuclear weapons, or what? A more specific question might be. "Would a mutual defense treaty or a visit by our fleet be more effective in assuring Liurania of our support in a certain crisis?" The basis for argument could be phrased in a debate proposition such as "Resolved: That the United States should enter into a mutual defense treatv with Laurania." Negative advocates might oppose this proposition by arguing that fleet maneuvers would be a better solution. This is not to say that debates should completely avoid creative interpretation of the controversy by advocates, or that good debates cannot occur over competing interpretations of the controversy; in fact, these sorts of debates may be very engaging. The point is that debate is best facilitated by the guidance provided by focus on a particular point of difference, which will be outlined in the following discussion.
1NC SSD
Fifth page, switch-side is key---Effective deliberation is crucial to the activation of personal agency and is only possible in a switch-side debate format where debaters divorce themselves from ideology to engage in political contestation
Patricia Roberts-Miller 3 is Associate Professor of Rhetoric at the University of Texas "Fighting Without Hatred:Hannah Ar endt ' s Agonistic Rhetoric" JAC 22.2 2003
Totalitarianism and the Competitive Space of Agonism¶ Arendt is probably most famous for her analysis of totalitarianism (especially her The Origins of Totalitarianism andEichmann in Jerusa¬lem), but the recent attention has been on her criticism of mass culture (The Human Condition). Arendt's main criticism of the current human condition is that the common world of deliberate and joint action is fragmented into solipsistic and unreflective behavior. In an especially lovely passage, she says that in mass society people are all imprisoned in the subjectivity of their own singular experience, which does not cease to be singular if the same experience is multiplied innumerable times. The end of the common world has come when it is seen only under one aspect and is permitted to present itself in only one perspective. (Human 58)¶ What Arendt so beautifully describes is that isolation and individualism are not corollaries, and may even be antithetical because obsession with one's own self and the particularities of one's life prevents one from engaging in conscious, deliberate, collective action. Individuality, unlike isolation, depends upon a collective with whom one argues in order to direct the common life. Self-obsession, even (especially?) when coupled with isolation from one' s community is far from apolitical; it has political consequences. Perhaps a better way to put it is that it is political precisely because it aspires to be apolitical. This fragmented world in which many people live simultaneously and even similarly but not exactly together is what Arendt calls the "social."¶ Arendt does not mean that group behavior is impossible in the realm of the social, but that social behavior consists "in some way of isolated individuals, incapable of solidarity or mutuality, who abdicate their human capacities and responsibilities to a projected 'they' or 'it,' with disastrous consequences, both for other people and eventually for themselves" (Pitkin 79). One can behave, butnot act. For someone like Arendt, a German-assimilated Jew, one of the most frightening aspects of the Holocaust was the ease with which a people who had not been extraordinarily anti-Semitic could be put to work industriously and efficiently on the genocide of the Jews. And what was striking about the perpetrators of the genocide, ranging from minor functionaries who facilitated the murder transports up to major figures on trial at Nuremberg, was their constant and apparently sincere insistence that they were not responsible. For Arendt, this was not a peculiarity of the German people, but of the current human and heavily bureaucratic condition of twentieth-century culture: we do not consciously choose to engage in life's activities; we drift into them, or we do them out of a desire to conform. Even while we do them, we do not acknowledge an active, willed choice to do them; instead, we attribute our behavior to necessity, and we perceive ourselves as determined—determined by circumstance, by accident, by what "they" tell us to do. We do something from within the anonymity of a mob that we would never do as an individual; we do things for which we will not take responsibility. Yet, whether or not people acknowledge responsibil¬ity for the consequences of their actions, those consequences exist. Refusing to accept responsibility can even make those consequences worse, in that the people who enact the actions in question, because they do not admit their own agency, cannot be persuaded to stop those actions. They are simply doing their jobs. In a totalitarian system, however, everyone is simply doing his or her job; there never seems to be anyone who can explain, defend, and change the policies. Thus, it is, as Arendt says, rule by nobody.¶ It is illustrative to contrast Arendt's attitude toward discourse to Habermas'. While both are critical of modern bureaucratic and totalitar¬ian systems, Arendt's solution is the playful and competitive space of agonism; it is not the rational-critical public sphere. The "actual content of political life" is "the joy and the gratification that arise out of being in company with our peers, out of acting together and appearing in public, out of inserting ourselves into the world by word and deed, thus acquiring and sustaining our personal identity and beginning something entirely new" ("Truth" 263). According to Seyla Benhabib, Arendt's public realm emphasizes the assumption of competition, and it "represents that space of appearances in which moral and political greatness, heroism, and preeminence are revealed, displayed, shared with others. This is a competitive space in which one competes for recognition, precedence, and acclaim" (78). These qualities are displayed, but not entirely for purposes of acclamation; they are not displays of one's self, but of ideas and arguments, of one's thought. When Arendt discusses Socrates' thinking in public, she emphasizes his performance: "He performed in the marketplace the way the flute-player performed at a banquet. It is sheer performance, sheer activity"; nevertheless, it was thinking: "What he actually did was to make public, in discourse, the thinking process" {Lectures 37). Pitkin summarizes this point: "Arendt says that the heroism associated with politics is not the mythical machismo of ancient Greece but something more like the existential leap into action and public exposure" (175-76). Just as it is not machismo, although it does have considerable ego involved, so it is not instrumental rationality; Arendt's discussion of the kinds of discourse involved in public action include myths, stories, and personal narratives.¶ Furthermore, the competition is not ruthless; it does not imply a willingness to triumph at all costs. Instead, it involves something like having such a passion for ideas and politics that one is willing to take risks. One tries to articulate the best argument, propose the best policy, design the best laws, make the best response. This is a risk in that one might lose; advancing an argument means that one must be open to the criticisms others will make of it. The situation is agonistic not because the participants manufacture or seek conflict, but because conflict is a necessary consequence of difference. This attitude is reminiscent of Kenneth Burke, who did not try to find a language free of domination but who instead theorized a way that the very tendency toward hierarchy in language might be used against itself (for more on this argument, see Kastely). Similarly, Arendt does not propose a public realm of neutral, rational beings who escape differences to live in the discourse of universals; she envisions one of different people who argue with passion, vehemence, and integrity.¶ Continued…¶ Eichmann perfectly exemplified what Arendt famously called the "banal¬ity of evil" but that might be better thought of as the bureaucratization of evil (or, as a friend once aptly put it, the evil of banality). That is, he was able to engage in mass murder because he was able not to think about it, especially not from the perspective of the victims, and he was able to exempt himself from personal responsibility by telling himself (and anyone else who would listen) that he was just following orders. It was the bureaucratic system that enabled him to do both. He was not exactly passive; he was, on the contrary, very aggressive in trying to do his duty. He behaved with the "ruthless, competitive exploitation" and "inauthen-tic, self-disparaging conformism" that characterizes those who people totalitarian systems (Pitkin 87).¶ Arendt's theorizing of totalitarianism has been justly noted as one of her strongest contributions to philosophy. She saw that a situation like Nazi Germany is different from the conventional understanding of a tyranny. Pitkin writes,¶ Totalitarianism cannot be understood, like earlier forms of domination, as the ruthless exploitation of some people by others, whether the motive be selfish calculation, irrational passion, or devotion to some cause. Understanding totalitarianism's essential nature requires solving the central mystery of the holocaust—the objectively useless and indeed dysfunctional, fanatical pursuit of a purely ideological policy, a pointless process to which the people enacting it have fallen captive. (87)¶ Totalitarianism is closely connected to bureaucracy; it is oppression by rules, rather than by people who have willfully chosen to establish certain rules. It is the triumph of the social.¶ Critics (both friendly and hostile) have paid considerable attention to Arendt's category of the "social," largely because, despite spending so much time on the notion, Arendt remains vague on certain aspects of it. Pitkin appropriately compares Arendt's concept of the social to the Blob, the type of monster that figured in so many post-war horror movies. That Blob was "an evil monster from outer space, entirely external to and separate from us that had fallen upon us intent on debilitating, absorb¬ing, and ultimately destroying us, gobbling up our distinct individuality and turning us into robots that mechanically serve its purposes" (4).¶ Pitkin is critical of this version of the "social" and suggests that Arendt meant (or perhaps should have meant) something much more complicated. The simplistic version of the social-as-Blob can itself be an instance of Blob thinking; Pitkin's criticism is that Arendt talks at times as though the social comes from outside of us and has fallen upon us, turning us into robots. Yet, Arendt's major criticism of the social is that it involves seeing ourselves as victimized by something that comes from outside our own behavior. I agree with Pitkin that Arendt's most powerful descriptions of the social (and the other concepts similar to it, such as her discussion of totalitarianism, imperialism, Eichmann, and parvenus) emphasize that these processes are not entirely out of our control but that they happen to us when, and because, we keep refusing to make active choices. We create the social through negligence. It is not the sort of force in a Sorcerer's Apprentice, which once let loose cannot be stopped; on the contrary, it continues to exist because we structure our world to reward social behavior. Pitkin writes, "From childhood on, in virtually all our institutions, we reward euphemism, salesmanship, slo¬gans, and we punish and suppress truth-telling, originality, thoughtful-ness. So we continually cultivate ways of (not) thinking that induce the social" (274). I want to emphasize this point, as it is important for thinking about criticisms of some forms of the social construction of knowledge: denying our own agency is what enables the social to thrive. To put it another way, theories of powerlessness are self-fulfilling prophecies.¶ Arendt grants that there are people who willed the Holocaust, but she insists that totalitarian systems result not so much from the Hitlers or Stalins as from the bureaucrats who may or may not agree with the established ideology but who enforce the rules for no stronger motive than a desire to avoid trouble with their superiors (see Eichmann and Life). They do not think about what they do. One might prevent such occurrences—or, at least, resist the modern tendency toward totalitarian¬ism—by thought: "critical thought is in principle anti-authoritarian" (Lectures 38).¶ By "thought" Arendt does not mean eremitic contemplation; in fact, she has great contempt for what she calls "professional thinkers," refusing herself to become a philosopher or to call her work philosophy. Young-Bruehl, Benhabib, and Pitkin have each said that Heidegger represented just such a professional thinker for Arendt, and his embrace of Nazism epitomized the genuine dangers such "thinking" can pose (see Arendt's "Heidegger"). "Thinking" is not typified by the isolated con¬templation of philosophers; it requires the arguments of others and close attention to the truth. It is easy to overstate either part of that harmony. One must consider carefully the arguments and viewpoints of others:¶ Political thought is representative. I form an opinion by considering a given issue from different viewpoints, by making present to my mind the standpoints of those who are absent; that is, I represent them. This process of representation does not blindly adopt the actual views of those who stand somewhere else, and hence look upon the world from a different perspective; this is a question neither of empathy, as though I tried to be or to feel like somebody else, nor of counting noses and joining a majority but of being and thinking in my own identity where actually I am not. The more people's standpoints I have present in my mind while I am ponder¬ing a given issue, and the better I can imagine how I would feel and think if I were in their place, the stronger will be my capacity for represen¬tative thinking and the more valid my final conclusions, my opinion. ("Truth" 241)¶ There are two points to emphasize in this wonderful passage. First, one does not get these standpoints in one's mind through imagining them, but through listening to them; thus, good thinking requires that one hear the arguments of other people. Hence, as Arendt says, "critical thinking, while still a solitary business, does not cut itself off from' all others.'" Thinking is, in this view, necessarily public discourse: critical thinking is possible "only where the standpoints of all others are open to inspection" (Lectures 43). Yet, it is not a discourse in which one simply announces one's stance; participants are interlocutors and not just speakers; they must listen. Unlike many current versions of public discourse, this view presumes that speech matters. It is not asymmetric manipulation of others, nor merely an economic exchange; it must be a world into which one enters and by which one might be changed.¶ Second, passages like the above make some readers think that Arendt puts too much faith in discourse and too little in truth (see Habermas). But Arendt is no crude relativist; she believes in truth, and she believes that there are facts that can be more or less distorted. She does not believe that reality is constructed by discourse, or that truth is indistinguishable from falsehood. She insists tha^ the truth has a different pull on us and, consequently, that it has a difficult place in the world of the political. Facts are different from falsehood because, while they can be distorted or denied, especially when they are inconvenient for the powerful, they also have a certain positive force that falsehood lacks: "Truth, though powerless and always defe ated in a head-on clash with the powers that be, possesses a strength of its own: whatever those in power may contrive, they are unable to discover or invent a viable substitute for it. Persuasion and violence can destroy truth, but they cannot replace it" ("Truth" 259).¶ Facts have a strangely resilient quality partially because a lie "tears, as it were, a hole in the fabric of factuality. As every historian knows, one can spot a lie by noticing incongruities, holes, or the j unctures of patched-up places" ("Truth" 253). While she is sometimes discouraging about our ability to see the tears in the fabric, citing the capacity of totalitarian governments to create the whole cloth (see "Truth" 252-54), she is also sometimes optimistic. InEichmann in Jerusalem, she repeats the story of Anton Schmidt—a man who saved the lives of Jews—and concludes that such stories cannot be silenced (230-32). For facts to exert power in the common world, however, these stories must be told. Rational truth (such as principles of mathematics) might be perceptible and demonstrable through individual contemplation, but "factual truth, on the contrary, is always related to other people: it concerns events and circumstances in which many are involved; it is established by witnesses and depends upon testimony; it exists only to the extent that it is spoken about, even if it occurs in the domain of privacy. It is political by nature" (23 8). Arendt is neither a positivist who posits an autonomous individual who can correctly perceive truth, nor a relativist who positively asserts the inherent relativism of all perception. Her description of how truth functions does not fall anywhere in the three-part expeditio so prevalent in bothrhetoric and philosophy: it is not expressivist, positivist, or social constructivist. Good thinking depends upon good public argument, and good public argument depends upon access to facts: "Freedom of opinion is a farce unless factual information is guaranteed" (238).¶ The sort of thinking that Arendt propounds takes the form of action only when it is public argument, and, as such, it is particularly precious: "For if no other test but the experience of being active, no other measure but the extent of sheer activity were to be applied to the various activities within the vita activa, it might well be that thinking as such would surpass them all" (Human 325). Arendt insists that it is "the same general rule— Do not contradict yourself (not your self but your thinking ego)—that determines both thinking and acting" (Lectures 3 7). In place of the mildly resentful conformism that fuels totalitarianism, Arendt proposes what Pitkin calls "a tough-minded, open-eyed readiness to perceive and judge reality for oneself, in terms of concrete experience and independent, critical theorizing" (274). The paradoxical nature of agonism (that it must involve both individuality and commonality) makes it difficult to maintain, as the temptation is great either to think one's own thoughts without reference to anyone else or to let others do one's thinking.¶ Arendt's Polemical Agonism¶ As I said, agonism does have its advocates within rhetoric—Burke, Ong, Sloane, Gage, and Jarratt, for instance—but while each of these theorists proposes a form of conflictual argument, not one of these is as adversarial as Arendt's. Agonism can emphasize persuasion, as does John Gage's textbook The Shape of Reason or William Brandt et al.'s The Craft of Writing. That is, the goal of the argument is to identify the disagreement and then construct a text that gains the assent of the audience. This is not the same as what Gage (citing Thomas Conley) calls "asymmetrical theories of rhetoric": theories that "presuppose an active speaker and a passive audience, a speaker whose rhetorical task is therefore to do something to that audience" ("Reasoned" 6). Asymmetric rhetoric is not and cannot be agonistic. Persuasive agonism still values conflict, disagreement, and equality among interlocutors, but it has the goal of reaching agreement, as when Gage says that the process of argument should enable one's reasons to be "understood and believed" by others (Shape 5; emphasis added).¶ Arendt's version is what one might call polemical agonism: it puts less emphasis on gaining assent, and it is exemplified both in Arendt's own writing and in Donald Lazere's "Ground Rules for Polemicists" and "Teaching the Political Conflicts." Both forms of agonism (persuasive and polemical) require substantive debate at two points in a long and recursive process. First, one engages in debate in order to invent one's argument; even silent thinking is a "dialogue of myself with myself (Lectures 40). The difference between the two approaches to agonism is clearest when one presents an argument to an audience assumed to be an opposition. In persuasive agonism, one plays down conflict and moves through reasons to try to persuade one's audience. In polemical agonism, however, one's intention is not necessarily to prove one's case, but to make public one' s thought in order to test it. In this way, communicability serves the same function in philosophy that replicability serves in the sciences; it is how one tests the validity of one's thought. In persuasive agonism, success is achieved through persuasion; in polemical agonism, success may be marked through the quality of subsequent controversy.¶ Arendt quotes from a letter Kant wrote on this point:¶ You know that I do not approach reasonable objections with the intention merely of refuting them, but that in thinking them over I always weave them into my judgments, and afford them the opportunity of overturning all my most cherished beliefs. I entertain the hope that by thus viewing my judgments impartially from the standpoint of others some third view that will improve upon my previous insight may be obtainable. {Lectures 42)¶ Kant's use of "impartial" here is interesting: he is not describing a stance that is free of all perspective; it is impartial only in the sense that it is not his own view. This is the same way that Arendt uses the term; she does not advocate any kind of positivistic rationality, but instead a "universal interdependence" ("Truth" 242). She does not place the origin of the "disinterested pursuit of truth" in science, but at "the moment when Homer chose to sing the deeds of the Trojans no less than those of the Achaeans, and to praise the glory of Hector, the foe and the defeated man, no less than the glory of Achilles, the hero of his kinfolk" ("Truth" 262¬63). It is useful to note that Arendt tends not to use the term "universal," opting more often for "common," by which she means both what is shared and what is ordinary, a usage that evades many of the problems associated with universalism while preserving its virtues (for a brief butprovocative application of Arendt's notion of common, see Hauser 100-03).¶ In polemical agonism, there is a sense in which one' s main goal is not to persuade one's readers; persuading one's readers, if this means that they fail to see errors and flaws in one' s argument, might actually be a sort of failure. It means that one wishes to put forward an argument that makes clear what one's stance is and why one holds it, but with the intention of provoking critique and counterargument. Arendt describes Kant's "hope" for his writings not that the number of people who agree with him would increase but "that the circle of his examiners would gradually be en¬larged" {Lectures 39); he wanted interlocutors, not acolytes.¶ This is not consensus-based argument, nor is it what is sometimes called "consociational argument," nor is this argument as mediation or conflict resolution. Arendt (and her commentators) use the term "fight," and they mean it. When Arendt describes the values that are necessary in our world, she says, "They are a sense of honor, desire for fame and glory, the spirit of fighting without hatred and 'without the spirit of revenge,' and indifference to material advantages" {Crises 167). Pitkin summarizes Arendt's argument: "Free citizenship presupposes the ability to fight— openly, seriously, with commitment, and about things that really mat¬ter—without fanaticism, without seeking to exterminate one's oppo¬nents" (266). My point here is two-fold: first, there is not a simple binary opposition between persuasive discourse and eristic discourse, the conflictual versus the collaborative, or argument as opposed to debate.¶ Second, while polemical agonismrequires diversity among interlocutors, and thus seems an extraordinarily appropriate notion, and while it may be a useful corrective to too much emphasis on persuasion, it seems to me that polemical agonism could easily slide into the kind of wrangling that is simply frustrating. Arendt does not describe just how one is to keep the conflict useful. Although she rejects the notion that politics is "no more than a battlefield of partial, conflicting interests, where nothing countfs but pleasure and profit, partisanship, and the lust for dominion," she does not say exactly how we are to know when we are engaging in the existential leap of argument versus when we are lusting for dominion ("Truth" 263).¶ Like other proponents of agonism, Arendt argues that rhetoric does not lead individuals or communities to ultimate Truth; it leads to decisions that will necessarily have to be reconsidered. Even Arendt, who tends to express a greater faith than many agonists (such as Burke, Sloane, or Kastely) in the ability of individuals to perceive truth, insists that self-deception is always a danger, so public discourse is necessary as a form of testing (see especially Lectures and "Truth"). She remarks that it is difficult to think beyond one's self-interest and that "nothing, indeed, is more common, even among highly sophisticated people, than the blind obstinacy that becomes manifest in lack of imagination and failure to judge" ("Truth" 242).¶ Agonism demands that one simultaneously trust and doubt one' s own perceptions, rely on one's own judgment and consider the judgments of others, think for oneself and imagine how others think. The question remains whether this is a kind of thought in which everyone can engage. Is the agonistic public sphere (whether political, academic, or scientific) only available to the few? Benhabib puts this criticism in the form of a question: "That is, is the 'recovery of the public space' under conditions of modernity necessarily an elitist and antidemocratic project that can hardly be reconciled with the demand for universal political emancipa¬tion and the universal extension of citizenship rights that have accompa¬nied modernity since the American and French Revolutions?" (75). This is an especially troubling question not only because Arendt's examples of agonistic rhetoric are from elitist cultures, but also because of com¬ments she makes, such as this one from The Human Condition: "As a living experience, thought has always been assumed, perhaps wrongly, to be known only to the few. It may not be presumptuous to believe that these few have not become fewer in our time" {Human 324).¶ Yet, there are important positive political consequences of agonism.¶ Arendt' s own promotion of the agonistic sphere helps to explain how the system could be actively moral. It is not an overstatement to say that a central theme in Arendt's work is the evil of conformity—the fact that the modern bureaucratic state makes possible extraordinary evil carried out by people who do not even have any ill will toward their victims. It does so by "imposing innumerable and various rules, all of which tend to 'normalize' its members, to make them behave, to exclude spontaneous action or outstanding achievement" (Human 40). It keeps people from thinking, and it keeps them behaving. The agonistic model's celebration of achievement and verbal skill undermines the political force of conformity, so it is a force against the bureaucratizing of evil. If people think for themselves, they will resist dogma; if people think of themselves as one of many, they will empathize; if people can do both, they will resist totalitarianism. And if they talk about what they see, tell their stories, argue about their perceptions, and listen to one another—that is, engage in rhetoric—then they are engaging in antitotalitarian action.¶ In post-Ramistic rhetoric, it is a convention to have a thesis, and one might well wonder just what mine is—whether I am arguing for or against Arendt's agonism. Arendt does not lay out a pedagogy for us to follow (although one might argue that, if she had, it would lookmuch like the one Lazere describes in "Teaching"), so I am not claiming that greater attention to Arendt would untangle various pedagogical problems that teachers of writing face. Nor am I claiming that applying Arendt's views will resolve theoretical arguments that occupy scholarly journals. I am saying, on the one hand, that Arendt's connection of argument and thinking, as well as her perception that both serve to thwart totalitarian¬ism, suggest that agonal rhetoric (despite the current preference for collaborative rhetoric) is the best discourse for a diverse and inclusive public sphere. On the other hand, Arendt's advocacy of agonal rhetoric is troubling (and, given her own admiration for Kant, this may be intentional), especially in regard to its potential elitism, masculinism, failure to describe just how to keep argument from collapsing into wrangling, and apparently cheerful acceptance of hierarchy. Even with these flaws, Arendt describes something we would do well to consider thoughtfully: a fact-based but not positivist, communally grounded but not relativist, adversarial but not violent, independent but not expressivist rhetoric.

Case

The aff’s claim to emancipation collapses the real material difference between our position as debaters and oppressed individuals for whom resistance is not a simple language-game---their deployment of an unproblematic posture of victimization spotlights the aff’s righteousness while robbing the oppressed of protest
Chow 93—Anne Firor Scott Professor of Literature at Trinity College of Arts and Sciences, Duke University (Rey, Writing Diaspora, 11-5) 

Until the very end of the novel, Jane is always excluded from every available form of social power. Her survival seems to depend on renouncing what power might come to her as teacher, mistress, cousin, heiress, or missionary's wife. She repeatedly flees from such forms of inclusion in the field of power, as if her status as an exemplary subject, like her authority as narrator, depends entirely on her claim to a kind of truth which can only be made from a position of powerlessness. By creating such an unlovely heroine and subjecting her to one form of harassment after another, Brontë demonstrates the power of words alone. 18¶ This reading of Jane Eyre highlights her not simply as the female underdog who is often identified by feminist and Marxist critics, but as the intellectual who acquires power through a moral rectitude that was to become the flip side of Western imperialism's ruthlessness. Lying at the core of Anglo¬American liberalism, this moral rectitude would accompany many territorial and economic conquests overseas with a firm sense of social mission. When Jane Eyre went to the colonies in the nineteenth century, she turned into the Christian missionary. It is this understanding—that Brontë's depiction of a socially marginalized English woman is, in terms of ideological production, fully complicit with England's empire¬building ambition rather than opposed to it—that prompted Gayatri Spivak to read Jane Eyre as a text in the service of imperialism. Referring to Brontë's treatment of the "madwoman" Bertha Mason, the white Jamaican Creole character, Spivak charges Jane Eyre for, precisely, its humanism, in which the "native subject" is not created as an animal but as "the object of what might be termed the terrorism of¶ 12¶ the categorical imperative." This kind of creation is imperialism's use/travesty of the Kantian metaphysical demand to "make the heathen into a human so that he can be treated as an end in himself." 19 In the twentieth century, as Europe's former colonies became independent, Jane Eyre became the Maoist. Michel de Certeau describes the affinity between her two major reincarnations, one religious and the other political, this way:¶ The place that was formerly occupied by the Church or Churches vis¬à¬vis the established powers remains recognizable, over the past two centuries, in the functioning of the opposition known as leftist….¶ There is vis¬à¬vis the established order, a relationship between the Churches that defended an other world and the parties of the left which, since the nineteenth century, have promoted a different future. In both cases, similar functional characteristics can be discerned….20¶ The Maoist retains many of Jane's awesome features, chief of which are a protestant passion to turn powerlessness into "truth" and an idealist intolerance of those who may think differently from her. Whereas the great Orientalist blames the living "third world" natives for the loss of the ancient non¬Western civilization, his loved object, the Maoist applauds the same natives for personifying and fulfilling her ideals. For the Maoist in the 1970s, the mainland Chinese were, in spite of their "backwardness," a puritanical alternative to the West in human form—a dream come true.¶ In the 1980s and 1990s, however, the Maoist is disillusioned to watch the China they sanctified crumble before their eyes. This is the period in which we hear disapproving criticisms of contemporary Chinese people for liking Western pop music and consumer culture, or for being overly interested in sex. In a way that makes her indistinguishable from what at first seems a political enemy, the Orientalist, the Maoist now mourns the loss of her loved object—Socialist China—by pointing angrily at living "third world" natives. For many who have built their careers on the vision of Socialist China, the grief is tremendous. In the "cultural studies" of the American academy in the 1990s, the Maoist is reproducing with prowess. We see this in the way¶ 13¶ terms such as "oppression," "victimization," and "subalternity" are now being used. Contrary to Orientalist disdain for contemporary native cultures of the non¬West, the Maoist turns precisely the "disdained'' other into the object of his/her study and, in some cases, identification. In a mixture of admiration and moralism, the Maoist sometimes turns all people from non¬Western cultures into a generalized "subaltern" that is then used to flog an equally generalized "West." 21¶ Because the representation of "the other" as such ignores (1) the class and intellectual hierarchies within these other cultures, which are usually as elaborate as those in the West, and (2) the discursive power relations structuring the Maoist's mode of inquiry and valorization, it produces a way of talking in which notions of lack, subalternity, victimization, and so forth are drawn upon indiscriminately, often with the intention of spotlighting the speaker's own sense of alterity and political righteousness. A comfortably wealthy white American intellectual I know claimed that he was a "third world intellectual," citing as one of his credentials his marriage to a Western European woman of part¬Jewish heritage? a professor of English complained about being "victimized" by the structured time at an Ivy League institution, meaning that she needed to be on time for classes? a graduate student of upper¬class background from one of the world's poorest countries told his American friends that he was of poor peasant stock in order to authenticate his identity as a radical "third world" representative? male and female academics across the U.S. frequently say they were "raped" when they report experiences of professional frustration and conflict. Whether sincere or delusional, such cases of self¬dramatization all take the route of self¬subalternization, which has increasingly become the assured means to authority and power. What these intellectuals are doing is robbing the terms of oppression of their critical and oppositional import, and thus depriving the oppressed of even the vocabulary of protest and rightful demand. The oppressed, whose voices we seldom hear, are robbed twice—the first time of their economic chances, the second time of their language, which is now no longer distinguishable from those of us who have had our consciousnesses "raised."¶ In their analysis of the relation between violence and representation, Armstrong and Tennenhouse write: "The idea of violence ¶ 14¶ as representation is not an easy one for most academics to accept. It implies that whenever we speak for someone else we are inscribing her with our own (implicitly masculine) idea of order." 22 At present, this process of "inscribing" often means not only that we "represent" certain historic others because they are/were ''oppressed"? it often means that there is interest in representation only when what is represented can in some way be seen as lacking. Even though the Maoist is usually contemptuous of Freudian psychoanalysis because it is "bourgeois," her investment in oppression and victimization fully partakes of the Freudian and Lacanian notions of "lack." By attributing "lack," the Maoist justifies the "speaking for someone else" that Armstrong and Tennenhouse call "violence as representation."¶ As in the case of Orientalism, which does not necessarily belong only to those who are white, the Maoist does not have to be racially "white" either. The phrase "white guilt" refers to a type of discourse which continues to position power and lack against each other, while the narrator of that discourse, like Jane Eyre, speaks with power but identifies with powerlessness. This is how even those who come from privilege more often than not speak from/of/as its "lack." What the Maoist demonstrates is a circuit of productivity that draws its capital from others' deprivation while refusing to acknowledge its own presence as endowed. With the material origins of her own discourse always concealed, the Maoist thus speaks as if her charges were a form of immaculate conception.¶ The difficulty facing us, it seems to me, is no longer simply the "first world" Orientalist who mourns the rusting away of his treasures, but also students from privileged backgrounds Western and non¬Western, who conform behaviorally in every respect with the elitism of their social origins (e.g., through powerful matrimonial alliances, through pursuit of fame, or through a contemptuous arrogance toward fellow students) but who nonetheless proclaim dedication to "vindicating the subalterns." My point is not that they should be blamed for the accident of their birth, nor that they cannot marry rich, pursue fame, or even be arrogant. Rather, it is that they choose to see in others' powerlessness an idealized image of themselves and refuse to hear in the dissonance between the content and manner of their speech their own complicity with violence. Even though these descendents of the Maoist may be quick to point¶ 15¶ out the exploitativeness of Benjamin Disraeli's "The East is a career," 23 they remain blind to their own exploitativeness as they make "the East" their career. How do we intervene in the productivity of this overdetermined circuit?

