Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
1NC - Privacy
Turn- morality undercuts political responsibility leading to
political failures and greater evils
Isaac 2
Jeffrey C. Isaac, James H. Rudy Professor of Political Science and Director of the Center
for the Study of Democracy and Public Life at Indiana University-Bloomington, 2002
(Ends, Means, and Politics, Dissent, Volume 49, Issue 2, Spring, Available Online to
Subscribing Institutions via EBSCOhost, p. 35-37)
As writers such as Niccolo Machiavelli, Max Weber, Reinhold Niebuhr, and 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 ones intention does not ensure the achievement of what one
intends. Abjuring violence or refusing to make common cause with morally
compromised 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 . [end page 35] This
is why, from the standpoint of politicsas opposed to religionpacifism 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 ones 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 .
deny ourselves some (and perhaps a lot) of the benefits big data because the
costs to privacy and related values are just too high . We have to stop the
slide away from privacy, he says, not because privacy is profitable or
efficient, but because it is moral. But as Schneier also recognizes, privacy is not a static
moral concept. Our personal definitions of privacy are both cultural and situational, he acknowledges.
Consumers are voting with their computer mice and smartphones for more digital goods in exchange for more personal
data. The culture increasingly accepts the giveaway of personal information
for the benefits of modern computerized life. This trend is not new. The idea that
privacy cant be invaded at all is utopian, says Professor Charles Fried of Harvard Law School.
There are amounts and kinds of information which previously were not given out and suddenly they have to be given out.
People adjust their behavior and conceptions accordingly. That is Fried in the 1970 Newsweek story, responding to an
earlier generations panic about big data and data mining . The same point applies today, and will
apply as well when the Internet of things makes todays data mining seem as
quaint as 1970s-era computation.
the right to privacy trumps even the right to lifesomething that seems
quite implausible from an intuitive point of view. If I have to give up the most private
piece of information about myself to save my life or protect myself from either grievous
bodily injury or financial ruin, I would gladly do so without hesitation. There are many
things I do not want you to know about me, but should you make a credible
threat to my life, bodily integrity, financial security, or health, and then hook me up to a lie detector machine, I
will truthfully answer any question you ask about me. I value my privacy a
lot, but I value my life, bodily integrity, and financial security much more than any of the
interests protected by the right to privacy.
[In Praise of Big Brother: Why We Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love Government
Surveillance; James Stacey Taylor; Public Affairs Quarterly Vol. 19, No. 3 (Jul., 2005),
pp. 227-246 Published by: University of Illinois Press on behalf of North American
Philosophical Publications Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40441413] //duff
A system of constant State surveillance would have other advantages, too. Under the current criminal
justice system a wealthy defendant who is innocent of the charges that she is
faced with can use her wealth to hire private investigators to demonstrate
her innocence, either by finding persons who witnessed the crime of which she is accused, or by finding persons
who can provide her with a legitimate alibi. This option is not open to poorer defendants
who are similarly innocent, but who cannot afford to hire private
investigators. Since this is so, innocent, poor defendants are more likely than
innocent, wealthy defendants to accept plea bargains, or to be convicted of
crimes that they did not commit. If, however, a poor person were to be accused of a crime in a
State that subjected its citizens to constant surveillance, the judge in her
case would be morally justified (indeed, would be morally required) in enabling the
defense to secure information that would prove her innocence, and that
would have been gathered by the State's surveillance devices. A State's use of
constant surveillance could thus reduce the number of persons who are
wrongfully convicted. This would not only be good in itself, but it would also lead to a more
equitable justice system, for the disparity in wrongful conviction rates
between the wealthy (who could use their wealth to prove their innocence) and the poor could be
eliminated.
transparency. He highlights, amongst other points, the fact that privacy as we know it today is a relatively new
form of coexistence, and one that has not only been advantageous. The private sphere has, for the longest
time, been the place of the oppression of women , for example. Contrast this with the gay
rights movements, which were among the first to show how social progress can
data can be used and abused, by anyone, at any time, for any purpose. In this sense, post-privacy as a
strategy complies well with Nassim Nicholas Talebs dictum of antifragility. Post-privacy is a practical
exercise in stoicism: basing your assumptions on the worst case scenario in
this case, that all information is public by default will not give you a false sense of security,
but rather will allow you to make plans in such a way that, should this worst
case actually occur, you will not be confronted with unsolvable problems. If
you keep in mind that all data is accessible, in one way or another, this can
actually reduce anxiety one of the more negative effects of surveillance.
They dont even have an impact to democracy, but five reasons democracy
re-entrench inequality
McElwee 14 (Five Reasons Why Democracy Hasn't Fixed Inequality,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sean-mcelwee/five-reasons-whydemocrac_b_5858160.html)//A.V.
One of the most longstanding hopes (on the left) and fears (on the right)
about democratic politics is that voters of modest means will use their
electoral weight to level the economic playing field . In a market economy, the median
voter's income will invariably be below the national average creating an apparently compelling opportunity for a politics of
redistribution. This makes the sustained increase in income inequality in the
United States and other developed countries a bit of a puzzle. One common
suggestion, offered recently by Eduardo Porter in The New York Times, is ignorance. Voters "don't grasp how deep
inequality is." But while Americans' understanding of economic trends is certainly imperfect, the data suggest that the
broad trends are known to the population. Nathan Kelly and Peter Enns, for instance, find that when asked to compare the
ratio of the highest paid occupation and the lowest, Americans at the bottom of the income distribution do believe
inequality is high and rising. In 1987, Americans as reported that the highest-paid occupation took home 20 times what
the lowest paid occupation did - by 2000, they thought the gap had grown to 74 times. A recent Pew survey finds that 65%
of adults agree that the gap between the rich and everyone else has increased in the past 10 years, only 8% say it has
decreased. A Gallup poll from earlier this year suggests that 67% of Americans report that they are either "somewhat" or
"very" dissatisfied with the income and wealth distribution in the U.S. If ignorance doesn't explain
inaction, what does? These five factors are the most important culprits: 1)
Upward mobility According to research from Carina Engelhardt and
Andreas Wagner, around the world people overestimate the level of upward
mobility in their society. They find that redistribution is lower then when actual social mobility is but also
lower where perceived mobility is higher. Even if voters perceive the level of inequality
correctly, their tendency to overstate the level of mobility can undermine
support for redistribution. In another study Alberto Alesina and Eliana La Ferrara find that, Americans
who believe that American society offers equal opportunity (a mythology) are more likely to oppose redistribution.
Using data from 33 democracies, Elvire Guillaud finds that those who
believe they have experienced downward mobility in the past decade are
32% more likely to support redistribution. A relatively strong literature now
supports this thesis. 2) Inequality undermines solidarity Enns and Kelly
find, rather counterintuitively, that when "inequality in America rises, the
public responds with increased conservative sentiment." That is, higher
inequality leads to less demand for redistribution. This is perhaps because
as society becomes less equal, its members have less in common and find it
less congenial to act in solidarity. Bo Rothstein and Eric Uslaner argue that, "the best policy response
to growing inequality is to enact universalistic social welfare programs. However, the social strains stemming from
increased inequality make it almost impossible to enact such policies." As inequality increases, the
winner-take-all economy leads voters try to look out for their own children.
The period during which overall inequality has risen has seen a massive
increase in more affluent families' spending on enrichment for their own
children. Chris Dillow points to research by Klaus Abbink, David Masclet and Daniel Mirza who find in social
science experiments that disadvantaged groups are more likely to sacrifice their wealth to reduce the wealth of the
advantaged group when inequality was lower than when it was higher. Kris-Stella Trump finds that
Research by five political scientists finds that status quo bias of America's
often-gridlocked congress serves to entrench inequality. More simply,
lower-income Americans tend to vote at a lower rate. William Franko,
Nathan Kelly and Christopher Witko find that states with lower turnout
inequality also have lower income inequality. Elsewhere, Franko finds that states with wider
turnout gaps between the rich and poor are less likely to pass minimum-wage increases, have weaker anti-predatorylending policies and have less generous health insurance programs for children in low-income families. Kim Hill, Jan
Leighley and Angela Hilton-Andersson find, "an enduring relationship between the degree of mobilization of lower-class
voters and the generosity of welfare benefits." Worryingly, Frederick Solt finds that, " citizens of states with
greater income inequality are less likely to vote and that income inequality
increases income bias in the electorate." That is, as inequality increases, the
poor are less likely to turn out, further exacerbating inequality. 4) Interestgroup politics The decline of labor unions has decreased the political importance of poor voters, because unions
were an important "get-out-the-vote" machine. A recent study by Jan Leighley and Jonathan
Nagler finds that the decline in union strength has reduced low-income and
middle-income turnout. But labor's influence (or lack thereof) is also important when the voting is done.
Research finds that policy outcomes in the United States are heavily mediated by lobbying between interest groups, so
organization matters. Martin Gilens writes, "Given the fact that most Americans
Richeson finds that when white Americans are reminded that the nation is
becoming more diverse, they become more conservative. Dog-whistle
phrases like "welfare queens" have long driven whites to oppose social
safety net programs they disproportionately benefit from. Research from Donald Kinder
and Cindy Kam indicates that racial bias among white voters is strongly correlated with hostility toward means-tested
social assistance programs. Another study by Steven Beckman and Buhong Zhen finds
that blacks are more likely to support redistribution even if their incomes
are far above average and that poor whites are more likely to oppose
redistribution. In other words, a massive public education campaign about
the extent of income inequality is neither necessary nor sufficient to achieve
the kind of redistributive policies liberals favor. The real obstacles to policy
action on inequality are more deeply ingrained in the structure of American
politics, demographics, and interest group coalitions . Insofar as there is a role for better
information to play, it likely relates not to inequality but tosocial mobility which remains widely misperceived and is a
potent driver of feelings about the justice of economic policy. As John Steinbeck noted, "Socialism never took root in
America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires."
Stronger unions, more lower income voter turnout and policies to reduce the corrupting influence of money on the
political process would all work to reduce inequality. It will take political mobilization, not simply voter education to
achieve change. The wonks have interpreted the world; the point, however, is to change it.
2NC Privacy
Morality bad
Privacy needs to be considered in a utilitarian framework to be properly evaluated
weigh it against our impacts
Solove 2Daniel Solove is an Associate Professor at George Washington University Law School
and holds a J.D. from Yale Law School, he is one of the worlds leading expert in information
privacy law and is well known for his academic work on privacy and for popular books on how
privacy relates with information technology, he has written 9 books and more than 50 law review
articles, 2002 (Conceptualizing Privacy, Available online at
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=313103, accessed on 7/17/15)
Thus far, attempts to locate a common denominator for conceptualizing privacy have been
unsatisfying. Conceptions that attempt to locate the core or essence of privacy wind
up being too broad or too narrow. I am not arguing that we must always avoid referring to privacy in the abstract;
sometimes it is easiest and most efficient to do so. Rather, such abstract reference to privacy often
fails to be useful when we need to conceptualize privacy to solve legal and policy
problems. Therefore, it may be worthwhile to begin conceptualizing privacy in a different way. A bottom-up
contextualized approach toward conceptualizing privacy will prove quite fruitful in todays world of rapidly changing
technology. Of course, in advocating a contextual analysis of privacy, the issue remains: At what level of generality should
the contexts be defined? This is a difficult question, and I doubt there is a uniform level of generality that is preferable.
This Article does not recommend that contexts be defined so narrowly as to pertain to only a few circumstances. It is often
useful to define contexts of some breadth, so long as the generalization is not overly reductive or distorting. All
generalization is an imperfection. Focusing on particular contexts and practices is a way
of carving up experience into digestible parts. The human mind simply cannot
examine experience in its chaotic totality: it must bite off pieces to analyze. The way
we conceptualize privacy in each context profoundly influences how we shape legal
solutions to particular problems. We can evaluate the results of our conceptions by looking to how well
they work in solving the problems. Although I critique attempts to locate an overarching conception of privacy, I am
certainly not arguing against endeavors to conceptualize privacy. Conceptualizing privacy in particular contexts is an
essential step in grappling with legal and policy problems. Thus, the issue of how we conceptualize privacy is of paramount
importance for the Information Age, for we are beset with a number of complex privacy problems, causing great
disruption to numerous important practices of high social value. With the method of philosophical inquiry I am
recommending, we can better understand, and thus more effectively grapple with, these emerging problems.
