Michigan Pappas Allen Neg USC Octas (1)

8/18/2019 Michigan Pappas Allen Neg USC Octas (1)

1/28

OCTOS NEG V. STANFROD GL


2/28

1NC


3/28

1NC T

A. The aff isn’t topical—

The agent an !e"# of the "e$ inicate a e#ate a#o%t esi"a#ilit& of polic& changeJon M E"icson ', Dean Emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts – California Polytechnic U., et

al., The Debaters !ui"e, Thir" E"ition, #. $

The Pro#osition of Policy% Urging &uture Action 'n #olicy #ro#ositions, each to#ic contains certain (ey elements, although theyha)e slightly "ifferent functions from com#arable elements of )alue*oriente" #ro#ositions. +. An agent "oing the acting ***TheU nite" - tates in The U nite" - tates shoul" a"o#t a #olicy of free tra"e. Li(e the ob/ect of e)aluation in a #ro#ositionof )alue, the agent is the s%#(ect of the sentence. 0. The )erb shoul"1the first #art of a )erb #hrase that urgesaction. 2. An action )erb to follo3 shoul" in the shoul"*)erb combination. &or e4am#le, shoul" a"o#t here means to #ut a#rogram or #olicy into action through go)ernmental means. $. A s#ecification of i"ections o" ali)itation of the action "esire". The #hrase free tra"e, for e4am#le, gi)es "irection an" limits to the to#ic, 3hich 3oul", fore4am#le, eliminate consi"eration of increasing tariffs, "iscussing "i#lomatic recognition, or "iscussing interstate commerce. Pro#ositions of #olicy "eal

3ith future action. 5othing has yet occurre". The enti"e e#ate is a#o%t *hethe" so)ething o%ght toocc%". 6hat you agree to "o, then, 3hen you acce#t the affirmati)e si"e in such a "ebate is to offer sufficient an" com#elling reasons for anau"ience to #erform the future action that you #ro#ose.

Legali$e )eans to )a+e la*f%l #& (%icial o" legislati!e sanction,%siness Dictiona"& No Date, 7legali8e7,

333.business"ictionary.com9"efinition9legali8e.html

legali8e: Definition: To ma(e enforceable, /ustifiable, or la3ful by /u"icial or legislati)e sanction.

Rele!ance isn’t eno%gh—onl& a p"ecise an li)ite "e$ c"eates eli#e"ation on apoint of )%t%al iffe"enceStein#e"g - F"eele& ;Austin J. &reeley is a esol)e"% That t3o #lus t3o e@uals four,7 because there is sim#ly no contro)ersy aboutthis statement. Contro)ersy is an essential #rere@uisite of "ebate. 6here there is no clash of i"eas,#ro#osals, interests, or e4#resse" #ositions on issues, there is no "ebate. 'n a""ition, "ebate cannot #ro"uceeffecti)e "ecisions 3ithout clear i"entification of a @uestion or @uestions to be ans3ere". &ore4am#le, general argument may occur about the broa" to#ic of illegal immigration. Bo3 many illegal immigrants are in the Unite" -tates 6hat is the im#act of illegal immigration an" immigrants on our economy 6hat is their im#act on our communities Do they commit crimes Do they ta(e /obs from American 3or(ers Do they #ay

ta4es Do they re@uire social ser)ices 's it a #roblem that some "o not s#ea( English 's it the res#onsibility ofem#loyers to "iscourage illegal immigration by not hiring un"ocumente" 3or(ers -houl" they ha)e theo##ortunity* to gain citi8enshi# Docs illegal immigration #ose a security threat to our country Do illegal immigrants "o

3or( that American 3or(ers are un3illing to "o Are their rights as 3or(ers an" as human beings at ris( "ue totheir status Are they abuse" by em#loyers, la3 enforcement, housing, an" businesses ' lo3 are their families im#acte" by their

status 6hat is the moral an" #hiloso#hical obligation of a nation state to maintain its bor"ers -houl" 3e buil" a 3all onthe Me4ican bor"er, establish a national i"entification can, or enforce e4isting la3s against em#loyers -houl" 3e in)iteimmigrants to become U.-. citi8ens -urely you can thin( of many more concerns to be a""resse" by acon)ersation about the to#ic area of illegal immigration. Partici#ation in this 7"ebate7 is li(ely to

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/legalize.htmlhttp://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/legalize.html


4/28

be emotional an" intense. Bo3e)er, it is not li(ely to be #ro"ucti)e or useful 3ithout focus on apa"tic%la" /%estion an" i"entification of a line e)a"cating sies in the contro)ersy . To be"iscusse" an" resol)e" effecti)ely, contro)ersies must be state" clearly . ague un"erstan"ing results inunfocuse" "eliberation an" #oor "ecisions, frustration, an" emotional "istress, as e)i"ence" by the failureof the Unite" -tates Congress to ma(e #rogress on the immigration "ebate "uring the summerof 0FFG.

-omeone "isturbe" by the #roblem of the gro3ing un"erclass of #oorly e"ucate", socially"isenfranchise" youths might obser)e, 7Public schools are "oing a terrible /ob They are o)ercro3"e",an" many teachers are #oorly @ualifie" in their sub/ect areas. E)en the best teachers can "o little more than struggle to maintainor"er in their classrooms.7 That same concerne" citi8en, facing a com#le4 range of issues, might arri)e at an unhel#ful "ecision,

such as 76e ought to "o something about this7 or. 3orse. 7'tHs too com#licate" a #roblem to "eal 3ith.7 !rou#s of concerne"citi8ens 3orrie" about the state of #ublic e"ucation coul" /oin together to e4#ress theirfrustrations, anger, "isillusionment, an" emotions regar"ing the schools, but 3ithout a focus for their"iscussions, they coul" easily agree about the sorry state of e"ucation 3ithout fin"ing #oints ofclarity or #otential solutions. A gri#e session 3oul" follo3 .