The claim that ethics should be the basis for winning a debate round is a pretty good example of our link argument---the ballot is not a tool of emancipation, but rather a tool of revenge---it serves as a palliative that denies their investment in oppression as a means by which to claim the power of victory
Enns 12—Professor of Philosophy at McMaster University (Dianne, The Violence of Victimhood, 28-30)
Guilt and Ressentiment We need to think carefully about what is at stake here. Why is this perspective appealing, and what are its effects? At first glance, the argument appears simple: white, privileged women, in their theoretical and practical interventions, must take into account the experiences and conceptual work of women who are less fortunate and less powerful, have fewer resources, and are therefore more subject to systemic oppression. The lesson of feminism's mistakes in the civil rights era is that this “mainstream” group must not speak for other women. But such a view must be interrogated. Its effects, as I have argued, include a veneration of the other, moral currency for the victim, and an insidious competition for victimhood. We will see in later chapters that these effects are also common in situations of conflict where the stakes are much higher. ¶ We witness here a twofold appeal: otherness discourse in feminism appeals both to the guilt of the privileged and to the resentment, or ressentiment, of the other. Suleri's allusion to “embarrassed privilege” exposes the operation of guilt in the misunderstanding that often divides Western feminists from women in the developing world, or white women from women of color. The guilt of those who feel themselves deeply implicated in and responsible for imperialism merely reinforces an imperialist benevolence, polarizes us unambiguously by locking us into the categories of victim and perpetrator, and blinds us to the power and agency of the other. Many fail to see that it is embarrassing and insulting for those identified as victimized others not to be subjected to the same critical intervention and held to the same demands of moral and political responsibility. Though we are by no means equal in power and ability, wealth and advantage, we are all collectively responsible for the world we inhabit in common. The condition of victimhood does not absolve one of moral responsibility. I will return to this point repeatedly throughout this book.¶ Mohanty's perspective ignores the possibility that one can become attached to one's subordinated status, which introduces the concept of ressentiment, the focus of much recent interest in the injury caused by racism and colonization. Nietzsche describes ressentiment as the overwhelming sentiment of “slave morality,” the revolt that begins when ressentiment itself becomes creative and gives birth to values. 19 The sufferer in this schema seeks out a cause for his suffering—“ a guilty agent who is susceptible to suffering”— someone on whom he can vent his affects and so procure the anesthesia necessary to ease the pain of injury. The motivation behind ressentiment, according to Nietzsche, is the desire “to deaden, by means of a more violent emotion of any kind, a tormenting, secret pain that is becoming unendurable, and to drive it out of consciousness at least for the moment: for that one requires an affect, as savage an affect as possible, and, in order to excite that, any pretext at all.” 20 In its contemporary manifestation, Wendy Brown argues that ressentiment acts as the “righteous critique of power from the perspective of the injured,” which “delimits a specific site of blame for suffering by constituting sovereign subjects and events as responsible for the ‘injury’ of social subordination.” Identities are fixed in an economy of perpetrator and victim, in which revenge, rather than power or emancipation, is sought for the injured, making the perpetrator hurt as the sufferer does. 21¶ 30¶ Such a concept is useful for understanding why an ethics of absolute responsibility to the other appeals to the victimized. Brown remarks that, for Nietzsche, the source of the triumph of a morality rooted in ressentiment is the denial that it has any access to power or contains a will to power. Politicized identities arise as both product of and reaction to this condition; the reaction is a substitute for action— an “imaginary revenge,” Nietzsche calls it. Suffering then becomes a social virtue at the same time that the sufferer attempts to displace his suffering onto another. The identity created by ressentiment, Brown explains, becomes invested in its own subjection not only through its discovery of someone to blame, and a new recognition and revaluation of that subjection, but also through the satisfaction of revenge. 22¶ The outcome of feminism's attraction to theories of difference and otherness is thus deeply contentious. First, we witness the further reification reification of the very oppositions in question and a simple reversal of the focus from the same to the other. This observation is not new and has been made by many critics of feminism, but it seems to have made no serious impact on mainstream feminist scholarship or teaching practices in women's studies programs. Second, in the eagerness to rectify the mistakes of “white, middle-class, liberal, western” feminism, the other has been uncritically exalted, which has led in turn to simplistic designations of marginal, “othered” status and, ultimately, a competition for victimhood. Ultimately, this approach has led to a new moral code in which ethics is equated with the responsibility of the privileged Western woman, while moral immunity is granted to the victimized other. Ranjana Khanna describes this operation aptly when she writes that in the field of transnational feminism, the reification of the other has produced “separate ethical universes” in which the privileged experience paralyzing guilt and the neocolonized, crippling resentment. The only “overarching imperative” is that one does not comment on another's ethical context. An ethical response turns out to be a nonresponse. 23 Let us turn now to an exploration of this third outcome.

Tournament: Glenbrooks | Round: 2 | Opponent: Bronx Science GL | Judge: Jack Ewing
1
Farm bill will pass – EPA decision gives it momentum
Wasson 11-19 – Staff writer at The Hill (Erik, “EPA ethanol decision pushes farm bill toward finish line”, November 19 of 2013, http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/agriculture/190777-epa-ethanol-decision-pushes-farm-bill-toward-finish-line)
The Environmental Protection Agency’s preliminary decision to reduce renewable fuels blending requirements has increased momentum
AND
the first time the agency has lowered the target from the prior year.

Plan trades off
Susan Page 13, USA Today, “How Obama can avoid the second-term curse,” 1-15-13, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/01/14/obama-second-term-curse/1834765/
"By the time a second term rolls around, the illusions about a president
AND
, but not everything. Fighting too many battles could mean winning none.
New farm bill key to prevent a food price spike
Nelson 10/17/13 Joe Nelson, writer for WEAU news, “Obama, ag industry waiting for new Farm bill,” http://www.weau.com/home/headlines/Obama-ag-industry-waiting-for-new-Farm-Bill-228259521.html
With the government shutdown over, farmers are still waiting for a deal to be
AND
could cut down profits or even force some farmers to quit or retire.
Extinction
Brown 9 (Lester R, Founder of the Worldwatch Institute and the Earth Policy Institute “Can Food Shortages Bring Down Civilization?” Scientific American, May, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=civilization-food-shortages)
The biggest threat to global stability is the potential for food crises in poor countries
AND
states disintegrate, their fall will threaten the stability of global civilization itself.
2
Text: The United States federal government should provide decentralized integrated solar thermal assistance to Mexico.
xSolar thermal technology solves the aff better – it’s more efficient than photovoltaic.
Richard Klein1 and Mariela Vasquez2, Spring-xx-2010, founder, Quixotic Systems Inc, inventor and entrepreneur1, engineering team, Quixotic Systems, B.A. in Mechanical Engineering @ University of Virginia2, “Solar Thermal: A New Sustainable Solution for Urban Multi-Family Buildings,” http://www.quixotic-systems.com/imgs/nesea-article.pdf

Advantages of solar thermal over solar electric (PV) Over the past few years
AND
water load is greater than the electricity con sumption (see table 1).
PV causes massive environmental damage
Mulvaney et al 1/14/09 (Dustin Mulvaney, Ph.D.—Switzer Fellow, Vicki Bolam—Technical Writer, Monica Cendejas—Project Manager, SVTC, Sheila Davis—Executive Director, SVTC, Lauren Ornelas—Campaign Director, SVTC, Simon Kim—SVTC Intern, Stanford University, Serena Mau—SVTC Intern, University of California, Berkeley, William Rowan—SVTC Intern, Stanford University, Esperanza Sanz, SVTC Intern, De Anza College, Peter Satre—SVTC Intern, Stanford University, Ananth Sridhar—SVTC Intern, Stanford University, Dean Young—SVTC Intern, Stanford University.  All work for Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition.  “Towrds a Just and Sustainable Solar Energy Industry”.  http://www.etoxics.org/site/DocServer/Silicon_Valley_Toxics_Coalition_-_Toward_a_Just_and_Sust.pdf?docID=821)

Silicon-based solar PV production involves many of the same materials as the microelectronics
AND
manufacturing facilities include trichloroethane, acetone, ammonia, and isopropyl alcohol.30

Collapse causes extinction
Ehrlich and Ehrlich 13 – Professor of Biology and Senior Research Scientist in Biology @ Stanford University (Paul R. Ehrlich (President of the Center for Conservation Biology @ Stanford University) and Anne H. Ehrlich, “Can a collapse of global civilization be avoided?,” Proceedings of the Royal Society Biological Sciences, Proc. R. Soc. B 2013 280, published online 9 January 2013)HA

Virtually every past civilization has eventually undergone collapse, a loss of socio-political
AND
of the vast majority of people would disappear. pg. 1-2 

3
Interpretation – “Economic engagement” is limited to trade of goods and services -energy is a non-economic partnership
Rose, 8 -- UC Berkeley Haas School of Business Administration Andrew, and Mark Spiegel, "Non-Economic Engagement and International Exchange: The Case of Environmental Treaties," April 2008, www.nber.org/papers/w13988.pdf?new_window=1
Non-Economic Engagement and International Exchange: The Case of Environmental Treaties We examine
AND
relations. The answer, in both theory and practice, is positive.

Violation – the AFF is an energy partnership

Voting issue – 

1. Limits – opening the floodgates to other types of engagement make the topic massive and unpredictable – this hurts NEG preparation, which is key to competitiveness and clash

2. Ground – gives them unique advantage areas and guts generics like the politics DA and Neolib K that are key to negative strategy on a topic with few common linkages
4
Energy sharing is a vehicle used for interventionist wars – manufactures justification for military conflicts   
Langlois-Bertrand 10 (Simon, Defence RandD Canada Centre for Operational Research and Analysis, "The Contemporary Concept of Energy Security," http://cradpdf.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/PDFS/unc101/p533868_A1b.pdf)
The energy security problem, in this view, is thus a purely geostrategic issue
AND
tends to order issues in a hierarchical manner,48 relegating other important concerns

We should be affirming policies that avoid “waste imperialism,” where the First World uses the Third as a giant landfill, producing massive structural inequality while reproducing the myth of the “dirty, foreign” Other
Mannathukkaren 12 (Nissim, Associate Professor, International Development Studies, Dalhousie University, “Garbage as our alter ego”, Nov 3, 2012, http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/garbage-as-our-alter-ego/article4059003.ece)
If there is one thing that is symptomatic of the modern human condition, but
AND
be hidden under the carpet. It has to be confronted head on. 

The judge should vote negative to embrace an aesthetics of voluntary simplicity

It’s try-or-die for the alternative – current consumption practices make extinction inevitable – shifting the subject position of the economic imaginary away from producers and towards consumers creates a shift towards creative strategies for simplicity and de-growth
Alexander 12 Samuel, lecturer at the Office for Environmental Programs, University of Melbourne, Australia, “DEGROWTH IMPLIES VOLUNTARY SIMPLICITY: OVERCOMING BARRIERS TO SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION”, Simplicity Institute Report 12b, 2012)
The global economy is exceeding the sustainable carrying capacity of the planet, and it
AND
in the hope that the existing barriers to sustainable consumption can be overcome.

Case
Consequences matter – the tunnel vision of moral absolutism generates evil and political irrelevance
Issac, 2002 (Jeffery, Professor of Political Science at Indiana University, Dissent, Vol. 49 No. 2, Spring)
Politics, in large part, involves contests over the distribution and use of power
AND
not true believers.  It promotes arrogance.  And it undermines political effectiveness.  
Using the federal government kills movements
Nayar, 99 – Professor at the University of Warwick School of Law (Jayan, “SYMPOSIUM: RE-FRAMING INTERNATIONAL LAW FOR THE 21ST CENTURY: Orders of Inhumanity”, Fall, 9 Transnat'l L. and Contemp. Probs. 599) 

The discussion above was intended to provide a perspective of world-order as an
AND
disciplining of minds and bodies--"world-order" as embodied violence.
Thinking globally on environmental issues excludes the common people who are key to solving environmental problems
Esteva and Prakash, 1998 (Gustavo, Latin American critic of development who has served as the Interim Chairman of the UN Research Institute for Social Development Board and as President of the 5th World Congress on Rural Sociology, and Madhu Suri, she has a Ph.D. in philosophy of education from the Syracuse University and is currently Professor of Educational theory and practice at Penn State University, “Grassroots Post-Modernism”, pp.  22-23, Zed Books Ltd.)
Once environmental "problems" are reduced to the ozone layer or to global warming
AND
of "scientific man," unchastened by all his failures at playing God.
This means the AFF fails – reliance on the federal government reinscribes their impacts
Nayar 99, (Jayan, Law Student at the University of Warwick, Re-Framing International Law for the 21st Century: Orders of Inhumanity, 9 Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems 599, Fall 1999)
So, back to the question: to what extent, for this, "
AND
within which are ordered and from which we ourselves order, remain unscrutinized.

By creating defining circumstances in which poverty exists, the AFF not only contributes to the problem, but can't solve it
KAPPELER 1995 Susanne Kappeler, The Will To Violence: The Politics of Personal Behavior, pg 1-4
What is striking is that the violence which is talked about is always the violence
AND
is am unmistakable signal to society that racist violence does indeed 'pay off'.

The result is terminal failure.  Impositions can't solve, localized politics are key  
KAPPELER 1995 Susanne Kappeler, The Will To Violence: The Politics of Personal Behavior, pg 4-5
If we nevertheless continue to explain violence by its 'circumstances' and attempt to counter it
AND
will, including our own, at the centre of political reflection.''

Tournament: Glenbrooks | Round: 3 | Opponent: Pace DL | Judge: Eric Short
1

Farm bill will pass – EPA decision gives it momentum
Wasson 11-19 – Staff writer at The Hill (Erik, “EPA ethanol decision pushes farm bill toward finish line”, November 19 of 2013, http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/agriculture/190777-epa-ethanol-decision-pushes-farm-bill-toward-finish-line)
The Environmental Protection Agency’s preliminary decision to reduce renewable fuels blending requirements has increased momentum
AND
the first time the agency has lowered the target from the prior year.

Plan trades off
Susan Page 13, USA Today, “How Obama can avoid the second-term curse,” 1-15-13, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/01/14/obama-second-term-curse/1834765/
"By the time a second term rolls around, the illusions about a president
AND
, but not everything. Fighting too many battles could mean winning none.
New farm bill key to prevent a food price spike
Nelson 10/17/13 Joe Nelson, writer for WEAU news, “Obama, ag industry waiting for new Farm bill,” http://www.weau.com/home/headlines/Obama-ag-industry-waiting-for-new-Farm-Bill-228259521.html
With the government shutdown over, farmers are still waiting for a deal to be
AND
could cut down profits or even force some farmers to quit or retire.
Extinction
Brown 9 (Lester R, Founder of the Worldwatch Institute and the Earth Policy Institute “Can Food Shortages Bring Down Civilization?” Scientific American, May, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=civilization-food-shortages)
The biggest threat to global stability is the potential for food crises in poor countries
AND
states disintegrate, their fall will threaten the stability of global civilization itself.
2

The United States federal government should condition plan on the federal government of Mexico meeting the four human rights requirements of the Mérida Initiative. The United States federal government should decide if the federal government of Mexico meets these requirements based off the findings of Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos.
Solves the AFF and boosts our human rights cred
WOLA 10 - (Washington Office of Latin America- contains multiple experts on human rights abuse in latin america and quotes the state department's report "Congress: Withhold Funds for Mexico Tied to Human Rights Performance" 9/14/10, http://www.wola.org/publications/congress_withhold_funds_for_mexico_tied_to_human_rights_performance)
The US government significantly strengthened its partnership with Mexico in combating organized crime in 2007
AND
established by Congress, particularly those dealing with prosecuting military abuses and torture: 

HR cred solves conflict
Burke-White 4 (William W., Lecturer in Public and International Affairs and Senior Special Assistant to the Dean, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University The Harvard Environmental Law Review Spring, 2004 LN,https://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/wburkewh/workingpapers/17HarvHumRtsJ249(2004).pdf)
This Article presents a strategic--as opposed to ideological or normative--argument that
AND
U.S.-U.N. cooperation on human rights issues.
3
Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to promote the integration of China into the global trading and financial systems; and security engagement, to encourage compliance with the ten principles by diplomatic and military means when economic incentives do not suffice, in order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent
AND
105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate
4

The United States Federal Government should eliminate the tax exemption for portfolio interest earned by foreign persons from U.S. government bonds, bonds issued by domestic businesses, and interest earned on domestic bank deposits, setting the tax rate at 30, and should encourage members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to adopt similar policies.
The United States Federal Government should establish a system of exemptions from this tax for citizens of nations that meet U.S. Trafficking in Persons Report standards for the elimination of trafficking in persons as defined by the Palermo Protocol, gradually increasing to a full exemption for citizens of countries that can demonstrate elimination or near elimination of trafficking in persons. 

Solves the Case---enacting the precise mandates of the CP solves trafficking globally
Fahey 9 – Diane L. Fahey, Associate Professor of Law, New York Law School, Winter 2009, “Can Tax Policy Stop Human Trafficking?” Georgetown Journal of International Law, 40 Geo. J. Int'l L. 345, p. lexis
Foreign persons used to be subject to U.S. tax on nonbusiness-
AND
the developed countries through a refund of a portion of the withheld tax.

Trafficking assistance causes government corruption---only the CP alone solves
Fahey 9 – Diane L. Fahey, Associate Professor of Law, New York Law School, Winter 2009, “Can Tax Policy Stop Human Trafficking?” Georgetown Journal of International Law, 40 Geo. J. Int'l L. 345, p. lexis
The developed countries should re-impose a withholding tax of 30 *399
AND
take meaningful steps *400 to stop trafficking will receive economic rewards.

Turns the case on a huge scale---government corruption’s the single most important cause of trafficking globally
Fahey 9 – Diane L. Fahey, Associate Professor of Law, New York Law School, Winter 2009, “Can Tax Policy Stop Human Trafficking?” Georgetown Journal of International Law, 40 Geo. J. Int'l L. 345, p. lexis
Traffickers do not operate in a vacuum. They require not only a *355
AND
n36 Sometimes, the government officials themselves own or patronize the brothels. n37

Not sure where the net benefit went….it was just latin American instability bad
Case

War causes sexual violence and reifies the subjugation of women
Eaton 04. Shana JD Georgetown University Law Center 35 Geo. J. Int'l L. 873 Summer lexis
While sexual violence against women has always been considered a negative side effect of war
AND
putting the human rights of these women at the heart of the conflict.

Consequences matter – the tunnel vision of moral absolutism generates evil and political irrelevance
Issac, 2002 (Jeffery, Professor of Political Science at Indiana University, Dissent, Vol. 49 No. 2, Spring)
Politics, in large part, involves contests over the distribution and use of power
AND
not true believers.  It promotes arrogance.  And it undermines political effectiveness.  

War turns structural violence and genocide
PPU 07 (Peace Pledge Union, oldest pacifist organization of Britain.  Genocide.  June 16. http://www.ppu.org.uk/genocide/index1a.html)
These are horrors we want to protect children from, so why try to talk
AND
disagree in safety. And genocide will be a shame of the past.

We only need to win a 1 risk of existential threats to win
Bostrum, 05 (Nick – professor of philosophy at Oxford and winner of the Gannon Award, Transcribed by Joe Packer 4:38-6:12 of the talk at http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/44, accessed 10/20/07)

Now if we think about what just reducing the probability of human extinction by just
AND
be lost if we went extinct it should still be a high priority.

Even a low probability outweighs
Art, 03 (Robert – professor of IR at Brandeis University, A Grand Strategy for America, p. 212-213)

Fourth and finally, great-power wars are highly destructive, not only to
AND
-power peace should be over-determined, not left to chance.

Tournament: Glenbrooks | Round: 6 | Opponent: Appleton East | Judge: Nick Locke
1NC
1

Farm bill will pass – EPA decision gives it momentum
Wasson 11-19 – Staff writer at The Hill (Erik, “EPA ethanol decision pushes farm bill toward finish line”, November 19 of 2013, http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/agriculture/190777-epa-ethanol-decision-pushes-farm-bill-toward-finish-line)
The Environmental Protection Agency’s preliminary decision to reduce renewable fuels blending requirements has increased momentum
AND
the first time the agency has lowered the target from the prior year.

Plan trades off
Susan Page 13, USA Today, “How Obama can avoid the second-term curse,” 1-15-13, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/01/14/obama-second-term-curse/1834765/
"By the time a second term rolls around, the illusions about a president
AND
, but not everything. Fighting too many battles could mean winning none.
New farm bill key to prevent a food price spike
Nelson 10/17/13 Joe Nelson, writer for WEAU news, “Obama, ag industry waiting for new Farm bill,” http://www.weau.com/home/headlines/Obama-ag-industry-waiting-for-new-Farm-Bill-228259521.html
With the government shutdown over, farmers are still waiting for a deal to be
AND
could cut down profits or even force some farmers to quit or retire.
Extinction
Brown 9 (Lester R, Founder of the Worldwatch Institute and the Earth Policy Institute “Can Food Shortages Bring Down Civilization?” Scientific American, May, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=civilization-food-shortages)
The biggest threat to global stability is the potential for food crises in poor countries
AND
states disintegrate, their fall will threaten the stability of global civilization itself.
2

Discourses of danger reproduces an American identity – that posits the US as a the defender of global freedom and liberty
Campbell, 98- Professor of International Politics University of Newcastle (David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity) 

The crisis of representation the United States faces is unique only in the particularities of
AND
the idea that foreign policy/Foreign Policy is constitutive of political identity.

B. That makes extinction inevitable
Willson, 02- Ph.D New College San Fransisco, Humanities, JD, American University (Brian, “Armageddon or Quantum Leap? U.S. Imperialism and?Human Consciousness from?an Evolutionary Perspective”, http://www.brianwillson.com/quantum.html)

Awaiting the impending U.S. government's concocted "preventive" war against Iraq
AND
everything that contributes to their support" (General John Sullivan, 1779).
In a prominent history book published in 1906 (The History of the United States
AND
cyclical, indicate that we are dangerously near the end of our evolutionary branch

C. Alternative text – reject the affirmative to desecuritize the Political. Vote negative to challenge securitization itself in favor of a political ethic that approaches problems in non-security terms and exposes the limits of their methodology.

D. Framework – security is a communicative action that requires discursive justification – there is an ethical responsibility to justify securitization in political discussion. The role of the ballot is to interrogate methodologies – to weigh their case the Aff has to legitimize securitization first
Williams, 03 Michael – IR Prof @ University of Ottawa, “Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics,” International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 4 (Dec., 2003), pp. 511-53, Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The International Studies Association, JSTOR http://www.jstor.org/stable/3693634

A second major criticism of the Copenhagen School concerns the ethics of securitization. Simply
AND
questioning the policies, or by disputing the threat, or both.36
3
Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to promote the integration of China into the global trading and financial systems; and security engagement, to encourage compliance with the ten principles by diplomatic and military means when economic incentives do not suffice, in order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent
AND
105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate
4

The United States federal government should condition substantially increasing nanotechnology assistance with Mexico on the federal government of Mexico meeting the four human rights requirements of the Mérida Initiative. The United States federal government should decide if the federal government of Mexico meets these requirements based off the findings of Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos.
Solves the AFF and boosts our human rights cred
WOLA 10 - (Washington Office of Latin America- contains multiple experts on human rights abuse in latin america and quotes the state department's report "Congress: Withhold Funds for Mexico Tied to Human Rights Performance" 9/14/10, http://www.wola.org/publications/congress_withhold_funds_for_mexico_tied_to_human_rights_performance)
The US government significantly strengthened its partnership with Mexico in combating organized crime in 2007
AND
established by Congress, particularly those dealing with prosecuting military abuses and torture:
HR cred solves conflict
Burke-White 4 (William W., Lecturer in Public and International Affairs and Senior Special Assistant to the Dean, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University The Harvard Environmental Law Review Spring, 2004 LN,https://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/wburkewh/workingpapers/17HarvHumRtsJ249(2004).pdf)
This Article presents a strategic--as opposed to ideological or normative--argument that
AND
U.S.-U.N. cooperation on human rights issues. 

Diseases

Empirically denied – diseases have been around forever and haven’t caused extinction. Plus, genetic diversity ensures that some humans will always survive.

No disease can kill us all – it would have to be everything at once
Gladwell, 95 (Malcolm, The New Republic, 7/17/95 and 7/24/95, “The Plague Year”, Lexis)

What would a real Andromeda Strain look like? It would be highly infectious like
AND
, but they neglect to point out the limitations of microscopic life forms.

Cooperation
Nanotech makes all conflict more likely – 1AC author
Gubrud 97
(Mark Avrum Gubrud, a research associate, Center for Superconductivity Research (University of Maryland, College Park), is ''a physicist, writer and social activist, November 1997, http://www.foresight.org/Conferences/MNT05/Papers/Gubrud/, “Nanotechnology and International Security”)
The possible applications of nanotechnology to advanced weaponry are fertile ground for fantasy. It
AND
and nifty gadgets are irrelevant if your enemy can simply blow you up.