The value of privacy depends on the contextdont buy into their universal
absolutes arguments
Solove 7Daniel Solove, an Associate Professor at George Washington University Law School
and holds a J.D. from Yale Law School, one of the worlds leading expert in information privacy
law and is well known for his academic work on privacy and for popular books on how privacy
relates with information technology, has written 9 books and more than 50 law review articles,
2007 (Ive Got Nothing to Hide and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy, Available online at
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565 , accessed on 7/17/15)
Because privacy involves protecting against a plurality of different harms or problems, the
value of privacy is different depending upon which particular problem or harm is being
protected. Not all privacy problems are equal; some are more harmful than others. Therefore,
we cannot ascribe an abstract value to privacy. Its value will differ substantially
depending upon the kind of problem or harm we are safeguarding against. Thus, to understand
privacy, we must conceptualize it and its value more pluralistically. Privacy is a set of protections against a related set of
problems. These problems are not all related in the same way, but they resemble each other. There is a social value
in protecting against each problem, and that value differs depending upon the
unnecessary goal. I could be persuaded that a radically revised model of practical reasoning based on the Just War
Tradition might have saliency for investigative strategies involving surveillance technologies. However,
Privacy is instrumental and never a moral absoluteits only valued through other
ends
Solove 2Daniel Solove is an Associate Professor at George Washington University Law School
and holds a J.D. from Yale Law School, he is one of the worlds leading expert in information
privacy law and is well known for his academic work on privacy and for popular books on how
privacy relates with information technology, he has written 9 books and more than 50 law review
articles, 2002 (Conceptualizing Privacy, Available online at
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=313103, accessed on 7/17/15)
However, along with other scholars,342 I contend that privacy has an instrumental value namely,
that it is valued as a means for achieving certain other ends that are valuable. As John
Dewey observed, ends are not fixed, but are evolving targets, constantly subject to revision and
change as the individual strives toward them.343 Ends are foreseen consequences which arise in the course of activity
and which are employed to give activity added meaning and to direct its further course.344 In contrast to many
conceptions of privacy, which describe the value of privacy in the abstract, I contend
that there is no overarching value of privacy. For example, theories of privacy have viewed the value of
privacy in terms of furthering a number of different ends. Fried claims that privacy fosters love and friendship. Bloustein
argues that privacy protects dignity and individuality. Boling and Inness claim that privacy is necessary for intimate
human relationships. According to Gavison, privacy is essential for autonomy and freedom. Indeed, there are a
number of candidates for the value of privacy, as privacy fosters self-creation, independence,
autonomy, creativity, imagination, counter-culture, freedom of thought, and reputation. However, no
one of these ends is furthered by all practices of privacy. The problem with
discussing the value of privacy in the abstract is that privacy is a dimension of a wide
variety of practices each having a different valueand what privacy is differs in different
contexts. My approach toward conceptualizing privacy does not focus on the value of privacy generally. Rather,
we must focus specifically on the value of privacy within particular practices .
due to other fac- tors than the corporate drive to use private information for profit making, as one sees with people going
on talk shows to reveal much about themselves, a form of exhibitionism. However, there can be little doubt that
corporations, especially the new social media, led by Facebook, are aiding, abetting, and seeking to legitimate the erosion
of privacy. The Wall Street Journal editorial page, which reflects that publication's philosophy, argues that the change
in norms indicates that the introduction of new laws or regulations to better protect
privacy is not called for.48 L. Gordon Crovitz pointed out that, as ofMarch 2011, more than half of
Americans over age twelve have Facebook accounts.49 He proceeded to ask: "If most
Americans are happy to have Facebook accounts, knowingly trading personal
information for other benefits, why is Washington so focused on new privacy laws?
There is little evidence that people want new rules:so Furthermore, Crovitz argues,
consumers value the benefits of information gathering , including better-targeted ads, specific
recommendations for cus- tomers, and huge troves of data for research, such as in Google Flu Trends, which
tracks search terms about illnesses to assist epidemiologists . " People are
increasingly at ease with sharing personal data in exchange for other benefits ;' he
argues.51
and seemingly intuitive as this concept is, it plainly doesn't work. Everyone agrees
that our privacy has been eroding for a very long time hence the notion of the "surveillance
society" and there is absolutely no indication that the trend is going to slow down, let
alone reverse. Even in the most literal sense, the walls of our castles are being pierced by more and more
connections to the outside world. It started with the telephone, the TV and the Internet, but imagine when your fridge
begins to communicate with your palm pilot, updating the shopping list as you run out of milk, and perhaps even sending
a notice to the grocer for home delivery. Or maybe the stove will alert the fire department because you didn't turn off the
hot plate before rushing out one morning.6 A less futuristic example of this connectivity would be smoke detectors that are
connected to alarm response systems. Outside the home, it becomes even more difficult to avoid
entering into relationships that produce electronic, personal data. Only the most zealous
will opt for standing in line to pay cash at the toll both every day, if they can just breeze through an electronic gate instead.
This problem is made even more complicated by the fact that there are certain cases in which we want "them" to have our
data. Complete absence from databanks is neither practical nor desirable. For
example, it can be a matter of life and death to have instant access to comprehensive
and up-to-date health-related information about the people who are being brought
into the emergency room unconscious. This information needs to be too detailed and needs to be updated too
often for example to include all prescriptiondrugs a person is currently using to be issued on, say, a smartcard held by
the individual, hence giving him or her full control over who accesses it. To make matters worse, with privacy
being by definition personal, every single person will have a different notion about
what privacy means. Data one person might allow to be collected might be deeply personal for someone else.
This makes it very difficult to collectively agree on the legitimate boundaries of the
privacy bubble.
Privacy cant be restored technological and corporate invasions happen all the
time.
Lewis 2014
James Andrew Lewis is a senior fellow and director of the Strategic Technologies Program at the
Center for Strategic and International Studies. Previously, US Departments of State and
Commerce as a Foreign Service officer and as a member of the Senior Executive Service.
Underestimating Risk in the Surveillance Debate - Center For Strategic & International Studies
- Strategic Technologies Program December - http://csis.org/publication/underestimatingrisk-surveillance-debate
On average, there are 16 tracking programs on every website. 4 This means that when you
visit a website, it collects and reports back to 16 companies on what youve looked at
and what you have done. These programs are invisible to the user. They collect IP address, operating
system and browser data, the name of the visiting computer, what you looked at,
and how long you stayed. This data can be made even more valuable when it is matched with other data
collections. Everything a consumer does online is tracked and collected. There is a
thriving and largely invisible market in aggregating data on individuals and then selling
it for commercial purposes. Data brokers collect utility bills, addresses, education, arrest records (arrests, not just
convictions). All of this data is recorded, stored, and made available for sale. Social networking sites sell user data in some
anonymized form so that every tweet or social media entry can be used to calculate market trends and refine advertising
strategies. What can be predicted from this social media data is amazingunemployment trends, disease outbreaks,
consumption patterns for different groups, consumer preferences, and political trends. It is often more accurate than
polling because it reflects peoples actual behavior rather than the answer they think an interviewer wants to hear.
Ironically, while the ability of U.S. agencies to use this commercial data is greatly restricted by law and policy, the same
restrictions do not apply to foreign governments. The development of the Internet would have been very
different and less dynamic if these business models had not been developed. They
Security first
Security comes firstprivacy is never absolute
Himma 7Kenneth Himma, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Seattle Pacific University, holds
JD and PhD and was formerly a Lecturer at the University of Washington in Department of
Philosophy, the Information School, and the Law School, 2007 (Privacy vs. Security: Why
Privacy is Not an Absolute Value or Right, Available online at http://ssrn.com/abstract=994458,
accessed on 7/17/15)
Although an account that enables us to determine when security and privacy come into conflict and when security trumps
privacy would be of great importance if I am correct about the general principle, my efforts in this essay will
have to be limited to showing that the various theories of legitimacy presuppose or entail that, other things being
equal, security is, as a general matter, more important than privacy. Among the moral rights
most people believe deserve legal protection, none is probably more poorly understood than privacy. What exactly privacy
is, what interests it encompasses, and why it deserves legal protection, are three of the most contentious issues in
theorizing about information ethics and legal theory. While there is certainly disagreement about the nature and
importance of other moral rights deserving legal protection, like the right to property, the very concept of privacy is deeply
contested. Some people believe that the various interests commonly characterized as privacy interests have some essential
feature in common that constitutes them as privacy interests; others believe that there is no such feature and that the
concept of privacy encompasses a variety of unrelated interests, some of which deserve legal protection while others do
not Notably, many people tend to converge on the idea that privacy rights, whatever they ultimately
encompass, are absolute in the sense that they may not legitimately be infringed for any
reason. While the various iterations of the USA PATRIOT Act are surely flawed with
respect to their particulars, there are many people who simply oppose, on principle,
even a narrowly crafted attempt to combat terrorism that infringes minimally on
privacy interests. There is no valid justification of any kind, on this absolutist
conception, for infringing any of the interests falling within the scope of the moral right to privacy.
has become a sieve. No secrets concerning matters that would interest the public
can be kept for long. And the public would be far more interested to learn that public officials were using private
information about American citizens for base political ends than to learn that we have been rough with terrorist suspects
a matter that was quickly exposed despite efforts at concealment. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act makes it
prevent a terrorist attack, not just punish the attacker after it occurs, and the
information that enables the detection of an impending attack may be scattered
around the world in tiny bits. A much wider, finer-meshed net must be cast than
when investigating a specific crime. Many of the relevant bits may be in the e-mails,
phone conversations or banking records of U.S. citizens, some innocent, some not
so innocent. The government is entitled to those data, but just for the limited
purpose of protecting national security.The Pentagon's rush to fill gaps in domestic intelligence reflects
the disarray in this vital yet neglected area of national security. The principal domestic intelligence agency is the FBI, but it
is primarily a criminal investigation agency that has been struggling, so far with limited success, to transform itself. It is
having trouble keeping its eye on the ball; an FBI official is quoted as having told the Senate that environmental and
animal rights militants pose the biggest terrorist threats in the United States. If only that were so. Most other
nations, such as Britain, Canada, France, Germany and Israel, many with longer histories of fighting terrorism than the
United States, have a domestic intelligence agency that is separate from its national
police force, its counterpart to the FBI. We do not. We also have no official with sole and
1NC Econ
Turn They increase cloud computing, which hurts the
environment
Schmidt 10 (Stephan Schmidt, writer for the Guardian, "The dark side of cloud
computing: soaring carbon emissions," The Guardian, 4-1-2010,
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/apr/30/cloud-computing-carbonemissions, al)
However, things turned out differently. Each day we generate more and more data
your digital footprint, so to speak, requires huge amounts of server space and energy. A
part of that digital footprint may be described as digital waste just think about all the
data that you have created online that you no longer use. Almost everything we do online
increases our carbon footprint. As a perverse example, Antivirus Company MacAffee
reports that the electricity needed just to transmit the trillions of spam e-mails sent every
year is equivalent to powering two million homes in the United States and generates the
same amount of greenhouse gas emissions as that produced by three million cars.
According to a recent Greenpeace report, Make IT Green: Cloud Computing and its
Contribution to Climate Change, the electricity consumed by cloud computing globally
will increase from 632 billion kilowatt hours in 2007 to 1,963 billion kWh by 2020 and
the associated CO2 equivalent emissions would reach 1,034 megatonnes.
granted.