5/28

most cases, ho3e)er, our agreements are highly im#erfect. 6e agree on some matters but not on others, on generalities butnot on s#ecifics , on #rinci#les but not on their a##lications, an" so on. An" this (in" of li)iteag"ee)ent is the sta"ting conition of contest an" e#ate. As John Courtney Murray 3rites% 6e hol" certain truthstherefore 3e can argue about them. 't seems to ha)e been one of the corru#tions of intelligence by #ositi)ism to assume that argument en"s 3hen agreement is reache". 'n a

basic sense, the re)erse is true. There can be no argument e4ce#t on the #remise, an" 3ithin a conte3t4 of ag"ee)ent.Murray +NF, +FO 'n other 3or"s, 3e cannot argue about something if 3e are not communicating% if 3e cannot

agree on the to#ic an" terms of argument or if 3e ha)e utterly "ifferent i"eas about 3hat countsas e)i"ence or goo" argument. At the )ery least, 3e must agree about 3hat it is that is being "ebate" before 3ecan "ebate it. &or instance,one cannot ha)e an argument about euthanasia 3ith someone 3ho thin(seuthanasia is a musical grou#. Ine cannot successfully stage a sit*in if oneHs target au"iencesim#ly thin(s e)eryone is resting or if those "oing the sitting ha)e no com#laints. 5or can one "emonstrate resistance to a #olicy if no one (no3s thatit is a #olicy. 'n other 3or"s, contest is meaningless if there is a lac( of agreement or communication about

3hat is being conteste". >esisters, "emonstrators, an" "ebaters must ha)e some share" i"easabout the sub/ect an"9or the terms of their "isagreements. The #artici#ants an" the target of asit*in must share an un"erstan"ing of the com#laint at han". An" a "emonstratorHs au"ience must (no3 3hat is beingresiste". 'n short, the contesting of an i"ea #resumes some agreement about 3hat that i"ea is an" ho3 one might go about intelligibly contesting it. 'n other 3or"s,

contestation rests on some basic agreement or harmony. The #oint may seem trite, as surely the ambiguists 3oul" agree that basic terms must be share" before they can be resiste" an" #roblemati8e". 'n fact, they are often )ery can"i"about this seeming #ara"o4 in their a##roach% the #ara"o4ical or 7#arasitic7 nee" of the sub)ersi)e for an or"er to sub)ert.


6/28

,. Vote neg—

1. 5"ep an clash—post facto topic change alte"s #alance of p"ep4 *hichst"%ct%"all& fa!o"s the aff #eca%se the& spea+ last an %se pe")s—+e& to engage ap"epa"e a!e"sa"& an a ta"get of )%t%al contestation.

2. Li)its—specific topics a"e +e& to "easona#le e3pectations fo" 2Ns—opens%#(ects c"eate incenti!es fo" a!oiance an )onopoli$ation of )o"al high g"o%n—that enies a "ole fo" the neg an t%"ns accessi#ilit&.

De#ating an "esea"ching go!e"n)ent polic& oes not ent"ench a %ni!e"salstana" of )ale s%#(ecthoo4 #%t "ef%sal on those g"o%ns i"onicall& oes6anotti4 1' QLaura, associate #rofessor of Political -cience at irginia Tech., Ph.D. from theUni)ersity of 6ashington in 0FF an" /oine" the Pur"ue Uni)ersity faculty in 0FF.!o)ernmentality, Intology, Metho"ology% >e*thin(ing Political Agency in the !lobal 6orl",originally #ublishe" online 2F December 0F+2, DI'% +F.++GG9F2F$2G?$+2?+0F, P. -agePublicationsR

Unli(e #ositions that a"o#t go)ernmentality as a "escri#ti)e tool an" en" u# embracing the liberal substantialist ontological assum#tions an"

e#istemological frame3or( they critici8e, #ositions that embrace an intra*agential or relationalO ontology, maintain that nothing SSis bute!e"&thing is )ae *ithin specific p"actices. Go!e"n)entalit& as a "esea"chp"og"a) that e3plo"es 77the p"esent as )%ltipl& constit%te, #olytem#oral . . . an" recombinatory . . .an" not /ust the e4#ression of a singular logic or the resultant of a linear #rocessN+ has an im#ortant role to#lay as a metho"ology of in@uiry that brings to the foregroun" the techni/%es th"o%gh

*hich po*e" is p"acticall& enacte, the ambiguity embe""e" in its #ractices, an" the )arious tactics forunsettling it that become #ossible in the conte4t of multifarious #olitical encounters.


7/28

bet3een SSsame an" SSnot @uite that can be a##ro#riate" by the subaltern. Mimicry is easily camouflage" as moc(ery, 3ith the colonial sub/ectconse@uently sub)erting or refusing to sim#ly re#eat the masters lessons. 'nstea" of #ro"ucing a controlle" imitation or a manage" res#onse from thenati)e, the ci)ili8ing mission elicits an ans3er bac(, a menacing loo(, a "istorte" an" "isturbing echo.G+ Agency is e4erte" through mo)es that areimbricate" 3ith "iscourses of #o3er but also recogni8e an" @uestion them. 'n this 3ay, uni)ersal claims are unsettle" an" #o3ers #ur#orte" unitymenace". olan"


8/28

liberal #olitical rationalities an" of their interactions 3ith non*liberal #olitical #layers ann%"t%"es a "aical s+epticis) a#o%t ientif&ing %ni!e"sall& goo o" #a acto"s o"a#st"act sol%tions to political p"o#le)s . 'nternational #o3er interacts in com#le4 3ays

3ith "i)erse #olitical s#aces an" 3ithin these s#aces it is a##ro#riate", hybri"i8e", re"escribe", hi/ac(e",an" tin(ere" 3ith. !o)ernmentality as a heuristic foc%ses on pe"fo")ing co)ple3iagnostics of e!ents. 't in)ites historically situate" e4#lorations an" careful "ifferentiations

rather than o)erarching "emoni8ations of SS#o3er, romantici8ations of the SSrebel or the SSthelocal. More broa"ly, theoretical formulations that concei)e the sub/ect in non*substantialist terms an" focus on #rocesses of sub/ectification, on theambiguity of #o3er "iscourses, an" on hybri"i8ation as the terrain for #olitical transformation, o#en 3ays for reconsi"ering #olitical agency beyon" the

"ichotomy of o##ression9rebellion. These alternati)e formulations also foster an ethics of #oliticalengagement, to be continuously ta(en u# through #lural an" uncertain #ractices, that "eman"continuous attention to SS3hat ha##ens instea" of fi4ations on SS3hat ought to be. 2 -uch ethicsof engagement 3oul" not a3ait the re)olution to come or ho#e for a #ristine SSfree"om to beregaine". 'nstea", it 3oul" constantly attem#t to t3ist the 3or(ing of #o3er by #laying 3ith

3hate)er car"s are a)ailable an *o%l "e/%i"e intense p"ocesses of "efle3i!it& on theconse/%ences of political choices. To conclu"e 3ith a famous #hrase by Michel &oucault SSmy #oint is not that e)erything is

ba", but that e)erything is "angerous, 3hich is not e4actly the same as ba". 'f e)erything is "angerous, then 3e al3ays ha)e something to "o. -o my#osition lea"s not to a#athy but to hy#er* an" #essimistic acti)ism.$