This advantage is silly – their uniqueness card is from 1997 – proves there is a very very high threshold for nanotech being the only thing that stops miscalc
No risk of accidental launch–Russia doesn’t rely on deteriorating systems
Podvig, 03  (Pavel, Center for Arms Control Studies, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, FORUM ON PHYSICS and SOCIETY of The American Physical Society, January, http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/2003/january/article1.cfm)
As we can see, the Russian early-warning network is indeed in a
AND
its role and is very unlikely to increase the danger of inadvertent launch.

No impact to hegemonic decline – their studies are wrong
MacDonald, 11 - Assistant Professor of Political Science at Williams College (Paul K, Spring 2011, "Graceful Decline?: The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchment", International Security, Vol. 35, No. 4, UTD McDermitt Library, KONTOPOULOS)
How do great powers respond to acute decline? The erosion of the relative power
AND
none of the declining powers that failed to retrench recovered their relative position.

Obama’s getting the U.S. out of heg now—the aff props up heg, causing great power conflict and a violent transition to multipolarity
Quinn, 11 – Lecturer in International Studies at the University of Birmingham (Adam, 7/1/11, “The Art of Declining Politely: Obama’s Prudent Presidency and the Waning of American Power”, International Affairs, Vol. 87, No. 4, Ebsco, KONTOPOULOS)
As for the administration’s involvement in the ‘Arab Spring’, and latterly military intervention
AND
seems it is fortunate enough to have a president who fits the bill.

Best data proves unipolar systems are substantially more war-prone than multipolar alternatives – causes offshore balancing
Monteiro, 12 - Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yale University (Nuno P., Winter 2012, “Unrest Assured Why Unipolarity is Not Peaceful”, http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ISEC_a_00064, KONTOPOULOS)
How well, then, does the argument that unipolar systems are peaceful account for
AND
higher.47 These figures provide no evidence that unipolarity is peaceful.48

Offshore Balancing solves US-Chinese relations and war over Taiwan
Layne, 08 – Robert M. Gates Chair in Intelligence and National Security at the George Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas AandM University and Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of California at Berkeley (Christopher, 2008, “China’s Challenge to US Hegemony”, Global Trends, KONTOPOULOS) Word Doc
Washington, however, faces perhaps a last chance to adopt a grand strategy that
AND
;" and support for a democratic Taiwan in a conflict with authoritarian China.

Sino relations solve extinction
Fu, 06 – Senior Research Professor of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and former Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in Behavioral Science at Stanford (Zhengyuan, “The Taiwan Issue and Sino-US Relations”, Transnational and Contemporary Problems, 2006, Lexis Nexis)
I. Introduction In the Twenty-First Century, China's relations with the United
AND
fourth of mankind, but for the rest of the world as well.

Tournament: Glenbrooks | Round: 7 | Opponent: University School of Nashville | Judge: Travis Henderson
1NC
1
Farm bill will pass – EPA decision gives it momentum
Wasson 11-19 – Staff writer at The Hill (Erik, “EPA ethanol decision pushes farm bill toward finish line”, November 19 of 2013, http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/agriculture/190777-epa-ethanol-decision-pushes-farm-bill-toward-finish-line)
The Environmental Protection Agency’s preliminary decision to reduce renewable fuels blending requirements has increased momentum
AND
the first time the agency has lowered the target from the prior year.

Plan trades off
Susan Page 13, USA Today, “How Obama can avoid the second-term curse,” 1-15-13, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/01/14/obama-second-term-curse/1834765/
"By the time a second term rolls around, the illusions about a president
AND
, but not everything. Fighting too many battles could mean winning none.

The farm bill is vital to multiple sectors for economic growth.
Baum, 11/22 (Janell contributor to Farm Futures, “White House Report Quantifies Farm Bill’s Economic Impact,” Farm Futures: Business and Marketing Tools for Profitable Farming, http://farmfutures.com/story-white-house-report-quantifies-farm-bills-economic-impact-0-105233-spx_1)
The farm bill will contribute to domestic agriculture sector, its workforce, rural American
AND
of GDP is tied in some way to what happens on the farm.

The impact is nuclear war.
O’Hanlon et al, 12 (Michael and Kenneth, foreign policy scholars at the Brookings Institution, “the real national security threat: america’s debt,” 7/3, http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/03/opinion/la-oe-ohanlon-fiscal-reform-20120703)
Lastly, American economic weakness undercuts U.S. leadership abroad. Other countries
AND
really possible if that fundamental prerequisite to effective foreign policy is not reestablished.
2
Text: The United States federal government should pass H.R. 2216, the NADBank Enhancement Act.
NADBank restrictions prevent investment – counter plan solves.
Balido, 11 (Nelson, President of the Border Trade Alliance, “Bill to expand NADBank projects holds potential to make big impact for border,”  August 29, http://www.thebta.org/btanews/bill-to-expand-nadbank-projects-holds-potential-to-make-big-impact-for-border.html)
Over the past sixteen years of operation, the NADBank has been vitally important to
AND
area’s quality of life and provide a needed boost to the region’s economy.
3
Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to promote the integration of China into the global trading and financial systems; and security engagement, to encourage compliance with the ten principles by diplomatic and military means when economic incentives do not suffice, in order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent
AND
105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies unconditionally means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate
4

Text: The United States federal government should condition substantially increasing its infrastructure assistance with Mexico through the North American Development Bank on the federal government of Mexico meeting the four human rights requirements of the Mérida Initiative. The United States federal government should decide if the federal government of Mexico meets these requirements based off the findings of Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos.
Solves the AFF and boosts our human rights cred
WOLA 10 - (Washington Office of Latin America- contains multiple experts on human rights abuse in latin america and quotes the state department's report "Congress: Withhold Funds for Mexico Tied to Human Rights Performance" 9/14/10, http://www.wola.org/publications/congress_withhold_funds_for_mexico_tied_to_human_rights_performance)
The US government significantly strengthened its partnership with Mexico in combating organized crime in 2007
AND
established by Congress, particularly those dealing with prosecuting military abuses and torture:
HR cred solves conflict
Burke-White 4 (William W., Lecturer in Public and International Affairs and Senior Special Assistant to the Dean, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University The Harvard Environmental Law Review Spring, 2004 LN,https://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/wburkewh/workingpapers/17HarvHumRtsJ249(2004).pdf)
This Article presents a strategic--as opposed to ideological or normative--argument that
AND
U.S.-U.N. cooperation on human rights issues. 

Water
Food wars don’t escalate
Salehyan, 07 – Assistant Professor of Political Science at University of Northern Texas (Idean, “The New Myth About Climate Change”, Foreign Policy, August 2007, May 29th 2010, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3922, KONTOPOULOS)
Dire scenarios like these may sound convincing, but they are misleading. Even worse
AND
Paris are at least as culpable for Darfur as the regime in Khartoum.
  Abundance causes conflict, not shortage
Dupont, 08 – Michael Hintze Professor of International Security and Director of the Centre for International Security Studies @ U of Sydney (Alan, June 2008, Survival, Vol. 50, Iss. 3, “The Strategic Implications of Climate Change”, p. 43)
Many of these projections are highly speculative or simply misleading, betraying the authors’ lack
AND
would lead either to reconsider their long-standing aversion to nuclear weapons.

  Resource scarcity spurs innovation which prevents resource wars
Meierding, 07 – Ph.D. Student at the University of Chicago (Emily, “Strategic Substitution and the Declining Likelihood of International Resource Wars”, March 2007 prepared for the International Studies Association Conference)
If these intra-disciplinary critics collectively call into question the resource pessimists’ claim that
AND
the likelihood of conflict. Future resource-inspired violence will be rare.
Warming
No impact to warming
Goklany 11 - a science and technology policy analyst for the United States Department of the Interior (Indur M., “Misled on Climate Change: How the UN IPCC (and others) Exaggerate the Impacts of Global Warming” December 2011, http://goklany.org/library/Reason20CC20and20Development202011.pdf, PZ)
A third approach would be to fix the root cause of why developing countries are
AND
while cellular phone users went from 0 per 100 to 33 per 100.
Icebergs are a negative feedback – none of their evidence takes this into account
Macfarlane, 09 (Jo, The Daily Mail Online. “Amazing discovery of green algae which could save the world from global warming” http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1104772/Amazing-discovery-green-algae-save-world-global-warming.html?ITO=1490#)
Melting icebergs, so long the iconic image of global warming, are triggering a
AND
calculates that a further 26million tons of CO2 is removed from the atmosphere.
Growing emissions in developing countries make CO2 reduction impossible – modeling is irrelevant
Koetzle, 08 – Ph.D. and Senior Vice President of Public Policy at the Institute for Energy Research (William, “IER Rebuttal to Boucher White Paper”, 4/13/2008, http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2008/04/13/ier-rebuttal-to-boucher-white-paper/)
For example, if the United States were to unilaterally reduced emissions by 30
AND
these reductions are to a large extent mirrored by all significant emitting nations.

Manufacturing 

No impact to hegemonic decline – their studies are wrong
MacDonald, 11 - Assistant Professor of Political Science at Williams College (Paul K, Spring 2011, "Graceful Decline?: The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchment", International Security, Vol. 35, No. 4, UTD McDermitt Library, KONTOPOULOS)
How do great powers respond to acute decline? The erosion of the relative power
AND
none of the declining powers that failed to retrench recovered their relative position.

Obama’s getting the U.S. out of heg now—the aff props up heg, causing great power conflict and a violent transition to multipolarity
Quinn, 11 – Lecturer in International Studies at the University of Birmingham (Adam, 7/1/11, “The Art of Declining Politely: Obama’s Prudent Presidency and the Waning of American Power”, International Affairs, Vol. 87, No. 4, Ebsco, KONTOPOULOS)
As for the administration’s involvement in the ‘Arab Spring’, and latterly military intervention
AND
seems it is fortunate enough to have a president who fits the bill.
More evidence – this is the 1AC card – heg isn’t inevitable
Brooks, Ikenberry, Wohlforth 13 – *Stephen G. Brooks is Associate Professor of Government at Dartmouth College, John Ikenberry is Albert G. Milbank Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University and Global Eminence Scholar at Kyung Hee University in Seoul, William C. Wohlforth is Daniel Webster Professor of Government at Dartmouth College (“Lean Forward: In Defense of American Engagement”, January/February 2013, Foreign Affairs, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/138468/stephen-g-brooks-g-john-ikenberry-and-william-c-wohlforth/lean-forward PURPLE))
Since the end of World War II, the United States has pursued a single
AND
ties, and give up its efforts to lead the liberal international order.¶ 

Best data proves unipolar systems are substantially more war-prone than multipolar alternatives – causes offshore balancing
Monteiro, 12 - Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yale University (Nuno P., Winter 2012, “Unrest Assured Why Unipolarity is Not Peaceful”, http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ISEC_a_00064, KONTOPOULOS)
How well, then, does the argument that unipolar systems are peaceful account for
AND
higher.47 These figures provide no evidence that unipolarity is peaceful.48

Offshore Balancing solves US-Chinese relations and war over Taiwan
Layne, 08 – Robert M. Gates Chair in Intelligence and National Security at the George Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas AandM University and Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of California at Berkeley (Christopher, 2008, “China’s Challenge to US Hegemony”, Global Trends, KONTOPOULOS) Word Doc
Washington, however, faces perhaps a last chance to adopt a grand strategy that
AND
;" and support for a democratic Taiwan in a conflict with authoritarian China.

Sino relations solve extinction
Fu, 06 – Senior Research Professor of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and former Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in Behavioral Science at Stanford (Zhengyuan, “The Taiwan Issue and Sino-US Relations”, Transnational and Contemporary Problems, 2006, Lexis Nexis)
I. Introduction In the Twenty-First Century, China's relations with the United
AND
fourth of mankind, but for the rest of the world as well.

Tournament: Greenhill | Round: 1 | Opponent: Peninsula TW | Judge: Jake Ziering
1
Debt ceiling will pass and political capital is key
Pace 9/12 (Julie, “AP White House correspondent, Syria debate on hold, Obama refocuses on agenda”, The Fresno Bee, September 9 of 2013, http://www.fresnobee.com/2013/09/12/3493538/obama-seeks-to-focus-on-domestic.html
With a military strike against Syria on hold, President Barack Obama tried Thursday to
AND
Speaker John Boehner on Thursday said the GOP will insist on curbing spending.

Drains capital – Backlash and hostage taking on unrelated priority legislation is empirically proven, likely in future and specifically true for Rubio  – Cuba policy is totally unique – this is the best link card you will ever read
LeoGrande, 12
William M. LeoGrande School of Public Affairs American University, Professor of Government and a specialist in Latin American politics and U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America, Professor LeoGrande has been a frequent adviser to government and private sector agencies, 12/18/12, http://www.american.edu/clals/upload/LeoGrande-Fresh-Start.pdf

The Second Obama Administration Where in the executive branch will control over Cuba policy lie
AND
rarely happen unless the urgency of the problem forces policymakers to take action.
This will destroy the U.S. and global economy and collapse trade
Davidson, 9/10 (Adam - co-founder of NPR’s “Planet Money” 9/10/2013, “Our Debt to Society,” http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/15/magazine/our-debt-to-society.html?pagewanted=alland_r=0))
This is the definition of a deficit, and it illustrates why the government needs
AND
free asset more risky, the entire global economy becomes riskier and costlier.
Nuclear war and extinction
Harris and Burrows 9 - *Mathew, PhD European History @ Cambridge, counselor in the National Intelligence Council (NIC) , Jennifer, a member of the NIC’s Long Range Analysis Unit (“Revisiting the Future: Geopolitical Effects of the Financial Crisis” http://www.ciaonet.org/journals/twq/v32i2/f_0016178_13952.pdf)
Increased Potential for Global Conflict
Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and indeed believes the future is
AND
within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world. 

2
Trade liberalization with Cuba kicks away the ladder to prevent successful Cuban development – causes neoliberal expansion and overconsumption – the alt is to de-link from latin america
Fanelli 8 (Carlo, SSHRC Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Department of Politics and Public Administration, Ryerson University, He received his PhD from the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Carleton University, “‘Cubanalismo’: The Cuban Alternative to Neoliberalism”, New Proposals: Journal of Marxism and Interdisciplinary Inquiry Vol.2, No. 1 (November 2008) pgs. 7-16)
A closer look at the history of capitalism, however, reveals a much different
AND
productivity levels, efficiency, and quality had been more or less achieved.

Extinction-~--tech and reforms fail
Richard A. Smith 7, Research Associate at the Institute for Policy Research and Development, UK; PhD in History from UCLA, June 2007, “The Eco-suicidal Economics of Adam Smith,” Capitalism Nature Socialism, Vol. 18, No. 2, p. 22-43
In the midst of the record-breaking heat wave in the summer of 2003
AND
"endless technical adjustments;" thus no further theoretical thought is required."27
3
Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to promote the integration of China into the global trading and financial systems; and security engagement, to encourage compliance with the ten principles by diplomatic and military means when economic incentives do not suffice, in order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent
AND
105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate

4
Text: The United States federal government should propose to the Organization of American States a multilateral effort to substantially repeal its economic sanctions on Cuba.
It solves the AFF and bolsters the OAS
IAD 12 (Inter-American Dialogue, US center for policy analysis, exchange
AND
http://www.thedialogue.org/PublicationFiles/IAD2012PolicyReportFINAL.pdf)
Even as Latin America expands its global reach and presence, it is important that
AND
, in order to regain a central role in inter-American affairs.
Everyone says yes
Erickson 10 (Daniel P. Erikson, associate for US policy¶ and director of Caribbean programs at the Inter-American¶ Dialogue, taught Latin American politics at Johns Hopkins-SAIS, is¶ frequently interviewed in US and international media, and has¶ testified before the US Congress, his past positions include¶ research associate at Harvard Business School and Fulbright¶ scholar in US-Mexican business relations, he is also a term member of the Council on Foreign Relations, “The Obama Administration and Latin America: Towards a New Partnership?” Working Paper No. 46, The Centre for International Governance Innovation, April 2010, pg. 27, http://www.thedialogue.org/PublicationFiles/Working_Paper2046.pdf
Although the early hopes for momentous change have¶ begun to dissipate, the presidency
AND
much of the hemisphere felt upon his election¶ to the White House.

Global Influence

The liberal international order ensures a transition is peaceful regardless of US engagement
Ikenberry 11 (G. John, “A World of Our Making: The international order that America created will endure—if we make the transition to a grand strategy based on reciprocity and shared leadership.” G. John Ikenberry is the Albert G. Milbank Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University in the Department of Politics and the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.  He is also Co-Director of Princeton’s Center for International Security Studies. Ikenberry is also a Global Eminence Scholar at Kyung Hee University in Seoul, Korea. In 2013-2014 Ikenberry will be the 72nd Eastman Visiting Professor at Balliol College, Oxford. http://www.democracyjournal.org/21/a-world-of-our-making-1.php?page=2)
Second, the character of liberal international order itself—with or without American hegemonic
AND
appear to have unique characteristics that encourage integration and discourage opposition and resistance.

Including non-democratic institutions in the world order impairs the world’s ability to make decisions and deals—non-democracies inherently undermine world decision-making—relative levels of cooperation have no impact
Ásgeirsdóttir and Steinwand Feb-28-12 “Drawing the Line: The Use of Equidistance versus Equitable Distribution in Demarcating Shared Ocean Areas,” Áslaug Ásgeirsdóttir is an Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Politics at Bates College, Martin Steinwand is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at Stony Brook University, http://mysbfiles.stonybrook.edu/~msteinwand/papers/AsgeirsdottirSteinwand.2012.pdf)

At first glance, we see that the regime type variables are statistically significant,
AND
shows ¶ strong evidence that democracies are better at bargaining with each other.

Status quo solves Obama credibility
Charles A. Kupchan – YOUR AUTHOR – 12, professor of international affairs at Georgetown University and the Whitney Shepardson senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, and Bruce W. Jentleson, professor of public policy and political science at Duke University, October/November 2012, “Obama’s strong suit,” http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/The20World20Today/2012/october/WT1012Kupchan.pdf
When it comes to handling matters of America’s national security, Republicans have for decades
AND
off; diplomatic and commercial contacts have deepened in step with political liberalization.

No war – China abides by international law and keeps a low profile
Haixia 12 (Qi, Lecturer at Department of International Relations – Tsinghua University, “Football Game Rather Than Boxing Match: China–US Intensifying Rivalry Does not Amount to Cold War,” Chinese Journal of International Politics, 5(2), Summer, p. 105-127, http://cjip.oxfordjournals.org/content/5/2/105.full)
Keeping Low Profile China's strategy of keeping low profile constitutes the political foundation of the
AND
other developing countries, and works to safeguard world peace and stability.’51

History proves no risk of China war – their cards are all hype
Dyer 9 (Gwynne, Ph.D. in War Studies – University of London and Board of Governors – Canada’s Royal Military College, “China Unlikely to Engage in Military Confrontation”, Jakarta Post, 4-29,
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2005/03/12/china-unlikely-engage-military-confrontation.html)

Given America's monopoly or huge technological lead in key areas like stealth bombers, aircraft
AND
build-up and no plausible threat of impending war in East Asia.

. Russia is far too weak to attack the US
Lieber, 07 (Professor of Government and International Affairs at Georgetown University - Robert J., "Persistent Primacy and the Future of the American Era", APSA Paper 2007, http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/2/1/1/0/5/pages211058/p211058-1.php)
Constraints on the capacity of adversaries also needs to be taken into account. Russia
AND
, first regionally and even globally, but only over the long term. 

2. Mutual interests ensure cooperation
Arbatov, 07 (Alexei, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, member of the Editorial Board of Russia in Global Affairs, “Is a New Cold War Imminent,” Russia in Global Affairs, No. 2, July-September 2007, http://eng.globalaffairs.ru/numbers/20/1130.html)
First, the present dispute lacks the Cold War’s system-forming element, that
AND
about 80 percent the Moscow Treaty expires on December 31, 2012.

No escalation – disagreements remain limited
Weitz 11 (Richard, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and a World Politics Review senior editor 9/27/2011, “Global Insights: Putin not a Game-Changer for U.S.-Russia Ties,” http://www.scribd.com/doc/66579517/Global-Insights-Putin-not-a-Game-Changer-for-U-S-Russia-Ties)

Fifth, there will inevitably be areas of conflict between Russia and the United States
AND
of social communication, that will constrain whoever is in charge of Russia.

Conflicts will never go nuclear – prefer Russian generals
Ivashov 7 (Colonel General Leonid Ivashov, President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, 2007.  Defense and Security, “Will America Fight Russia?” p. Lexis)

Numerous scenarios and options are possible. Everything may begin as a local conflict that
AND
nuclear arsenals. It will stop the war and put negotiations into motion.

We would crush them
Sharavin 7 (Alexander Sharavin, Director of the Institute of Political and Military Analysis, 2007.  Defense and Security, “Will America Fight Russia?” p. Lexis)

The United States may count on a mass air raid and missile strike at objects
AND
The American strategic missile forces in their turn will escape the war unscathed.

Agriculture

The impact is exaggerated – Cuban ag isn’t sustainable
Thompson and Stephens, 12 – * Ph.D. Curriculum and Education Director @ Duke University AND  Marian Cheek Jackson Center (Charles D. and Alexander, “Visions for Sustainable Agriculture in Cuba and the United States: Changing Minds and Models through Exchange”, Southern States, March 22 2013, http://www.southernspaces.org/2012/visions-sustainable-agriculture-cuba-and-united-states-changing-minds-and-models-through-exchan) SP

Following the Cuban Revolution (1953–59), the Soviet Union’s (USSR)
AND
time during the year in 2010, up from 11 in 2005. 

ST solves this is their Scholik evidence
. Recent regulatory changes implemented by the U.S. government provide a means for individuals and businesses to begin forming the relationships with their Cuban counterparts that will lead to future trade opportunities
Zero chance the US adopts the Cuban model
Pfeiffer, 3 – energy editor for From the Wilderness (Dale, “Cuba-A Hope”, From the Wilderness,
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/120103_korea_2.html.

Resistance to Cuban-style agricultural reform would be particularly stiff in the United States
AND
to turn a profit is effectively drowned out by the overproduction of agribusiness.

1. Icebergs are a negative feedback – none of their evidence takes this into account
   Macfarlane, 09 (Jo, The Daily Mail Online. “Amazing discovery of green algae which could save the world from global warming” http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1104772/Amazing-discovery-green-algae-save-world-global-warming.html?ITO=1490#)
   Melting icebergs, so long the iconic image of global warming, are triggering a
   AND
   calculates that a further 26million tons of CO2 is removed from the atmosphere.

2. CO2 is not anthropogenic – their evidence is based on a misinterpretation
Marohasy, 09 (Jennifer, senior fellow at the Australian think tank the Institute of Public Affairs, PhD in biology from the University of Queensland. Cites research from  Robert H. Essenhigh,  Department of Mechanical Engineering at Ohio State University, “Carbon Dioxide in Atmosphere 5-15 Years Only” 4-17-09.  http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/04/carbon-dioxide-in-atmosphere-5-15-years-only/)
If carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels only stayed in the atmosphere a few years
AND
-accepted, rider that CO2 emissions from combustion should therefore be curbed.  
However, the actual data in the text of the IPCC Report separately states a
AND
The economic and political significance of that conclusion will be self-evident.

3. Growing emissions in developing countries make CO2 reduction impossible – modeling is irrelevant
Koetzle, 08 – Ph.D. and Senior Vice President of Public Policy at the Institute for Energy Research (William, “IER Rebuttal to Boucher White Paper”, 4/13/2008, http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2008/04/13/ier-rebuttal-to-boucher-white-paper/)
For example, if the United States were to unilaterally reduced emissions by 30
AND
these reductions are to a large extent mirrored by all significant emitting nations.

4. Observational data proves warming has stopped – the multi-decadal oscillation overwhelms CO2 forcing
Akasofu, 08 – Former director of the Geophysical Institute and the International Arctic Research Center @ U of Alaska-Fairbanks (Syun-Ichi, “Global warming has paused”, 9/27/2008, http://newsminer.com/news/2008/sep/27/global-warming-has-paused/?opinion)
Recent studies by the Hadley Climate Research Center (UK), the Japan Meteorological Agency
AND
the CO2 effect, as I have stated during the last several years.

Tournament: Greenhill | Round: 4 | Opponent: Niles West NP | Judge: Kirk Gibson
1
Congress will raise the debt ceiling now – but it’ll be a tough fight
The Detriot News 9/19/13 (Dale McFeatters, "Another Debt Ceiling Debate?")
The tea party-influenced wing of the House GOP favors passing the CRs but
AND
that his leadership is weak and uncertain, the president almost dare not.

Obama’s push is key
Lillis and Wasson 9/7, Mike, the Hill writer, Erik, the Hill writer, “Fears of wounding Obama weigh heavily on Democrats ahead of vote,” 9/7, http://thehill.com/homenews/house/320829-fears-of-wounding-obama-weigh-heavily-on-democrats#ixzz2fOPUfPNr
The prospect of wounding President Obama is weighing heavily on Democratic lawmakers as they decide
AND
through this fiscal thicket. These are going to be very difficult votes."

Drains capital – Backlash and hostage taking on unrelated priority legislation is empirically proven, likely in future and specifically true for Rubio  – Cuba policy is totally unique – this is the best link card you will ever read
LeoGrande, 12
William M. LeoGrande School of Public Affairs American University, Professor of Government and a specialist in Latin American politics and U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America, Professor LeoGrande has been a frequent adviser to government and private sector agencies, 12/18/12, http://www.american.edu/clals/upload/LeoGrande-Fresh-Start.pdf

The Second Obama Administration Where in the executive branch will control over Cuba policy lie
AND
rarely happen unless the urgency of the problem forces policymakers to take action.

Debt ceiling causes Iran strikes
Nimmo 6
Kurt, Iran Attack: No Way Back Now, 1/18/6, http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m19768andl=iandsize=1andhd=0
But none of this is relevant now. Israel will goad the United States—
AND
economic history proves, it is that you cannot have prosperity without one."
Nuclear war
Chossudovsky in 7
Michel, Professor of Economics, The Unthinkable: The US- Israeli Nuclear War on Iran, http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticleandcode=CHO20070121andarticleId=4536
The World is at the crossroads of the most serious crisis in modern history.
AND
analysts have suggested, ultimately leading us into a World War III scenario.
2

The Supreme Court of the United States should grant a writ of certiorari for the PERNOD RICARD USA LLC v. BACARDI INC case and rule in favor of Pernod Ricard USA LLC.
CP solves the case – the plan solves Pernod’s appeal.  From the 1ac solvency author.
Reinsch 10 (Bill Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council, representing some 400 companies on focuses—and focuses on trade policy issues, a member of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. "DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL TRADEMARK IMPLICATIONS OF HAVANA CLUB AND SECTION 211 OF THE OMNIBUS APPROPRIATIONS ACT OF 1999." HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION. MARCH 3, 2010.http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-111hhrg55221/html/CHRG-111hhrg55221.htm)
And by the way--for all this talk of litigation there has ¶ been
AND
against Bacardi for their use of Havana Club. ¶ And they lost.

3

Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to promote the integration of China into the global trading and financial systems; and security engagement, to encourage compliance with the ten principles by diplomatic and military means when economic incentives do not suffice, in order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent
AND
105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Voting issue – 

1. Limits – opening the floodgates to other types of engagement make the topic massive and unpredictable – this hurts NEG preparation, which is key to competitiveness and clash

2. Ground – gives them unique advantage areas and guts generics like the politics DA and Neolib K that are key to negative strategy on a topic with few common linkages 

3. Extra-topicality – using diplomatic/political/cultural mechanisms gives them unpredictable advantage areas and solvency mechanisms that we can’t prepare for

4

The aff’s fear of protectionism is epistemologically bankrupt because they glorify an ideologically insulated Anglo-American system of free trade as the natural way of the world – we must repoliticize alternatives to free trade lest people who do NOT practice free trade become demonized as irrational and expendable
James Fallows, national correspondent for the Atlantic, BA in history and literature from Harvard and was a Rhodes Scholar @ Oxford for economics, 1993, “How the World Works”, The Atlantic online, http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1993/12/how-the-world-works/5854/
WHY Friedrich List? The more I had heard about List in the preceding five
AND
and interference are inherently wrong—then you are a flat-earther.