Forestry House Rue du Luxembourg 66 B-1000 Brussels Belgium - EU green light for
120 million new investments in circular bioeconomy projects//RD)
The European Commission releases 50 million of EU public money via the Bio-based
Industries Joint Undertaking (BBI JU) leveraging 70 million of investments from
industry into projects to boost the European bioeconomy. The Bio-based Industries Joint
Undertaking, a public-private partnership between the EU and the Bio-based Industries
Consortium (BIC), has approved the funding of 10 projects totalling 120
million to boost the EU capacity to stimulate growth and jobs via a more
circular, low carbon and sustainable bioeconomy. The BBI is a 3.7 billion innovative
partnership that was officially launched in July 2014. Driven by a unique cross sector
industry grouping, the BBI focuses on using Europe's biomass and wastes to
make high value products and bring them to market. Advanced biorefineries and
innovative technologies are at the heart of this process, converting renewable resources
into sustainable bio-based chemicals, materials and fuels, allowing the EU to reduce
its dependence on finite fossil resources. In the midst of political discussions on
developing an ambitious circular economy for Europe, Marcel Wubbolts, Chairman of
the Bio-based Industries Consortium and Chief Technology Officer of Royal DSM said:
"Today we celebrate the translation of the vision of the Bio-based Industries Consortium
into concrete projects that will help Europe develop a future economic model that is fully
sustainable. The bioeconomy is global and these investments ensure that
Europe remains a sustainable, competitive and innovative region ." The 7
funded research projects will tackle specific value chain challenges such as
***Zero empirical data supports their theory the only financial crisis of the new liberal
order experienced zero uptick in violence or challenges to the central factions governed
by the US that check inter-state violence they have no theoretical foundation for
proving causality
Barnett, 9 senior managing director of Enterra Solutions LLC (Thomas, The New
Rules: Security Remains Stable Amid Financial Crisis, 25 August 2009,
http://www.aprodex.com/the-new-rules--security-remains-stable-amid-financial-crisis398-bl.aspx)
When the global financial crisis struck roughly a year ago, the blogosphere was ablaze with all sorts of
scary predictions of, and commentary regarding, ensuing conflict and wars -- a rerun of the Great Depression
leading to world war, as it were. Now, as global economic news brightens and recovery -- surprisingly led by China and
emerging markets -- is the talk of the day, it's interesting to look back over the past year and realize how
globalization's first truly worldwide recession has had virtually no impact whatsoever on the
international security landscape. None of the more than three-dozen ongoing conflicts listed by
GlobalSecurity.org can be clearly attributed to the global recession. Indeed, the last new entry (civil
conflict between Hamas and Fatah in the Palestine) predates the economic crisis by a year, and three
quarters of the chronic struggles began in the last century. Ditto for the 15 low-intensity conflicts listed by
Wikipedia (where the latest entry is the Mexican "drug war" begun in 2006). Certainly, the Russia-Georgia conflict last
August was specifically timed, but by most accounts the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics was the most
important external trigger (followed by the U.S. presidential campaign) for that sudden spike in an almost two-decade
long struggle between Georgia and its two breakaway regions. Looking over the various databases, then, we see a
most familiar picture: the usual mix of civil conflicts, insurgencies, and liberation-themed
terrorist movements. Besides the recent Russia-Georgia dust-up, the only two potential state-onstate wars (North v. South Korea, Israel v. Iran) are both tied to one side acquiring a nuclear weapon capacity -- a
process wholly unrelated to global economic trends. And with the United States effectively tied down by its two
ongoing major interventions (Iraq and Afghanistan-bleeding-into-Pakistan), our involvement elsewhere around
the planet has been quite modest, both leading up to and following the onset of the economic crisis: e.g.,
the usual counter-drug efforts in Latin America, the usual military exercises with allies across Asia, mixing it up with
pirates off Somalia's coast). Everywhere else we find serious instability we pretty much let it burn, occasionally pressing
the Chinese -- unsuccessfully -- to do something. Our new Africa Command, for example, hasn't led us to anything beyond
advising and training local forces. So, to sum up: No significant uptick in mass violence or unrest
(remember the smattering of urban riots last year in places like Greece, Moldova and Latvia?); The usual frequency
maintained in civil conflicts (in all the usual places); Not a single state-on-state war directly caused (and no great-poweron-great-power crises even triggered); No great improvement or disruption in great-power cooperation
regarding the emergence of new nuclear powers (despite all that diplomacy); A modest scaling back of international
policing efforts by the system's acknowledged Leviathan power (inevitable given the strain); and No serious efforts
by any rising great power to challenge that Leviathan or supplant its role. (The worst things we can cite
are Moscow's occasional deployments of strategic assets to the Western hemisphere and its weak efforts to outbid the
United States on basing rights in Kyrgyzstan; but the best include China and India stepping up their aid and investments
in Afghanistan and Iraq.) Sure, we've finally seen global defense spending surpass the previous world record set in the late
1980s, but even that's likely to wane given the stress on public budgets created by all this unprecedented "stimulus"
spending. If anything, the friendly cooperation on such stimulus packaging was the most notable
great-power dynamic caused by the crisis. Can we say that the world has suffered a distinct shift to political
radicalism as a result of the economic crisis? Indeed, no. The world's major economies remain governed by
center-left or center-right political factions that remain decidedly friendly to both markets and trade. In
the short run, there were attempts across the board to insulate economies from immediate damage (in effect, as much
protectionism as allowed under current trade rules), but there was no great slide into "trade wars." Instead, the World
Trade Organization is functioning as it was designed to function, and regional efforts toward free-trade agreements have
not slowed. Can we say Islamic radicalism was inflamed by the economic crisis? If it was, that shift was clearly
overwhelmed by the Islamic world's growing disenchantment with the brutality displayed by violent extremist groups such
as al-Qaida. And looking forward, austere economic times are just as likely to breed connecting evangelicalism as
disconnecting fundamentalism. At the end of the day, the economic crisis did not prove to be sufficiently frightening to
provoke major economies into establishing global regulatory schemes, even as it has sparked a spirited -- and much
needed, as I argued last week -- discussion of the continuing viability of the U.S. dollar as the world's primary reserve
currency. Naturally, plenty of experts and pundits have attached great significance to this debate, seeing in it the
beginning of "economic warfare" and the like between "fading" America and "rising" China. And yet, in a world of globally
integrated production chains and interconnected financial markets, such "diverging interests" hardly constitute signposts
for wars up ahead. Frankly, I don't welcome a world in which America's fiscal profligacy goes undisciplined, so bring it on
-- please! Add it all up and it's fair to say that this global financial crisis has proven the great resilience of
America's post-World War II international liberal trade order.
2NC Econ
Seitz 1/30/15
spending reached $67 billion in 2014 and is expected to hit $113 billion in
2018, Technology Business Research said in a report Wednesday. "While the vast majority of IT companies remain
plagued by low-single-digit revenue growth rates at best, investments in public cloud from
software-centric vendors such as Microsoft and SAP are moving the
corporate needle," TBR analyst Jillian Mirandi said in a statement. Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT) is pushing the
cloud development platform Azure and migrating Office customers to the cloud-based Office 365. SAP (NYSE:SAP) got a
late start to the public cloud but has acquired SuccessFactors and Ariba to accelerate its efforts. The second half of 2014
was marked by partnerships and integration of services from different vendors in the software-as-a-service sector. SaaS
vendors like Salesforce.com (NYSE:CRM) and Workday (NYSE:WDAY) have also added
Columbus 14
(Louis, 2/24/14, Forbes, The Best Cloud Computing Companies And CEOs To Work For
In 2014, http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiscolumbus/2014/02/24/the-best-cloudcomputing-companies-and-ceos-to-work-for-in-2014/, 7/17/15, SM)
IT decision makers spending on security technologies will increase 46% in 2015, with
cloud computing increasing 42% and business analytics investments up 38%.
. Enterprise investments in storage will increase 36%, and for wireless & mobile, 35%. Cloud computing initiatives are the
most important project for the majority of IT departments today (16%) and are expected to cause the most disruption in
the future. IDG predicts the majority of cloud computings disruption will be focused on improving service and generating
new revenue streams. These and other key take-aways are from recent IDG Enterprise research titled Computerworld
Forecast Study 2015. The goal of the study was to determine IT priorities for 2015 in areas such as spending, staffing and
technology. Computerworld spoke with 194 respondents, 55% of which are from the executive IT roles. 19% from midlevel IT, 16% in IT professional roles and 7% in business management. You can find the results and methodology of the
study here. Additional key take-aways from the study include: Enterprises are predicting they will increase their
spending on security technologies by 46%, cloud computing by 42% with the greatest growth in
enterprises with over 1,000 employees (52%), 38% in business analytics, 36% for storage
solutions and 35% for wireless & mobile. The following graphic provides an overview of the top five tech spending
increases in 2015:
2018. The projections, part of an IDC webinar on the marketing software revolution, reveal a
compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 12.4% and total spend of $130 billion
across the five-year stretch between 2014 and 2015. Customer relationship
management software is a sizable growth sector of marketing, with
projections from IDCs software tracker predicting CRM application revenue will reach $31.7 billion
by 2018, a CAGR of 6.9%. A MaaS revival Most marketing solutions are available in the cloud, but some large businesses
are acquiring these point solutions, investing in them and then turning them into a marketing as a service platform. The
MaaS, an industry segment bundling a tech platform, creative services and the IT services to run it, is making a comeback
after economic uncertainty stunted investment in this area for so many years. IDCs view on marketing as a service
platforms is that it will blend global media and marketing tech expenditure. There may have been little or no budget being
attributed to this type of product in 2014, but IDC has forecasted increases in the run up to
2018. Getting the investment in early can set a company up for a similar or larger return later down the road, a fact
demonstrated by IDC that puts spend from digital marketing leaders at $14 million
while achievers and contenders set aside $4.2 million and $3.1 million
respectively.
The tech sector is growing nowemployment
Snyder 2/5 (Bill Snyder, The best jobs are in tech, and so is the job growth,
Febuary 5th, 2015, http://www.infoworld.com/article/2879051/it-careers/the-best-jobsare-in-tech-and-so-is-the-job-growth.html)
In 2014, IT employment grew by 2.4 percent. Although that doesnt sound
like much, it represents more than 100,000 jobs. If the projections by CompTIA
and others hold up, the economy will add even more this year. Tech dominates
the best jobs in America A separate report by Glassdoor, a large job board that
includes employee-written reviews of companies and top managers, singled out 25 of the
best jobs in America, and 10 of those were in IT. Judged by a combination of factors -including earnings potential, career opportunities, and the number of current job listings
-- the highest-rated tech job was software engineer, with an average base salary of
$98,074. In the last three months, employers have posted 104,828 openings for software
engineers and developers on the Glassdoor job site, though many are no longer current.
(Glassdoor combines the titles of software developers and software engineers, so we
don't know how many of those positions were just for engineers.) The highest-paid tech
occupation listed on Glassdoor is solutions architect, with an average base pay of
$121,657. Looked at more broadly, the hottest tech occupation in the United States last
year was Web developer, for which available jobs grew by 4 percent to a total of 235,043
jobs -- a substantial chunk of the 4.88 million employed tech workers, according to the
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. As for tech support, jobs in that occupation increased by
2.5 percent to 853,256, which is a bit more than overall tech job growth of 2.4
percent. Taken together, the two new reports provide more evidence that we can
expect at least another year of buoyant employment prospects in IT -- and
give rough guidelines of the skills you need to get a great job and the potential employers
you might contact. Hiring across the economy Most striking is the shift in
employer attitudes over the last year or two, says Tim Herbert, CompTIAs vice
president of research. Theres less concern about the bottom dropping out, he
said. Even worst-case estimates by employers are not at all bad, he adds. The
survey found that 43 percent of the companies say they are understaffed, and 68 percent
say they expect filling those positions will be challenging or very challenging. If thats
the case, supply and demand should push salaries even higher. One of the
most positive trends in last years employment picture is the broad wave of
IT hiring stretching across different sectors of the economy. Companies that
posted the largest number of online ads for IT-related jobs were Accenture, Deloitte,
Oracle, General Dynamics, Amazon.com, JP Morgan, United Health, and Best Buy,
according to Burning Glass Technologies Labor Insights, which tracks online
and setting in train the process leading to war. There would not appear to be any
merit in this hypothesis according to a study undertaken by Minxin Pei and Ariel
Adesnik of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. After studying 93
episodes of economic crisis in 22 countries in Latin America and Asia in the years
since World War II they concluded that Much of the conventional wisdom about the
political impact of economic crises may be wrong ..The severity of economic crisis as measured in terms of inflation and negative growth bore no relationship to the
collapse of regimes.(or, in democratic states, rarely) to an outbreak of violenceIn
the cases of dictatorships and semi-democracies, the ruling elites responded to crises
by increasing repression (thereby using one form of violence to abort another.)
episodes of contentious political action. They are often described as important tools for
activists seeking to replace authoritarian regimes and to promote freedom and
democracy, and they have been lauded for their democratizing potential. Despite the
prominence of Twitter revolutions, color revolutions, and the like in public debate,
policymakers and scholars know very little about whether and how new media affect
contentious politics. Journalistic accounts are inevitably based on anecdotes
rather than rigorously designed research. Although data on new media have been
sketchy, new tools are emerging that measure linkage patterns and content as well as
track memes across media outlets and thus might offer fresh insights into new media.
The impact of new media can be better understood through a framework that considers
five levels of analysis: individual transformation, intergroup relations, collective action,
regime policies, and external attention. New media have the potential to change how
citizens think or act, mitigate or exacerbate group conflict, facilitate collective action,
spur a backlash among regimes, and garner international attention toward a given
country. Evidence from the protests after the Iranian presidential election in June 2009
suggests the utility of examining the role of new media at each of these five levels.
Although there is reason to believe the Iranian case exposes the potential benefits of new
media, other evidencesuch as the Iranian regimes use of the same social network tools
to harass, identify, and imprison protesterssuggests that, like any media, the Internet
is not a magic bullet. At best, it may be a rusty bullet. Indeed, it is plausible
that traditional media sources were equally if not more important. Scholars and
policymakers should adopt a more nuanced view of new medias role in democratization
and social change, one that recognizes that new media can have both positive and
negative effects. Introduction In January 2010, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
articulated a powerful vision of the Internet as promoting freedom and global political
transformation and rewriting the rules of political engagement and action. Her vision
resembles that of others who argue that new media technologies facilitate participatory
politics and mass mobilization, help promote democracy and free markets, and create
new kinds of global citizens. Some observers have even suggested that Twitters creators
should receive the Nobel Peace Prize for their role in the 2009 Iranian protests.1 But not
everyone has such sanguine views. Clinton herself was careful to note when sharing her
vision that new media were not an unmitigated blessing. Pessimists argue that these
technologies may actually exacerbate conflict, as exemplified in Kenya, the Czech
Republic, and Uganda, and help authoritarian regimes monitor and police their citizens.