9/28

CASE

Thei" conception of ientit& p"es%)es an inte"section of positions f"o) *hich toe)an acco%nta#ilit&—this "ene"ing of the social fiel "ep"o%ces isciplina"&po*e" an loc+s %s into the g"i of positionalit&4 p"e!enting change5%a" 8. Jasbir Puar, #rofessor of 3omens an" gen"er stu"ies at >utgers Uni)ersity, Du(eUni)ersity Press% Durham, 5C an" Lon"on, U, #g. 0++

There is no entity, no i"entity, no /%ee" s%#(ect o" s%#(ect to /%ee", rather @ueernesscoming forth at us from all "irections, screaming its "efiance, suggesting a mo)e f"o)inte"sectionalit& to asse)#lage , an affecti)e conglomeration that recogni8es othercontingencies of belonging mel"ing, fusing, )iscosity, bouncingO that might not fall so easily into 3hat issometimes "enote" as "eacti!e co))%nit& fo")ations*i"entity #olitics*by controltheorists. The assemblage, a series of "is#erse" but mutually im#licate" an" messy net3or(s,"ra3s together enunciation an" "issolution, causality an" effect, organic an" nonorganic forces.&or Deleu8e an" !uattari, assemblages are collections of multi#licities%There is no unity to ser)e as a #i)ot in the ob/ect, or to "i)i"e in the sub/ect. There is not e)en the unity to abort inthe ob/ect, or 7return7 in the sub/ect. A multi#licity has neither sub/ect nor ob/ect, only

"eterminations, magnitu"es, an" "imensions that cannot increase in number 3ithout themulti#licity changing in nature the la3s of combination therefore increase as the multi#licity gro3s O.... An assemblageis #recisely this increase in the "imensions of a multi#licity that necessarily changes in nature as it e4#an"s its connections.

The"e a"e no points o" positions .... There are only lines.0+ As oppose to an inte"sectional )oel of i"entity, 3hich #resumes that com#onents*race,class, gen"er, se4uality, nation, age, religion*are se#arable analytics an" can thus be"isassemble", an assemblage is more attune" to inter3o)en forces that merge an" "issi#atetime, s#ace, an" bo"y against linearity, coherency, an" #ermanency .00 'ntersectionality "eman"sthe (no3ing , naming, an" thus sta#ili$ing of ientit& across s#ace an" time, relying on thelogic of e@ui)alence an" analogy bet3een )arious a4es of i"entity an" generating narrati)es of#rogress that "eny the ficti)e an" #erformati)e as#ects of i"entification% you become an i"entity,

yes, but also timelessness 3or(s to consoli"ate the fiction of a seamless stable i"entity in e)ery

s#ace. &urthermore, the stu"y of intersectional i"entities often in)ol)es ta(ing imbricate"i"entities a#art one by one to see ho3 they influence each other, a #rocess that betrays thefoun"ing im#ulse of intersectionality, that i"entities cannot so easily be clea)e". 6e can thin( ofintersectionality as a hermeneutic of #ositionality that see(s to account for locality, s#ecificity, #lacement, /unctions. As a toolof i!e"sit& )anage)ent an a )ant"a of li#e"al )%ltic%lt %"alis)4 intersectionalitycoll%es *ith the isciplina"& appa"at%s of the state* census, "emogra#hy, racial#rofiling, sur)eillance* in that 7"ifference7 is encase" 3ithin a structural container that sim#ly

3ishes the )essiness of ientit& into a formulaic gri", #ro"ucing analogies in its 3a(e an"engen"ering 3hat Massumi names 7gri"loc(7% a 7bo4QingR into its site on the culture ma#.7 Beelaborates%

The iea of positionalit& begins by subtracting mo)ement from the #icture. This catches the bo"y in cultural free8e*frame. The #oint of e4#lanatory "e#arture is a #in*#ointing, a 8ero #ointof stasis. 6hen #ositioning of any (in" co)es a "etermining fi"st4 )o!e)ent co)es a

p"o#le)atic secon.... If course, a bo"y occu#ying one #osition on the gri" might succee" inma(ing a mo)e to occu#y another #osition....


10/28

mo)ement, for flo3, for socialO change. Bighlighting the 7#ara"o4es of #assage an" #osition,7Massumi ma(es the case for i"entity a##earing as such only in retros#ect% a 7retros#ecti)eor"ering7 that can only be 73or(ing bac(3ar"s from the mo)ementHs en".7 Again from Massumi%7!en"er, race an" se4ual orientation also emerge an" bac(*form their reality , ... !ri"s ha##en. Sosocial an c%lt%"al ete")inations fee #ac+ into the p"ocess f"o) *hich the&a"ose . 'n"eterminacy an" "etermination, change an" free8e*framing, go together.70$

The phallocent"ic econo)& 0"iga"a& c"iti/%es is less sta#le an %nita"& than the&ass%)e—the st"%ct%"alist %ne"pinnings of the 1ac p"e!ent an& positi!e notion of

#eco)ing. Di#s on that g"o%n.,%tle" 99 QJu"ith, !en"er Trouble, e"ition #ublishe" +, >outle"ge% 5e3 or(, 5, #. 2G*$2R

The feminist a##ro#riation of se4ual "ifference , 3hether 3ritten in o##osition to the #hallogocentrismof Lacan 'rigaray O or as a critical reelaboration of Lacan, attem#ts to theori8e the feminine, not as ane4#ression of the meta#hysics of substance, but as the unre#resentable absence effecte" by masculineO "enialthat groun"s the signifying economy through e4clusion.The feminine as the re#u"iate"9e4clu"e" 3ithin that system constitutes the