Extinction-~--tech and reforms fail - The alternative is to de-link from Latin America
Richard A. Smith 7, Research Associate at the Institute for Policy Research and Development, UK; PhD in History from UCLA, June 2007, “The Eco-suicidal Economics of Adam Smith,” Capitalism Nature Socialism, Vol. 18, No. 2, p. 22-43
In the midst of the record-breaking heat wave in the summer of 2003
AND
"endless technical adjustments;" thus no further theoretical thought is required."27

WTO

Protectionism won’t spiral out of control – interdependence
Marshall, 09 (Andrew – asia political risk correspondent, Assault on free trade a key political risk, Reuters, 1/21/2009, p. lexis)

PREVENTING DISASTER Despite the risks, many analysts argue that a wholesale retreat into protectionism
AND
markets that are highly dependent on exports," the Economist Intelligence Unit said.

There isn’t incentive for any country to leave global trade
No chance of war from economic decline-~--best and most recent data
Daniel W. Drezner 12, Professor, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, October 2012, “The Irony of Global Economic Governance: The System Worked,” http://www.globaleconomicgovernance.org/wp-content/uploads/IR-Colloquium-MT12-Week-5_The-Irony-of-Global-Economic-Governance.pdf
The final outcome addresses a dog that hasn’t barked: the effect of the Great
AND
II – and not even worse – must be regarded as fortunate.”42

WTO is dead
Cooke, 09 (Shamus, trade unionist, social service worker, writer for Workers Action, frequent contributor to Global Research, 111-15-2009 “What Is At Stake With Free Trade”, http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticleandcode=COO20091115andarticleId=16096)

In the ten years since the World Trade Organization (WTO) protests in Seattle
AND
democratic, and would rather go it alone on the global market place.

No resource wars
Salehyan, 07 – Assistant Professor of Political Science at University of Northern Texas (Idean, “The New Myth About Climate Change”, Foreign Policy, August 2007, May 29th 2010, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3922, KONTOPOULOS)
Dire scenarios like these may sound convincing, but they are misleading. Even worse
AND
Paris are at least as culpable for Darfur as the regime in Khartoum. 

IPR

1. No war
   Easterbrook, 05 senior fellow at The New Republic, 05 Greg, “EXPLAINING 15 YEARS OF DIMINISHING VIOLENCE — The End of War?”, http://democraticpeace.wordpress.com/2009/05/31/easterbrook-end-of-war/  
   Daily explosions in Iraq, massacres in Sudan, the Koreas staring at each other
   AND
   plowshares and spears into pruning hooks. The world ought to take notice.

2. No major power war
Mandelbaum, 99 (Michael Mandelbaum is Christian A. Herter Professor of American Foreign Policy, the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies,  Johns Hopkins University, Washington DC; and Director, Project on East-West Relations, Council on Foreign Relations, New York  Survival, Winter 1998-99)
Political, social and technological trends that began or have accelerated in the twentieth century
AND
no reason to doubt that deterrence has put down roots in both places.

3. Costs have risen and benefits shrunk
Jervis, 02 - Adlai E. Stevenson Professor of International Politics, Columbia University, (Robert, , “Theories of War in an Era of Leading Power Peace”. American Political Science Review 96:1–14.)
My explanation for the development and maintenance of the Community combines and reformulates several factors
AND
fates are linked more positively than negatively to the rest of the Community.

4. Fear of conventional escalation checks war
Mueller, 88 (John, Professor of Political Science at the University of Rochester, International Security, Fall)
THE BELIEF IN ESCALATION.  Those who started World Wars I and II and so
AND
or not, that the essentially satisfied major powers would find intolerably costly.

5. If great powers do have an incentive to fight, it doesn't mean they will fight each other, it just means they will intervene.

6. It doesn't guarantee escalation to nuclear war.

1. Empirically denied – diseases have been around forever and haven’t caused extinction. Plus, genetic diversity ensures that some humans will always survive.

2. No disease can kill us all – it would have to be everything at once
Gladwell, 95 (Malcolm, The New Republic, 7/17/95 and 7/24/95, “The Plague Year”, Lexis)

What would a real Andromeda Strain look like? It would be highly infectious like
AND
, but they neglect to point out the limitations of microscopic life forms.

3. Multiple alternate causalities to disease
Brower, 03 (Jennifer, science/technology policy analyst, and Peter Chalk, political scientist, Summer 2003, Rand Review, Vol. 27, No. 2, “Vectors Without Borders,”  http://www.rand.org/publications/randreview/issues/summer2003/vectors.html)
This year's outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in Beijing, Hong
AND
increase the likelihood that people will come into contact with potentially fatal diseases.

4. Intervention checks – if 50 of the population started dying, people would take precautions to prevent future outbreaks.

5. Medicine solves -- old diseases would never rise again to kill us all -- penicillin is awesome -- it solves the botanic plague, hydration solves Ebola, and small pox has pretty much been  eradicated.

6. Most diseases are dumb -- they can't kill us all the only disease close to this is HIV but if people started releasing this or it actually became a pandemic people would probably start figuring out how to treat it.

7. Natural immunities check -- portions of populations are immune to HIV
Henahan, NO DATE -- correspondent for various medical trade publications including the Medical Tribune, Modern Medicine, Diagnostic Imaging, Physician's Radio Network, Drug Topics and the Newspaper of Cardiology, contributing editor for Ophthalmology Times and Primary Psychiatry (Sean, "WEAK FORM OF HIV MAY PROVIDE IMMUNITY", Access Excellence, No Date, July 30th 2010, http://www.accessexcellence.org/WN/SUA05/hiv2.php, KONTOPOULOS)

A less virulent strain of HIV (HIV-2) appears to offer natural
AND
1 vaccine development," said Dr. Phyllis Kanki, Harvard AIDS Institute.

Tournament: Greenhill | Round: 5 | Opponent: Damien MR | Judge: Rachel Boroditsky
1

Economic engagement must be a direct trade transaction – anything else is political
Resnick 1 – Dr. Evan Resnick, Ph.D. in Political Science from Columbia University, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yeshiva University, “Defining Engagement”, Journal of International Affairs, Spring, 54(2), Ebsco
Scholars have limited the concept of engagement in a third way by unnecessarily restricting the
AND
will be shown below, permits the elucidation of multiple types of positive sanctions
Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for
AND
105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate

2
Congress will raise the debt ceiling and avoid a shutdown now – but it’ll be a tough fight
The Detriot News 9/19/13 (Dale McFeatters, and#34;Another Debt Ceiling Debate?and#34
The tea party-influenced wing of the House GOP favors passing the CRs but
AND
that his leadership is weak and uncertain, the president almost dare not.

Engagement with Mexico sparks backlash – Congress doesn’t trust Mexico
AP ‘13
(5/2/13, Associated Press, “Obama to Pitch Immigration Overhaul in Mexico” http://www.newsmaxworld.com/Newsfront/obama-immigration-mexico-trip/2013/05/02/id/502393)
For Pena Nieto, Obamaand#39;s visit is a chance for him to showcase his countryand#39;s
AND
not ready to sign off on more money without a lot more details.and#34;

Obama’s push is key
Lillis and Wasson 9/7, Mike, the Hill writer, Erik, the Hill writer, “Fears of wounding Obama weigh heavily on Democrats ahead of vote,” 9/7, http://thehill.com/homenews/house/320829-fears-of-wounding-obama-weigh-heavily-on-democrats#ixzz2fOPUfPNr
The prospect of wounding President Obama is weighing heavily on Democratic lawmakers as they decide
AND
this fiscal thicket. These are going to be very difficult votes.and#34;?
Government shutdown cuts cyber-infrastructure
Sideman 11 – online content producer for Washington Technology (Alysha, “Agencies must determine computer security teams in face of potential federal shutdown With cybersecurity threats on the rise, essential IT staff would be much bigger than in 1995”, February 23 of 2011, http://fcw.com/Articles/2011/02/23/Agencies-must-determine-computer-security-teams-in-face-of-shutdown.aspx?Page=1)
With the WikiLeaks hacks and other threats to cybersecurity present, guarding against cyberattacks has
AND
going to be a hole in the system,” he told the site.
That causes retaliation and nuclear war
Tilford 12 Robert, Graduate US Army Airborne School, Ft. Benning, Georgia, “Cyber attackers could shut down the electric grid for the entire east coast” 2012, http://www.examiner.com/article/cyber-attackers-could-easily-shut-down-the-electric-grid-for-the-entire-east-coa
To make matters worse a cyber attack that can take out a civilian power grid
AND
include the use of “nuclear weapons”, if authorized by the President.
3

Text: The European Union ought to include the United Mexican States in the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
4

The aff’s fear of protectionism is epistemologically bankrupt because they glorify an ideologically insulated Anglo-American system of free trade as the natural way of the world – we must repoliticize alternatives to free trade lest people who do NOT practice free trade become demonized as irrational and expendable.
James Fallows, national correspondent for the Atlantic, BA in history and literature from Harvard and was a Rhodes Scholar @ Oxford for economics, 1993, “How the World Works”, The Atlantic online, http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1993/12/how-the-world-works/5854/
WHY Friedrich List? The more I had heard about List in the preceding five
AND
protection and interference are inherently wrong—then you are a flat-earther

Extinction-~--tech and reforms fail - The alternative is to de-link from Latin America
Richard A. Smith 7, Research Associate at the Institute for Policy Research and Development, UK; PhD in History from UCLA, June 2007, “The Eco-suicidal Economics of Adam Smith,” Capitalism Nature Socialism, Vol. 18, No. 2, p. 22-43
In the midst of the record-breaking heat wave in the summer of 2003
AND
and#34;endless technical adjustments;and#34; thus no further theoretical thought is required.and#34;27

Manufacturing 

Industry resilient – 10 year growth trend
Wolf, 12 – Correspondent for Reuters (“U.S. aerospace industry sees 10th straight growth year”, Dec. 5th, 2012, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/05/us-aerospace-us-idUSBRE8B41EI20121205)
(Reuters) - U.S. aerospace and arms companies are poised for
AND
to large purchases by oil-rich Gulf states, among other factors.

Aerospace industry resilient – cuts prove
Pae, 06 – LA Times staff writer (“Aerospace Industry Strong Despite Cuts”, Sept. 5th, 2006, http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/05/business/fi-defense5)
Somber headlines and gloomy forecasts have cast a pall over much of Southern Californiaand#39;s aerospace
AND
the numerical level will be pretty stable,and#34; Jones said of his workforce.

Airpower doesnand#39;t deter – only ground forces are perceived
Allan, 94 (Charles, Air Force National Defense Fellow at the CSIS,and#34;Extended Conventional Deterrence: In from the Cold and Out of the Nuclear Fire?and#34; Washington Quarterly, Summer, 1994)
Information. As we have seen, imperfect information about a defenderand#39;s commitment may be
AND
Without clear recognition of U.S. power, deterrence cannot hold.

Status Quo solves Air Power
Friedman and Preble 10
(Benjamin Friedman is a research fellow in defense and homeland security studies at the Cato Institute, Christopher Preble is director of foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, Budgetary Savings from Military Restraint, September 22, 2010 Cato Policy Analysis No. 667 September 23, 2010 http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/PA667.pdf)

We would also eliminate six fighter wing equivalents from the Air Force. There are
AND
aerial vehicles, given their flexibility and low cost relative to manned aircraft.

Resource conflict won’t escalate
Salehyan, 07 – Assistant Professor of Political Science at University of Northern Texas (Idean, “The New Myth About Climate Change”, Foreign Policy, August 2007, May 29th 2010, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3922, KONTOPOULOS)
Dire scenarios like these may sound convincing, but they are misleading. Even worse
AND
Paris are at least as culpable for Darfur as the regime in Khartoum. 

There’s also no impact to decline
The Seattle Times, 08
Economists disagree on the Doha roundand#39;s potential benefits; estimates of economic gain that could
AND
U.S.-South Korea free-trade deal earlier this year.

No impact to hegemonic decline – their studies are wrong
MacDonald, 11 - Assistant Professor of Political Science at Williams College (Paul K, Spring 2011, and#34;Graceful Decline?: The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchmentand#34;, International Security, Vol. 35, No. 4, UTD McDermitt Library, KONTOPOULOS)
How do great powers respond to acute decline? The erosion of the relative power
AND
none of the declining powers that failed to retrench recovered their relative position.

U.S. primacy isn’t key to peace—their data is flawed
Preble, 10 – Director of Foreign Policy Studies at CATO (Christopher, 8/3/10, “U.S. Military Power: Preeminence for What Purpose?”, http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/u-s-military-power-preeminence-for-what-purpose/, KONTOPOULOS)
Most in Washington still embraces the notion that America is, and forever will be
AND
States while the schlubs in fly-over country pick up the tab.

Heg decline is inevitable and trying to maintain heg makes transition worse
Pape 9 (Robert, Pape professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago Empire Falls, National Interest, 1/22/09)

Clearly, major shifts in the balance of power in the international system often lead
AND
much of its strategic freedom. Washington must adopt more realistic foreign commitments.  
No chance of war from economic decline-~--best and most recent data
Daniel W. Drezner 12, Professor, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, October 2012, “The Irony of Global Economic Governance: The System Worked,” http://www.globaleconomicgovernance.org/wp-content/uploads/IR-Colloquium-MT12-Week-5_The-Irony-of-Global-Economic-Governance.pdf
The final outcome addresses a dog that hasn’t barked: the effect of the Great
AND
II – and not even worse – must be regarded as fortunate.”42

EU Relations

Protectionism won’t spiral out of control—interdependence
Marshall, 09 (Andrew – asia political risk correspondent, Assault on free trade a key political risk, Reuters, 1/21/2009, p. lexis)
PREVENTING DISASTER Despite the risks, many analysts argue that a wholesale retreat into protectionism
AND
markets that are highly dependent on exports,and#34; the Economist Intelligence Unit said.
The U.S. will never abandon free trade--institutions and self-interest check
Ikenson, 09 – director of Catoand#39;s Center for Trade Policy Studies (Daniel, Center for Trade Policy Studies, Free Trade Bulletin 37, “A protectionism fling”, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10651, WEA)
A Growing Constituency for Freer Trade The WTO/GATT system was created in the
AND
United States, so an open trade policy is an example to uphold.
The U.S. can credibly deter Iran
Posen, 06 (Barry, Ford International Professor of Political Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, AlterNet, March 30, http://www.alternet.org/audits/34219/)
Some worry that Iran would be unconvinced by an American deterrent, choosing instead to
AND
States are grave, and they do not require much imagination to grasp.
No risk of Middle Eastern wars
Fettweis, 07(Christopher J. Professor of National Security Affairs @ Naval War College, 07 (Survival 49.4, “and#39;On the Consequences of Failure in Iraq,”)
No matter what the outcome in Iraq, the region is not likely to devolve
AND
, there is every reason to believe that it is doing so again.

Tournament: Michigan | Round: 1 | Opponent: Niles West LS | Judge: David Heidt
1

CIR will pass now but it will be tough
Nowicki, 10-30 -- Arizona Republic's national political reporter
Dan, and Erin Kelly, "Fleeting Hopes for Immigration Reform," AZ Central, 10-30-13, www.azcentral.com/news/politics/articles/20131029fleeting-hopes-immigration-reform.html?nclick_check=1, accessed 10-31-13, mss
However, reform backers point to encouraging signs in addition to the intense push by
AND
is not like renaming a post office. It’s going to be tough.”
Obama’s PC is key- but he’s using restraint
Nowicki, 10-25 -- Arizona Republic's national political reporter
Dan, "Pleas from Obama may hinder immigration bill push," USA Today, 10-25-13, www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/10/25/obama-immigration-bill-partisanship/3188629/, accessed 10-31-13, mss
One leading national champion of immigration change dismissed the idea that Obama should defer to
AND
. "But we also believe that the president himself could do more."
Any Cuba engagement is unpop
LeoGrande, 12
William M. LeoGrande School of Public Affairs American University, Professor of Government and a specialist in Latin American politics and U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America, Professor LeoGrande has been a frequent adviser to government and private sector agencies, 12/18/12, http://www.american.edu/clals/upload/LeoGrande-Fresh-Start.pdf

The Second Obama Administration Where in the executive branch will control over Cuba policy lie
AND
rarely happen unless the urgency of the problem forces policymakers to take action.

Visas are key to cybersecurity preparedness
McLarty 9 (Thomas F. III, President – McLarty Associates and Former White House Chief of Staff and Task Force Co-Chair, “U.S. Immigration Policy: Report of a CFR-Sponsored Independent Task Force”, 7-8, http://www.cfr.org/ publication/19759/us_immigration_policy.html)
We have seen, when you look at the table of the top 20 firms
AND
going to strengthen, I think, our system, our security needs.
Cyber-vulnerability causes great power nuclear war
Fritz 9 Researcher for International Commission on Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament Jason, researcher for International Commission on Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament, former Army officer and consultant, and has a master of international relations at Bond University, “Hacking Nuclear Command and Control,” July,  http://www.icnnd.org/latest/research/Jason_Fritz_Hacking_NC2.pdf
This paper will analyse the threat of cyber terrorism in regard to nuclear weapons.
AND
its own, without the need for compromising command and control centres directly.
2

A. Discourses of danger reproduces an American identity – that posits the US as a the defender of global freedom and liberty
Campbell, 98- Professor of International Politics University of Newcastle (David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity)
The crisis of representation the United States faces is unique only in the particularities of
AND
the idea that foreign policy/Foreign Policy is constitutive of political identity.

B. That makes extinction inevitable
Willson, 02- Ph.D New College San Fransisco, Humanities, JD, American University (Brian, “Armageddon or Quantum Leap? U.S. Imperialism and?Human Consciousness from?an Evolutionary Perspective”, http://www.brianwillson.com/quantum.html)

Awaiting the impending U.S. government's concocted "preventive" war against Iraq
AND
everything that contributes to their support" (General John Sullivan, 1779).
In a prominent history book published in 1906 (The History of the United States
AND
cyclical, indicate that we are dangerously near the end of our evolutionary branch

C. Alternative text – reject the affirmative to desecuritize the Political. Vote negative to challenge securitization itself in favor of a political ethic that approaches problems in non-security terms and exposes the limits of their methodology.

D. Framework – security is a communicative action that requires discursive justification – there is an ethical responsibility to justify securitization in political discussion. The role of the ballot is to interrogate methodologies – to weigh their case the Aff has to legitimize securitization first
Williams, 03 Michael – IR Prof @ University of Ottawa, “Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics,” International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 4 (Dec., 2003), pp. 511-53, Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The International Studies Association, JSTOR http://www.jstor.org/stable/3693634

A second major criticism of the Copenhagen School concerns the ethics of securitization. Simply
AND
questioning the policies, or by disputing the threat, or both.36 

3

The Supreme Court of the United States should grant a writ of certiorari for the PERNOD RICARD USA LLC v. BACARDI INC case and rule in favor of Pernod Ricard USA LLC.
CP solves the case – the plan solves Pernod’s appeal.  From the 1ac solvency author.
Reinsch 10 (Bill Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council, representing some 400 companies on focuses—and focuses on trade policy issues, a member of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. "DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL TRADEMARK IMPLICATIONS OF HAVANA CLUB AND SECTION 211 OF THE OMNIBUS APPROPRIATIONS ACT OF 1999." HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION. MARCH 3, 2010.http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-111hhrg55221/html/CHRG-111hhrg55221.htm)
And by the way--for all this talk of litigation there has ¶ been
AND
against Bacardi for their use of Havana Club. ¶ And they lost.
4
Substantial is that which grounds and shapes – not numerical minutiae. The primary substance that is the foundation for economic engagement toward Cuba is the embargo. The plan only changes an instance of the embargo – this is ACCIDENTAL NOT SUBSTANTIAL
Malaguti, 11 (Michael J., practices with the Concord firm of Ransmeier and Spellman, “Substantial Confusion: The Use and Misuse of the Word ‘Substantial’ in the Legal Profession,” August, 52 N.H.B.J. 6, p. l/n)
Aristotle's definies substance as "that which is neither predicable of a subject nor present
AND
size of the diamond may change without affecting its "diamond-ness."

Prefer it 

1) Limits – Allowing any other definition is unpredictable. Justifies lifting the embargo for any commodity – infinitely delimits 

2) Ground – marginal changes to manifestations of the embargo NOT the embargo policy itself destroys negative link ground for trade DA’s and CP ground which also shifts the uniqueness debate  
WTO

Protectionism won’t spiral out of control – interdependence
Marshall, 09 (Andrew – asia political risk correspondent, Assault on free trade a key political risk, Reuters, 1/21/2009, p. lexis)

PREVENTING DISASTER Despite the risks, many analysts argue that a wholesale retreat into protectionism
AND
markets that are highly dependent on exports," the Economist Intelligence Unit said.

There isn’t incentive for any country to leave global trade

Multilat is inevitable BRIC and NATO are the only militarily tied institutions and won’t trade off with a loss in trade

1. Terrorists won’t pursue or use nuclear weapons
   Waltz, 03 (Kenneth, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate Renewed, 2003, p. 130)
   For terrorists who abandon tactics of disruption and harassment in favor of dealing in wholesale
   AND
   to wreak great destruction, threats they would not want to execute anyway.

2. No risk of nuclear terrorism—can’t get material, can’t make the bomb, and can’t bring it into the US
Chapman, 08 (Steve, member of the Chicago Tribune editorial board since 1981, “The Implausibility of Nuclear Terrorism”, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/02/the_implausibility_of_nuclear.html)
But remember: After Sept. 11, 2001, we all thought more attacks
AND
it bear fruit. Given the formidable odds, he probably won't bother.

3. No way for terrorists to produce a nuke on their own – Iraq proves
Kamp, 96 (Karl-Heinz, heads the foreign and security policy section of the Konrad- Adenauer-Stiftung in Sankt Agustin, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, July)
Reports of nuclear smuggling appear to lend added weight to the idea that terrorists can
AND
who would certainly have far fewer resources--would find bomb building easier. 

IPR

1. Empirically denied – diseases have been around forever and haven’t caused extinction. Plus, genetic diversity ensures that some humans will always survive.

2. No disease can kill us all – it would have to be everything at once
Gladwell, 95 (Malcolm, The New Republic, 7/17/95 and 7/24/95, “The Plague Year”, Lexis)

What would a real Andromeda Strain look like? It would be highly infectious like
AND
, but they neglect to point out the limitations of microscopic life forms.

3. Multiple alternate causalities to disease
Brower, 03 (Jennifer, science/technology policy analyst, and Peter Chalk, political scientist, Summer 2003, Rand Review, Vol. 27, No. 2, “Vectors Without Borders,”  http://www.rand.org/publications/randreview/issues/summer2003/vectors.html)
This year's outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in Beijing, Hong
AND
increase the likelihood that people will come into contact with potentially fatal diseases.

4. Intervention checks – if 50 of the population started dying, people would take precautions to prevent future outbreaks.

5. Medicine solves -- old diseases would never rise again to kill us all -- penicillin is awesome -- it solves the botanic plague, hydration solves Ebola, and small pox has pretty much been  eradicated.

6. Most diseases are dumb -- they can't kill us all the only disease close to this is HIV but if people started releasing this or it actually became a pandemic people would probably start figuring out how to treat it.

7. Natural immunities check -- portions of populations are immune to HIV
Henahan, NO DATE -- correspondent for various medical trade publications including the Medical Tribune, Modern Medicine, Diagnostic Imaging, Physician's Radio Network, Drug Topics and the Newspaper of Cardiology, contributing editor for Ophthalmology Times and Primary Psychiatry (Sean, "WEAK FORM OF HIV MAY PROVIDE IMMUNITY", Access Excellence, No Date, July 30th 2010, http://www.accessexcellence.org/WN/SUA05/hiv2.php, KONTOPOULOS)

A less virulent strain of HIV (HIV-2) appears to offer natural
AND
1 vaccine development," said Dr. Phyllis Kanki, Harvard AIDS Institute.

Tournament: Michigan | Round: 3 | Opponent: Dowling WZ | Judge: Yao Yao Liu
1
CIR will pass now but it will be tough
Nowicki, 10-30 -- Arizona Republic's national political reporter
Dan, and Erin Kelly, "Fleeting Hopes for Immigration Reform," AZ Central, 10-30-13, www.azcentral.com/news/politics/articles/20131029fleeting-hopes-immigration-reform.html?nclick_check=1, accessed 10-31-13, mss
However, reform backers point to encouraging signs in addition to the intense push by
AND
is not like renaming a post office. It’s going to be tough.”
Obama’s PC is key- but he’s using restraint
Nowicki, 10-25 -- Arizona Republic's national political reporter
Dan, "Pleas from Obama may hinder immigration bill push," USA Today, 10-25-13, www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/10/25/obama-immigration-bill-partisanship/3188629/, accessed 10-31-13, mss
One leading national champion of immigration change dismissed the idea that Obama should defer to
AND
. "But we also believe that the president himself could do more."
Plan drains PC – clout and raw political power
Martinez 13 – Political Science and History major, Deputy Supervisor, Councilman (Tony, “United States Cuba Relations – Why US Cuba Policy Does Not Change: Asymmetrical Absurdity”, US Cuba Politics, http://www.uscubapolitics.com/2013/05/united-states-cuba-relations-why-us.html, May 14, 2013)PN
It’s the perennial chant, “when is U.S. Cuba policy going
AND
back slide to raw political power. Meet the consequences of distorted politics.

Comprehensive immigration reform is key to the economy and highly skilled workers
Farrell 12/13/12 (Chris, a contributing editor for Bloomberg Businessweek. From 1986-97, he was on the magazine's staff, as a corporate finance staff and department editor and then as an economics editor. Farrell wrote Right on the Money: Taking Control of Your Personal Finances and Deflation: What Happens When Prices Fall? Among Farrell's many awards are a National Magazine Award, two Loeb Awards, and the Edward R. Murrow Award. Farrell is a graduate of the London School of Economics and Stanford University. “Obama’s Next Act: Immigration Reform” http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-13/obamas-next-act-immigration-reform) 

Washington won’t get much of a reprieve from verbal pyrotechnics once the drama of the
AND
legality offers Washington a rare twofer: a just move that’s economically efficient.
Economic decline risks multiple global nuclear wars
O’Hanlon 12 Kenneth G. Lieberthal, Director of the John L. Thornton China Center and Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy and Global Economy and Development at the Brookings Institution, former Professor at the University of Michigan “The Real National Security Threat: America's Debt,” Los Angeles Times, July 10th, http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2012/07/10-economy-foreign-policy-lieberthal-ohanlon, reading the purple
Alas, globalization and automation trends of the last generation have increasingly called the American
AND
really possible if that fundamental prerequisite to effective foreign policy is not reestablished.

2
The United States federal government should eliminate the enforcement of all restrictions on economic engagement between the U.S. and Cuba mandated by Cuba’s inclusion on the ‘state sponsors of terrorism’ list, other than restrictions related to U.S. arms sales to Cuba. The United States federal government should clarify that it no longer considers Cuba a state sponsor of terrorism, and that it retains legal restrictions related to such designation only as a means to restrain its own arms sales. 

Competes-~--the CP doesn’t take Cuba off the list, it just eliminates all the economic restrictions that are caused by their inclusion on the list, other than the ban on arms sales. 

Removing Cuba from the list would include lifting restrictions on U.S. arms sales
AP 13 – Associated Press, 3/23/13, “US on verge of momentous Cuba decision: Whether to take island off controversial terror list,” http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/03/23/us-on-verge-momentous-cuba-decision-whether-to-take-island-off-controversial/
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry must decide within a few weeks
AND
by the World Bank or other international lending institutions, among other measures.