2 They argue that new media encourage self-segregation and polarization as people seek
out only information that reinforces their prior beliefs, offering ever more opportunities
for the spread of hate, misinformation, and prejudice.3 Some skeptics question whether
new media have significant effects at all. Perhaps they are simply a tool used by those
who would protest in any event or a trendy hook for those seeking to tell political
stories. Do new media have real consequences for contentious politicsand in which
direction?4 The sobering answer is that, fundamentally, no one knows. To this point,
little research has sought to estimate the causal effects of new media in a
methodologically rigorous fashion, or to gather the rich data needed to establish causal
influence. Without rigorous research designs or rich data, partisans of all
viewpoints turn to anecdotal evidence and intuition
San Francisco and is a business and technology correspondent for the New Yorker.
The World Cracks Down on the Internet, 12-4-14,
http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/world-cracks-internet, msm]
In September of last year, Chinese
well beyond crude measures like restricting access to particular Web sites or censoring online comments that use certain keywords.
Madeline Earp, a research analyst at Freedom House, the Washington-based nongovernmental organization, suggested a phrase to describe
the approach: strategic, timely censorship. She told me, Its about allowing a surprising amount of open discussion, as long as youre not
the kind of person who can really use that discussion to organize people. On Thursday, Freedom House published its fifth annual report
on Internet freedom around the world. As in years past, China
Chinas place in the rankings wont come as a surprise to many people. The notable part is that
the report suggests that, when it comes to Internet freedom, the rest of the world is
gradually becoming more like China and less like Iceland. The researchers found that Internet
freedom declined in thirty-six of the sixty-five countries they studied,
continuing a trajectory they have noticed since they began publishing the
reports in 2010. Earp, who wrote the China section, said that authoritarian regimes might even be
explicitly looking at China as a model in policing Internet communication .
(Last year, she co-authored a report on the topic for the Committee to Protect Journalists.) China isnt alone in its
influence, of course. The reports authors even said that some countries are using the U.S. National Security Agencys widespread
surveillance, which came to light following disclosures by the whistle-blower Edward Snowden, as an excuse to augment their own
monitoring capabilities. Often, the surveillance comes with little or no oversight, they said, and is directed at human-rights activists and
political opponents. China, the U.S., and their copycats arent the only offenders, of course. In fact, interestingly,
the
United States was the sixth-best country for Internet freedom , after Germanythough
this may say as much about the poor state of Web freedom in other places as it does about protections for U.S. Internet users. Among the
other countries, this was a particularly bad year for Russia
report notednot to mention temporarily shutting down access to YouTube and Twitter. As Jenna Krajeski wrote in a post about Turkeys
Twitter ban, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoan vowed in March, Well eradicate Twitter. I dont care what the international community
says. They will see the power of the Turkish Republic. A month later, Russian President Vladimir Putin, not to be outdone by Erdoan,
famously called the Internet a C.I.A. project, as Masha Lipman wrote in a post about Russias recent Internet controls. Since Putin took
office again in 2012, the report found, the government has enacted laws to block online content, prosecuted people for their Internet
activity, and surveilled information and communication technologies. Among changes in other countries, the report said that the
governments of Uzbekistan and Nigeria had passed laws requiring cybercafs to keep logs of their customers, and that the Vietnamese
government began requiring international Internet companies to keep at least one server in Vietnam. Whats behind
the
decline in Internet freedom throughout the world? There could be several reasons for it, but the most obvious one
is also somewhat mundane: especially in countries where people are just beginning to go online in large numbers, governments
that restrict freedom offlineparticularly authoritarian regimesare only beginning to
do the same online, too. Whats more, governments that had been using strategies like blocking certain Web sites to try to control the
Internet are now realizing that those approaches dont actually do much to keep their citizens from seeing content that the governments
would prefer to keep hidden. So theyre turning
more people use the Internet to freely communicate and obtain information, governments
have ratcheted up efforts to control it. Today, more than 2 billion people have access to the Internet, a
number that has more than doubled in the past five years. Deepening Internet penetration is particularly evident in the developing world,
where declining subscription costs, government investments in infrastructure, and the rise of mobile technology has allowed the number of
users to nearly triple since 2006. In order to better understand the diverse, rapidly evolving threats to Internet freedom, Freedom House, a
Washington, D.C., NGO that conducts research on political freedom, has undertaken an analysis - the first of its kind - of the ways in which
governments in 37 key countries create obstacles to Internet access, limit digital content and violate users' rights. What we found was that
Internet freedom in a range of countries, both democratic and authoritarian, is declining. Embold ened
governments and
their sympathizers are increasingly using technical attacks to disrupt
political activists' online networks, eavesdrop on their communications and
debilitate their websites. Such attacks were reported in at least 12 countries ,
ranging from China to Russia, Tunisia to Burma, Iran to Vietnam. In Belarus, at the height of controversial elections, the
authorities created mirror versions of opposition websites, diverting users
to the new ones, where deliberately false information on the times and
locations of protests were posted. In Tunisia, in the run-up to the January 2011 uprising that drove the regime
from power, the authorities regularly broke into the e-mail, Facebook and blogging accounts of opposition and human rights activists, either
deleting specific material or simply collecting intelligence about their plans. Governments
peeping in their online log. The report also warns that 2015s dares in terms of web freedom
will increase as Russia and Turkey plan to increase controls on foreignbased internet organizations. Many countries already put major American
internet businesses into odd circumstances . Among them: Twitter, Facebook
and Google, who were challenged by problematic regulations. Overlooking
these laws has led to their services being hindered. For instance, Googles engineers retreated from Russia while
China blocked Gmail, after the company refused to give the national governments access to its servers. This Wednesday, Vladimir Putin, Russian President approved
the law obliging organizations to store Russian clients information on
servers located on Russian grounds. But only a few countries approve of this new legislation. As a result it is expected that the law will spur
some international debates not long from now. Most of tech experts believe that pieces of legislation and other state measures will not be able to actually stop information from rolling on the
internet. For instance, a year ago Russian powers asked Facebook to shut down a page setup against the government, advancing anti-government protests. Despite the fact that Facebook
Turkey after the organization declined to erase the posts revealing information about government authorities accused of corruption. The result of the government action was that while Twitter was
blocked, Turkish users started to evade the ban. Comparable demands were registered in nations like China, Pakistan, and so forth. According to a popular Russian blogger, Anton Nosik,
governments are delusional to think they can remove an article or video footage from the web when materials can easily be duplicated and posted somewhere else. Most Internet users militate
aggressive foreign policies. Examples include Sweden under Gustavus Adolphus, Prussia and
Russia in the eighteenth centuries, and Japan and the United States in the late nineteenth
and twentieth centuries.5 Unlike other parvenu powers, the constraints on the United States were more
internal than external. Congress, not other powers, kept American presidents from playing a more active role in European
affairs in the 1920s and 1930s and forced a withdrawal from Indochina in the 1970s. The United States was never spurned
or humiliated by other powers, but some American presidents and their advisers did feel humiliated by the constraints
imposed upon them domestically. They frequently sought to commit the country to activist policies through membership
in international institutions that involved long-term obligations (for example, the imf and nato), executive actions (for
example, the 1940 destroyer deal, intervention in the Korean War, and sending Marines to Lebanon in 1958), and
congressional resolutions secured on the basis of false or misleading information (the Gulf of Tonkin and Iraq War
resolutions). Ironically, concern for credibility promoted ill-considered and open-ended commitments like Vietnam and
Iraq that later led to public opposition and the congressional constraints that subsequent American presidents considered
detrimental to presidential credibility. Instead of 123 prompting a reassessment of national
population had Internet access and, on the other hand, mobilisation witnessed a decline
between 2005 and 2008 although the number of Internet users rose during the same
period. As there is no direct correlation between increased Internet use and
political action organised through this medium, we have to assume a more complex
relationship. A successful social movement seems to need more than a virtual space of
debate to be successful, although such a space can be an important complementary
factor in opening windows and expanding the realm of what can be said in public. A
political movement revolves around a core of key actors, and "netizens" qualify for this
task. The Internet also features a variety of tools that facilitate the organisation of events.
However, to be successful, social movements need more than a well-organised campaign.
In Egypt, we witnessed an important interaction between print and online media,
between the representatives of a relative elitist medium and the traditional, more
accessible print media. A social movement needs to provide frames resonating with
grievances of the public coupled with periods of increased public attention to politics in
order to create opportunity structures. To further transport their message and to attract
supporters, a reflection of the struggle of the movement with the government in the
"classical" media such as newspapers and television channels is necessary to give the
movement momentum outside the Internet context.
Democracy Bad
Democracies start more wars- statistical analysis proves
Henderson 2 (Errol Henderson, Assistant Professor, Dept. of Political Science at the University
of Florida, 2002, Democracy and War The End of an Illusion?, p. 146)
Are Democracies More Peaceful than Nondemocracies with Respect to Interstate Wars ? The results indicate that
democracies are more war-prone than non-democracies (whether democracy is coded
dichotomously or continuously) and that democracies are more likely to initiate interstate
wars. The findings are obtained from analyses that control for a host of political,
economic, and cultural factors that have been implicated in the onset of
interstate war, and focus explicitly on state level factors instead of simply inferring state level processes from
dyadic level observations as was done in earlier studies (e.g., Oneal and Russett, 1997; Oneal and Ray, 1997). The
results imply that democratic enlargement is more likely to increase the probability
of
war for states since democracies are more likely to become involved inand to initiateinterstate wars.
Democracy leads to wars against non-democracies.
Daase 6 (Christopher, Chair in International Organisation, University of Frankfurt, Democratic
Wars, pg. 77)
In what follows, I will focus on three reasons why democracies might be peaceful to each other, but abrasive or even
bellicose towards non- democracies. The first reason is an institutional one: domestic institutions
1NC Solvency
5 alt causes Aff doesnt solve
Enderle 6/12
(Rob, 6/12/15, CIO, US surveillance programs are killing the tech industry, Rob is the president
and principal analyst of the Enderle Group, he has worked for IBM, Dell, Microsoft, Siemens, and
Intel, MBA @ California State University, Long Beach,
http://www.cio.com/article/2934887/privacy/u-s-surveillance-programs-are-killing-the-techindustry.html, 7/13/15, SM)
The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, ranked as the most authoritative science and technology think
tank in the U.S. (second in the world behind Max Planck Institutes of Germany), has just released its latest report on the
impact of the existence and disclosure of the broad NSA national and international spying programs. It was initially
reported that the revenue loss range would be between $21.5 billion and $35 billion, mostly affecting U.S. cloud service
providers. However, they have gone back and researched the impact and found it to be both far larger and far broader than
originally estimated. In fact, it appears the surveillance programs could cause a number of U.S. technology firms to fail
outright or to be forced into bankruptcy as they reorganize for survival. The damage has also since spread to domestic
aerospace and telephony service providers. The programs identified in the report are PRISM; the
program authorized by the FISA Amendments act, which allowed search without the need for a
warrant domestically and abroad, and Bullrun; the program designed to compromise encryption
technology worldwide. The report ends in the following recommendations: Increase
transparency about U.S. surveillance activities both at home and abroad. Strengthen
information security by opposing any government efforts to introduce backdoors in software or
weaken encryption. Strengthen U.S. mutual legal assistance treaties (MLATs). Work to establish
international legal standards for government access to data. Complete trade agreements like the Trans
Pacific Partnership that ban digital protectionism, and pressure nations that seek to erect
protectionist barriers to abandon those efforts. The 2014 survey indicates that 25 percent of companies in the
UK and Canada plan to pull data out of the U.S. Of those responding, 82 percent indicated they now look at national laws
as the major deciding factor with regard to where they put their data. Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) company Birst
indicated that its European customers are refusing to host information in the U.S. for fear of spying. Salesforce, another
SaaS company, revealed that its German insurance client pulled out of using the firm. In fact, Salesforce faced major
short-term sales losses and suffered a $124 million deficit in the fiscal quarter after the NSA revelations according to the
report. Cisco, the U.S. firm that leads the networking market, reported that sales was interrupted in Brazil, China and
Russia as a result of the belief that the U.S. had placed backdoors in its networking products. Ciscos CEO, John
Chambers, tied his revenue shortfall to the NSA disclosure. Servint, a U.S. Web Hosting company, reported losing half of
its international clients as a result of the NSA Disclosure. Qualcomm, IBM, Microsoft and Hewlett-Packard have all
reported significant adverse revenue impact in China from the NSA disclosure. A variety of U.S. companies including
Cisco, McAfee/Intel, Apple and Citrix Systems were all dropped from the approved list for the Chinese government as a
result of the NSA disclosure. But it isnt even just tech companies that have lost significant customers and revenues.