#ossibility of a criti@ue an" "isru#tion of that hegemonic conce#tual scheme.The 3or(s of Jac@ueline >ose$ an" Jane!allo#?F un"erscore in "ifferent 3ays the constructe" status of se4ual "ifference, the inherent instability ofthat construction, an" the "ual conse@uentiality of a #rohibition that at once institutes a se4ual i"entity an"#ro)i"es for the e4#osure of that constructions tenuous groun". Although 6ittig an" other materialistfeminists 3ithin the &rench conte4t 3oul" argue that se4ual "ifference is an unthin(ing re#lication of a reifie" set of se4e" #olarities,

these criticisms neglect the critical "imension of the unconscious 3hich, as a site of re#resse"se4uality, reemerges 3ithin the "iscourse of the sub/ect as the )ery i)possi#ilit& of itscohe"ence. As >ose #oints out )ery clearly, the construction of a coherent se4ual i"entity along the"is/uncti)e a4is of the feminine9masculine is boun" to fail?+ the "isru#tions of this coherence through theina")ertent reemergence of the re#resse" re)eal not only that i"entity is constructe", but that the #rohibition that constructs

i"entity is inefficacious :the pate"nal la* o%ght to #e %ne"stoo not as a ete")inistici!ine *ill4 #%t as a pe"pet%al #%)#le"4 p"epa"ing the g"o%n fo" the ins%""ectionsagainst hi);. The "ifferences bet3een the materialist an" Lacanian an" #ost* LacanianO #ositionsemerge in a normati)e @uarrel o)er 3hether there is a retrie)able se4uality either before or

outsi"e the la3 in the mo"e of the unconscious or after the la3 as a #ostgenital se4uality. Para"o4ically, the normati)etro#e of #olymor#hous #er)ersity is un"erstoo" to characteri8e both )ie3s of alternati)e se4uality. There is noagreement, ho3e)er, on the manner of "elimiting that la3 or set of la3s. The #sychoanalytic criti@uesuccee"s in gi)ing an account of the construction of the sub/ect1an" #erha#s also the illusion of substance13ithin the matri4 ofnormati)e gen"er relations. 'n her e4istential*materialist mo"e,6ittig #resumes the sub/ect, the #erson, to ha)e a #resocial an"

#regen"ere" integrity. In the other han", the #aternal La3 in Lacan, as 3ell as the monologic mastery of#hallogocentrism in 'rigaray, bear the mar( of a monotheistic singularity that is #erha#s less%nita"& an" culturally %ni!e"sal than the g%iing st"%ct%"alist ass%)ptions of theaccount p"es%)e.?0


11/28

ina")ertently mobili8e #ossibilities of sub/ects that "o not merely e4cee" the boun"s ofcultural intelligibility , but effecti)ely e4#an" the boun"aries of 3hat is, in fact, culturally intelligible.The feminist norm of a #ostgenital se4uality became the ob/ect of significant criticism from feminist theorists of se4uality, some of

3hom ha)e sought a s#ecifically feminist an"9or lesbian a##ro#riation of &oucault. This uto#ian notion of a se4ualityfree" from heterose4ual constructs, a se4uality #e&on ose, can be e4#ose" as #hantasmatic, thenit must be #ossible to enact an i"entification that "is#lays its #hantasmatic structure. 'f there is no ra"ical re#u"iation of a culturally

constructe" se4uality, 3hat is left is the @uestion of ho3 to ac(no3le"ge an" "o the construction one is in)ariably in. A"ethe"e fo")s of "epetition that o not constit%te a si)ple i)itation , re#ro"uction, an", hence,consoli"ation of the la3 the anachronistic notion of male i"entification that ought to be "iscar"e" from a feminist )ocabularyO

6hat #ossibilities of gen"er configurations e4ist among the )arious emergent an" occasionallycon)ergent matrices of cultural intelligibility that go)ern gen"ere" life 6ithin the terms of feminist se4ual theory, it isclear that the #resence of #o3er "ynamics 3ithin se4uality is in no sense the same as the sim#le consoli"ation or augmentation of a

heterose4ist or #hallogocentric #o3er regime. The #resence of so*calle" heterose4ual con)entions 3ithinhomose4ual conte4ts as 3ell as the #roliferation of s#ecifically gay "iscourses of se4ual "ifference, asin the case of butch an" femme as historical i"entities of se4ual style, cannot be e4#laine" as chimericalre#resentations of originally heterose4ual i"entities. An" neither can they be un"erstoo" as the #ernicious insistence ofheterose4ist constructs 3ithin gay se4uality an" i"entity. The re#etition of heterose4ual constructs 3ithin se4ualcultures both gay an" straight may 3ell be the ine)itable site of the "enaturali8ation an"mobili8ation of gen"er categories. The re#lication of heterose4ual constructs in non*heterose4ualframes brings into relief the utterly constructe" status of the so*calle" heterose4ual original.Thus, ga& is tost"aight not as cop& is to o"iginal4 #%t4 "athe"4 as cop& is to cop& . The #aro"ic re#etition of theoriginal, "iscusse" in the final sections of cha#ter 2 of this te4t, re)eals the original to be nothing other than a #aro"y of the i"ea of


12/28

the natural an" the original.?N E)en if heterose4ist constructs circulate as the a)ailable sites of#o3er9"iscourse from 3hich to "o gen"er at all, the @uestion remains% 6hat #ossibilities ofrecirculation e4ist 6hich #ossibilities of "oing gen"er re#eat an" "is#lace through hy#erbole, "issonance,internal confusion, an" p"olife"ation the !e"& const"%cts #& *hich the& a"e )o#ili$e? Consi"er not only that the ambiguities an" incoherences 3ithin an" among heterose4ual, homose4ual, an"

bise4ual #ractices are su##resse" an" re"escribe" 3ithin the reifie" frame3or( of the "is/uncti)e an" asymmetrical binary of

masculine9feminine, but that these cultural configurations of gen"er confusion o#erate as sites for inter)ention, e4#osure, an""is#lacement of these reifications. 'n other 3or"s, the unity of gen"er is the effect of a regulatory#ractice that see(s to ren"er gen"er i"entity uniform through a com#ulsory heterose4uality . Theforce of this #ractice is, through an e4clusionary a##aratus of #ro"uction, to restrict the relati)e meanings of heterose4uality,

homose4uality, an" bise4uality as 3ell as the sub)ersi)e sites of their con)ergence an" resignification. That the #o3erregimes of heterose4ism an" #hallogocentrism see( to augment themsel)es through a constant "epetition of thei" logic, their meta#hysic, an" their naturali8e" ontologies "oes not im#ly that re#etitionitself ought to be sto##e"1as if it coul" be. 'f re#etition is boun" to #ersist as the mechanism of the culturalre#ro"uction of i"entities, then the crucial @uestion emerges% 6hat (in" of sub)ersi)e re#etitionmight call into @uestion the regulatory #ractice of i"entity itself 'f there is no recourse to a #erson, a se4, or ase4uality that esca#es the matri4 of #o3er an" "iscursi)e relations that effecti)ely #ro"uce an" regulate theintelligibility of those conce#ts for us, 3hat constitutes the #ossibility of effecti)e in)ersion, sub)ersion, or"is#lacement 3ithin the terms of a constructe" i"entity 6hat #ossibilities e4ist by )irtue of the constructe" character of se4an" gen"er 6hereas &oucault is ambiguous about the #recise character of the regulatory #ractices that #ro"uce the category ofse4, an" 6ittig a##ears to in)est the full res#onsibility of the construction to se4ual re#ro"uction an" its instrument, com#ulsory