Net-Beneficial-~--arms sales sustain global U.S. militarism and invisible structural violence-~--enforcing legal restrictions is key
Andrew Gavin Marshall 13, head of the Geopolitics division of the Hampton Institute,
AND
of arms, having to apply for a license from the State Department.
3
“Engagement” requires increasing economic contacts in trade or financial transactions
Resnick 1 – Dr. Evan Resnick, Ph.D. in Political Science from Columbia University, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yeshiva University, “Defining Engagement”, Journal of International Affairs, Spring, 54(2), Ebsco
Scholars have limited the concept of engagement in a third way by unnecessarily restricting the
AND
be shown below, permits the elucidation of multiple types of positive sanctions.
The plan is appeasement – they are distinct
Times-Dispatch Staff 12 (Jan 22, “Cuba: Patsies,” http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/cuba-patsies/article_5755996d-246f-5ca4-ada5-14b567a56603.html, jkim)
The Obama administration's appeasement of the Castro regime in Cuba was meant to improve conditions
AND
back efforts at promoting democracy in the island gulag, among other things.

Substantial is that which grounds and shapes – not numerical minutiae. The primary substance that is the foundation for economic engagement toward Cuba is the embargo. The plan only changes an instance of the embargo – this is ACCIDENTAL NOT SUBSTANTIAL
Malaguti, 11 (Michael J., practices with the Concord firm of Ransmeier and Spellman, “Substantial Confusion: The Use and Misuse of the Word ‘Substantial’ in the Legal Profession,” August, 52 N.H.B.J. 6, p. l/n)
Aristotle's definies substance as "that which is neither predicable of a subject nor present
AND
size of the diamond may change without affecting its "diamond-ness."

Prefer it 

1) Limits – Allowing any other definition is unpredictable. Justifies lifting the embargo for any commodity – infinitely delimits 

2) Ground – marginal changes to manifestations of the embargo NOT the embargo policy itself destroys negative link ground for trade DA’s and CP ground which also shifts the uniqueness debate  
4

The plan kills the friend/enemy distinction – that causes war and extinction
Strong 7-Distinguished Professor of Political Science @ Harvard, PhD in Political Science @ Harvard Tracy, Foreword: Dimensions of the New Debate about Carl Schmitt, from The Concept of the Political, 2007, pg. xx-xxiii, DKP Gender edited
In The Concept of the Political, Schmitt identifies as the "high points of
AND
no outcome except an end to politics and the elimination of all difference.
The alternative is to reject the affirmative’s ethics of obligation and inclusion. Only endorsement of enmity opens political space for pluralization of political difference, ending the perpetuation of violence.

The war on terror is only possible by denying authentic relations of enmity between ourselves and the terrorist -~--they have legitimate political grievances, so the proper solution is the alternative’s level political playing field that allows for the productive expression of opposition between “us and them”
Prozorov 6 – Sergei Prozorov, collegium fellow at the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, University of Helsinki, Professor of International Relations in the Department of International Relations, Faculty of Politics and Social Sciences, Petrozavodsk State University, Russia, 2006, “Liberal Enmity: The Figure of the Foe in the Political Ontology of Liberalism,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 75-99
The present hegemony of liberal ultra-politics is well illustrated by the contemporary phenomenon
AND
of an ontological critique of liberalism, hence the present importance of Schmitt.

Case
Embargo is an alt cause to the AFF – that was CX
Reps of terror in the real world are accurate depictions – prefer scholars
Michael J. Boyle 8, School of International Relations, University of St. Andrews, and John Horgan, International Center for the Study of Terrorism, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, April 2008, “A Case Against Critical Terrorism Studies,” Critical Studies On Terrorism, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 51-64
 Jackson (2007c) calls for the development of an explicitly CTS on the
AND
community of scholars does not produce such scathing indictments of its own work.
Consequences matter – the tunnel vision of moral absolutism generates evil and political irrelevance
Issac, 2002 (Jeffery, Professor of Political Science at Indiana University, Dissent, Vol. 49 No. 2, Spring)
Politics, in large part, involves contests over the distribution and use of power
AND
not true believers.  It promotes arrogance.  And it undermines political effectiveness.  
Violence is proximately caused – root cause logic is poor scholarship
Sharpe 10, lecturer, philosophy and psychoanalytic studies, and Goucher, senior lecturer, literary and psychoanalytic studies – Deakin University, ‘10
(Matthew and Geoff, Žižek and Politics: An Introduction, p. 231 – 233)
We realise that this argument, which we propose as a new ‘quilting’ framework
AND
whom todaypointedly reject Theory’s legitimacy, neither reading it nor taking it seriously.

Ideology breeds terrorism and will continue to indefinitely – only way to prevent future acts of violence is hard-line militarism by the United States
Alex Epstein, Graduate of Duke University, BA Philosophy, Junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute, “Fight the Root of Terrorism With Bombs, Not Bread,” San Francisco Chronicle, August 14, 2005, http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticleandid=11243,
The pernicious idea that poverty causes terrorism has been a popular claim since the attacks
AND
is the only way for our government to attack terrorism at its root.
If terrorist insecurity is inevitable then ONLY the strategic security focus can prevent disproportionate state response
Lake ‘2 David A. Jerri-Ann and Gary E. Jacobs Professor of Social Sciences and Distinguished Professor of Political Science at the University of California, “Rational Extremism: Understanding Terrorism in the Twenty-first Century” Dialog-IO, Spring 2002, pp. 15–29 © 2002 by the IO Foundation and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/INOR/Dialogue_IO/lake1.pdf
Many factors affect the likely response to a terrorist attack. Key to any choice
AND
must learn to live with some risk of terrorism for the indefinite future.

Their scholarship is bankrupt -- reject it
Jones and David ‘9 Martin and Smith, M. L. R.(2009)'We're All Terrorists Now: Critical—or Hypocritical—Studies “on”
Terrorism?',Studies in Conflict and Terrorism,32:4,292 — 302, April
Nevertheless, the notion that an inherent pro-state bias vitiates terrorism studies pervades
AND
hand experience of groups like the Taliban, Al Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah.
Method focus causes scholarly paralysis
Jackson, associate professor of IR – School of International Service @ American University, 2011
(Patrick Thadeus, The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations, p. 57-59)
Perhaps the greatest irony of this instrumental, decontextualized importation of “falsification” and
AND
goal that, ironically, Popper and Kuhn and Lakatos would all reject.

Tournament: Michigan | Round: 6 | Opponent: Niles West CK | Judge: Toby Whisehunt
Long

The affirmative’s failure to advance a topical defense of federal policy undermines debate’s transformative and intellectual potential

1. “Resolved” means debate should be a legislative forum
   Army Officer School ‘4
   (5-12, “# 12, Punctuation – The Colon and Semicolon”, http://usawocc.army.mil/IMI/wg12.htm)
   The colon introduces the following: a. A list, but only after "
   AND
   resolved:"¶ Resolved: (colon) That this council petition the mayor.

2. The United States is the country composed of the 50 states
Encarta ‘7
The Encarta Online Dictionary. “United States” 2007 encarta.msn.com
U•nit•ed States  y? n?t?d stáyts  country in central North America, consisting of 50 states. Languages: English. Currency: dollar. Capital: Washington, D.C.. Population: 290,342,550 (2001). Area: 9,629,047 sq km (3,717,796 sq mi.) Official name United States of America

3. The federal government is the government in Washington DC – not its individual members
AHD ‘2
The American Heritage Dictionary. 2002, Pg 647GBS-JV
Of or relating to the central government of a federation as distinct from the governments of its member units.

4. “Should” means the debate is solely about a policy established by governmental means
Ericson ‘3
(Jon M., Dean Emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts – California Polytechnic U., et al., The Debater’s Guide, Third Edition, p. 4)
The Proposition of Policy: Urging Future Action In policy propositions, each topic contains
AND
compelling reasons for an audience to perform the future action that you propose.
First, a limited topic of discussion that provides for equitable ground is key to productive inculcation of decision-making and advocacy skills in every and all facets of life---even if their position is contestable that’s distinct from it being valuably debatable---this still provides room for flexibility, creativity, and innovation, but targets the discussion to avoid mere statements of fact
Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp45-
Debate is a means of settling differences, so there must be a difference of
AND
particular point of difference, which will be outlined in the following discussion.

Second, constraints are key to creativity---challenging ourselves to innovate within the confines of rules creates far more creative responses than starting with a blank slate  
Mayer 6 – Marissa Ann Mayer, vice-president for search products and user experience at Google, February 13, 2006, “Creativity Loves Constraints,” online: http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/06_07/b3971144.htm?chan=gl
When people think about creativity, they think about artistic work -- unbridled, unguided
AND
be a clock) or constrained possibilities (a canvas that is marked).

Third, discussion of specific policy-questions is crucial for skills development---we control uniqueness: university students already have preconceived notions about how the world operates---government policy discussion is vital to force engagement with and resolution of competing perspectives to improve social outcomes, however those outcomes may be defined
Esberg and Sagan 12 *Jane Esberg is special assistant to the director at New York University's Center on. International Cooperation. She was the winner of 2009 Firestone Medal, AND Scott Sagan is a professor of political science and director of Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation “NEGOTIATING NONPROLIFERATION: Scholarship, Pedagogy, and Nuclear Weapons Policy,” 2/17 The Nonproliferation Review, 19:1, 95-108
These government or quasi-government think tank simulations often provide very similar lessons for
AND
quickly; simulations teach students how to contextualize and act on information.14

Fourth, switch-side is key---Effective deliberation is crucial to the activation of personal agency and is only possible in a switch-side debate format where debaters divorce themselves from ideology to engage in political contestation
Patricia Roberts-Miller 3 is Associate Professor of Rhetoric at the University of Texas "Fighting Without Hatred:Hannah Ar endt ' s Agonistic Rhetoric" JAC 22.2 2003
Totalitarianism and the Competitive Space of Agonism¶ Arendt is probably most famous for her
AND
not relativist, adversarial but not violent, independent but not expressivist rhetoric.

Effective decision-making outweighs---
Key to social improvements in every and all facets of life
Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp9-10
If we assume it to be possible without recourse to violence to reach agreement on
AND
in our intelligent self-interest to reach these decisions through reasoned debate.

2

Language can never fully describe the world, producing a gap between the Real and our conceptions of it—we repress what can’t be symbolized because it threatens the completeness of our Fantasy
Edkins, 03 Jenny—Senior Lecturer of International Politics at the University of Wales-Abserystwyth, Trauma and the Memory of Politics pg 11-14 

In the psychoanalytic account the subject is formed around a lack, and in the
AND
will have been. And the social order too shares this retroactive constitution.
The subject and the social order in which the subject finds a place are both
AND
the subject and the non-existence of any complete, closed social order

The affirmative addresses the gap by using political action to impose a certain view of reality—a utopian world devoid of problems. Achieving this fantasmatic, new world order facilitates the existence of scapegoat, which must be violently exterminated in order to stabilize our fragile notion of reality
Stratavakis, 99 Yannis—visiting fellow University of Essex, Lacan and the Political pg 63-65

What constantly emerges from this exposition is that when harmony is not present it has
AND
will be excluded from its symbolization—without, however, ever disappearing.
In this regard, a vignette from the history of nature conservation can be revealing
AND
policy continued and expanded for years) (Worster, 1994:263).
What is this dialectic between the beatific fantasy of nature and the demonised vermin doing
AND
a negation of the generalised lack that crosses the field of the social.
But how is this done? If social fantasy produces the self-consistency of
AND
the play between the real and the symbolic/imaginary nexus producing reality.

Alternative text: Reject the affirmative and traverse the fantasy

Only identifying the impossibility of our representation avoids the exclusionary logic of the 1AC
Stratavakis, 99 Yannis—visiting fellow University of Essex, Lacan and the Political pg 63-65

By saying ‘We are all Jews!’, ‘We all live in
AND
identify himself, his own lack, with the lack in the Other.

Tournament: Michigan | Round: 7 | Opponent: Pine Crest MM | Judge: Jack Caporal
1
CIR will pass now but it will be tough
Nowicki, 10-30 -- Arizona Republic's national political reporter
Dan, and Erin Kelly, "Fleeting Hopes for Immigration Reform," AZ Central, 10-30-13, www.azcentral.com/news/politics/articles/20131029fleeting-hopes-immigration-reform.html?nclick_check=1, accessed 10-31-13, mss

However, reform backers point to encouraging signs in addition to the intense push by
AND
is not like renaming a post office. It’s going to be tough.”
Obama’s PC is key- but he’s using restraint
Nowicki, 10-25 -- Arizona Republic's national political reporter
Dan, "Pleas from Obama may hinder immigration bill push," USA Today, 10-25-13, www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/10/25/obama-immigration-bill-partisanship/3188629/, accessed 10-31-13, mss
One leading national champion of immigration change dismissed the idea that Obama should defer to
AND
. "But we also believe that the president himself could do more."
Plan requires Obama to invest a huge amount of political capital, particularly because of the new Congress
Birns and Strain 11-18 - Larry Birns, Director of the Council on Hemispheric Affairs, and Kelsey Strain, Research Associate at the COHA, November 18, 2010, "The Mid-Term Elections: An Easy Prediction for the Future of U.S.-Cuba Relations," online: http://www.coha.org/the-mid-term-elections-an-easy-prediction-for-the-future-of-u-s-cuba-relations/
As former U.S. Ambassador to Cuba, Wayne Smith, explains,
AND
primary objective, should he decide that it is worth the political investment.
Skilled workers solve warming
Herman and Smith, 10
(Richard T. Herman is the founder of Richard T. Herman and Associates, an immigration and business law firm in Cleveland, Ohio which serves a global clientele in over 10 languages. He is the co-founder of a chapter of TiE, a global network of entrepreneurs started in 1992 in Silicon Valley. He has appeared on National Public Radio, FOX News, and various affiliates of NBC, CBS, and ABC. He has also been quoted in such publications as USA Today,InformationWeek, PCWorld, ComputerWorld, CIO, Site Selection and National Lawyers Weekly, Robert L. Smith is a veteran journalist who covers international cultures and immigration issues for the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Ohio’s largest newspaper. Bob grew up in Cleveland, where he lives with his wife, Cleveland Orchestra violinist Chul-In Park, and their two children, Jae, 5, and Sun-Hee, 3. He has written extensively about immigration issues and has interviewed people at all points of the immigrant experience, from undocumented field workers to hugely successful entrepreneurs, Parts of this paper were excerpted from the book “Immigrant Inc.: Why Immigrant Entrepreneurs are Driving the New Economy (and how they will save the American worker)” (John Wiley and Sons, 2009) by Richard T. Herman and Robert L. Smith.  Available wherever books are sold, “Why Immigrants Can Drive the Green Economy,” Immigation Policy Center, http://immigrationpolicy.org/perspectives/why-immigrants-can-drive-green-economy)
Raymond Spencer, an Australian-born entrepreneur based in Chicago, has a window
AND
. “This project gets us closer to achieving both of those goals.”
Warming is an existential risk – quickening reductions is key to avoiding extinction
Mazo 10 – PhD in Paleoclimatology from UCLA
(Jeffrey Mazo, Managing Editor, Survival and Research Fellow for Environmental Security and Science Policy at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, 3-2010, “Climate Conflict: How global warming threatens security and what to do about it,” pg. 122)
The best estimates for global warming to the end of the century range from 2
AND
adaptation to these extremes would mean profound social, cultural and political changes.
2
Substantial is that which grounds and shapes – not numerical minutiae. The primary substance that is the foundation for economic engagement toward Cuba is the embargo. The plan only changes an instance of the embargo – this is ACCIDENTAL NOT SUBSTANTIAL
Malaguti, 11 (Michael J., practices with the Concord firm of Ransmeier and Spellman, “Substantial Confusion: The Use and Misuse of the Word ‘Substantial’ in the Legal Profession,” August, 52 N.H.B.J. 6, p. l/n)
Aristotle's definies substance as "that which is neither predicable of a subject nor present
AND
size of the diamond may change without affecting its "diamond-ness."

Prefer it 

1) Limits – Allowing any other definition is unpredictable. Justifies lifting the embargo for any commodity – infinitely delimits 

2) Ground – marginal changes to manifestations of the embargo NOT the embargo policy itself destroys negative link ground for trade DA’s and CP ground which also shifts the uniqueness debate  
3

Obama is taking a hard line stance against Cuba now
Forero 13 - NPR's South America correspondent and The Washington Post's correspondent for Colombia and Venezuela (Juan, “Obama's Unfinished Business: Latin America”, January 22 of 2013, NPR, http://www.npr.org/2013/01/22/169980241/obamas-unfinished-business-latin-america)
FORERO: Well, I think there's two policy shifts in Cuba that are super
AND
, the Cuban-American community, particularly in Florida, does vote.
Cuban policy is appeasement – it pleases Castro
Walser 12 – Ph.D. and a Senior Policy Analyst at The Heritage Foundation (Ray, “Cuban-American Leaders: “No Substitute for Freedom” in Cuba”, June 25 of 2012, http://blog.heritage.org/2012/06/25/cuban-american-leaders-no-substitute-for-freedom-in-cuba/)
However, these pleasing liberal assumptions are negated on a daily basis by hard-
AND
tyranny of the Castro regime, there is “no substitute for freedom.”
Appeasement triggers multiple scenarios for nuclear war – it is only a question of perception
Hanson 9 - American military historian, columnist and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution (Victor, “Change, Weakness, Disaster, Obama: Answers from Victor Davis Hanson”, December 7 of 2009, Interview between Bernard Chapin and Hanson, http://pjmedia.com/blog/change-weakness-disaster-obama-answers-from-victor-davis-hanson/)
BC: Are we currently sending a message of weakness to our foes and allies
AND
tiger and now no one quite knows whom it will bite or when.

4
A. Discourses of danger reproduces an American identity – that posits the US as a the defender of global freedom and liberty
Campbell, 98- Professor of International Politics University of Newcastle (David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity)
The crisis of representation the United States faces is unique only in the particularities of
AND
the idea that foreign policy/Foreign Policy is constitutive of political identity.

B. That makes extinction inevitable
Willson, 02- Ph.D New College San Fransisco, Humanities, JD, American University (Brian, “Armageddon or Quantum Leap? U.S. Imperialism and?Human Consciousness from?an Evolutionary Perspective”, http://www.brianwillson.com/quantum.html)

Awaiting the impending U.S. government's concocted "preventive" war against Iraq (indeed, against the world), this is perhaps one of the most frightening moments in human history. In a surreal scenario, the U.S. government is renewing active threats of using nuclear weapons and reviving use of anti-personnel land mines, and is introducing new technological weapons of death we can only imagine, and some we cannot. As grim as this scene is, I believe it must be the inevitable and logical extension of the continued growth ad nauseum of the American Way Of Life (AWOL) in particular, and the Western Way Of Life in general. Premeditated murder of thousands--perhaps millions--of innocents is the price for AWOL's insatiable consumption and its bloodthirsty vengeance, totally abdicating responsibility for lethal consequences to the planet and its species, including, ironically, our own. Perhaps Gaia is presenting the current transparent dangers to us as like a cosmic gift so that we might actually be able to see the extraordinary folly of our ways in time to creatively "storm the Bastille."U.S. Terrorist Roots U.S. civilization was founded on and has been sustained by terrorism, facilitated by Eurocentric racism, classism, and arrogant ethnocentrism. The grossest irony of all, of course, is that the "War on Terror," to be successful, must focus on our own civilization, the most egregious proponent of terror the world has even known. Terror was systematically utilized since our country's beginnings in the 1600s. The following instructions, facilitated by a cruel racism, are part of the historic record: "burning and spoiling the Indian country," (Captain John Underhill, Massachusetts Bay Colony, 1636); "put to death the Pequot Indian men of Block Island" (Massachusetts Bay Governor John Winthrop's order to Captain John Endecott, 1637); "laying waste," and instilling "terror...by any means" among the Indians (General George Washington, 1779); "with malice enough in our hearts to destroy everything that contributes to their support" (General John Sullivan, 1779).
In a prominent history book published in 1906 (The History of the United States
AND
cyclical, indicate that we are dangerously near the end of our evolutionary branch

C. Alternative text – reject the affirmative to desecuritize the Political. Vote negative to challenge securitization itself in favor of a political ethic that approaches problems in non-security terms and exposes the limits of their methodology.

D. Framework – security is a communicative action that requires discursive justification – there is an ethical responsibility to justify securitization in political discussion. The role of the ballot is to interrogate methodologies – to weigh their case the Aff has to legitimize securitization first
Williams, 03 Michael – IR Prof @ University of Ottawa, “Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics,” International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 4 (Dec., 2003), pp. 511-53, Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The International Studies Association, JSTOR http://www.jstor.org/stable/3693634

A second major criticism of the Copenhagen School concerns the ethics of securitization. Simply
AND
questioning the policies, or by disputing the threat, or both.36
5

Text: Major League Baseball should repeal the Kuhn directive, amend Rule 4(a) and Rule 3(a)(1) to permit the drafting of Cuban players, and allow these newly drafted players to sign contracts with the teams that draft them, and impose a moderate tax on teams that sign Cuban players – the proceeds of which will be used to support Cuban baseball.
Kuhn repeal solves US-Cuba
Greller 2k (Matthew, JD from the American University Washington College of Law, “Give Me Your Tired, Your Poor, Your Fastball Pitchers Yearning for Strike Three: n1 How Baseball Diplomacy Can Revitalize Major League Baseball and United States-Cuba Relations,” 14 Am. U. Int'l L. Rev. 1647, Lexis)
To facilitate changes in Cuban baseball player immigration, MLB, Cuba, and the
AND
on Cubans competing in professional sports, which discourages Cuban participation in MLB.
Draft inclusion boosts baseball diplomacy
Greller 2k (Matthew, JD from the American University Washington College of Law, “Give Me Your Tired, Your Poor, Your Fastball Pitchers Yearning for Strike Three: n1 How Baseball Diplomacy Can Revitalize Major League Baseball and United States-Cuba Relations,” 14 Am. U. Int'l L. Rev. 1647, Lexis)
To remain close to the Cuban government's desire to respect the principles of Cuban sports
AND
Diplomacy to move halfway towards its goals, and advance to Second Base.
Relations

No bioterror threat
Mueller, 05 (John, Professor of Political Science at OhioState. May 2005. International Studies Perspectives, Volume 6 Issue 2 Page 208-234, Simplicity and Spook: Terrorism and the Dynamics of Threat Exaggeration)
Properly developed and deployed, biological weapons could indeed, if thus far only in
AND
—in fact, nobody even noticed that the attacks had taken place. 

No impact to cyber-terror-~--won’t cause military conflict
Thomas P.M. Barnett 13, special assistant for strategic futures in the U.S. Defense Department's Office of Force Transformation from 2001 to 2003, is chief analyst for Wikistrat, March/April 2013, “Think Again: The Pentagon,” Foreign Policy, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/03/04/the_pentagon?page=full
As for cyber serving as a stand-alone war-fighting domain, there
AND
But you won't hear that from the next-warriors on the Potomac.

No environment impact
Stossel, 07 Journalist, winner of the Peabody Award, anchors ABC News, 07 John, “Environmental Alarmists Have It Backwards”, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/04/how_about_economic_progress_da.html
Watching the media coverage, you'd think that the earth was in imminent danger --
AND
If we care about human life, we should celebrate Economic Progress Day.
No keystone species impact
Doremus, 2K (Holly,  Professor of Law at UC Davis Washington and Lee Law Review, Winter 57 Wash and Lee L. Rev. 11, lexis)  
In recent years, this discourse frequently has taken the form of the ecological horror
AND
that a high proportion of species can be lost without precipitating a collapse.

No impact to Russian economy
Blackwill, 09 – former associate dean of the Kennedy School of Government and Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Planning (Robert, RAND, “The Geopolitical Consequences of the World Economic Recession—A Caution”, http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/2009/RAND_OP275.pdf, WEA)
Now on to Russia. Again, five years from today. Did the global
AND
are likely to be changed in any serious way by the economic crisis.
Baseball Diplomacy

No impact to US-EU relations
The Hindu, 04 (Card is no longer available online, if you need it, please e-mail me, Friday April 30th 2004, May 21st 2010, KONTOPOULOS)
It is one of the Europea Union's most cherished ambitions to play a bigger and
AND
after enlargement it will be harder rather than easier to forge consensus.''

Diplomacy has limited utility – can’t be effectively practiced by the government
Wolf and Rosen, 04 (Charles Jr. Wolf - Senior Economic Adviser and Corporate Fellow in International Economics at RAND, and Brian Rosen - Doctoral Fellow at the RAND Corporation, “Public Diplomacy: How to Think about and improve it,” www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/2004/RAND_OP134.pdf)
Still, a reformed and enhanced public diplomacy should be accompanied by limited expectations about
AND
messenger (the United States government), inevitably the two will be linked.

NO impact to baseball diplomacy
Briley 10 – Ron Briley, History Network News, July 12, 2010, “Baseball and Foreign Policy--Yes There is a History Here,” online: http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=12375andpageid=andpagename=
Elias concludes, however, the decision to cast its lot with American Empire has
AND
opportunity contained in the promise of the Declaration of Independence and American dream.

Tournament: Ohio Valley | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Houston County | Judge: Donnie Grasse, Libby Mandarino, Dan Bagwell
1

A. Discourses of danger reproduces an American identity – that posits the US as a the defender of global freedom and liberty
Campbell, 98- Professor of International Politics University of Newcastle (David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity) 

The crisis of representation the United States faces is unique only in the particularities of
AND
the idea that foreign policy/Foreign Policy is constitutive of political identity.

B. That makes extinction inevitable
Willson, 02- Ph.D New College San Fransisco, Humanities, JD, American University (Brian, “Armageddon or Quantum Leap? U.S. Imperialism and?Human Consciousness from?an Evolutionary Perspective”, http://www.brianwillson.com/quantum.html)

Awaiting the impending U.S. government's concocted "preventive" war against Iraq
AND
everything that contributes to their support" (General John Sullivan, 1779).
In a prominent history book published in 1906 (The History of the United States
AND
cyclical, indicate that we are dangerously near the end of our evolutionary branch

C. Alternative text – reject the affirmative to desecuritize the Political. Vote negative to challenge securitization itself in favor of a political ethic that approaches problems in non-security terms and exposes the limits of their methodology.

2

Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to promote the integration of China into the global trading and financial systems; and security engagement, to encourage compliance with the ten principles by diplomatic and military means when economic incentives do not suffice, in order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent
AND
105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate
3

The United States federal government should
- ask the governments of Brazil and Mexico to diplomatically engage Cuba on its behalf in regards to licensing the development of Cuban offshore oil in the North Cuba Basin.
- inform Brazil and Mexico that it will abide by the results of negotiations
- implement any policy changes that negotiations between Brazil, Mexico, and Cuba recommend and

Solves the case and preserves US soft power
Iglesias 12 – Commander of the US Navy (Carlos, “United States Security Policy
Implications of a Post-Fidel Cuba”, 2012, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA560408~~)
Unlike the policy implications above, the major hurdle to this interest does not ¶
AND
with whom to act or just watching from ¶ across the Florida Straits.

4
Trade Promotion Authority likely to pass but obstacles remain – it is vital to Obama’s trade agenda.
Politi, 12/6 (James, US economics and trade correspondent for the Financial Times, “Fast-track opens door for US TPP approval,” http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/ce008052-5dfd-11e3-8fca-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2miHER8ZD)
Senior US lawmakers have moved closer to a deal to grant President Barack Obama the
AND
Another said they were “working to have something as soon as possible”.