Boeing lost a major defense contract to Saab AB to replace Brazils aging fighter jets due to the disclosure. Verizon was
dropped by a large number German government facilities for fear Verizon would open them up to wiretapping and other
surveillance.
terrorists. But that was not good enough for the Bush team, which was determined to use the nations tragedy to grab ever more
power for its vision of an imperial presidency. Mr. Bush ignored the FISA law and ordered the National
Security Agency to intercept phone calls and e-mail between people abroad and people in
the United States without a warrant, as long as the target was not in this country. The
president did not announce his decision. He allowed a few lawmakers to be briefed but withheld key documents.
The special intelligence court was in the dark until The Times disclosed the spying in
December 2005. Mr. Bush still refused to stop. He claimed that FISA was too limiting for the
Internet-speed war against terror. But he never explained those limits and rebuffed lawmakers offers to legally
accommodate his concerns. This year, the administration found an actual problem with FISA: It
requires a warrant to eavesdrop on communications between foreigners that go through
computers in the United States. It was a problem that did not exist in 1978, and it had an easy fix. But Mr. Bushs
lawyers tacked dangerous additions onto a bill being rushed through Congress before the recess. When the smoke cleared, Congress
had fixed the real loophole, but also endorsed the idea of spying without court approval. It gave legal cover to more than five years of
illegal spying. Fortunately, the law is to expire in February, and some Democratic legislators are trying to fix it. House members have
drafted a bill, which is a big improvement but still needs work. The Senate is working on its bill, and we hope it will show the courage
this time to restore the rule of law to American surveillance programs. There are some red lines, starting with the absolute need for
court supervision of any surveillance that can involve American citizens or others in the United States. The bill passed in August
allowed the administration to inform the FISA court about its methods and then issue blanket demands for data to communications
companies without any further court approval or review. The House bill would permit the government to conduct surveillance for 45
days before submitting it to court review and approval. (Mr. Bush is wrong when he says the bill would slow down intelligence
gathering.) After that, ideally, the law would require a real warrant. If Congress will not do that, at a minimum it must require spying
programs to undergo periodic audits by the court and Congress. The administration wants no reviews. Mr. Bush and his team say they
have safeguards to protect civil liberties, meaning surveillance will be reviewed by the attorney general, the director of national
intelligence and the inspectors general of the Justice Department and the Central Intelligence Agency. There are two enormous flaws
in that. The Constitution is based on the rule of law, not individuals; giving such power to any president would be un-American. And
this one long ago showed he cannot be trusted. Last week, The Times reported that the C.I.A. director, Gen. Michael V. Hayden, is
investigating the office of his agencys inspector general after it inquired into policies on detention and interrogation. This improper,
perhaps illegal investigation sends a clear message of intimidation. We also know that the F.B.I. has abused expanded powers it was
granted after 9/11 and that the former attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, systematically covered up the presidents actions with
deliberately misleading testimony. Mr. Bush says the law should give immunity to communications
companies that gave data to the government over the last five years without a court order.
He says they should not be punished for helping to protect America, but what Mr. Bush
really wants is to avoid lawsuits that could uncover the extent of the illegal spying he
authorized after 9/11. It may be possible to shield these companies from liability, since the government lied to them about
the legality of its requests. But the law should allow suits aimed at forcing disclosure of Mr. Bushs actions. It should also require a
full accounting to Congress of all surveillance conducted since 9/11. And it should have an expiration date, which the White House
does not want. Ever since 9/11, we have watched Republican lawmakers help Mr. Bush shred the Constitution in the name of fighting
terrorism. We have seen Democrats acquiesce or retreat in fear. It is time for that to stop.
2NC Solvency
Alt Causes
6 more alt causes the Aff doesnt resolve any of them
Kehl et al 14 (Danielle Kehl is a Policy Analyst at New Americas Open Technology Institute
(OTI). Kevin Bankston is the Policy Director at OTI, Robyn Greene is a Policy Counsel at OTI, and
Robert Morgus is a Research Associate at OTI, New Americas Open Technology Institute Policy
Paper, Surveillance Costs: The NSAs Impact on the Economy, Internet Freedom &
Cybersecurity, July 2014// rck)
The U.S. government has already taken some limited steps to mitigate this damage and begin the slow, difficult process of
rebuilding trust in the United States as a responsible steward of the Internet. But the reform efforts to date have been
relatively narrow, focusing primarily on the surveillance programs impact on the rights of U.S. citizens. Based on our
findings, we recommend that the U.S. government take the following steps to address the broader concern that the NSAs
programs are impacting our economy, our foreign relations, and our cybersecurity: Strengthen privacy protections for
both Americans and non-Americans, within the United States and extraterritorially. Provide for increased
transparency around government surveillance, both from the government and companies.
Recommit to the Internet Freedom agenda in a way that directly addresses issues raised by NSA
surveillance, including moving toward international human-rights based standards on
surveillance. Begin the process of restoring trust in cryptography standards through the National
Institute of Standards and Technology. Ensure that the U.S. government does not undermine cybersecurity by
inserting surveillance backdoors into hardware or software products. Help to eliminate security vulnerabilities
in software, rather than stockpile them. Develop clear policies about whether, when, and under
what legal standards it is permissible for the government to secretly install malware on a
computer or in a network. Separate the offensive and defensive functions of the NSA in order to
minimize conflicts of interest.
Circumvention
The executive can circumvent via national security letters
Sanchez 15
(Julian Dont (Just) Let the Sun Go Down on Patriot Powers, May 29, 2015,
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/dont-just-let-the-sun-go-down-on-patriot-powers)
Also permanent are National Security Letters or NSLs, which allow the FBI to obtain a more
limited range of telecommunications and financial records without even needing to seek
judicial approval. Unsurprisingly, the government loves these streamlined tools, and used
them so promiscuously that the FBI didnt even bother using 215 for more than a
year after the passage of the Patriot Act. Inspector General reports have also made clear that
the FBI is happy to substitute NSLs for 215 orders when even the highly
accommodating FISC manages a rare display of backbone. In at least one case, when
the secret court refused an application for journalists records on First Amendment grounds,
the Bureau turned around and obtained the same data using National Security
Letters.
Executive will circumvent the NSA- FDR wire tapping proves
Katyal and Caplan 08 (The Surprisingly Stronger Case for the Legality of the NSA
Surveillance Program: FDR Precendent, http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu
/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1058&context=fwps_papers, accessed 7-15-2015, EHS MKS)
This Article explains why the legal case for the recently disclosed National Security Agency surveillance
program turns out to be stronger than what the Administration has advanced. In defending its
action, the Administration overlooked the details surrounding one of the most important
periods of presidentially imposed surveillance in wartime President Franklin Delano
Roosevelts (FDR) wiretapping and his secret end-run around both the wiretapping
prohibition enacted by Congress and decisions of the United States Supreme Court. In our view,
the argument does not quite carry the day, but it is a much heftier one than those that the Administration has put forth to date to justify
its NSA program. The secret history, moreover, serves as a powerful new backdrop against which to view todays controversy. In
general, we believe that compliance with executive branch precedent is a critical element in
assessing the legality of a Presidents actions during a time of armed conflic t. In the crucible
of legal questions surrounding war and peace, few judicial precedents will provide concrete
answers. Instead, courts will tend to invoke the political question doctrine or other
prudential canons to stay silent; and even in those cases where they reach the merits, courts
will generally follow a minimalist path. For these and other reasons, the ways in which past Presidents have acted
will often be a more useful guide in assessing the legality of a particular program, as Presidents face pressures on
security unimaginable to any other actor outside or inside government . At the same time as Presidents
realize these pressures, they are under an oath to the Constitution, and so the ways in which they balance constitutional governance
and security threats can and should inform practice today
***Off Case***
<<T Domestic>>
Top Shelf
1NC Shell
T NOT DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE
A. DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE IS SURVEILLANCE OF US PERSONS
Small 8
MATTHEW L. SMALL. United States Air Force Academy 2008 Center for the Study
of the Presidency and Congress, Presidential Fellows Program paper "His Eyes are Watching
You: Domestic Surveillance, Civil Liberties and Executive Power during Times of National Crisis"
http://cspc.nonprofitsoapbox.com/storage/documents/Fellows2008/Small.pdf
Before one can make any sort of assessment of domestic surveillance policies, it is first necessary to narrow the scope
of the term domestic surveillance. Domestic surveillance is a subset of intelligence gathering. Intelligence, as it is to
be understood in this context, is information that meets the stated or understood needs of policy makers and has
been collected, processed and narrowed to meet those needs (Lowenthal 2006, 2). In essence, domestic surveillance
is a means to an end; the end being intelligence . The intelligence community best understands
calls inside the United States. International Calls are calls either to or from the
United States. And dont forget to deposit $2 for the first five minutes, and an extra $2 to cover the cost of the
guy listening in at the NSA. Domestic Flights, the White House reminds us, are flights
from one American city to another. International Flights are flights to or from
the United States. So what happens if I call a domestic airline about a flight to Europe, but theyve
outsourced their reservation agents to India? Is that a domestic call about an international flight, or an international
call about a domestic flight? Wait, theres more. Domestic Mail consists of letters and packages sent within the
United States, the press release reads. International Mail consists of letters and packages sent to or from the United
States. And dont forget, we can not only open either kind, kind if we damn well feel like it, but if youre using an
international stamp and we need it for our collection, were keeping it. One more item from the press release,
Domestic Commerce involves business within the United States. International Commerce involves business between
the United States and other countries. International commerce. You know, the kind of stuff Jack Abramoff did for
the -- Huh, leave Abramoff out of it? Gotcha, sorry.
Overview
Our interpretation is that topical affirmatives must be surveillance of US
persons located within the US their affirmative is surveillance of non-US
persons in foreign locations, which is a voting issue.
T version of the Aff
AT: W/M
They dont meet Section 702 is not domestic surveillance because it is
foreign surveillance of foreign persons.
AT: C/I
Their interpretation is bad ___
Prefer our interpretation Small 8 takes the general consensus of the
intelligence community, which would include experts on surveillance, to
define domestic surveillance as US persons. Olberman 6 should be
preferred over any piece of evidence they read because it comes from the
White House its the most predictable definition and has the most accurate
definition of domestic surveillance, which is that it must be calls inside the
US.
Impact Debate
XT: Limits
Extend limits requiring surveillance to be of US persons and within the US
narrows the literature base because there are infinite Affs if the surveillance
can be foreign. Allowing the Aff to read a plan about foreign surveillance
explodes limits because it goes way outside the scope of domestic
surveillance we prevent the proliferation of infinite and impossible to
research mechanisms.
Crafting a limited interpretation of domestic is necessary to stabilize our
resolutional focus and to foster in-depth research on the plan. Only our
interpretation facilitates specific debates, which are critical to accurately
test the Affirmatives desirability, whereas shallow and overly generic
debates dont focus our learning in the same way.
Blocks
Extra-T
Extra T is a voting issue
1. Limits allowing them to go outside of resolutional actions lets them do
anything there is no way to predict the infinite number of advantages they
can garner.
2. Topicality the extra topical portions of the plan arent domestic
surveillance kills topic specific education allowing them to go outside
detracts focus from the resolution.
AT: Overlimit
Better to overlimit than underlimit depth over breadth, we can have more
in-depth debate about actually topical Affs.
AT: Predictability
They are the opposite of predictable when debating domestic surveillance,
nobody is expected to do research on surveillance of non-US persons in
foreign locations.
AT: Reasonability
Prefer competing interpretations
1. Theyre not reasonable the limits debate proves they explode the topic,
there is no way our interpretations are even close.
2. Reasonability forces judge intervention having the judge decide what
reasonable means in every different round means that we can never have
a definition of what is and is not reasonable.
<<Terror DA>>
Top Shelf
1NC Shell
Terror risk is high- maintaining current surveillance is key
Inserra, 6/8 (David Inserra is a Research Associate for Homeland Security and Cyber Security
in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign and National Security Policy of the Kathryn
and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy, at The Heritage
Foundation, 6-8-2015, "69th Islamist Terrorist Plot: Ongoing Spike in Terrorism Should Force
Congress to Finally Confront the Terrorist Threat," Heritage Foundation,
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2015/06/69th-islamist-terrorist-plot-ongoing-spikein-terrorism-should-force-congress-to-finally-confront-the-terrorist-threat)
On June 2 in Boston, Usaamah Abdullah Rahim drew a knife and attacked police
officers and FBI agents, who then shot and killed him. Rahim was being watched by
Bostons Joint Terrorism Task Force as he had been plotting to behead police
officers as part of violent jihad. A conspirator, David Wright or Dawud Sharif Abdul
Khaliq, was arrested shortly thereafter for helping Rahim to plan this attack. This
plot marks the 69th publicly known Islamist terrorist plot or attack against the U.S.
homeland since 9/11, and is part of a recent spike in terrorist activity. The U.S. must
redouble its efforts to stop terrorists before they strike, through the use of properly
applied intelligence tools. The Plot According to the criminal complaint filed against Wright, Rahim had
originally planned to behead an individual outside the state of Massachusetts,[1] which, according to news reports citing
anonymous government officials, was Pamela Geller, the organizer of the draw Mohammed cartoon contest in Garland,
Texas.[2] To this end, Rahim had purchased multiple knives, each over 1 foot long, from Amazon.com. The FBI was
listening in on the calls between Rahim and Wright and recorded multiple
conversations regarding how these weapons would be used to behead someone .