heterose4uality, yet other "iscourses con)erge to #ro"uce this categorial fiction for reasons notal3ays clear or consistent 3ith one another. The #o3er relations that infuse the biologicalsciences are not easil& "e%ce, an" the me"icolegal alliance emerging in nineteenth*century Euro#e has spa*ne catego"ial fictions that co%l not #e anticipate in a")ance. The )ery com#le4ity of the "iscursi)e ma# that constructs gen"er a##ears to hol" out the #romise of anina")ertent an" generati)e con)ergence of these "iscursi)e an" regulatory structures. 'f theregulatory fictions of se4 an" gen"er are themsel)es multi#ly conteste" sites of meaning, then the )ery)%ltiplicit& of their construction hols o%t the possi#ilit& of a is"%ption of their uni)ocal#osturing.

Vote neg e!en if the 1AC is t"%e. Thei" clai)s a"e pa"t of a *ill to t"%th that fi3es

s%#(ects in place an ena#les the logic of the *a" on te""o". Asse)#lages a"e ap"io" /%estion #eca%se the& constit%te the fiel of e)e"gence fo" s%#(ecti!ities.5%a" 8. Jasbir, #rofessor of 3omens an" gen"er stu"ies at >utgers Uni)ersity, Du(e Uni)ersity Press% Durham, 5C an" Lon"on, U, #g. 0+$

Lin(e" to this is 3hat Massumi calls 7ontogenetic "ifference7 or 7ontogenetic #riority,7 a conce#tthat rescri#ts tem#orality e4terior to the sheer a"ministrati)e units that are mobili8e" to ca#turethe other3ise unruly #rocesses of a bo"y %To say that #assage an" in"eterminancy @co)e fi"st@ or 7are #rimary7 is more a statement ofontological #riority than the assertion of a time se@uence. They ha)e ontological #ri)ilege in thesense that they constitute the fiel of e)e"gence, 3hile #ositionings are *hat e)e"ge. Thetric( is to e4#ress that #riority in a 3ay that res#ects the inse#arability an"

contem#oraneousness of the "is/unct "imensions% their ontogenetic "ifference. An" later% 7The fiel" of emergence is not p"e=social . 't is o#en*en"e"ly social. ... Ine of the thingsthat the "imension of change is ontogenetically H#rior toH is thus the )ery "istinction bet3eenin"i)i"ual an" the collecti)e, as 3ell as any gi)en mo"el of their interaction. That interaction is #recisely 3hat ta(esform.7H The gi)en mo"els of interaction 3oul" be these bifurcate" "istinctions bet3een the bo"y an" the social its significationOsuch that the "istinctions "isa##ear. MassumiHs mo)e from ontology being, becomingO to ontogenesis is also rele)ant to ho3 he

"iscusses affect an" cognition an" the #rocesses of the bo"y% 7&ee"bac( an" fee" for3ar", or recursi)ity, ina""ition to con)erting "istance into intensity, fol"s the "imensions of time into each other . Thefiel" of emergence of e4#erience has to be thought of as a s#ace*time continuum, as an


13/28

ontogenetic "imension #rior to the se#arating*out of s#ace an" time. Linear time, li(e #osition*gri""e" s#ace, 3oul" be emergent @ualities of the e)ent of the 3orl"Hs self* relating . 7 0 GThis ontogenetic "imension that is 7#rior7 but not 7#re7 claims its #riorness not throughtem#orality but through its ontological status as that 3hich #ro"uces fiel"s of emergence the#rior an" the emergence are ne)ertheless 7contem#oraneous.7 7Intological #riority7 is a tem#orality an" as#atiali8ation that has yet to be imagine", a #ro#erty more than a boun"e"* ness by s#ace an" time. The ontogenetic "imension thatarticulates or occu#ies multi#le tem#oralities of )ectors an" #lanes is also that 3hich enables an emergent bifurcation of time an"s#ace.

'"entity is one of affect, a capt%"e that #ro#oses 3hat one is by mas(ing its retros#ecti)eor"ering an" thus its ontogenetic "imension* 3hat one 3as* through the guise of an illusoryfuturity% 3hat one is an" 3ill contin%e to #e. Bo3e)er, this is anything but a relay bet3eenstasis an" flu4 #osition is but one "eri)ati)e of systems in constant motion, line" 3ith erratictra/ectories an" unruly #ro/ectiles . 'f the ontogenetic "imensions of affect ren"er affect as #riorto re#resentation *#rior to race, class, gen"er, se4, nation, e)en as these categories might be themost #ertinent ma##ing of or reference bac( to affect itself*ho3 might i"entity*as*retros#ecti)e*or"ering am#lify rather than inhibit #ra4es of #olitical organi8ing 'f 3e transfer our energy , ourturbulence, our momentum from the "efense of the integ"it& of ientit& an" submit instea" to this affecti)ei"eation of i"entity, *hat +ins of political st"ategies4 of @politics of the open en4@@)ight *e %na#ashel& st%)#le %pon? >ather than rehashing the #ros an" cons of i"entity

#olitics, can 3e thin( instea" of affecti)e #oliticsDis#lacing @ueerness as an i"entity or mo"ality that is )isibly, au"ibly, legibly, or tangibly e)i"ent*the seemingly @ueer bo"y in a 7cultural free8e*frame7 of sorts*assemblages allo3 us to attune tomo)ements, intensities, emotions, energies, affecti)ities, an" te4tures as they inhabit e)ents,s#atiality, an" cor#orealities. 'ntersectionality #ri)ileges naming, )isuality, e#istemology, re#resentation,an" meaning, 3hile asse)#lage un"erscores feeling, tactility, ontology, affect, an" information. &urther,in the s3ay from "isci#linary societies 3here the #ano#tic 7functione" #rimarily in terms of#ositions, fi4e" #oints, an" i"entities7O to control societies, the "iagram of control , Michael Bar"t 3rites, is 7oriente" to3ar" mobility an" anonymity . . . . The fle4ible an" mobile #erformances ofcontingent i"entities, an" thus its assemblages or institutions are elaborate" #rimarily throughre#etition an" the #ro"uction of simulacra. 70 Asse)#lages a"e th%s c"%cial concept%altools that allo3 us to ac(no3le"ge an" com#rehen" #o3er #e&on isciplina"& "eg%lato"&