Plan trades off
LeoGrande, 12
William M. LeoGrande School of Public Affairs American University, Professor of Government and a specialist in Latin American politics and U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America, Professor LeoGrande has been a frequent adviser to government and private sector agencies, 12/18/12, http://www.american.edu/clals/upload/LeoGrande-Fresh-Start.pdf

The Second Obama Administration Where in the executive branch will control over Cuba policy lie
AND
rarely happen unless the urgency of the problem forces policymakers to take action.
Political capital is essential for TPA, which maintains US trade leadership, growth, and hegemony.
Riley and Kim, 13 (Bryan, Jay Van Andel senior policy analyst in trade policy for the Center for International Trade and Economics, and Anthony, senior policy analyst Center for International Trade and Economics, “Advancing Trade Freedom: Key Objective of Trade Promotion Authority Renewal,” http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/04/advancing-trade-freedom-key-objective-of-trade-promotion-authority-renewal)
Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) has been a critical tool for advancing free trade
AND
that accrue from such policies. It should not let the opportunity pass.

Collapse of trade causes great power war and US economic decline in the short term
PANITCHPAKDI ‘4 (Supachai Panitchpakdi, secretary-general of the UN Conference on Trade and Development, 2/26/2004, American Leadership and the World Trade Organization, p. http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/spsp_e/spsp22_e.htm)
The second point is that strengthening the world trading system is essential to America's wider
AND
constrained, not by multilateral rules, but by the absence of rules.

Safety

Empirically denied and alternate causality – hundreds of thousands of species die annually
Paltrowitz, 01 (JD Brooklyn Journal of I-Law, 2001 (A Greening of the World Trade Organisation”)
However, the panel did not take into account the practical reality that negotiations are
AND
impose few constraints on a contracting party's implementation of domestic environmental policies." n108
2. Species extinction won't cause human extinction – humans and the environment are adaptable
Doremus, 2K (Holly,  Professor of Law at UC Davis Washington and Lee Law Review, Winter 57 Wash and Lee L. Rev. 11, lexis)  
In recent years, this discourse frequently has taken the form of the ecological horror
AND
that a high proportion of species can be lost without precipitating a collapse.

3. Collapse is common – won’t spillover
Russia

Russia is far too weak to attack the US
Lieber, 07 (Professor of Government and International Affairs at Georgetown University - Robert J., "Persistent Primacy and the Future of the American Era", APSA Paper 2007, http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/2/1/1/0/5/pages211058/p211058-1.php)
Constraints on the capacity of adversaries also needs to be taken into account. Russia
AND
, first regionally and even globally, but only over the long term. 

World oil prices high—job reports, economy, Brent and WTI
Channel News Asia 12/7 ("Oil prices gain after bullish US jobs report", 12/7/13, www.channelnewsasia.com/news/business/international/oil-prices-gain-after/913342.html  candle)
NEW YORK: World oil prices pushed higher on Friday after a solid jobs report
AND
growth is firming, a good sign for the country's huge oil market.

American technology is key to Cuban oil development—plan unlocks exports
Padgett 8 (Tim is a TIME contributor and Miami and Latin America Bureau Chief; 10/23/08; http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1853252,00.html candle)
The Spanish energy company Repsol-YPF has entered into a production-sharing agreement
AND
really able to do it to the extent the Cubans need are the Americans

That causes Saudi Arabia to flood the oil market and collapse prices
Morse and Richards 2 (Edward L. Morse is Executive Adviser at Hess Energy Trading Company and was Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Energy Policy in 1979-81. James Richard is a portfolio manager at Firebird Management, an investment fund active in eastern Europe, Russia, and Central Asia, Foreign Affairs, March/April)
A simple fact explains this conclusion: 63 percent of the world's proven oil reserves
AND
lost in the preceding four years, mainly to non-OPEC countries.
Low oil prices wreck the Russian economy—high prices create a window for sustained growth
IMF, 11 - International Monetary Fund (9/27/11, "Russia Should Leverage Commodity Boom to Boost Growth", http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2011/int092711a.htm, KONTOPOULOS)
Russia’s economy grew by 4 percent in 2010, aided by the boom in commodity
AND
turn into a deficit fairly quickly, putting pressure on the exchange rate.
Causes multiple scenarios for CBW conflict
Oliker and Charlick-Paley 02 (Olga and Tanya, RAND Corporation Project Air Force, “Assessing Russia’s Decline,” www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1442/)
The preceding chapters have illustrated the ways in which Russia’s decline affects that country and
AND
rogue states and nonstate terrorist actors, increasing the risk of nuclear war.
Mutual interests ensure cooperation
Arbatov, 07 (Alexei, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, member of the Editorial Board of Russia in Global Affairs, “Is a New Cold War Imminent,” Russia in Global Affairs, No. 2, July-September 2007, http://eng.globalaffairs.ru/numbers/20/1130.html)
First, the present dispute lacks the Cold War’s system-forming element, that
AND
about 80 percent the Moscow Treaty expires on December 31, 2012.

Cooperation

1. Terrorists won’t pursue or use nuclear weapons
   Waltz, 03 (Kenneth, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate Renewed, 2003, p. 130)
   For terrorists who abandon tactics of disruption and harassment in favor of dealing in wholesale
   AND
   to wreak great destruction, threats they would not want to execute anyway.

2. No risk of nuclear terrorism—can’t get material, can’t make the bomb, and can’t bring it into the US
Chapman, 08 (Steve, member of the Chicago Tribune editorial board since 1981, “The Implausibility of Nuclear Terrorism”, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/02/the_implausibility_of_nuclear.html)
But remember: After Sept. 11, 2001, we all thought more attacks
AND
it bear fruit. Given the formidable odds, he probably won't bother.

Empirical trends disprove warming impacts
Goklany 11 - a science and technology policy analyst for the United States Department of the Interior (Indur M., “Misled on Climate Change: How the UN IPCC (and others) Exaggerate the Impacts of Global Warming” December 2011, http://goklany.org/library/Reason20CC20and20Development202011.pdf, PZ)
Discussion and Conclusions Despite claims that GW will reduce human well-being in poor
AND
been, overall, a very significant benefit to people in poor countries.
Global Warming is a natural process – Antarctica proves
Kelly 12 (Conor “NASA’s Antarctic Study Casts Doubt on Global Warming” ForexTV.com 6/19/12 http://www.forextv.com/forex-news-story/nasa-s-antarctic-study-casts-doubt-on-global-warming)
A recent study published by University of Southern California researchers suggests that Antarctica featured drastically
AND
global temperatures will reach Miocene Era levels by the end of this century.
Extensive checks prove no loose nukes
Frost, 05 (Robin, teaches political science at Simon Fraser University, British Colombia, “Nuclear Terrorism after 9/11,” Adelphi Papers, December)
In fact, all the evidence is that the weapons were indeed safely withdrawn.  
AND
, nor Iraq nor Iran could make use of these explosive devices.’

Tournament: Ohio Valley | Round: Quarters | Opponent: Alpharetta HM | Judge: Weil, Salathe, Hirn
1

Trade Promotion Authority likely to pass but obstacles remain – it is vital to Obama’s trade agenda.
Politi, 12/6 (James, US economics and trade correspondent for the Financial Times, “Fast-track opens door for US TPP approval,” http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/ce008052-5dfd-11e3-8fca-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2miHER8ZD)
Senior US lawmakers have moved closer to a deal to grant President Barack Obama the
AND
Another said they were “working to have something as soon as possible”.

Plan trades off
LeoGrande, 12
William M. LeoGrande School of Public Affairs American University, Professor of Government and a specialist in Latin American politics and U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America, Professor LeoGrande has been a frequent adviser to government and private sector agencies, 12/18/12, http://www.american.edu/clals/upload/LeoGrande-Fresh-Start.pdf

The Second Obama Administration Where in the executive branch will control over Cuba policy lie
AND
rarely happen unless the urgency of the problem forces policymakers to take action.
Political capital is essential for TPA, which maintains US trade leadership, growth, and hegemony.
Riley and Kim, 13 (Bryan, Jay Van Andel senior policy analyst in trade policy for the Center for International Trade and Economics, and Anthony, senior policy analyst Center for International Trade and Economics, “Advancing Trade Freedom: Key Objective of Trade Promotion Authority Renewal,” http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/04/advancing-trade-freedom-key-objective-of-trade-promotion-authority-renewal)
Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) has been a critical tool for advancping free trade
AND
that accrue from such policies. It should not let the opportunity pass.

Lack of US trade leadership causes world war from protectionist trade blocs.
Bergsten 97 – Peterson Institute for International Economics (Fred C., “Global Trade and American Politics”, September 27, 1997, The Economist, http://www.iie.com/publications/papers/print.cfm?doc=pubandResearchID=291
First, the United States remains the only plausible leader of far-reaching trade
AND
the Cold War, now places at the top of the international agenda.

Protectionism causes world war.
Panzer 8 (Michael J., Faculty – New York Institute of Finance, Financial Armageddon: Protect Your Future from Economic Collapse, p. 137-138)
The rise in isolationism and protectionism will bring about ever more heated arguments and dangerous
AND
between Muslims and Western societies as the beginnings of a new world war. 

2

Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to
• AND
• order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent
AND
105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate
3

The United States federal government should
- ask the governments of Brazil and Mexico to diplomatically engage Cuba on its behalf
- inform Brazil and Mexico that it will abide by the results of negotiations
- implement any policy changes that negotiations between Brazil, Mexico, and Cuba.

Solves the case
Iglesias 12 – Commander of the US Navy (Carlos, “United States Security Policy
Implications of a Post-Fidel Cuba”, 2012, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA560408~~)
Unlike the policy implications above, the major hurdle to this interest does not ¶
AND
with whom to act or just watching from ¶ across the Florida Straits.
4

A. Discourses of danger reproduces an American identity – that posits the US as a the defender of global freedom and liberty
Campbell, 98- Professor of International Politics University of Newcastle (David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity)
The crisis of representation the United States faces is unique only in the particularities of
AND
the idea that foreign policy/Foreign Policy is constitutive of political identity.

B. That makes extinction inevitable
Willson, 02- Ph.D New College San Fransisco, Humanities, JD, American University (Brian, “Armageddon or Quantum Leap? U.S. Imperialism and?Human Consciousness from?an Evolutionary Perspective”, http://www.brianwillson.com/quantum.html)

Awaiting the impending U.S. government's concocted "preventive" war against Iraq
AND
everything that contributes to their support" (General John Sullivan, 1779).
In a prominent history book published in 1906 (The History of the United States
AND
cyclical, indicate that we are dangerously near the end of our evolutionary branch

C. Alternative text – reject the affirmative to desecuritize the Political. Vote negative to challenge securitization itself in favor of a political ethic that approaches problems in non-security terms and exposes the limits of their methodology.

D. Framework – security is a communicative action that requires discursive justification – there is an ethical responsibility to justify securitization in political discussion. The role of the ballot is to interrogate methodologies – to weigh their case the Aff has to legitimize securitization first
Williams, 03 Michael – IR Prof @ University of Ottawa, “Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics,” International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 4 (Dec., 2003), pp. 511-53, Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The International Studies Association, JSTOR http://www.jstor.org/stable/3693634

A second major criticism of the Copenhagen School concerns the ethics of securitization. Simply
AND
questioning the policies, or by disputing the threat, or both.36 

Multilat
War in the Middle East will never escalate to all-out war – conflicts remain relatively localized
Cook, Takeyh, and Maloney, 07 (Douglas Dillon Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, Ray, Senior Fellow For Middle Eastern Studies at the CFR,  Suzanne, Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy, Brookings Institution, June 28, , online: http://www.cfr.org/publication/13702/why_the_iraq_war_wont_engulf_the_mideast.html, accessed December 25, 2007)
Yet, the Saudis, Iranians, Jordanians, Syrians, and others are very
AND
its civil strife and prevent local conflicts from enveloping the entire Middle East.
Unilateralism is what sustains primacy – other states bandwagon with the US for fear of other rising powers.  Moving towards multilateralism makes it unsustainable
Seldena, 13 – assistant professor of political science at the University of Florida (Zachary, “Balancing Against or Balancing With? The Spectrum of Alignment and the Endurance of American Hegemony” Security Studies Volume 22, Issue 2, 2013, Taylor and Francis)
Understanding which of these choices—soft balancing against the hegemon or alignment with the
AND
an increased reluctance to use its power in support of its national interests.

Obama administration is hard-lining Cuba
Haven 13 (Paul, Associated Prices, NY Times, “Cuba, US try talking, but face many obstacles”, 6/21/13 http://www.timesherald.com/article/20130621/NEWS05/130629930/cuba-us-try-talking-but-face-many-obstacles#full_story)
To be sure, there is still far more that separates the long-time
AND
against the Cuban people, and respect basic human rights,” he said.
The AFF is appeasement
Walser 12 – Ph.D. and a Senior Policy Analyst at The Heritage Foundation (Ray, “Cuban-American Leaders: “No Substitute for Freedom” in Cuba”, June 25 of 2012, http://blog.heritage.org/2012/06/25/cuban-american-leaders-no-substitute-for-freedom-in-cuba/)
However, these pleasing liberal assumptions are negated on a daily basis by hard-
AND
tyranny of the Castro regime, there is “no substitute for freedom.”
Appeasement triggers multiple scenarios for nuclear
Hanson 9 - American military historian, columnist and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution (Victor, “Change, Weakness, Disaster, Obama: Answers from Victor Davis Hanson”, December 7 of 2009, Interview between Bernard Chapin and Hanson, http://pjmedia.com/blog/change-weakness-disaster-obama-answers-from-victor-davis-hanson/)
BC: Are we currently sending a message of weakness to our foes and allies
AND
tiger and now no one quite knows whom it will bite or when.

Ethanol

You don’t solve warming – your author
Specht 13 – Legal advisor, at Pearlmaker Holsteins (Jonathan, “Raising Cane: Sugar Sugarcane Ethanol’s Economic and Environmental Effects on the United States”, April 24 of 2013, http://works.bepress.com/jonathan_specht/2/)
It must be stressed that sugarcane-based ethanol, from Cuba or anywhere else
AND
can, and should, be part of the solution to both problems. 

China/Russia/India alt cause to warming – net-larger emitter that the plan doesn’t affect.
Empirical trends disprove warming impacts
Goklany 11 - a science and technology policy analyst for the United States Department of the Interior (Indur M., “Misled on Climate Change: How the UN IPCC (and others) Exaggerate the Impacts of Global Warming” December 2011, http://goklany.org/library/Reason20CC20and20Development202011.pdf, PZ)
Discussion and Conclusions Despite claims that GW will reduce human well-being in poor
AND
been, overall, a very significant benefit to people in poor countries.
Cuban econ resilient – other countries ensure no collapse
Feinberg 11 - professor of international political economy at the University of California, San Diego. Senior Fellow at Brookings (“Reaching Out: Cuba’s New Economy and the International Response”, November 2011, Brookings Institute, http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2011/11/18-cuba-feinberg)
Since the collapse of its former patron, the Soviet Union, a resilient Cuba
AND
in their bilateral trade accounts, but are frustrated by Cuba’s scant economic offerings

No impact to bioterror
Dove 12 Alan Dove, PhD in Microbiology, science journalist and former Adjunct Professor at New York University, “Who’s Afraid of the Big, Bad Bioterrorist?” Jan 24 2012, http://alandove.com/content/2012/01/whos-afraid-of-the-big-bad-bioterrorist/
The second problem is much more serious. Eliminating the toxins, we’re left with
AND
biodefense industry is a far greater threat to us than any actual bioterrorists.
You don’t solve production or demand – your author
Elledge 9 (Nicholas Elledge, Research Fellow, Council on Hemispheric Affairs, “Cuba’s Sugarcane Ethanol Potential: Cuba, Raúl Castro, and the Return of King Sugar to the Island,” The Panama News, November 3, 2009, http://www.thepanamanews.com/pn/v_15/issue_17/opinion_13.html)
The Cuban government’s decision to disassemble most of Cuba’s aging sugarcane infrastructure stemmed from the
AND
and standardizing efficient practices would be essential to bolstering Cuba’s sugarcane industry today.
Chavez’s death stabilizes Cuba now, no risk of collapse
Anya Landau French 13, Director of the New America Foundation U.S. – Cuba Policy Initiative, 3/6/13, “Can Cuba Survive the Loss of Chavez?,” http://thehavananote.com/2013/03/can_cuba_survive_loss_chavez
Not unsurprisingly, many in and out of Cuba now wonder if the loss of
AND
Time will tell, perhaps sooner rather than later, whether he can.

Tournament: Ohio Valley | Round: 2 | Opponent: Henry Grady | Judge: Brad Meloche
1

New sanctions won’t pass – democrats
Hooper 12-4 – Capitol Hill reporter for the Hill (Molly, “House bill would bash Iran deal”, December 4 of 2013, http://thehill.com/homenews/house/191986-house-bill-would-bash-tehran-deal)
“I think that we should have a sense of the House that we oppose
AND
is scheduled to adjourn for the year at the end of next week.

Leogrande
PC key
Woods 11-25 – Newsmax political correspondent (Amy, “Obama Mounts 'Aggressive' Drive to Woo Congress on Iran Deal”, November 25 of 2013, http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Obama-aggressive-Congress-Iran/2013/11/25/id/538641)
The White House is casting the nuclear agreement reached Sunday with Iran as part of
AND
punishment on the country that could threaten the treaty, NBC News reported. 

New sanctions cause Iran war
WORLD TRIBUNE 11 – 13 – 13 Obama said to suspend Iran sanctions without informing Congress, http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/11/13/obama-said-to-suspend-iran-sanctions-without-informing-congress/
The administration has also pressured Congress to suspend plans for new sanctions legislation against Iran
AND
for right now is a pause, a temporary pause, in sanctions.”
Iran war escalates
White, July/August 2011 (Jeffrey—defense fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, What Would War With Iran Look Like, National Interest, p. http://www.the-american-interest.com/article-bd.cfm?piece=982)
A U.S.-Iranian war would probably not be fought by the United
AND
beyond, complicating both U.S. military operations and coalition diplomacy.
2
Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to promote the integration of China into the global trading and financial systems; and security engagement, to encourage compliance with the ten principles by diplomatic and military means when economic incentives do not suffice, in order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent
AND
105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate
3

A. Discourses of danger reproduces an American identity – that posits the US as a the defender of global freedom and liberty
Campbell, 98- Professor of International Politics University of Newcastle (David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity) 

The crisis of representation the United States faces is unique only in the particularities of
AND
the idea that foreign policy/Foreign Policy is constitutive of political identity.

B. That makes extinction inevitable
Willson, 02- Ph.D New College San Fransisco, Humanities, JD, American University (Brian, “Armageddon or Quantum Leap? U.S. Imperialism and?Human Consciousness from?an Evolutionary Perspective”, http://www.brianwillson.com/quantum.html)

Awaiting the impending U.S. government's concocted "preventive" war against Iraq
AND
everything that contributes to their support" (General John Sullivan, 1779).
In a prominent history book published in 1906 (The History of the United States
AND
cyclical, indicate that we are dangerously near the end of our evolutionary branch

C. Alternative text – reject the affirmative to desecuritize the Political. Vote negative to challenge securitization itself in favor of a political ethic that approaches problems in non-security terms and exposes the limits of their methodology.

4

The United States Department of Defense should start a competitive procurement process to obtain a small modular nuclear reactor. The Nuclear Regulatory Committee should tailor existing regulations on licensing of small modular nuclear reactors that are compliant with non-proliferation guidelines and standards. The United States federal government should share the technology with Mexico.
Procurement solves -~-- it optimizes military applications and generates innovation in nuclear technology.
Andres and Breetz, February 2011 (Richard – Professor of National Security Strategy at the National War College and senior fellow and Energy and Environmental Security and Policy Chair in the Center for Strategic Studies at the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University, and Hanna – doctoral candidate in the Department of Political Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Small Nuclear Reactors for Military Installations: Capabilities, Costs, and Technological Implications, p. 7-8)
DOD as First Mover Thus far, this paper has reviewed two of DOD’s most
AND
available in the future, then it should pursue a leadership role now.
NRC regulations are modeled -~-- it’s the golden standard that other nations follow.
Lovering et. al, 9/7/2012 (Jessica – policy analyst at the Breakthrough Institute, Ted Nordhaus – chairman at the Breakthrough Institute, and Michael Shllenberger – president of the Breakthrough Institute, Out of the Nuclear Closet, Foreign Policy, p. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/09/07/out_of_the_nuclear_closet?page=full)
Nuclear has enjoyed bipartisan support in Congress for more than 60 years, but the
AND
operational standards for the design, construction, and operation of nuclear plants.
Adv 1
Relations resilient
USDS ’99 12/23/99, US Department of State, “U.S. Department of State Background Note”, http://www.infoplease.com/country/profiles/mexico.html
The scope of U.S.-Mexican relations goes far beyond diplomatic and official contacts; it entails extensive commercial, cultural, and educational ties, as demonstrated by the annual figure of nearly a million legal border crossings a day. In addition, more than a half-million American citizens live in Mexico. More than 2,600 U.S. companies have operations there, and the U.S. accounts for 55 of all foreign direct investment in Mexico. Along the 2,000-mile shared border, state and local governments interact closely.
Chavez’s death stabilizes Cuba now, no risk of collapse
Anya Landau French 13, Director of the New America Foundation U.S. – Cuba Policy Initiative, 3/6/13, “Can Cuba Survive the Loss of Chavez?,” http://thehavananote.com/2013/03/can_cuba_survive_loss_chavez
Not unsurprisingly, many in and out of Cuba now wonder if the loss of
AND
Time will tell, perhaps sooner rather than later, whether he can.

Nuke Leadership
military SMRs cause blowback and gut our nonproliferation agenda
Smith 11 (Terrence P., Program Coordinator and Research Assistant with the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy – CSIS, “An Idea I Can Do Without: “Small Nuclear Reactors for Military Installations”,” Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2-16, http://csis.org/blog/idea-i-can-do-without-small-nuclear-reactors-military-installations)
What are the alternatives to small nuclear reactors (assuming we want to maintain a
AND
production.”My point is, maybe that is where they should stay.
Russian nuclear expansion k2 economy – opens up massive energy exports
Daly 9 -- UPI Int'l Correspondent (John CK, 4/21/12, "Analysis: Russia's ambitious nuclear-power expansion plans," http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2009/04/21/Analysis-Russias-ambitious-nuclear-power-expansion-plans/UPI-20531240328864/)

WASHINGTON, April 21 (UPI) -- The global recession has severely hammered the
AND
hydrocarbon exports generate more than 60 percent of the Russian government's export revenues.
Nuclear war
Filger 9 – Columnist and Founder – Global EconomicCrisis.com (Sheldon, 5/10/09, “Russian Economy Faces Disasterous Free Fall Contraction”, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sheldon-filger/russian-economy-faces-dis_b_201147.html)

In Russia, historically, economic health and political stability are intertwined to a degree
AND
the financial impact of the Global Economic Crisis is its least dangerous consequence.

Military nuclear installments will be targeted for sabotage – causes accidents
Wong 12 (Kelvin, Associate Research Fellow – S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, “Beyond Weapons: The Military’s Quest For Nuclear Power – Analysis,” Eurasia Review, 5-22, http://www.eurasiareview.com/22052012-beyond-weapons-the-militarys-quest-for-nuclear-power-analysis/)
Civilian And Military Nuclear Incidents Despite improvements in nuclear safety, public sentiment on nuclear
AND
destruction and sabotage are likely, should give military planners cause to pause.

Tournament: Ohio Valley | Round: 4 | Opponent: Johns Creek | Judge: Evan Sweet
1

New sanctions won’t pass – democrats
Hooper 12-4 – Capitol Hill reporter for the Hill (Molly, “House bill would bash Iran deal”, December 4 of 2013, http://thehill.com/homenews/house/191986-house-bill-would-bash-tehran-deal)
“I think that we should have a sense of the House that we oppose
AND
is scheduled to adjourn for the year at the end of next week.

Plan trades off
LeoGrande, 12
William M. LeoGrande School of Public Affairs American University, Professor of Government and a specialist in Latin American politics and U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America, Professor LeoGrande has been a frequent adviser to government and private sector agencies, 12/18/12, http://www.american.edu/clals/upload/LeoGrande-Fresh-Start.pdf

The Second Obama Administration Where in the executive branch will control over Cuba policy lie
AND
rarely happen unless the urgency of the problem forces policymakers to take action.
PC key
Woods 11-25 – Newsmax political correspondent (Amy, “Obama Mounts 'Aggressive' Drive to Woo Congress on Iran Deal”, November 25 of 2013, http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Obama-aggressive-Congress-Iran/2013/11/25/id/538641)
The White House is casting the nuclear agreement reached Sunday with Iran as part of
AND
punishment on the country that could threaten the treaty, NBC News reported. 

New sanctions cause Iran war
WORLD TRIBUNE 11 – 13 – 13 Obama said to suspend Iran sanctions without informing Congress, http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/11/13/obama-said-to-suspend-iran-sanctions-without-informing-congress/
The administration has also pressured Congress to suspend plans for new sanctions legislation against Iran
AND
for right now is a pause, a temporary pause, in sanctions.”
Iran war escalates
White, July/August 2011 (Jeffrey—defense fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, What Would War With Iran Look Like, National Interest, p. http://www.the-american-interest.com/article-bd.cfm?piece=982)
A U.S.-Iranian war would probably not be fought by the United
AND
beyond, complicating both U.S. military operations and coalition diplomacy.
2

A. Discourses of danger reproduces an American identity – that posits the US as a the defender of global freedom and liberty
Campbell, 98- Professor of International Politics University of Newcastle (David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity) 

The crisis of representation the United States faces is unique only in the particularities of
AND
the idea that foreign policy/Foreign Policy is constitutive of political identity.

B. That makes extinction inevitable
Willson, 02- Ph.D New College San Fransisco, Humanities, JD, American University (Brian, “Armageddon or Quantum Leap? U.S. Imperialism and?Human Consciousness from?an Evolutionary Perspective”, http://www.brianwillson.com/quantum.html)

Awaiting the impending U.S. government's concocted "preventive" war against Iraq
AND
everything that contributes to their support" (General John Sullivan, 1779).
In a prominent history book published in 1906 (The History of the United States
AND
cyclical, indicate that we are dangerously near the end of our evolutionary branch

C. Alternative text – reject the affirmative to desecuritize the Political. Vote negative to challenge securitization itself in favor of a political ethic that approaches problems in non-security terms and exposes the limits of their methodology.

3

Economic engagement is a conditional QPQ
Shinn 96 James Shinn, C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia at the CFR in New York City and director of the council’s multi-year Asia Project, worked on economic affairs in the East Asia Bureau of the US Dept of State, “Weaving the Net: Conditional Engagement with China,” pp. 9 and 11, google books
In sum, conditional engagement consists of a set of objectives, a strategy for attaining those objectives, and tactics (specific policies) for implementing that strategy.
• The objectives of conditional engagement are the ten principles, which were selected to preserve American vital interests in Asia while accommodating China’s emergence as a major power.
• The overall strategy of conditional engagement follows two parallel lines: economic engagement, to promote the integration of China into the global trading and financial systems; and security engagement, to encourage compliance with the ten principles by diplomatic and military means when economic incentives do not suffice, in order to hedge against the risk of the emergence of a belligerent China.
• The tactics of economic engagementshouldpromote China’s economic integration through negotiationsontrade liberalization, institution building, and educational exchanges. While a carrots-and-sticks approach may be appropriate within the economic arena, the use of trade sanction to achieve short-term political goals is discouraged.
• The tactics of security engagement should reduce the risks posed by China’s rapid military expansion, its lack of transparency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and transnational problems such as crime and illegal migration, by engaging in arms control negotiations, multilateral efforts, and a loosely-structured defensive military arrangement in Asia.8
To footnotes
8. Conditional engagement’s recommended tactics of tit-for-tat responses are equivalent
AND
105, no. 3 (1990), pp. 383-88).