Rahim then changed his plan early on the morning of June 2. He planned to go on vacation right here in Massachusetts.
Im just going to, ah, go after them, those boys in blue. Cause, ah, its the easiest target.[3] Rahim and Wright had used
the phrase going on vacation repeatedly in their conversations as a euphemism for violent jihad. During this
conversation, Rahim told Wright that he planned to attack a police officer on June 2 or June 3. Wright then offered advice
on preparing a will and destroying any incriminating evidence. Based on this threat, Boston police officers and FBI agents
approached Rahim to question him, which prompted him to pull out one of his knives. After being told to drop his
weapon, Rahim responded with you drop yours and moved toward the officers, who then shot and killed him. While
Rahims brother, Ibrahim, initially claimed that Rahim was shot in the back, video surveillance was shown to community
leaders and civil rights groups, who have confirmed that Rahim was not shot in the back.[4 ] Terrorism Not Going Away
This 69th Islamist plot is also the seventh in this calendar year. Details on how exactly Rahim
was radicalized are still forthcoming, but according to anonymous officials, online propaganda from
ISIS and other radical Islamist groups are the source.[5] That would make this attack
the 58th homegrown terrorist plot and continue the recent trend of ISIS playing an
important role in radicalizing individuals in the United States. It is also the sixth plot or
attack targeting law enforcement in the U.S., with a recent uptick in plots aimed at police. While the debate over the
PATRIOT Act and the USA FREEDOM Act is taking a break, the terrorists are not. The result of the debate has been the
reduction of U.S. intelligence and counterterrorism capabilities, meaning that the U.S. has to do even more with less when
it comes to connecting the dots on terrorist plots.[6] Other legitimate intelligence tools and
capabilities must be leaned on now even more. Protecting the Homeland To keep the U.S. safe,
Congress must take a hard look at the U.S. counterterrorism enterprise and determine other measures that are needed to
improve it. Congress should: Emphasize community outreach. Federal grant funds should be used to create robust
community-outreach capabilities in higher-risk urban areas. These funds must not be used for political pork, or so broadly
that they no longer target those communities at greatest risk. Such capabilities are key to building trust within these
communities, and if the United States is to thwart lone-wolf terrorist attacks, it must place effective community outreach
operations at the tip of the spear. Prioritize local cyber capabilities. Building cyber-investigation capabilities in the higherrisk urban areas must become a primary focus of Department of Homeland Security grants. With so much terrorismrelated activity occurring on the Internet, local law enforcement must have the constitutional ability to monitor and track
violent extremist activity on the Web when reasonable suspicion exists to do so. Push the FBI toward being more
effectively driven by intelligence. While the FBI has made high-level changes to its mission and organizational structure,
the bureau is still working on integrating intelligence and law enforcement activities. Full integration will require
overcoming inter-agency cultural barriers and providing FBI intelligence personnel with resources, opportunities, and the
stature they need to become a more effective and integral part of the FBI . Maintain essential
respect individual privacy and liberty. In the American system, the government
must do both equally well. Clear-Eyed Vigilance The recent spike in terrorist plots and
attacks should finally awaken policymakersall Americans, for that matterto the seriousness
of the terrorist threat. Neither fearmongering nor willful blindness serves the
United States. Congress must recognize and acknowledge the nature and the scope
of the Islamist terrorist threat, and take the appropriate action to confront it.
Bulk surveillance is crucial to detect and act on threats many examples prove
Hines 13 [Pierre Hines is a defense council member of the Truman National Security Project,
Heres how metadata on billions of phone calls predicts terrorist attacks
http://qz.com/95719/heres-how-metadata-on-billions-of-phone-calls-predicts-terrorist-attacks,
June 19th, 2013//Rahul]
Yesterday, when NSA Director General Keith Alexander testified before the House
Committee on Intelligence, he declared that the NSAs surveillance programs have
provided critical leads to help prevent over 50 potential terrorist events. FBI
Deputy Director Sean Boyce elaborated by describing four instances when the NSAs
surveillance programs have had an impact: (1) when an intercepted email from a
terrorist in Pakistan led to foiling a plan to bomb of the New York subway system;
(2) when NSAs programs helped prevent a plot to bomb the New York Stock
Exchange; (3) when intelligence led to the arrest of a U.S. citizen who planned to
bomb the Danish Newspaper office that published cartoon depictions of the Prophet
Muhammad; and (4) when the NSAs programs triggered reopening the 9/11
investigation. So what are the practical applications of internet and phone records gathered from two NSA
programs? And how can metadata actually prevent terrorist attacks? Metadata does not give the NSA and intelligence
community access to the content of internet and phone communications. Instead, metadata is more like the
transactional information cell phone customers would normally see on their billing
statementsmetadata can indicate when a call, email, or online chat began and how long the communication lasted.
Section 215 of the Patriot Act provides the legal authority to obtain business records from phone companies. Meanwhile,
the NSA uses Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to authorize its
PRISM program. According the figures provided by Gen. Alexander, intelligence gathered based on
Section 702 authority contributed in over 90% of the 50 cases . One of major benefits of
metadata is that it provides hindsightit gives intelligence analysts a retrospective view of a
sequence of events. As Deputy Director Boyce discussed, the ability to analyze previous
communications allowed the FBI to reopen the 9/11 investigation and determine who was linked to that attack. It
is important to recognize that terrorist attacks are not orchestrated overnight; they
take months or years to plan. Therefore, if the intelligence community only catches
wind of an attack halfway into the terrorists planning cycle, or even after a terrorist attack has
taken place, metadata might be the only source of information that captures the
sequence of events leading up to an attack. Once a terrorist suspect has been identified or once an attack has
taken place, intelligence analysts can use powerful software to sift through metadata to determine which numbers, IP
addresses, or individuals are associated with the suspect. Moreover, phone numbers and IP addresses
sometimes serve as a proxy for the general location of where the planning has taken
place. This ability to narrow down the location of terrorists can help determine
whether the intelligence community is dealing with a domestic or international threat. Even
more useful than hindsight is a crystal ball that gives the intelligence community a look into the future. Simply knowing
how many individuals are in a chat room, how many individuals have contacted a particular phone user, or how many
individuals are on an email chain could serve as an indicator of how many terrorists are involved in a plot. Furthermore,
knowing when a suspect communicates can help identify his patterns of behavior. For instance, metadata can help
establish whether a suspect communicates sporadically or on a set pattern (e.g., making
a call every Saturday at 2 p.m.). Any deviation from that pattern could indicate that the plan
changed at a certain point; any phone number or email address used consistently and then not at all could
indicate that a suspect has stopped communicating with an associate. Additionally, a rapid increase in communication
could indicate that an attack is about to happen. Metadata can provide all of this information
without ever exposing the content of a phone call or email. If the metadata reveals
the suspect is engaged in terrorist activities, then obtaining a warrant would allow
intelligence officials to actually monitor the content of the suspects
communication. In Gen. Alexanders words, These programs have protected our country and allies . . . [t]hese
programs have been approved by the administration, Congress, and the courts. Now, Americans will have to decide
deadly genetic malware into the wild, they are still unlikely to succeed in killing everyone. However, even
if every such mass death event results only in a high (i.e., not total) kill rate and
there is a large gap between each such event (so that individuals can build up the
requisite scientific infrastructure again), extinction would be inevitable
regardless. Some of the engineered bioweapons will be more successful than others; the inter-apocalyptic eras will
vary in length; and post-apocalyptic environments may be so war-torn, disease-stricken,
and impoverished of genetic variation that they may culminate in true extinction
events even if the initial cataclysm only results in 90% death rates , since they may
cause the effective population size to dip below the so-called minimum viable
population. This author ran a Monte Carlo simulation using as (admittedly very crude and poorly informed,
though arguably conservative) estimates the following Earth-like parameters: bioterrorism event mean death rate 50%
and standard deviation 25% (beta distribution), initial population 1010, minimum viable population 4000, individual
omnicidal act probability 107 per annum, and population growth rate 2% per annum. One thousand trials yielded an
average post-space-age time until extinction of less than 8000 years. This is essentially instantaneous on a cosmological
scale, and varying the parameters by quite a bit does nothing to make the survival period comparable with the age of the
universe.
Overview
1. Current NSA surveillance efforts that would be curtailed by FISA Court
restrictions on Section 702 would guarantee a terrorist attack via bioweapons
intelligence gathered based on Section 702 has been crucial to counterterrorism
efforts.
Disease would rapidly spread, and war over whatever minimal resources were left
would be inevitable, causing extinction.
2. DA outweighs case:
A. Magnitude a bioweapon rapidly spreading fatal diseases would wipe out the
entire population, whereas economic collapse would only affect a small amount
B. Time frame a terrorist attack would immediately obliterate everything,
whereas economic collapse would take a number of years before having its minimal
effect
3. DA turns case:
A. Turns econ post attack intervention would cost the state over $1 trillion and
cause mass deaths
Inglesby 14
(Tom, 2/11/14, UPMC Center for Health Security of the University of Pittsburgh medical Center,
Bioterrorism: Assessing the Threat, Tom is a director and CEO of the UPMC Center for Health
Security and an Associate Professor of Medicine and Public Health at the University of Pittsburgh,
http://www.upmchealthsecurity.org/our-work/testimony/bioterrorism-assessing-the-threat,
7/15/15, SM)
The Consequences of Biological Weapons The anthrax events of 2001 were shocking for the country. Letters
carrying anthrax spores were sent to a number of people in different cities. Hospitals, doctors, and nurses at the time were
largely unfamiliar with the disease. Elements of all three branches of government were each affected and closed at some
point. Buildings had to be evacuated for prolonged periods. Cases appeared over weeks in different places. A number of
people were sickened and killed. The source of the anthrax could not be identified. The communication about it from our
own government was often uncertain and changing. The media coverage was constant. People were afraid of their own
mail. Nothing like this had happened before in our country or any country. A great deal has been done to improve our
ability to recognize and respond to biological weapons events since that time. I will say more about that below. But it is
important for this committee to know that a future biological weapons attack on the US could look quite
different from the 2001 anthrax incident - in terms of size of attack, form, and the numbers
affected. The anthrax letters of 2001 came with a warning in them, which allowed some people to begin
taking protective antibiotics and initiate evacuation. Future events are unlikely to come with warnings like
that. It is more likely that the first sign of a bioterror attack will be sick people appearing in clinics and emergency rooms.
And while the anthrax letters of 2001 came through the mail, future bioterrorism attacks could come in many different
kinds of form. There are many means of creating aerosols. And there are clearly other means of using biological weapons
against the public. We also need to understand that the scope of future bioweapons events could be
far, far greater that what we saw in 2001. In 2009, the US National Security Council said: "The effective
dissemination of a lethal biological agent within an unprotected population could place at risk the
lives of hundreds of thousands of people. The unmitigated consequences of such an event could
overwhelm our public health capabilities, potentially causing an untold number of deaths. The
economic cost could exceed $1 trillion for each such incident." The use of such weapons
could lead to substantial loss of life and great societal disruption. Even with a small or modestsized attack, the social and economic impact would be significant.
B. Turns privacy and Internet freedom a major terrorist attack would increase
surveillance because more would be necessary to prevent future attacks; the NSA
would be even more invasive than they are now
Uniqueness
Extend Inserra 6/8 a recent spike in terrorist plots means the risk is extremely
high; US intelligence tools have been key to stop the 69 known terrorist plots, and
current programs balance both national security and individuals privacy rights.
Homegrown
Homegrown terrorism on the rise74 plots discovered
Blackmore 1/17 (Carrie Blackmore, 1-17-2015, "Number of homegrown terrorists is rising," USA
TODAY, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/01/17/number-of-homegrownterrorists-is-rising/21940159/)
CINCINNATI We are far from knowing the outcome of the case against Christopher Cornell, the young local
man accused of plotting an attack on the U.S. Capitol, but if he is convicted, he would be added to a growing
list of homegrown jihadist terrorists. From Sept. 11, 2001, to January 2014, there
were 74 known terrorist plots perpetrated by Americans, lawful U.S. residents or
visitors largely radicalized here in the United States, according to the most recent data reported by
the Congressional Research Service. Five of those plots were carried out before law enforcement was able to intervene.
Fifty-three of the cases almost 72 percent happened after April 2009. That's a
152 percent increase over that time period and constitutes a spike , according to the report
by the service, an agency that works exclusively for the U.S. Congress, providing policy and legal analysis to committees
and members of the House and Senate. "It may be too early to tell how sustained this uptick is," the report reads.