)oels , 3here 7#articles, an" not #arts, recombine, 3here forces, an" not categories, clash. 72FMost im#ortant, gi)en the heightene" "eath machine as#ect of nationalism in our contem#orary #olitical terrain*a heightene"sensorial an" anatomical "omination in"is#ensable to MbembeHs necro#olitics*assemblages 3or( against narrati)esof U.-. e4ce#tionalism that secure em#ire, challenging the fi4ity of racial an" se4ual ta4onomiesthat inform #ractices of state sur)eillance an" control an" #ef%ling the @%s !e"s%s the)@of the 3ar on terror. In a more cynical note, the recent 3or( of Eyal 6ei8man on the use of the #hiloso#hy of !illes Deleu8e,&eli4 !uattari, an" !uy Debor" by the 'sraeli Defense &orces "emonstrates that 3e cannot affor" to ignore conce#ts such as 3ar

machines an" machinic assemblages, as they are alrea"y hea)ily culti)ate" as instructi)e tactics in military strategy.O Fo" *hileinte"sectionalit& an its %ne"pinnings= an %n"elenting episte)ological *ill tot"%th= #resu##oses i"entity an" thus "isa)o3s futurity, or , #erha#s more accurately, #rematurelyantici#ates an" thus fi4es a #ermanence to fore)er, assemblage, in its "ebt to ontology an" its es#ousalof 3hat cannot be (no3n, seen, or hear", or has yet to be (no3n, seen, or hear", allo*s fo"

#eco)ing beyon" or 3ithout being.20

hite )ale s%p"e)ac& f%nctions not th"o%gh e3cl%sion4 #%t an a#st"act )achineof facialit&. Dialectics an pheno)enolog& fail #eca%se theo"i$ing one’s position in"elation to the o)inant face is al*a&s an i)plicit concession to po*e"Salanha B8. Arun -al"anha, #rofessor of geogra#hy at the Uni)ersity of Minnesota,Psyche"elic 6hite% !oa Trance an" the iscosity of >ace, Uni)ersity of Minnesota Press%Minnea#olis, M5, #g. +$


14/28


15/28

Salanha 8. Arun -al"anha, #rofessor of geogra#hy at the Uni)ersity of Minnesota,Psyche"elic 6hite% !oa Trance an" the iscosity of >ace, Uni)ersity of Minnesota Press%Minnea#olis, M5, #g. +

'n no real sense "i" the hi##ies become 'n"ians or #oor blac(s, or p"ostit%tes or tram#s1 oronly in a guilty "isingenuous sense1 but they foun" their o3n significance in 3hat they too(

these grou#s to be % a significance to be un"erstoo" against the "ominant society an" 3ithres#ect to their o3n s#ecial a3areness, says the ethnogra#her Paul 6illis. ++ -eeing blac(s, Me4icans, an" 'n"ians asmore authentic, because relati)ely untouche" by mainstream 3hite mo"ernity, the counterculture transforme" 3hitemo"ernity by a##ro#riating some of that authenticity . ecall the #ro#osition of >achel A"ams an"

Leslie &ie"ler of a##ro#riating frea( as a critical category% Q&Rrea(s cannot be neatl& aligne 3ith any#articular i"entity or i"eological #osition. >ather, frea( is ty#ically use" to connote the absenceof any (no3n category of i"entity....' am "ra3n to frea( because, li(e @ueer, it is a conce#t that"ef%ses the logic of ientit& politics, an" the i""econcila#le #roblems of incl%sion ane3cl%sion that necessarily acco)pan& ientita"ian catego"ies. +0 A true f"ea+ing of

*hiteness 3oul" gras# its lines of flight not for fascism but for a future 3here #aler *s(inne" bo"ies ha)e no #ri)ilege" access to economic an" cultural ca#ital an" to ha##iness. &rea(ing 3hiteness is #roblem*base" , coalition*le", an" self*critical it 3oul" try to un"erstan" 3hat bio#hysical an" technological forces subten" it com#uters, B', floo"s, ra"iationO. Bumanisman" cosmo #olitanism are se)erely limite" if the struggle against racism is "efine" onl& inh%)an te")s.-o% race shoul" not be aban"one" or abolishe", #%t p"olife"ate . >aces energies are then

"irecte" at )%ltipl&ing "acial iffe"ences, so as to ren"er them (o&f%ll& cacophonic. 6hat is nee"e" is an affi")ation of "ace’s !i"t%alit& . 6hen racial formations crumble an"mingle li(e this, the "ominance of 3hiteness in the global racial assemblage is un"ermine" asthe faciality machine fin"s it increasingly "ifficult to ta(e hol" of bo"ies. 't is not that e)eryone

becomes com#letely


16/28

3hiteness is no easy tas( . A goo" start for social scientists, ho3e)er, is to ac(no3le"ge the#ersistent materiality of race. 't is im#ortant that the real barriers to mobility an" imaginationthat e4ist in "ifferent #laces be ta(en into account. Cosmo#olitanism has to be in!ente4 noti)pose . Ta(ing res#onsibility an" acti)ism 3ill only follo3 from both un"erstan"ing an"feeling the intensi)e "ifferences that e4ist bet3een many "ifferent (in"s of bo"ies% bet3een aJe3 an" a blac( sol"ier, bet3een a 3oman in the -ahel an" a 3oman on 6all -treet, bet3een a

Peru)ian #easant an" a Chinese /ournalist.

5"eca"it& is the sha"e conition of li!ing )atte"4 s%#(ect as it is to %ne/%alist"i#%tion. Fo"eg"o%ning it is +e& to ispel the e3istential ini!i%alis) of the1AC4 *hich cloa+s the f%nctioning of po*e" an pla&s into "eactiona"& fo"ces** of #osthumanism that isnt tie" to liberal humanist alts**aff ma(es #recariousness into an i"entity, #re)enting any share" conce#tion of ethics**AT% start 3ith anti*human9sla)e – must start 3ith share" #recarity, nothing foun"s us outsi"e struggle to establish bon"s

,%tle" 12. Ju"ith hetoric an"Com#arati)e Literature an" the co"irector of the Program of Critical Theory at the Uni)ersity ofCalifornia, oun"table 3ith Lauren % TheDrama >e)ie3 ?N%$ T0+NO 6inter 0F+0, #g. +N

' thin( it may be im#ortant to (ee# acti)e the relationshi# bet3een the )arious meanings of the#recarious that both 'sabell an" Jasbir ha)e lai" out% +O #recariousness, a function of our social