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate
4

The United States federal government should
- ask the governments of Brazil and Mexico to diplomatically engage Cuba on its behalf
- inform Brazil and Mexico that it will abide by the results of negotiations
- implement any policy changes that negotiations between Brazil, Mexico, and Cuba recommend and
-establish an embassy in the Republic of Cuba

Solves the case and preserves US soft power
Iglesias 12 – Commander of the US Navy (Carlos, “United States Security Policy
Implications of a Post-Fidel Cuba”, 2012, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA560408~~)
Unlike the policy implications above, the major hurdle to this interest does not ¶
AND
with whom to act or just watching from ¶ across the Florida Straits.

Adv 2
The impact is exaggerated – Cuban ag isn’t sustainable
Thompson and Stephens, 12 – * Ph.D. Curriculum and Education Director @ Duke University AND  Marian Cheek Jackson Center (Charles D. and Alexander, “Visions for Sustainable Agriculture in Cuba and the United States: Changing Minds and Models through Exchange”, Southern States, March 22 2013, http://www.southernspaces.org/2012/visions-sustainable-agriculture-cuba-and-united-states-changing-minds-and-models-through-exchan) SP
Following the Cuban Revolution (1953–59), the Soviet Union’s (USSR)
AND
time during the year in 2010, up from 11 in 2005. 

Zero chance the US adopts the Cuban model
Pfeiffer, 3 – energy editor for From the Wilderness (Dale, “Cuba-A Hope”, From the Wilderness,
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/120103_korea_2.html.
Resistance to Cuban-style agricultural reform would be particularly stiff in the United States
AND
to turn a profit is effectively drowned out by the overproduction of agribusiness.
No impact to biodiversity
Easterbrook, 03 – senior fellow at the New Republic, 03 “We're All Gonna Die!”, http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.07/doomsday.html?pg=1andtopic=andtopic_set=
If we're talking about doomsday - the end of human civilization - many scenarios simply
AND
as he was, wrote Remembrance of Things Past while lying in bed.

Empirical trends disprove warming impacts
Goklany 11 - a science and technology policy analyst for the United States Department of the Interior (Indur M., “Misled on Climate Change: How the UN IPCC (and others) Exaggerate the Impacts of Global Warming” December 2011, http://goklany.org/library/Reason20CC20and20Development202011.pdf, PZ)
Discussion and Conclusions Despite claims that GW will reduce human well-being in poor
AND
been, overall, a very significant benefit to people in poor countries.
World oil prices high—job reports, economy, Brent and WTI
Channel News Asia 12/7 ("Oil prices gain after bullish US jobs report", 12/7/13, www.channelnewsasia.com/news/business/international/oil-prices-gain-after/913342.html  candle)
NEW YORK: World oil prices pushed higher on Friday after a solid jobs report
AND
growth is firming, a good sign for the country's huge oil market.

American technology is key to Cuban oil development—plan unlocks exports
Padgett 8 (Tim is a TIME contributor and Miami and Latin America Bureau Chief; 10/23/08; http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1853252,00.html candle)
The Spanish energy company Repsol-YPF has entered into a production-sharing agreement
AND
really able to do it to the extent the Cubans need are the Americans

That causes Saudi Arabia to flood the oil market and collapse prices
Morse and Richards 2 (Edward L. Morse is Executive Adviser at Hess Energy Trading Company and was Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Energy Policy in 1979-81. James Richard is a portfolio manager at Firebird Management, an investment fund active in eastern Europe, Russia, and Central Asia, Foreign Affairs, March/April)
A simple fact explains this conclusion: 63 percent of the world's proven oil reserves
AND
lost in the preceding four years, mainly to non-OPEC countries.
Low oil prices wreck the Russian economy—high prices create a window for sustained growth
IMF, 11 - International Monetary Fund (9/27/11, "Russia Should Leverage Commodity Boom to Boost Growth", http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2011/int092711a.htm, KONTOPOULOS)
Russia’s economy grew by 4 percent in 2010, aided by the boom in commodity
AND
turn into a deficit fairly quickly, putting pressure on the exchange rate.
Causes multiple scenarios for CBW conflict
Oliker and Charlick-Paley 02 (Olga and Tanya, RAND Corporation Project Air Force, “Assessing Russia’s Decline,” www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1442/)
The preceding chapters have illustrated the ways in which Russia’s decline affects that country and
AND
rogue states and nonstate terrorist actors, increasing the risk of nuclear war.

Adv 1

War won’t go nuclear
Enders 2 (Jan 30, David, Michigan Daily, “Experts say nuclear war still unlikely,” http://www.michigandaily.com/content/experts-say-nuclear-war-still-unlikely)

• Ashutosh Varshney – Professor of Political Science and South Asia expert at the University of Michigan
• Paul Huth – Professor of International Conflict and Security Affairs at the University of Maryland
• Kenneth Lieberthal – Professor of Political Science at the University of Michigan. Former special assistant to President Clinton at the National Security Council
  University political science Prof. Ashutosh Varshney becomes animated when asked about the likelihood of
  AND
  command control system has strengthened. The trigger is in very safe hands."

War in the Middle East will never escalate to all-out war – conflicts remain relatively localized
Cook, Takeyh, and Maloney, 07 (Douglas Dillon Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, Ray, Senior Fellow For Middle Eastern Studies at the CFR,  Suzanne, Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy, Brookings Institution, June 28, , online: http://www.cfr.org/publication/13702/why_the_iraq_war_wont_engulf_the_mideast.html, accessed December 25, 2007)
Yet, the Saudis, Iranians, Jordanians, Syrians, and others are very
AND
its civil strife and prevent local conflicts from enveloping the entire Middle East.

No escalation – great powers will cooperate
Collins and Wohlforth, 04 - *professor of political science at Notre Dame AND professor of government at Dartmouth (Kathleen and William, “Defying ‘Great Game’ Expectations, Strategic Asia 2003-2004, http://www.dartmouth.edu/~govt/docs/15-Central20Asia-press.pdf)

While cautious realism must remain the watchword concerning an impoverished and potentially unstable region comprised
AND
11, as well as reinforce regional and domestic stability in Central Asia.
The world is moving to pluralism, not multipolarity – the US can still maintain unipolar leadership because most challengers are regional
Etzioni, 13 - served as a senior advisor to the Carter White House; taught at Columbia University, Harvard University and The University of California at Berkeley; and is currently a university professor and professor of international relations at The George Washington University (Amitai, “The Devolution of American Power” 37 Fletcher F. World Aff. 13, lexis)
The theory that the world is moving from a unipolar order, dominated by the
AND
- to multipolarity takes place. This is one of the principle strengths of
Unilateralism is what sustains primacy – other states bandwagon with the US for fear of other rising powers.  Moving towards multilateralism makes it unsustainable
Seldena, 13 – assistant professor of political science at the University of Florida (Zachary, “Balancing Against or Balancing With? The Spectrum of Alignment and the Endurance of American Hegemony” Security Studies Volume 22, Issue 2, 2013, Taylor and Francis)
Understanding which of these choices—soft balancing against the hegemon or alignment with the
AND
the United States and move away from policies that help to maintain American hegemony
AND
an increased reluctance to use its power in support of its national interests.

Tournament: Wake Forest | Round: 2 | Opponent: Westminster ZW | Judge: Sara Kirsch
1

Text: The United States federal government should remove the travel ban to gradually remove the embargo
Removing the embargo gradually solves – immediate removal causes instability
Zimmerman 10 – CHELSEA A. ZIMMERMAN, Georgetown Law, ’10, “Rethinking The Cuban Trade Embargo: An Opportune Time To Mend a Broken Policy,” http://www.thepresidency.org/storage/documents/Fellows2010/Zimmerman.pdf, ACC. 6-13-2013)
Elimination of the trade embargo immediately is not a feasible solution, as such a
AND
pork and fish would result (U.S. International Trade Commission).
2
The plan re-inscribes neoliberalism – the alternative is to reject neoliberalism
Harris 8 (Richard L Harris: Professor of Global Studies at California State University, Monterey Bay; Managing Editor of the Journal of Developing Societies (SAGE India); and Coordi­ nating Editor of Latin American Perspectives (SAGE USA). “Latin America’s Response to Neoliberalism and Globalization,” http://www.nuso.org/upload/articulos/3506_2.pdf)
The economic, political and social development of the Latin American and Caribbean countries is
AND
model of uneven and inequitable development that has pillaged most of the region.
Extinction-~--tech and reforms fail
Richard A. Smith 7, Research Associate at the Institute for Policy Research and Development, UK; PhD in History from UCLA, June 2007, “The Eco-suicidal Economics of Adam Smith,” Capitalism Nature Socialism, Vol. 18, No. 2, p. 22-43
In the midst of the record-breaking heat wave in the summer of 2003
AND
and#34;endless technical adjustments;and#34; thus no further theoretical thought is required.and#34;27
3
Engagement isn’t appeasement
Resnick 1 (Evan, Assistant Professor and coordinator of the United States Programme at RSIS, “Defining Engagement,” Journal of International Affairs, 0022197X, Spring2001, Vol. 54, Issue 2, http://web.ebscohost.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/ehost/detail?sid=1b56e6b4-ade2-4052-9114-7d107fdbd01940sessionmgr12andvid=2andhid=24andbdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ3d3d#db=mthandAN=4437301)

Thus, a rigid conceptual distinction can be drawn between engagement and appeasement. Whereas
AND
or in exchange for certain concessions on the part of the target state.
The AFF is appeasement
Barros et. al 9 (Andrew, Associate Professor of History at the University of Quebec in Montreal, Canada, Debating British Decisionmaking toward Nazi Germany in the 1930s, 2009, http://fas-polisci.rutgers.edu/levy/200920IS201930s20correspondence.pdf)
Conventional definitions of appeasement generally emphasize the use of concessions to satisfy the adversary’s grievances
AND
of British appeasement policy toward Nazi Germany from a standard resolving grievances interpretation.
“Increase” means net increase
Words and Phrases 8 (v. 20a, p. 264-265)
Cal.App.2 Dist. 1991.  Term “increase,” as used
AND
.  West’s Ann.Cal.Pub.Res.Code § 25123.

Vote NEG

1. Limits – justifies removing small restrictions on all countries which explodes limits – theyre key to clash
   2. Ground – not increasing economic engagement means we don’t have any DA links because they aren’t specific to economic and they don’t increase it
   4

Strikes inevitable even without congressional approval
Miller 9/6
Jake, “Congress struggling with how to vote on Syria attack” http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57601727/congress-struggling-with-how-to-vote-on-syria-attack/
Ultimately, apart from considerations about damaged U.S. credibility, the congressional
AND
, but it could also be entirely inconsequential to the presidentand#39;s ultimate decision.
Congressional approval boosts Obama’s cred – an XO would kill it
Luce 9-1 – Washington bureau chief of the Financial Times (Edward, “Barack Obama risks more than just his credibility on Syria”, September 1 of 2013, http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/8c1b8faa-128b-11e3-8336-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2dtdrJg26)
First, the positive side. Mr Obama’s request, which Congress will debate only
AND
differences to respond to the barbaric gassing of hundreds of innocent foreign children.
Obama’s cred solves south china sea conflict
Ben Coes 11, a former speechwriter in the George H.W. Bush administration, managed Mitt Romney’s successful campaign for Massachusetts Governor in 2002 and author, “The disease of a weak president”, The Daily Caller, http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/30/the-disease-of-a-weak-president/
The disease of a weak president usually begins with the Achilles’ heel all politicians are
AND
on behalf of our allies. And our allies are Israel and India.
South China Sea conflicts cause extinction
Wittner 11 (Lawrence S. Wittner, Emeritus Professor of History at the State University of New York/Albany, Wittner is the author of eight books, the editor or co-editor of another four, and the author of over 250 published articles and book reviews. From 1984 to 1987, he edited Peace and Change, a journal of peace research., 11/28/2011, and#34;Is a Nuclear War With China Possible?and#34;,  www.huntingtonnews.net/14446)
While nuclear weapons exist, there remains a danger that they will be used.
AND
—destroying agriculture, creating worldwide famine, and generating chaos and destruction. 

Transition 

Lifting the embargo destroys Cuban ag
Gonzalez 3 –  Assistant Professor at Seattle University School of Law (Carmen, “SEASONS OF RESISTANCE: SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND FOOD SECURITY IN CUBA”, Summer of 2003, book p. 729-33)
Notwithstanding these problems, the greatest challenge to the agricultural development strategy adopted by the
AND
to the retention of an agricultural development model borne of crisis and isolation. 

Extinction
Ehrlich and Ehrlich 13 – Professor of Biology and Senior Research Scientist in Biology @ Stanford University (Paul R. Ehrlich (President of the Center for Conservation Biology @ Stanford University) and Anne H. Ehrlich, “Can a collapse of global civilization be avoided?,” Proceedings of the Royal Society Biological Sciences, Proc. R. Soc. B 2013 280, published online 9 January 2013)HA
¶ Virtually every past civilization has eventually undergone collapse, a loss of socio-
AND
of the vast majority of people would disappear. pg. 1-2

The risk of nuclear terrorism is exceedingly low – their authors are all trumpeting inflated threats.
Mueller ‘11
John Mueller is Professor of Political Science at Ohio State University. He is the author of Atomic Obsession. “The truth about al Qaeda”. August 5, 2011. CNN’s Global Public Square. http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/05/the-truth-about-al-qaeda/
The chief lesson of 9/11 should have been that small bands of terrorists
AND
It seems wildly unlikely that al Qaeda is remotely ready to go nuclear.

Asia won’t transfer nukes- too hard and they don’t have the materials
Kirk and Chick ‘9  Donald Kirk and Kristen Chick, How big a threat is North Korea?, May 28, 2009, http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0528/p06s01-wosc.html
It is widely believed that a nuclear reactor recently constructed in Syria – and destroyed
AND
are interested in cash or cooperation, why would you bother with that?and#34;

Leadership
No impact to hegemonic decline – their studies are wrong
MacDonald, 11 - Assistant Professor of Political Science at Williams College (Paul K, Spring 2011, and#34;Graceful Decline?: The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchmentand#34;, International Security, Vol. 35, No. 4, UTD McDermitt Library, KONTOPOULOS)
How do great powers respond to acute decline? The erosion of the relative power
AND
none of the declining powers that failed to retrench recovered their relative position.

Obama’s getting the U.S. out of heg now—the aff props up heg, causing great power conflict and a violent transition to multipolarity
Quinn, 11 – Lecturer in International Studies at the University of Birmingham (Adam, 7/1/11, “The Art of Declining Politely: Obama’s Prudent Presidency and the Waning of American Power”, International Affairs, Vol. 87, No. 4, Ebsco, KONTOPOULOS)
As for the administration’s involvement in the ‘Arab Spring’, and latterly military intervention
AND
seems it is fortunate enough to have a president who fits the bill.

Best data proves unipolar systems are substantially more war-prone than multipolar alternatives
Monteiro, 12 - Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yale University (Nuno P., Winter 2012, “Unrest Assured Why Unipolarity is Not Peaceful”, http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ISEC_a_00064, KONTOPOULOS)
How well, then, does the argument that unipolar systems are peaceful account for
AND
higher.47 These figures provide no evidence that unipolarity is peaceful.48

That makes nuclear war involving the U.S. inevitable – Only Offshore balancing solves
Layne, 06 - Robert M. Gates Chair in Intelligence and National Security at the George Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas AandM University and Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of  California at Berkeley (Christopher, 2006, “The Peace of Illusions: American Grand Strategy from 1940 to the Present”, p. 169, KONTOPOULOS) PDF
Proponents of U.S. hegemony like to say that America’s military commit¬ments in
AND
from the danger of being entrapped in Eurasian conflicts by its alliance commitments.

Offshore Balancing solves US-Chinese relations and war over Taiwan
Layne, 08 – Robert M. Gates Chair in Intelligence and National Security at the George Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas AandM University and Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of California at Berkeley (Christopher, 2008, “China’s Challenge to US Hegemony”, Global Trends, KONTOPOULOS) Word Doc
Washington, however, faces perhaps a last chance to adopt a grand strategy that
AND
;and#34; and support for a democratic Taiwan in a conflict with authoritarian China.

Sino relations solve extinction
Fu, 06 – Senior Research Professor of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and former Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in Behavioral Science at Stanford (Zhengyuan, “The Taiwan Issue and Sino-US Relations”, Transnational and Contemporary Problems, 2006, Lexis Nexis)
I. Introduction In the Twenty-First Century, Chinaand#39;s relations with the United
AND
fourth of mankind, but for the rest of the world as well.

U.S. primacy isn’t key to peace—their data is flawed
Preble, 10 – Director of Foreign Policy Studies at CATO (Christopher, 8/3/10, “U.S. Military Power: Preeminence for What Purpose?”, http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/u-s-military-power-preeminence-for-what-purpose/, KONTOPOULOS)
Most in Washington still embraces the notion that America is, and forever will be
AND
States while the schlubs in fly-over country pick up the tab.
There is no plausible scenario for resource wars
Victor, 07 – Senior Fellow @ Stanford Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and the Woods Institute for the Environment (David, “What Resource Wars?”, 11/1/2007, http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7344601/What-resource-wars-From-Arabia.html)
THE SECOND surge in thinking about resource wars comes from all the money that is
AND
find it easier to build a coalition for policy when hawks are supportive.

Tournament: Wake Forest | Round: 4 | Opponent: Capital EK | Judge: Austin Layton
1

Text: The United States federal government should remove the travel ban to gradually remove the embargo
Removing the embargo gradually solves – immediate removal causes instability
Zimmerman 10 – CHELSEA A. ZIMMERMAN, Georgetown Law, ’10, “Rethinking The Cuban Trade Embargo: An Opportune Time To Mend a Broken Policy,” http://www.thepresidency.org/storage/documents/Fellows2010/Zimmerman.pdf, ACC. 6-13-2013)
Elimination of the trade embargo immediately is not a feasible solution, as such a
AND
pork and fish would result (U.S. International Trade Commission).
2
The plan re-inscribes neoliberalism – the alternative is to reject neoliberalism
Harris 8 (Richard L Harris: Professor of Global Studies at California State University, Monterey Bay; Managing Editor of the Journal of Developing Societies (SAGE India); and Coordi­ nating Editor of Latin American Perspectives (SAGE USA). “Latin America’s Response to Neoliberalism and Globalization,” http://www.nuso.org/upload/articulos/3506_2.pdf)
The economic, political and social development of the Latin American and Caribbean countries is
AND
model of uneven and inequitable development that has pillaged most of the region.
Extinction-~--tech and reforms fail
Richard A. Smith 7, Research Associate at the Institute for Policy Research and Development, UK; PhD in History from UCLA, June 2007, “The Eco-suicidal Economics of Adam Smith,” Capitalism Nature Socialism, Vol. 18, No. 2, p. 22-43
In the midst of the record-breaking heat wave in the summer of 2003
AND
"endless technical adjustments;" thus no further theoretical thought is required."27
3
Engagement isn’t appeasement
Resnick 1 (Evan, Assistant Professor and coordinator of the United States Programme at RSIS, “Defining Engagement,” Journal of International Affairs, 0022197X, Spring2001, Vol. 54, Issue 2, http://web.ebscohost.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/ehost/detail?sid=1b56e6b4-ade2-4052-9114-7d107fdbd01940sessionmgr12andvid=2andhid=24andbdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ3d3d#db=mthandAN=4437301)

Thus, a rigid conceptual distinction can be drawn between engagement and appeasement. Whereas
AND
or in exchange for certain concessions on the part of the target state.
The AFF is appeasement
Barros et. al 9 (Andrew, Associate Professor of History at the University of Quebec in Montreal, Canada, Debating British Decisionmaking toward Nazi Germany in the 1930s, 2009, http://fas-polisci.rutgers.edu/levy/200920IS201930s20correspondence.pdf)
Conventional definitions of appeasement generally emphasize the use of concessions to satisfy the adversary’s grievances
AND
of British appeasement policy toward Nazi Germany from a standard resolving grievances interpretation.
“Increase” means net increase
Words and Phrases 8 (v. 20a, p. 264-265)
Cal.App.2 Dist. 1991.  Term “increase,” as used
AND
.  West’s Ann.Cal.Pub.Res.Code § 25123.

Vote NEG

1. Limits – justifies removing small restrictions on all countries which explodes limits – theyre key to clash
   2. Ground – not increasing economic engagement means we don’t have any DA links because they aren’t specific to economic and they don’t increase it
   4

Syria authorization will pass – Obama’s full court press key to undecided voters
Chicago Tribune 9/6
“Syria crisis: Obama plans 'full-court press' to sway Congress” http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-syria-conflict-20130906,0,1469446,full.story
WASHINGTON— President Barack Obama will take his case for military action in Syria directly
AND
in part because they want to see what others are going to do.

Drains capital – Backlash and hostage taking on unrelated priority legislation is empirically proven, likely in future and specifically true for Rubio  – Cuba policy is totally unique – this is the best link card you will ever read
LeoGrande, 12 William M. LeoGrande School of Public Affairs American University, Professor of Government and a specialist in Latin American politics and U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America, Professor LeoGrande has been a frequent adviser to government and private sector agencies, 12/18/12, http://www.american.edu/clals/upload/LeoGrande-Fresh-Start.pdf
The Second Obama Administration Where in the executive branch will control over Cuba policy lie
AND
rarely happen unless the urgency of the problem forces policymakers to take action.

PC is key – approval requires it
Brown et al 9-4 – White House reporter who focuses on the intersection of policy and politics in the administration and on Capitol Hill. She has covered the Senate, the 2008 Obama campaign, the health care overhaul bill, Wall Street reform and various tax cut battles in Congress. (Carrie, Jake Sherman covers Congress for POLITICO, “President Obama’s political capital spreads thin”, September 4 of 2013, http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/obamas-political-capital-spreads-thin-96306.html)
President Barack Obama faced a heavy lift in Congress this fall when his agenda included
AND
— and House Republicans don’t think the Syria vote will be any different.
Intervention in Syria deters WMD use globally—solves multiple scenarios for nuclear conflict
Fitzpatrick 9-6 Mark, Director of the Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Program, International Institute for Strategic Studies; “Obama's "altruistic" Syria intervention enhances deterrence against WMD” Global Post; September 6, 2013; http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/kyodo-news-international/130906/obamas-altruistic-syria-intervention-enhances-deterren
The impending U.S. intervention in Syria is a rare case of a
AND
Iran will follow through on hints of willingness to curb its nuclear programme.
5

The plan causes economic overheating
Robert David Cruz 03 (current qualifications: PhD., Chief economist for Miami-Dade County) “Foreign Direct Investment in Post-Castro Cuba: Problems, Opportunities and Recommendations,” University of Miami, Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies, Pg. 20, http://ctp.iccas.miami.edu/Research_Studies/RDCruz.pdf
The appropriate U.S. role during an economic transition is not to promote
AND
infrastructure in ways that promote economic development that is spread across the island.

That causes democratic backsliding and regional prolif
Schulz 00 (Donald Schulz, Chairman of the Political Science Department at Cleveland State University, March 2000, The United States and Latin America: Shaping an Elusive Future, http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub31.pdf)
A second major interest is the promotion of democracy. At first glance, this
AND
heightened politico-military rivalry between different blocs or coalitions in the hemisphere.
Prolif causes extinction – escalation
Kroenig 12 – Matthew Kroenig is an Assistant Professor of Government at Georgetown University and a Stanton Nuclear Security Fellow on the Council on Foreign Relations, May 26th, 2012, “The History of Proliferation Optimism: Does It Have A Future?” http://www.npolicy.org/article.php?aid=1182andtid=30
What’s Wrong with Proliferation Optimism?
The proliferation optimist position, while having a distinguished pedigree, has several major flaws
AND
war in an attempt to force less-resolved opponents to back down.
Econ
Lifting the embargo destroys Cuban ag
Gonzalez 3 –  Assistant Professor at Seattle University School of Law (Carmen, “SEASONS OF RESISTANCE: SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND FOOD SECURITY IN CUBA”, Summer of 2003, book p. 729-33)
Notwithstanding these problems, the greatest challenge to the agricultural development strategy adopted by the
AND
to the retention of an agricultural development model borne of crisis and isolation. 

Extinction
Ehrlich and Ehrlich 13 – Professor of Biology and Senior Research Scientist in Biology @ Stanford University (Paul R. Ehrlich (President of the Center for Conservation Biology @ Stanford University) and Anne H. Ehrlich, “Can a collapse of global civilization be avoided?,” Proceedings of the Royal Society Biological Sciences, Proc. R. Soc. B 2013 280, published online 9 January 2013)HA
¶ Virtually every past civilization has eventually undergone collapse, a loss of socio-
AND
of the vast majority of people would disappear. pg. 1-2

Cuban growth inevitable – only a question of US benefits
Iwata 6 (Edward, writer for USA Today, “Cuba’s Economic Fate Up in the Air”, USA Today, 8/28/06, http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/world/2006-08-27-cuba-economy_x.htm)
Despite the hope of U.S. companies that Cuba might welcome capitalism and
AND
beginning to pick up again because it looks like there might be change."

There is no bioterrorist threat. The most sophisticated terrorist group ever tried attacking with a biological agent 9 times and the attacks were so bad no one even noticed they were happening.
Mueller, 05 (John, Professor of Political Science at OhioState. May 2005. International Studies Perspectives, Volume 6 Issue 2 Page 208-234, Simplicity and Spook: Terrorism and the Dynamics of Threat Exaggeration)
Properly developed and deployed, biological weapons could indeed, if thus far only in
AND
—in fact, nobody even noticed that the attacks had taken place.
Relations
US decline will not spark wars
MacDonald and Parent 11—Professor of Political Science at Williams College and Professor of Political Science at University of Miami Paul K. MacDonald and Joseph M. Parent, “Graceful Decline? The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchment,” International Security, Vol. 35, No. 4 (Spring 2011), pp. 7–44
Our findings are directly relevant to what appears to be an impending great power transition
AND
exacerbate U.S. grand strategic problems and risk unnecessary clashes. 101

War is impossible – Chinese democratization will facilitate cooperation
Friedberg, 05 (Aaron L. Friedberg, Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University. International Security, Vol. 30, No. 2 (Fall 2005) http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/is3002_pp007-045_friedberg.pdf)
Liberal optimists believe that, although it is still far from finished, the process  
AND
as war among the members of  the European Union appears to be today.
Chinese Sphere of Influence is key to aerospace, biotech, and nuclear power.
Wise 09 (Carol, Associate Professor of International Relations at the University of Southern California, 2009, “China in Latin America: The Whats and Wherefores,” http://es.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/02/19/es.kht015.full)//DR. H
At the same time, as China’s commercial and political relationship with the countries in
AND
technology cooperation in areas such as aerospace, biotechnology, and nuclear power.

No impact to cred
Miller ‘10 February 3rd, 2010, Aaron David, public policy scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Princeton University, Foreign Policy, “The End of Diplomacy?” http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/02/03/the_end_of_diplomacy?page=full
Back in the day, there was a time when American diplomacy did big and
AND
abroad and hobbled by its inability to organize its own house at home.

Tournament: Wake Forest | Round: 5 | Opponent: Highland Park HS | Judge: Jessie Suh
1
Text: The United States federal government should back entry and negotiate as an economic partner with Mexico in the Transatlantic Free Trade Area

Integrating Mexico into TAFTA negotiations reignites support for widespread multilateral trade liberalization – decreases international violence globally
Hills 4/24 – former US Trade Representative and Chief Executive Officer of Hills and Company International Consultants (Carla A, “A Trans-Atlantic Trade Pact for the World,” 4/24/13, New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/25/opinion/global/a-trans-atlantic-trade-pact-for-the-world.html)//SJF
The opening of global markets — starting in 1947 with the first round of trade
AND
with the successful conclusion of the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.