"Regardless, the apparent spike in such activity after April 2009 suggests that ideologies
supporting violent jihad continue to influence some Americans even if a tiny minority." A
review of the 74 cases shows that just seven were initiated by someone working independently, a
probably loose networks of individuals. Measured in terms of frequency and numbers, it is attacks
from those sources that are increasingly the most noteworthy On February 26, during the annual
worldwide threats hearing, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper warned: Home-grown violent
extremists continue to pose the most likely threat to the homeland. Last Friday, Secretary of Homeland
Security Jeh Johnson stated on MSNBC: Were in a new phasein the global terrorist threat where, because of
effective use of social media, the Internet, by ISIL, al-Qaeda, we have to be concerned about the independent actor who is
here in the homeland who may strike with little or no warning Finally, yesterday, former CIA deputy director Michael
Morell described the messaging efforts of jihadist groups generally and the self-declared Islamic State (IS) more
specifically: Their narrative is pretty powerful: The West, the United States, the modern world, is a
significant threat to their religion. Their answer to that is to establish a caliphate. And they are being attacked by
the U.S. and other Western nations, and by these apostate regimes in the region. Because they are being attacked
they need support in two ways; people coming to fight for them, and people coming to stand up
and attack coalition nations in their home. In summary, the most likelythough not most lethalterror
threats to Americans come from individuals living within the United States who are partially
motivated to undertake self-directed attacks based upon their perception that the United States
and the West are at war with the Muslim world.
ISIS
Isis is mobilizing now and ready to take action.
DeSoto 5/7 (Randy DeSoto May 7, 2015 http://www.westernjournalism.com/isis-claims-tohave-71-trained-soldiers-in-targeted-u-s-states/ Randy DeSoto is a writer for Western
Journalism, which consistently ranks in the top 5 most popular conservative online news outlets
in the country)
Purported ISIS jihadists issued threats against the United States Tuesday,
indicating the group has trained soldiers positioned throughout the country, ready
to attack any target we desire. The online post singles out controversial blogger Pamela Geller, one of the
organizers of the Draw the Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, calling for her death to heal the
hearts of our brothers and disperse the ones behind her. ISIS also claimed responsibility for the
shooting, which marked the first time the terror group claimed responsibility for an
attack on U.S. soil, according to the New York Daily News. The attack by the Islamic State in America is only
the beginning of our efforts to establish a wiliyah [authority or governance] in the heart of our enemy, the ISIS post reads.
As for Geller, the jihadists state: To those who protect her: this will be your only warning of housing this woman and her
circus show. Everyone who houses her events, gives her a platform to spill her filth are legitimate targets. We have been
watching closely who was present at this event and the shooter of our brothers. ISIS further claims to have
known that the Muhammad cartoon contest venue would be heavily guarded, but
conducted the attack to demonstrate the willingness of its followers to die for the
Sake of Allah. The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security, in fact, issued a bulletin on April 20 indicating
the event would be a likely terror target. ISIS drew its message to a close with an ominous threat:
We have 71 trained soldiers in 15 different states ready at our word to attack any
target we desire. Out of the 71 trained soldiers 23 have signed up for missions like
Sunday, We are increasing in number bithnillah [if God wills]. Of the 15 states, 5 we will
name Virginia, Maryland, Illinois, California, and MichiganThe next six months will be
interesting. Fox News reports that the U.S. intelligence community was assessing the threat
and trying to determine if the source is directly related to ISIS leadership or an
opportunist such as a low-level militant seeking to further capitalize on the Garland
incident. Former Navy Seal Rob ONeill told Fox News he believes the ISIS threat is credible, and the U.S. must be
prepared. He added that the incident in Garland is a prime example of the difference between a gun free zone and Texas.
They showed up at Charlie Hebdo, and it was a massacre. If these two guys had gotten into that building it would have
been Charlie Hebdo times ten. But these two guys showed up because they were offended by something protected by the
First Amendment, and were quickly introduced to the Second Amendment. Geller issued a statement regarding the
ISIS posting: This threat illustrates the savagery and barbarism of the Islamic State. They want me dead for violating
Sharia blasphemy laws. What remains to be seen is whether the free world will finally wake up and stand for the freedom
of speech, or instead kowtow to this evil and continue to denounce me.
announced that the Air Force museum, which is part of the base, was canceling a
planned Friday night concert and was stopping tours that were regularly offered
until further notice. The base said this was "due to elevated security measures."
Since NORTHCOM was established in October 2002, the threat level has reached
Bravo on four occasions: Feb. 9, 2003, amid concerns al Qaeda was planning
attacks on American targets; Dec. 21, 2003, when officials were concerned about
attacks during the holiday season; May 1, 2011, in the aftermath of the raid that
killed Osama bin Laden; and the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.
ISIS will emerge as a serious threat to the US
Morell 15 (Michael Morell is the former deputy director of the CIA and has twice served as
acting director. He is the author of The Great War of Our Time: The CIA's Fight Against
Terrorism From al Qa'ida to ISIS. May 14, 2015 Time Magazine ISIS Is a Danger on U.S.
Soil http://time.com/3858354/isis-is-a-danger-on-u-s-soil/)
The terrorist group poses a gathering threat. In the aftermath of the attempted terrorist attack on May 4 in Garland,
Texasfor which ISIS claimed responsibilitywe find ourselves again considering the question of whether
or not ISIS is a real threat. The answer is yes. A very serious one. Extremists inspired by
Osama bin Ladens ideology consider themselves to be at war with the U.S.; they want to
attack us. It is important to never forget thatno matter how long it has been since 9/11. ISIS is just the latest
manifestation of bin Ladens design. The group has grown faster than any terrorist group we
can remember, and the threat it poses to us is as wide-ranging as any we have seen .
What ISIS has that al-Qaeda doesnt is a Madison Avenue level of sophisticated messaging and social media. ISIS has a
multilingual propaganda arm known as al-Hayat, which uses GoPros and cameras mounted on drones to make videos that
appeal to its followers. And ISIS uses just about every tool in the platform boxfrom Twitter to YouTube to Instagramto
great effect, attracting fighters and funding. Digital media are one of the groups most significant strengths; they have
helped ISIS become an organization that poses four significant threats to the U.S. First, it is a threat to the stability of the
entire Middle East. ISIS is putting the territorial integrity of both Iraq and Syria at risk. And a further collapse of either or
both of these states could easily spread throughout the region, bringing with it sectarian and religious strife, humanitarian
crises and the violent redrawing of borders, all in a part of the world that remains critical to U.S. national interests. ISIS
now controls more territoryin Iraq and Syriathan any other terrorist group anywhere in the world. When al-Qaeda in
Iraq joined the fight in Syria, the group changed its name to ISIS. ISIS added Syrians and foreign fighters to its ranks, built
its supply of arms and money and gained significant battlefield experience fighting Bashar Assads regime. Together with
the security vacuum in Iraq and Nouri al-Malikis alienation of the Sunnis, this culminated in ISISs successful blitzkrieg
across western Iraq in the spring and summer of 2014, when it seized large amounts of territory. ISIS is not the first
extremist group to take and hold territory. Al-Shabab in Somalia did so a number of years ago and still holds territory
there, al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb did so in Mali in 2012, and al-Qaeda in Yemen did so there at roughly the same
time. I fully expect extremist groups to attempt to takeand sometimes be successful in takingterritory in the years
ahead. But no other group has taken so much territory so quickly as ISIS has. Second, ISIS is attracting young men and
women to travel to Syria and Iraq to join its cause. At this writing, at least 20,000 foreign nationals from roughly 90
countries have gone to Syria and Iraq to join the fight. Most have joined ISIS. This flow of foreigners has outstripped the
flow of such fighters into Iraq during the war there a decade ago. And there are more foreign fighters in Syria and Iraq
today than there were in Afghanistan in the 1980s working to drive the Soviet Union out of that country. These foreign
nationals are getting experience on the battlefield, and they are becoming increasingly radicalized to ISISs cause. There is
a particular subset of these fighters to worry about. Somewhere between 3,500 and 5,000 jihadist
wannabes have traveled to Syria and Iraq from Western Europe, Canada, Australia and the U.S. They all have
easy access to the U.S. homeland, which presents two major concerns: that these
fighters will leave the Middle East and either conduct an attack on their own or
conduct an attack at the direction of the ISIS leadership. The former has already
happened in Europe. It has not happened yet in the U.S.but it will . In spring 2014, Mehdi
Nemmouche, a young Frenchman who went to fight in Syria, returned to Europe and shot three people at the Jewish
Museum of Belgium in Brussels. The third threat is that ISIS is building a following among other extremist groups around
the world. The allied exaltation is happening at a faster pace than al-Qaeda ever enjoyed. It has occurred in Algeria, Libya,
Egypt and Afghanistan. More will follow. These groups, which are already dangerous, will become even more so. They will
increasingly target ISISs enemies (including us), and they will increasingly take on ISISs brutality. We saw the targeting
play out in early 2015 when an ISIS-associated group in Libya killed an American in an attack on a hotel in Tripoli
frequented by diplomats and international businesspeople. And we saw the extreme violence play out just a few weeks
after that when another ISIS-affiliated group in Libya beheaded 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians. And fourth, perhaps most
insidiously, ISISs message is radicalizing young men and women around the globe who have never traveled to Syria or
Iraq but who want to commit an attack to demonstrate their solidarity with ISIS. These are the so-called lone wolves. Even
before May 4, such an ISIS-inspired attack had already occurred in the U.S.: an individual with sympathies for ISIS
attacked two New York City police officers with a hatchet. Al-Qaeda has inspired such U.S. attacksthe Fort Hood
shootings in late 2009 that killed 13 and the Boston Marathon bombing in spring 2013 that killed five and injured nearly
300. The attempted attack in Texas is just the latest of these. We can expect more of these kinds of attacks in the U. S.
Attacks by ISIS-inspired individuals are occurring at a rapid pace around the worldroughly 10 since ISIS took control of
so much territory. Two such attacks have occurred in Canada, including the October 2014 attack on the Parliament
building. And another occurred in Sydney, in December 2014. Many planning such attacksin Australia, Western Europe
and the U.S.have been arrested before they could carry out their terrorist plans. Today an ISIS-directed
ISIS will attack three reasons its capabilities are growing, an attack would be
good propaganda, and it basically hates all things America
Rogan 15 (Tom, panelist on The McLaughlin Group and holds the Tony Blankley Chair at the
Steamboat Institute, Why ISIS Will Attack America, National Review, 3-24-15,
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415866/why-isis-will-attack-america-tom-rogan)//MJ
There is no good in you if they are secure and happy while you have a pulsing vein. Erupt volcanoes of jihad everywhere.
Light the earth with fire upon all the [apostate rulers], their soldiers and supporters. ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi,
November 2014. Those words werent idle. The Islamic State (ISIS) is still advancing, across continents
and cultures. Its attacking Shia Muslims in Yemen, gunning down Western tourists
in Tunisia, beheading Christians in Libya, and murdering or enslaving all who do
not yield in Iraq and Syria. Its black banner seen as undaunted by the international coalition against it, new
recruits still flock to its service. The Islamic States rise is, in other words, not over, and it is likely to end
up involving an attack on America. Three reasons why such an attempt is inevitable: ISISS STRATEGY
PRACTICALLY DEMANDS IT Imbued with existential hatred against the United States, the group doesnt just oppose
American power, it opposes Americas identity. Where the United States is a secular democracy that binds law to
individual freedom, the Islamic State is a totalitarian empire determined to sweep freedom from the earth. As an
ideological and physical necessity, ISIS must ultimately conquer America. Incidentally,
this kind of total-war strategy explains why counterterrorism experts are rightly concerned about nuclear proliferation.
The Islamic States strategy is also energized by its desire to replace al-Qaeda as Salafi
jihadisms global figurehead. While al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and ISIS had a short flirtation
last year, ISIS has now signaled its intent to usurp al-Qaedas power in its home territory. Attacks by ISIS last week against
Shia mosques in the Yemeni capital of Sanaa were, at least in part, designed to suck recruits, financial donors, and
prestige away from AQAP. But to truly displace al-Qaeda, ISIS knows it must furnish a new
9/11. ITS CAPABILITIES ARE GROWING Today, ISIS has thousands of European citizens in its ranks.
Educated at the online University of Edward Snowden, ISIS operations officers have cut back
With the groups leaders styling themselves as Mohammeds heirs, Allahs chosen
warriors on earth, attacking the infidel United States would reinforce ISISs
narrative. Of course, attacking America wouldnt actually serve the Islamic States long-term objectives. Quite the
opposite: Any atrocity would fuel a popular American resolve to crush the group with expediency. (Make no mistake, it
would be crushed.) The problem, however, is that, until then, America is in the bulls eye.