)ulnerability an" e4#osure that is al3ays gi)en some #olitical form, an" #recarity as"ifferentially "istribute", an" so one im#ortant "imension of the une@ual "istribution ofcon"itions re@uire" for continue" life but also 0O #recariti8ation as an ongoing #rocess, so that

3e "o not re"uce the #o3er of #recarious to single acts or single e)ents. Precariti8ation allo3s usto thin( about the slo3 "eath that ha##ens to ta"gete o" neglecte #o#ulations o)er timean" s#ace. An" it is surely a form of po*e" *itho%t a s%#(ect , 3hich is to say that there is noone center that #ro#els it s "irection an" "estruction. 'f 3e only staye" 3ith #recariti8ation, ' am not sure that 3ecoul" account for the structure of feeling that Lauren has brought u#. An" if 3e "eci"e" to rally un"er the name ofthe #recarious 3e might be ma(ing a social an" #olitical con"ition into an i"entity, an" so

cloa+ing some 3ay that that form of #o3er actually 3or(s. -o maybe #recarious is 3hat 3efeel , or 3oul" rather not feel, an" its analysis has to be lin(e" to the im#etus to #eco)ei)pe")ea#le , as so often ha##ens 3ithin 8ones of military nationalism an" rhetorics ofsecurity an" self*"efense .


17/28

that our #recarity is to a large e4tent "e#en"ent u#on the organi8ation of economic an" socialrelationshi#s, the #resence or absence of sustaining infrastructures an" social an politicalinstit%tions. 'n this sense, #recarity is inissocia#le f"o) that i)ension of politics thata""resses the organi8ation an" #rotection of bo"ily nee"s. Precarity e4#oses our sociality, thefragile an" necessary "imensions of our inter"e#en"ency. 6hether e4#licitly state" or not, e)ery #olitical effort to manage #o#ulations in)ol)es a tactical

"istribution of #recarity, more often than not articulate" through an une@ual "istribution of#recarity, one that "e#en"s u#on "ominant norms regar"ing 3hose life is grie)able an" *o"thp"otecting , an" 3hose life is ungrie)able, or marginally or e#iso"ically grie)able 1 a life thatis, in that sense, alrea"y lost in #art or in 3hole, an" thus less 3orthy of #rotection an"sustenance. 'n my o3n )ie3, then, 3e ha)e to start from this share" con"ition of #recarity not ase4istential fact, but as a social con"ition of #olitical lifeO in or"er to "ef%te those no")ati!eope"ations , #er)asi)ely racist, that "eci"e in a")ance 3ho counts as human an" 3ho "oes not.My #oint is not to "eha#ilitate h%)anis), but rather to struggle for a conce#tion of ethicalobligation that is groun"e" in #recarity. 5o one esca#es the #recarious "imension of social life1 it is, 3e might say, our common non*foun"ation. Nothing %s o%tsie of a st"%ggleto esta#lish #ons that sustain us.


18/28

2NC


19/28

ORR

T%"ns the enti"e case #eca%se it )eans *e ha!e to ontologi$e o%" conition to)a+e sense of the *o"lO"" 1'1ictoria-te)en, '"entity an" Authoritarianism% The


20/28

AT STONE

E!en thei"


21/28

masculinist signifying economy. Although 'rigaray clearly broa"ens the sco#e of feminist criti@ue bye4#osing the e#istemological, ontological, an" logical structures of a masculinist signifying economy , the #o3erof her analysis is %ne"c%t p"ecisel& #& its glo#ali$ing "each . 's it #ossible to i"entify amonolithic as 3ell as a monologic masculinist economy that t"a!e"ses the a""a& of c%lt%"alan histo"ical conte3ts in 3hich se4ual "ifference ta(es #lace 's the failure to ac(no3le"gethe s#ecific cultural o#erations of gen"er o##ression itself a (in" of episte)ological

i)pe"ialis), one 3hich is not ameliorate" by the sim#le elaboration of cultural "ifferences ase4am#les of the selfsame #hallogocentrism The effort to inclu"e Ither cultures as

)ariegate" am#lifications of aglobal #hallogocentrism constitutes an a##ro#riati)e act that ris(sa "epetition of the self=agg"ani$ing gest%"e of #hallogocentrism, coloni8ing un"er thesign of the same those "ifferences that might other3ise call that totali8ing conce#t [email protected] &eminist criti@ue ought to e4#lore the totali8ing claims of a masculinist signifyingeconomy, but also remain self*critical 3ith res#ect to the totali8ing gestures of feminism. Theeffort to i"entify the enemy as sing%la" in fo") is a re)erse*"iscourse that uncritically mimicsthe strategy of the o##ressor instea" of offering a "ifferent set of terms. That the tactic can o#erate infeminist an" antifeminist conte4ts ali(e suggests that the coloni8ing gesture is not #rimarily or i""e%ci#l&)asc%linist. 't can o#erate to effect other relations of racial, class, an" heterose4istsubor"ination, to name but a fe3. An" clearly, listing the )arieties of o##ression , as ' began to "o,

assumes their "iscrete, se@uential coe4istence along a hori8ontal a4is that "oes not "escribe theircon)ergences 3ithin the social fiel". A )ertical mo"el is similarly insufficient o##ressions cannot

be summarily ran(e" , causally relate", "istribute" among #lanes of originality an""eri)ati)eness.0$ 'n"ee", the fiel" of #o3er structure" in #art by the im#eriali8ing gesture of"ialectical app"op"iation e3cees an enco)passes the a3is of se3%al iffe"ence,offering a ma##ing of intersecting "ifferentials 3hich cannot be summarily hierarchi8e" either 3ithin the terms of #hallogocentrismor any other can"i"ate for the #osition of #rimary con"ition of o##ression. >ather than an e4clusi)e tactic of masculinist signifying

economies, "ialectical a##ro#riation an" su##ression of the Ither is one tactic among many, "e#loye"centrally but not e4clusi)ely in the ser)ice of e4#an"ing an" rationali8ing the masculinist"omain.