US backing is vital to Mexican negotiation credibility in TAFTA
Glickhouse and Zissis 4/26 – editor-in-chief of the Americas Society and Council of the Americas (Rachel, Carin, “Explainer: President Barack Obama's Trip to Mexico and Costa Rica,” 4/26/13, http://www.as-coa.org/articles/explainer-president-barack-obamas-trip-mexico-and-costa-rica)//SJF
Trade: Talking TPP and More in Mexico Given that Mexico is the third-
AND
. support to join in the EU-U.S. negotiations. 

TAFTA is better and solves the affs internal links – comparative evidence to TPP
Cooper 13 –Ryan Cooper is the web editor of the Washington Monthly, (“A Look at Two Potential Trade Deals”, March 13, 2013, http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2013_03/a_look_at_two_potential_trade043546.php#)//sawyer
Prestowitz highlights several little-known facts about the TPP which ought to see wider discussion before any treaty is signed. For example, it has the potential to seriously alter many of our existing trade agreements, especially in Latin America and the Caribbean:
 An additional problem is how the TPP would destroy the Caribbean Basin Free Trade
AND
a 2005 study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
2
Economic engagement isnt normalizing trade
Resnick 1 – Dr. Evan Resnick, Ph.D. in Political Science from Columbia University, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yeshiva University, “Defining Engagement”, Journal of International Affairs, Spring, 54(2), Ebsco
Scholars have limited the concept of engagement in a third way by unnecessarily restricting the
AND
be shown below, permits the elucidation of multiple types of positive sanctions.

“Increase” means net increase
Words and Phrases 8 (v. 20a, p. 264-265)
Cal.App.2 Dist. 1991.  Term “increase,” as used
AND
.  West’s Ann.Cal.Pub.Res.Code § 25123.

Vote NEG

1. Limits – justifies removing small restrictions on all countries which explodes limits – theyre key to clash
   2. Ground – not increasing economic engagement means we don’t have any DA links because they aren’t specific to economic and they don’t increase it
   3

The TPP will cause allow for corporations to subvert regulations accelerating environmental collapse – the Asian-Pacific region is key
Nash-hoff 13 -Michele Nash-Hoff, Founder and President at ElectroFab Sales (“The Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Agreement Would Harm Our Environment”, 7/10/13
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michele-nashhoff/the-transpacific-partners_1_b_3568136.html)//sawyer
Proponents say that the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement would be a
AND
to vote "no" to granting the President "fast track authority."

Biodiversity collapse will lead to an invisible threshold of destruction
Diner, 94 David, Ph.D., Planetary Science and Geology, "The Army and the Endangered Species Act: Who's Endangering Whom?," Military Law Review, 143 Mil. L. Rev. 161
To accept that the snail darter, harelip sucker, or Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew
AND
, 80 humankind may be edging closer to the abyss.
4

Strikes inevitable even without congressional approval
Miller 9/6
Jake, “Congress struggling with how to vote on Syria attack” http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57601727/congress-struggling-with-how-to-vote-on-syria-attack/
Ultimately, apart from considerations about damaged U.S. credibility, the congressional
AND
, but it could also be entirely inconsequential to the president's ultimate decision.
The TPP is unpopular – assumes your turns
Capling and Ravenhill  11 ¬ - Ann Capling went to the University of Melbourne, John Ravenhill went to the   Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University, (“Multilateralising regionalism: what role for the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement?,  December 12, 2011 http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09512748.2011.634078)//sawyer
Of particular note here has been the capacity of protectionist forces in the US Congress
AND
Textile Organizations, which argues that Vietnam should be excluded from the negotiations.
Congressional approval boosts Obama’s cred – an XO would kill it
Luce 9-1 – Washington bureau chief of the Financial Times (Edward, “Barack Obama risks more than just his credibility on Syria”, September 1 of 2013, http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/8c1b8faa-128b-11e3-8336-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2dtdrJg26)
First, the positive side. Mr Obama’s request, which Congress will debate only
AND
to respond to the barbaric gassing of hundreds of innocent foreign children.
Obama’s cred solves south china sea conflict
Ben Coes 11, a former speechwriter in the George H.W. Bush administration, managed Mitt Romney’s successful campaign for Massachusetts Governor in 2002 and author, “The disease of a weak president”, The Daily Caller, http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/30/the-disease-of-a-weak-president/
The disease of a weak president usually begins with the Achilles’ heel all politicians are
AND
on behalf of our allies. And our allies are Israel and India.
South China Sea conflicts cause extinction
Wittner 11 (Lawrence S. Wittner, Emeritus Professor of History at the State University of New York/Albany, Wittner is the author of eight books, the editor or co-editor of another four, and the author of over 250 published articles and book reviews. From 1984 to 1987, he edited Peace and Change, a journal of peace research., 11/28/2011, "Is a Nuclear War With China Possible?",  www.huntingtonnews.net/14446)
While nuclear weapons exist, there remains a danger that they will be used.
AND
—destroying agriculture, creating worldwide famine, and generating chaos and destruction. 

5
Text: The People’s Republic of China should negotiate as an economic partner in the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Their 1AC Wilson and Olson evidence says China doesn’t have an incentive to join – the CP solves all of the 2nd advantage
China
War is impossible – Chinese democratization will facilitate cooperation
Friedberg, 05 (Aaron L. Friedberg, Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University. International Security, Vol. 30, No. 2 (Fall 2005) http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/is3002_pp007-045_friedberg.pdf)
Liberal optimists believe that, although it is still far from finished, the process  
AND
as war among the members of  the European Union appears to be today.

No China war – economic interdependence
China wouldn’t get involved
Brzezinski, 05 (Zbigniew - national security affairs advisor to the Carter administration – FEB - “Make Money, Not War,” Foreign Policy, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=2740)
There will be inevitable frictions as China’s regional role increases and as a Chinese “
AND
flow of oil would cease, and the Chinese economy would be paralyzed.

No evidence that says there is an incentive for negociation
No Taiwan escalation
Shor 12 (Francis, Professor of History – Wayne State, “Declining US Hegemony and Rising Chinese Power: A Formula for Conflict?”, Perspectives on Global Development and Technology, 11(1), pp. 157-167)
While the United States no longer dominates the global economy as it did during the
AND
of the U.S. governing elite's ideological commitment to national security.
Trade

Trade does not solve war—there’s no correlation between trade and peace
Martin, Mayer and Thoenig, 08 (Phillipe, University of Paris 1 Pantheon—Sorbonne, Paris School of Economics, and Centre for Economic Policy Research; Thierry MAYER, University of Paris 1 Pantheon—Sorbonne, Paris School of Economics, CEPII, and Centre for Economic Policy Research, Mathias THOENIG, University of Geneva and Paris School of Economics, The Review of Economic Studies 75)

Does globalization pacify international relations? The “liberal” view in political science argues
AND
, even taking into account the increase in the number of sovereign states.

Plan isn’t bilateral nor preferencial – their evidence says there are stumbling blocks among countries – that was CX
TPP won’t boost the economy – it just replicates the economic inequality of NAFTA
Pérez-Rocha and Trew 12 – *helps to coordinate the Networking for Justice on Global Investment project, as part of the IPS Global Economy Project, Trade campaigner for the Council of Canadians (Manu, Stuart, “Don't Expand NAFTA,” 7/26/12, http://www.ips-dc.org/articles/dont_expand_nafta)//SJF
¶ The United States recently announced that Canada and Mexico will join negotiations for the
AND
growing trinational opposition to the TPP in Leesburg, Virginia, and beyond.

No chance of war from economic decline-~--best and most recent data
Daniel W. Drezner 12, Professor, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, October 2012, “The Irony of Global Economic Governance: The System Worked,” http://www.globaleconomicgovernance.org/wp-content/uploads/IR-Colloquium-MT12-Week-5_The-Irony-of-Global-Economic-Governance.pdf
The final outcome addresses a dog that hasn’t barked: the effect of the Great
AND
II – and not even worse – must be regarded as fortunate.”42

There’s also no impact to decline
The Seattle Times, 08

Economists disagree on the Doha round's potential benefits; estimates of economic gain that could
AND
U.S.-South Korea free-trade deal earlier this year.

The bicycle theory of trade protectionism is empirically false
Alden 13 - Bernard L. Schwartz senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, and was project director for the CFR Independent Task Force on U.S. Trade and Investment Policy (Edward, “Opportunity Knocks for Obama on Trade,” World Politics Review, January 8, 2013, http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/12604/opportunity-knocks-for-obama-on-trade)//AC

That 2013 should matter so much in trade policy is rather surprising. What has
AND
the United States and other countries have managed to swerve and keep going.

Tournament: Wake Forest | Round: Doubles | Opponent: River Hill DD | Judge: Matt Malia, Josh Clark, Kirk Gibson
T

The affirmative’s failure to advance a topical defense of federal policy undermines debate’s transformative and intellectual potential

1. “Resolved” means debate should be a legislative forum
   Army Officer School ‘4
   (5-12, “# 12, Punctuation – The Colon and Semicolon”, http://usawocc.army.mil/IMI/wg12.htm)
   The colon introduces the following: a. A list, but only after "
   AND
   resolved:"¶ Resolved: (colon) That this council petition the mayor.

2. The United States is the country composed of the 50 states
Encarta ‘7
The Encarta Online Dictionary. “United States” 2007 encarta.msn.com
U•nit•ed States  y? n?t?d stáyts  country in central North America, consisting of 50 states. Languages: English. Currency: dollar. Capital: Washington, D.C.. Population: 290,342,550 (2001). Area: 9,629,047 sq km (3,717,796 sq mi.) Official name United States of America

3. The federal government is the government in Washington DC – not its individual members
AHD ‘2
The American Heritage Dictionary. 2002, Pg 647GBS-JV
Of or relating to the central government of a federation as distinct from the governments of its member units.

4. “Should” means the debate is solely about a policy established by governmental means
Ericson ‘3
(Jon M., Dean Emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts – California Polytechnic U., et al., The Debater’s Guide, Third Edition, p. 4)
The Proposition of Policy: Urging Future Action In policy propositions, each topic contains
AND
compelling reasons for an audience to perform the future action that you propose.
First, a limited topic of discussion that provides for equitable ground is key to productive inculcation of decision-making and advocacy skills in every and all facets of life-~--even if their position is contestable that’s distinct from it being valuably debatable-~--this still provides room for flexibility, creativity, and innovation, but targets the discussion to avoid mere statements of fact
Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp45-
Debate is a means of settling differences, so there must be a difference of
AND
particular point of difference, which will be outlined in the following discussion.

Second, constraints are key to creativity-~--challenging ourselves to innovate within the confines of rules creates far more creative responses than starting with a blank slate  
Mayer 6 – Marissa Ann Mayer, vice-president for search products and user experience at Google, February 13, 2006, “Creativity Loves Constraints,” online: http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/06_07/b3971144.htm?chan=gl
When people think about creativity, they think about artistic work -- unbridled, unguided
AND
be a clock) or constrained possibilities (a canvas that is marked).

Third, discussion of specific policy-questions is crucial for skills development-~--we control uniqueness: university students already have preconceived notions about how the world operates-~--government policy discussion is vital to force engagement with and resolution of competing perspectives to improve social outcomes, however those outcomes may be defined
Esberg and Sagan 12 *Jane Esberg is special assistant to the director at New York University's Center on. International Cooperation. She was the winner of 2009 Firestone Medal, AND Scott Sagan is a professor of political science and director of Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation “NEGOTIATING NONPROLIFERATION: Scholarship, Pedagogy, and Nuclear Weapons Policy,” 2/17 The Nonproliferation Review, 19:1, 95-108
These government or quasi-government think tank simulations often provide very similar lessons for
AND
quickly; simulations teach students how to contextualize and act on information.14

Fourth, switch-side is key-~--Effective deliberation is crucial to the activation of personal agency and is only possible in a switch-side debate format where debaters divorce themselves from ideology to engage in political contestation
Patricia Roberts-Miller 3 is Associate Professor of Rhetoric at the University of Texas "Fighting Without Hatred:Hannah Ar endt ' s Agonistic Rhetoric" JAC 22.2 2003
Totalitarianism and the Competitive Space of Agonism¶ Arendt is probably most famous for her
AND
not relativist, adversarial but not violent, independent but not expressivist rhetoric.

Effective decision-making outweighs-~--
Key to social improvements in every and all facets of life
Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp9-10
If we assume it to be possible without recourse to violence to reach agreement on
AND
in our intelligent self-interest to reach these decisions through reasoned debate.

Only portable skill-~--means our framework turns case
Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp9-10
After several days of intense debate, first the United States House of Representatives and
AND
customer for out product, or a vote for our favored political candidate.

Effective deliberation is the lynchpin of solving all existential global problems
Christian O. Lundberg 10 Professor of Communications @ University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, “Tradition of Debate in North Carolina” in Navigating Opportunity: Policy Debate in the 21st Century By Allan D. Louden, p311
The second major problem with the critique that identifies a naivety in articulating debate and
AND
with the existential challenges to democracy in an increasingly complex world. 

Case

1. Latin American neoliberalism is critical to reducing poverty and inequality
   Miroff ‘12December 1st, 2012, Nick, collective winner of a Pulitzer prize, writer for NPR, the Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, “Latin American Equality: Free Markets or a Left Wing Success?” http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/121130/latin-america-middle-class-equality-poverty-left-wing-success-story
   HAVANA, Cuba — Latin America has long been a case study in the social
   AND
   , have had an impact on both poverty and inequality,” Thale added.

2. Anti-neoliberalism movements fail-~--only neolib works
Ferguson ‘10 2010, James, Professor of Anthropology at Stanford, “The Uses of Neoliberalism,” Antipode, 41.1, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2009.00721.x/abstract
This problem in recent progressive scholarship strikes me as related to a parallel problem in
AND
an exploration of the contemporary possibilities for developing genuinely progressive arts of government.
3. A revolution is in a debate space is ineffective – instead, we should use the debate as a method for better CBA for the future – has the best potential to change in the real world – negation theory serves as a DA
4. Consequences matter – the tunnel vision of moral absolutism generates evil and political irrelevance
Issac, 2002 (Jeffery, Professor of Political Science at Indiana University, Dissent, Vol. 49 No. 2, Spring)
Politics, in large part, involves contests over the distribution and use of power
AND
not true believers.  It promotes arrogance.  And it undermines political effectiveness.  

5. Status quo solves their internal link – representative democracy is checked by the federal systems of checks and balances and allows MORE voices which outweighs
6. The AFF demands a violent revolution which will be destroyed and only result in a new dictatorship
Feldheim (Prof of Philosophy @ SUNY) 8
(Andrew, REPLY TO WARD CHURCHILL, dspace.sunyconnect.suny.edu, GoogleScholar)
Churchill’s assumption that, when a nonviolent group becomes a viable threat to an  oppressive
AND
, condemnation.  The nonviolent variation is far  more likely to elicit the support

 of other groups and even nations.  It is practically superior.         There is also something to be said about the difference in results that are obtained  when a dictatorship is overthrown through violent means, as opposed to nonviolent means.   Gene Sharp notes that, essential to the removal of a dictatorship and the establishment of  democracy, is a fundamental redistribution of the governmental power structure.  Violence  may be less conducive towards this goal.  According to Sharp,     A military coup d’ etat against a dictatorship might appear to be relatively    one of the easiest and quickest ways to remove a particularly repugnant    regime.  However, there are very serious problems with that technique.     Most importantly, it leaves in place the existing maldistribution of power    between the population and the elite in control of the government and its    military forces.  The removal of particular persons and cliques from the    government positions most likely will merely make it possible for another    group to take their place. (Sharp, 2002, p. 5)    Sharp feels that, unless the dictatorial power structure is changed to a more democratically  oriented power structure, the stage is set for another tyrannical group to simply take the  place of the deposed one.        At this point, in order to avoid the same reliance on absolutes that I find inappropriate  in Churchill’s argument, it is important to recognize the crucial role that the uniqueness of  every situation has in determining the proper methods to be employed on behalf of an  oppressed or subjugated group.  There are kernels of truth in Churchill’s contentions that have more or less import in accordance with the specific situation.  There are cases, both  historical and theoretical, for which violent action seems the only logical alternative.  The  extermination of the European Jews during World War II seems like such an instance.  One  important difference between this example and the oppression of Indians by the English, or  African-Americans by the United States, is that, in the case of the Nazis, it was not an  instance of the same type of repression.  They did not wish to subjugate or exploit the Jews;  they simply wished to kill them.         Fortunately, however, the Nazi example is the exception rather than the rule.  Most  cases of oppression stem from a wish to subjugate a population in order to profit unfairly  from their labors, or to usurp their property.  To give Mr. Churchill his due, even in cases  such as these, there may be factors, specific to particular situations, which call for violent  resistance or a mixture of violent and nonviolent resistance.  Each situation must be  evaluated on its own merits.  My contention is not that there is no truth in Churchill’s  position.  Rather, it is his use of absolutes, his insistence that violence or the threat of  violence is always necessary, that demands a refutation.         Churchill presents his contention, that violence or the threat of violence  is a necessary  constituent of successful resistance to tyranny, in a way that makes it unfalsifiable.  This,  however, does not add to its merit.  To potential counterexamples, Churchill simply relies  on the presence of groups which may be potentially  violent.  The very nature of tyranny,  however, naturally encourages feelings of resentment and hostility on the part of the  oppressed.  If one looked hard enough, he could always find some indication of potential  violence, even if not overt.  Churchill’s argument will, in this sense, always be true, but  gives us no more actual information than a tautology.  Also, since Churchill supposes a  causal relationship between violent resistance and the defeat of dictatorships, and this  construct is placed within an historical context, we can never know what would have  happened if there had been no violence or the threat of violence, but only nonviolent  resistance.  While it may not be possible to prove Churchill’s argument unsound, its very  nature makes it of limited utility.  

7. And this true in North America too – The immediate effect of the alternative would be a massive increase in direct anti-Black and anti-Red violence
Fire Rider (advocate from the Northern Ontario Ojibwe and American Indian Movement) 5
(Marty, Why Churchill Political Agenda is Wrong for Indians, February 2005, http://aimfireca.tripod.com/id44.html)
I think we can agree that Churchill's political philosophy is liberal socialism regarding foreign policy
AND
environment where Indians would be subject to further violence, racism and discriminating.

Tournament: Wake Forest | Round: Octas | Opponent: Hooch AS | Judge: James Durkee, Jenny Heidt, Dan Bagwell
1
Syria authorization will pass – Obama’s full court press key to undecided voters
Chicago Tribune 9/6
“Syria crisis: Obama plans 'full-court press' to sway Congress” http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-syria-conflict-20130906,0,1469446,full.story
WASHINGTON— President Barack Obama will take his case for military action in Syria directly
AND
in part because they want to see what others are going to do.

Drains capital – Backlash and hostage taking on unrelated priority legislation is empirically proven, likely in future and specifically true for Rubio  – Cuba policy is totally unique – this is the best link card you will ever read
LeoGrande, 12 William M. LeoGrande School of Public Affairs American University, Professor of Government and a specialist in Latin American politics and U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America, Professor LeoGrande has been a frequent adviser to government and private sector agencies, 12/18/12, http://www.american.edu/clals/upload/LeoGrande-Fresh-Start.pdf
The Second Obama Administration Where in the executive branch will control over Cuba policy lie
AND
rarely happen unless the urgency of the problem forces policymakers to take action.
PC is key – approval requires it
Brown et al 9-4 – White House reporter who focuses on the intersection of policy and politics in the administration and on Capitol Hill. She has covered the Senate, the 2008 Obama campaign, the health care overhaul bill, Wall Street reform and various tax cut battles in Congress. (Carrie, Jake Sherman covers Congress for POLITICO, “President Obama’s political capital spreads thin”, September 4 of 2013, http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/obamas-political-capital-spreads-thin-96306.html)
President Barack Obama faced a heavy lift in Congress this fall when his agenda included
AND
— and House Republicans don’t think the Syria vote will be any different.
Intervention in Syria deters WMD use globally—solves multiple scenarios for nuclear conflict
Fitzpatrick 9-6 Mark, Director of the Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Program, International Institute for Strategic Studies; “Obama's "altruistic" Syria intervention enhances deterrence against WMD” Global Post; September 6, 2013; http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/kyodo-news-international/130906/obamas-altruistic-syria-intervention-enhances-deterren
The impending U.S. intervention in Syria is a rare case of a
AND
Iran will follow through on hints of willingness to curb its nuclear programme.
2
The plan re-inscribes neoliberalism – the alternative is to reject neoliberalism
Harris 8 (Richard L Harris: Professor of Global Studies at California State University, Monterey Bay; Managing Editor of the Journal of Developing Societies (SAGE India); and Coordi­ nating Editor of Latin American Perspectives (SAGE USA). “Latin America’s Response to Neoliberalism and Globalization,” http://www.nuso.org/upload/articulos/3506_2.pdf)
The economic, political and social development of the Latin American and Caribbean countries is
AND
model of uneven and inequitable development that has pillaged most of the region.
Extinction-~--tech and reforms fail
Richard A. Smith 7, Research Associate at the Institute for Policy Research and Development, UK; PhD in History from UCLA, June 2007, “The Eco-suicidal Economics of Adam Smith,” Capitalism Nature Socialism, Vol. 18, No. 2, p. 22-43
In the midst of the record-breaking heat wave in the summer of 2003
AND
"endless technical adjustments;" thus no further theoretical thought is required."27

3
Economic engagement is only positive incentives
Haass 00 – Richard Haass and Meghan O’Sullivan, Senior Fellows in the Brookings Institution Foreign Policy Studies Program, Honey and Vinegar: Incentives, Sanctions, and Foreign Policy, p. 5-6
Architects of engagement strategies have a wide variety of incentives from which to choose.
AND
a framework to guide the use of engagement strategies in the upcoming decades.
 “Increase” means net increase
Words and Phrases 8 (v. 20a, p. 264-265)
Cal.App.2 Dist. 1991.  Term “increase,” as used
AND
.  West’s Ann.Cal.Pub.Res.Code § 25123.

Vote negative

a) Limits – policies the embargo means there’s a near-infinite range of “one exception” affs
b) Ground – unconditional engagement denies us “say no” and backlash arguments which are a crucial part of the engagement debate
c) no brightline for their we meet argument because they don’t specify which part of the embargo they remove – means our offense doesn’t apply and allows them to shift out of link arguments and counterplan competition which is a voter for fairness
4

Text: the United States federal government should phase out a substantial portion of its economic restrictions toward Cuba on the condition that the government of Cuba makes appropriate economic and political reforms.
Only conditioning removal of the embargo on continued reform prevents Castro from backsliding on status quo reforms
Sanguinetty 13
Jorge, “Who benefits and loses if the US-Cuba embargo is lifted?” http://devresearchcenter.org/2013/04/08/who-benefits-and-loses-if-the-us-cuba-embargo-is-lifted-by-jorge-a-sanguinetty/ April mtc
The answer depends on the conditions under which the embargo is lifted. I focus
AND
lifting of the US embargo is likely to bring about democracy in Cuba.
Global Cred

There isn’t a brink to credibility – international law of the embargo has been around for 60 years
Plan doesn’t cause a transition
Suchlicki 2K – Jaime, full History professor and Phd with a concentration in Cuba (“The U.S. Embargo of Cuba”, June 2000, University of Miami, http://www6.miami.edu/iccas/USEmbargo.pdf)
There is no evidence that tourism, trade, or investment had anything to do
AND
entrepreneurs. The will to liberalize the economy does not exist in Cuba.

Soft power doesn’t solve—increases resentment
Gray 11—Professor of International Politics and Strategic Studies at the University of Reading, England Colin S., April, “HARD POWER AND SOFT POWER: THE UTILITY OF MILITARY FORCE AS AN INSTRUMENT OF POLICY IN THE 21ST CENTURY,” Published by Strategic Studies Institute
An inherent and unavoidable problem with a country’s soft power is that it is near
AND
disciplinary value of (American) military force is also to be deplored.
Relations

No impact to instability – evidence is from 1994 – drug war, changing geopolitics disprove the internal link
No impact to instability – Chavez death stabilizes Latin America
Anya Landau French 13, Director of the New America Foundation U.S. – Cuba Policy Initiative, 3/6/13, “Can Cuba Survive the Loss of Chavez?,” http://thehavananote.com/2013/03/can_cuba_survive_loss_chavez
Not unsurprisingly, many in and out of Cuba now wonder if the loss of
AND
Time will tell, perhaps sooner rather than later, whether he can.

No global economic decline from the lifting of the embargo – empirics prove
No chance of war from economic decline-~--best and most recent data
Daniel W. Drezner 12, Professor, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, October 2012, “The Irony of Global Economic Governance: The System Worked,” http://www.globaleconomicgovernance.org/wp-content/uploads/IR-Colloquium-MT12-Week-5_The-Irony-of-Global-Economic-Governance.pdf
The final outcome addresses a dog that hasn’t barked: the effect of the Great
AND
II – and not even worse – must be regarded as fortunate.”42

They don’t have an internal link to the global economy – their Hakim evidence just says it could stir economic issues in Argentina and Brazil
Ethanol

Alt cause - China and India are a net-larger consumer of C02 

No spillover for species – other species fill in
Species extinction won't cause human extinction – humans and the environment are adaptable
Doremus, 2K (Holly,  Professor of Law at UC Davis Washington and Lee Law Review, Winter 57 Wash and Lee L. Rev. 11, lexis)  
In recent years, this discourse frequently has taken the form of the ecological horror
AND
that a high proportion of species can be lost without precipitating a collapse.

NO food wars
Salehyan, 07 – Assistant Professor of Political Science at University of Northern Texas (Idean, “The New Myth About Climate Change”, Foreign Policy, August 2007, May 29th 2010, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3922, KONTOPOULOS)
Dire scenarios like these may sound convincing, but they are misleading. Even worse
AND
Paris are at least as culpable for Darfur as the regime in Khartoum. 

The Amazon isn't vulnerable – reject their evidence
Morano and Washburn 2k Marc Morano is a co-producer of American Investigator's "Amazon Rainforest: Clear-Cutting the Myths." He is the communications director for James Inhofe, ranking member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Kent Washburn is a co-producer of the same production. Citing Dr. Patrick Moore, PhD in Ecology and one of the founders of Greenpeace, and Philip Stott, Professor of Biogeography at University of London. "SHAKY SCIENCE BEHIND SAVE-RAINFOREST EFFORT," WorldNetDaily, 6/26, http://www.wnd.com/2000/06/4162/
“The Amazon is actually the least endangered forest in the world,” states Moore
AND
endangered forests” because “they are the least suitable for human habitation.”
Multiple alternate causes to food prices
Teslik, 08 – Assistant Editor at Council on Foreign Relations (Lee Hudson, “Food Prices”,  6/30/2008, http://www.cfr.org/publication/16662/food_prices.html)  
Before considering factors like supply and demand within food markets, it is important to
AND
University, cites European bans on genetically modified crops as a prime example. 

Alt cause to food prices – this is the un-underlined 1AC Wise evidence
This rapidly growing market was fuelled by a wide range of government incentives and mandates and by the rising price of petroleum.

National Security

Terrorists won’t pursue or use nuclear weapons
Waltz, 03 (Kenneth, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate Renewed, 2003, p. 130)
For terrorists who abandon tactics of disruption and harassment in favor of dealing in wholesale
AND
to wreak great destruction, threats they would not want to execute anyway.

prolif is slow and solves conflict through mutual deterrence
Bennett, 05 – Staff Writer for the Boston Globe (Drake, "Give nukes a chance", Boston Globe, March 20th 2005, July 14th 2010, http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2005/03/20/give_nukes_a_chance?pg=full, KONTOPOULOS)

KENNETH N. WALTZ, adjunct professor of political science at Columbia University, doesn't
AND
''The gradual spread of nuclear weapons is more to be welcomed than feared.”