22/28

AT 5ERH

H%t%all& e3cl%si!e. F"ea+ing *hiteness th"o%gh a theo"& of )achinic asse)#lagesis a istinct st"ateg& that’s a p"e"e/ to )a+ing sense of the 1AC itself Salanha B8. Arun -al"anha, #rofessor of geogra#hy at the Uni)ersity of Minnesota,Psyche"elic 6hite% !oa Trance an" the iscosity of >ace, Uni)ersity of Minnesota Press%Minnea#olis, M5, #g. 0FF

The multi#lication of race 'm #ro#osing sho%l #e isting%ishe from othe" anti"acistst"ategies. 't is neither anti3hite, nor #ro*'n"ian, nor a sim#le celebration of hybri"ity, normulticultural or uni)ersalist. Machinic antiracism isnt anti3hite because it is a3are that thefrea(y creati)ities of the 3hite racial formation can be use" against 3hite su#remacy. 't "oesntta(e si"es in racial #olitics at all for 'n"ians, for minorities, for the #oor, against the richO but as(s 3hat nee"s toha##en fo" the"e to #e sies at all. Machinism is 3ary of any i"entity #olitics as this ten"s tohie inte"nal fiss%"es of the ientit& it see+s to efen. 'n my case, the resistance against culturalim#erialism in "efense of some !oan i"entity has often been se)erely limite" by a strong Catholic, nostalgic an" mi""le*class bias, as 3ell as

homo#hobia an" conser)ati)e moralism. +? Machinism also a)oi"s the easy re)erence for tra)el an" bricolagefoun" in #ostmo"ernism an" a lot of cultural stu"ies. Mobility an" hybri"i8ation can be goo" or ba". Alac( of cosmo#olitanism cannot be hel" against anyone but must be e4#laine". Bailing the transracial in)enti)eness in consumer tactics har"ly ero"esthe international "i)ision of labor, a")ertising, an" the military*in"ustrial com#le4 that su##ort racial clustering in the first #lace. &inally,

machinism oes not i)pl& multiculturalism or liberal uni)ersalism, because ho#ing forhori8ontal e@uality :


23/28

TIEORJ GOOD

Ie"e’s o%" theo"& goo net #enefit. A!e"sion to )eta=na""ati!es is itself a )eta=na""ati!e4 an a potentiall& Haoist one at that.,o*)an 1B. Paul ea"ing >eyCho3, Postcolonial -tu"ies, ol. +2, 5o. 2, #g. 0$

Thus, Cho3 recasts the in)estments an" orientations of cultural stu"ies, #oststructuralism, an" other #olitici8e" Ssuffi4*stu"ies sub/ects in terms of theunac(no3le"ge" but constituti)e SChinese #re/u"ice, first i"entifie" by -#i)a(. Accor"ing to Cho3, SChina has a multi#le status in 6estern "iscourses,inclu"ing cultural stu"ies. As 3ell as re#resenting, for so long, the Ither of ca#italism, of free"om, of "emocracy, an" so on, SChina has also offere"Sra"ical thought in the 6est a #romissory image of alterity, re)olution, "ifference, alternati)eness, an" hence resistance as such. An", as Cho3 alsoobser)es, one of the most en"uring metanarrati)es that has long organi8e" cultural stu"ies an" cultural theory #lus much more besi"esO is the

"iscourse of Sresistance. S'f there is a metanarrati)e that continues to thri)e in these times of)etana""ati!e #ashing’, argues Cho3, Sit is that of SSresistance% S-el"om "o 3e atten" a conferenceor turn to an article in an aca"emic /ournal of the humanities or the social sciences 3ithoutencountering some call for SSresistance to some such metanarrati)i8e" #o3er as SSglobalca#italism, SS6estern im#erialism, SS#atriarchy, SScom#ulsory heterose4uality, an" soforth.$+The "iscourses of cultural theory an" cultural stu"ies more 3i"ely "o seem to be structure" by (ey3or"s or 3orseO bu883or"s li(e Sresistance,Sstruggle, S"ifference, Shybri"ity an" Smulticulturalism. An" many ha)e inter#rete" this as e)i"ence that such #utati)ely Sra"ical 3or( is, basically,

nothing more than fashionable nonsense.


24/28

S(ee#ing it real. -uch a rationale for the re/ection of "econstruction or in"ee" STheory as suchOis 3i"es#rea".


25/28

"eman" fre@uent reiteration in or"er for cultural stu"ies to retain its critical an" #oliticalim#etus in the current intellectual climate.?0


26/28

1NR


27/28

CONDO GOOD

0t’s goo that *e’"e %nce"tain—negation is a p"ocess of /%estioning that "e/%i"esieological fl%3. e’"e still st%ents fo")ing opinions so it’s conitional ethics4an "e/%i"ing ce"taint& t%"ns caseSholoc+ 12 – Chatham Uni)ersity A"ale, Metho"ology of the Pri)ilege"% 6hite Anti*racist &eminism, -ystematic 'gnorance, an" E#istemic Uncertainty, By#atia olume 0G, 'ssue $, #ages GF+–G+$, 5o)ember 0F+0, "mlO

Bo3e)er, something #rofoun" ha##ens in The Color of &ear that troubles the e#istemological arrogancean" self*"ece#tion that e#itomi8e normati)e 3hiteness. Da)i" frustrates e)eryone to the #oint 3here ictorLe3is, an African American man in the grou#, finally loses his #atience an" lashes out in anger at Da)i"Hs 3illful ignorance. This is aclimactic moment in the film an" one that ' fin" instructi)e to 3hite anti*racist efforts both feminist an" other3ise. Lee Mun 6ah,the filmma(er an" facilitator of the "iscussion, gently but s(illfully as(s Da)i" 3hat is (ee#ing him from belie)ing ictorHs claimsabout #er)asi)e racism% -o 3hat 3oul" it mean Da)i", then, if life really 3as that harsh 6hat if the 3orl" 3as not as you thought,that Qracial in/usticeR is actually ha##ening to lots of human beings on this earth Be continues, 6hat if he (ne3 his reality betterthan you 6hat then occurs is best "escribe" as a lightbulb moment% Da)i" says 3ith uncharacteristic thoughtfulness, Ih, thatHs )ery sa""ening. ou "onHt 3ant to belie)e that man can be so cruel to himself an" his o3n (in". Da)i"Hs comment startlingly echoes

3hat James


28/28

ARHSTRONG

5%"e c"eati!it& "e/%i"es the e3istence of const"aints=== "etaining so)e eg"ee ofp"eicta#ilit& ena#les c"eati!it& *ithin those const"aints *itho%t p"e=sc"iptinge!e"& e#atePaul A")st"ong 2+ , Professor of English an" Dean of the College of Arts an" -ciences at the-tate Uni)ersity of 5e3 or( at -tony

Michigan Pappas Allen Neg USC Octas (1)

Documents

Transcript of Michigan Pappas Allen Neg USC Octas (1)