Al-Qaeda
Terror threat high nowAl Qaeda initiatives prove
Daily Mail 7/15 (7-15-2015, "Terror alert remains high,"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-181751/Terror-alert-remains-high.html)
Britain and the US remained on terror alert today, following a call from Osama bin
Laden's deputy for Muslims to attack the "missions" of the two countries. An audio
tape said to have come from Ayman al-Zawahri was played on Arabic television
station al-Jazeera, urging "brothers" to follow the example of the September 11
hijackers. "Consider your 19 brothers who attacked America in Washington and
New York with their planes as an example," said the voice, identified as al-Zawahri by al-Jazeera, which
did not say how it got the tape. "Attack the missions of the United States , the UK, Australia and Norway
and their interests, companies and employees. Turn the ground beneath their feet
into an inferno and kick them out of your countries," said the tape. "Know that you are
not alone in this battle. Your mujahadeen brothers are following the enemies as
well and are lying in wait for them." Al-Zawahri, who has not been seen since the
war in Afghanistan, lashed out at Arab leaders for offering "airports and the
facilities" to the Allied troops, in an apparent reference to the war on Iraq. His call to
arms came as British and US embassies in the Saudi capital Riyadh remained shut amid fears they could be targeted in
"imminent" terrorist attacks, and America upped its homeland terror alert status. Hijack plot foiled And details
emerged of a possible al Qaida plot to hijack a civilian airliner in the Saudi town of Jeddah and crash it into a bank.
According to reports, three armed Moroccans arrested in Jeddah's airport on Monday had planned the suicide hijack and
hoped to crash the plane into the headquarters of Saudi's National Commercial Bank. It was not clear if they were linked
to last week's triple suicide bombings of foreign residential compounds in Riyadh which killed 34, including two Britons,
or similar bombings in Morocco on Friday. Security boosted Security officials warned that al Qaida
Link
Extend Hines 13 restrictions by the FISA Court on NSA data collection through
Section 702 would mean records key to stopping terrorism would be unavailable to
the government. Specifically, through Section 702, the government has been
essential to preventing over 90% of the 50 known terrorist plots. Metadata is the
only source of information that can capture the sequence of events, which is crucial
to stopping large-scale terrorist attacks.
Unwarranted domestic surveillance is the most significant anti-terror tool
available- allows us to infiltrate terror groups and prevent weapons proliferationhas solved 53 of 54 suppressed terror attacks in recent years
Clarke et al 2013 [Report and Recommendations of the Presidents Review Group on
Intelligence and Surveillance Technologies, Liberty and Security in a Changing World,
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2013-12-12_rg_final_report.pdf, Accessed
7/3/15, AX]
According to NSA, section 702 is the most significant tool in NSA collection arsenal for the
detection, identification, and disruption of terrorist threats to the US and around the world. To
cite just one example, collection under section 702 was critical to the discovery and disruption of a
planned bomb attack in 2009 against the New York City subway system and led to the arrest and
conviction of Najibullah Zazi and several of his co-conspirators. According to the Department of Justice and
the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in a 2012 report to Congress: Section 702 enables the
Government to collect information effectively and efficiently about foreign targets overseas and in
a manner that protects the privacy and civil liberties of Americans. Through rigorous oversight,
the Government is able to evaluate whether changes are needed to the procedures or guidelines,
and what other steps may be appropriate to safeguard the privacy of personal information . In addition, the
Department of Justice provides the joint assessments and other reports to the FISC. The FISC has been actively involved
in the review of section 702 collection. Together, all of these mechanisms ensure thorough and continuous oversight of
section 702 activities. . . . Section 702 is vital to keeping the nation safe. It provides information about
the plans and identities of terrorists allowing us to glimpse inside terrorist organizations and
obtain information about how those groups function and receive support. In addition, it lets us collect
information about the intentions and capabilities of weapons proliferators and other foreign
adversaries who threaten the United States. In reauthorizing section 702 for an additional five years in 2012,
the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence concluded: [T]he authorities provided [under section
702] have greatly increased the governments ability to collect information and act quickly against
important foreign intelligence targets. The Committee has also found that [section 702] has been implemented
with attention to protecting the privacy and civil liberties of US persons, and has been the subject of extensive oversight by
the Executive branch, the FISC, as well as the Congress. . . . [The] failure to reauthorize [section 702] would
result in a loss of significant intelligence and impede the ability of the Intelligence Community to
respond quickly to new threats and intelligence opportunities.147Our own review is not inconsistent with
this assessment. During the course of our analysis, NSA shared with the Review Group the details of 54
counterterrorism investigations since 2007 that resulted in the prevention of terrorist attacks in
diverse nations and the United States. In all but one of these cases, information obtained under
section 702 contributed in some degree to the success of the investigation. Although it is difficult to assess
precisely how many of these investigations would have turned out differently without the information learned through
section 702, we are persuaded that section 702 does in fact play an important role in the nations effort to
The U.S. governments sweeping surveillance programs have disrupted more than 50 terrorist
plots in the United States and abroad, including a plan to bomb the New York Stock Exchange,
senior government officials testified Tuesday. The officials, appearing before a largely friendly House committee,
defended the collection of telephone and Internet data by the National Security Agency as central
to protecting the United States and its allies against terrorist attacks. And they said that recent
disclosures about the surveillance operations have caused serious damage. We are now faced with a situation
that, because this information has been made public, we run the risk of losing these collection capabilities,
said Robert S. Litt, general counsel of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Were not going to know for
many months whether these leaks in fact have caused us to lose these capabilities, but if they do have that effect, there is
no doubt that they will cause our national security to be affected. The hearing before the House
Intelligence Committee was the third congressional session examining the leaks of classified material about two top-secret
surveillance programs by Edward Snowden, 29, a former NSA contractor and onetime CIA employee. Articles based on the
material in The Washington Post and Britains Guardian newspaper have raised concerns about intrusions on civil
liberties and forced the Obama administration to mount an aggressive defense of the effectiveness and privacy protections
of the operations. Gen. Keith B. Alexander, the head of the NSA, told the committee that the programs had
helped prevent potential terrorist events over 50 times since 9/11. He said at least 10 of the disrupted
plots involved terrorism suspects or targets in the United States. Alexander said officials do not plan to release additional
information publicly, to avoid revealing sources and methods of operation, but he said the House and Senate intelligence
committees will receive classified details of the thwarted plots. Newly revealed plots In testimony last week, Alexander
said the surveillance programs had helped prevent an attack on the subway system in New York
City and the bombing of a Danish newspaper. Sean Joyce, deputy director of the FBI, described two
additional plots Tuesday that he said were stopped through the surveillance a plan by a Kansas
City, Mo., man to bomb the New York Stock Exchange and efforts by a San Diego man to send
money to terrorists in Somalia. The officials said repeatedly that the operations were authorized by Congress and
subject to oversight through internal mechanisms and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, whose proceedings are
secret. Alexander said that more than 90 percent of the information on the foiled plots came from a program targeting the
communications of foreigners, known as PRISM. The program was authorized under Section 702 of a 2008
law that amended the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The law authorizes the NSA to collect e-
mails and other Internet communications to and from foreign targets overseas who are thought to
be involved in terrorism or nuclear proliferation or who might provide critical foreign
intelligence. No American in the country or abroad can be targeted without a warrant, and no person inside the United
States can be targeted without a warrant. A second program collects all call records from U.S. phone companies. It is
authorized under Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act. The records do not include the content of calls, location data, or a
subscribers name or address. That law, passed in 2001 and renewed twice since then, also amended FISA. Snowden, a
high school dropout who worked at an NSA operations center in Hawaii for 15 months as a contractor, released highly
classified information on both programs, claiming they represent government overreach. He has been in hiding since
publicly acknowledging on June 9 that he leaked the material. Several lawmakers pressed for answers on how Snowden, a
low-level systems administrator, could have had access to highly classified material such as a court order for phone
records. We need to seal this crack in the system, said Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger (Md.), the ranking Democrat on
the intelligence panel. Alexander said he is working with intelligence officials to come up with a two-person rule to
ensure that the agency can block unauthorized people from removing information from the system. But Alexander and the
other witnesses focused more heavily on justifying the programs and arguing that they operate under legal guidelines. As
Americans, we value our privacy and our civil liberties, Alexander said. As Americans, we also value our security and our
safety. In the 12 years since the attacks on September 11th, we have lived in relative safety and
security as a nation. That security is a direct result of the intelligence communitys quiet efforts to
better connect the dots and learn from the mistakes that permitted those attacks to occur on
9/11.
Surveillance is necessary and has very little negative consequences on civil liberty
Boot 13 [Max Boot, Max Boot is an American author, consultant, editorialist, lecturer, and
military historian, Stay calm and let the NSA carry on,
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/09/opinion/la-oe-boot-nsa-surveillance-20130609, June
9th, 2015//Rahul]
After 9/11, there was a widespread expectation of many more terrorist attacks on the United States.
So far that hasn't happened. We haven't escaped entirely unscathed (see Boston Marathon, bombing of),
but on the whole we have been a lot safer than most security experts, including me, expected. In light
of the current controversy over the National Security Agency's monitoring of telephone calls and emails, it is worthwhile to
ask: Why is that? It is certainly not due to any change of heart among our enemies. Radical Islamists still want to
kill American infidels. But the vast majority of the time, they fail. The Heritage Foundation estimated last
year that 50 terrorist attacks on the American homeland had been foiled since 2001. Some, admittedly,
failed through sheer incompetence on the part of the would-be terrorists. For instance, Faisal Shahzad, a Pakistani
American jihadist, planted a car bomb in Times Square in 2010 that started smoking before exploding, thereby alerting
two New Yorkers who in turn called police, who were able to defuse it. But it would be naive to adduce all of our security
success to pure serendipity. Surely more attacks would have succeeded absent the ramped-up counterterrorism efforts undertaken by the U.S. intelligence community, the military and law enforcement. And a
large element of the intelligence community's success lies in its use of special intelligence that is, communications
intercepts. The CIA is notoriously deficient in human intelligence infiltrating spies into terrorist organizations is hard
to do, especially when we have so few spooks who speak Urdu, Arabic, Persian and other relevant languages. But the
NSA is the best in the world at intercepting communications. That is the most important technical
advantage we have in the battle against fanatical foes who will not hesitate to sacrifice their lives
to take ours. Which brings us to the current kerfuffle over two NSA monitoring programs that have been exposed by the
Guardian and the Washington Post. One program apparently collects metadata on all telephone calls made in the United
States. Another program provides access to all the emails, videos and other data found on the servers of major Internet
firms such as Google, Apple and Microsoft. At first blush these intelligence-gathering activities raise the
specter of Big Brother snooping on ordinary American citizens who might be cheating on their spouses or
bad-mouthing the president. In fact, there are considerable safeguards built into both programs to
ensure that doesn't happen. The phone-monitoring program does not allow the NSA to listen in on conversations
without a court order. All that it can do is to collect information on the time, date and destination of phone calls. It
should go without saying that it would be pretty useful to know if someone in the U.S. is calling a
number in Pakistan or Yemen that is used by a terrorist organizer. As for the Internet-monitoring
program, reportedly known as PRISM, it is apparently limited to "non-U.S. persons" who are abroad and
thereby enjoy no constitutional protections. These are hardly rogue operations. Both programs were initiated by
President George W. Bush and continued by President Obama with the full knowledge and support of Congress and
continuing oversight from the federal judiciary. That's why the leaders of both the House and Senate intelligence
committees, Republicans and Democrats alike, have come to the defense of these activities. It's possible that, like all
government programs, these could be abused see, for example, the IRS making life tough on tea partiers. But there is
no evidence of abuse so far and plenty of evidence in the lack of successful terrorist attacks
that these programs have been effective in disrupting terrorist plots. Granted there is
something inherently creepy about Uncle Sam scooping up so much information about us. But Google, Facebook, Amazon,
Twitter, Citibank and other companies know at least as much about us, because they use very similar data-mining
programs to track our online movements. They gather that information in order to sell us products, and no one seems to
be overly alarmed. The NSA is gathering that information to keep us safe from terrorist attackers. Yet somehow its actions
have become a "scandal," to use a term now loosely being tossed around. The real scandal here is that the Guardian and
Washington Post are compromising our national security by telling our enemies about our intelligence-gathering
capabilities. Their news stories reveal, for example, that only nine Internet companies share information with the NSA.
This is a virtual invitation to terrorists to use other Internet outlets for searches, email, apps and
all the rest. No intelligence effort can ever keep us 100% safe, but to stop or scale back the NSA's
special intelligence efforts would amount to unilateral disarmament in a war against terrorism
that is far from over.
useless because it has not by itself prevented an attack reflect unfamiliarity with
intelligence. Intelligence does not work as it is portrayed in filmssolitary agents do not make startling discoveries
that lead to dramatic, last-minute success. Success is the product of the efforts of teams of dedicated
individuals from many agencies, using many tools and techniques, working together to assemble
fragments of data from many sources into a coherent picture. In practice, analysts must
simultaneously explore many possible scenarios. A collection program contributes
by not only what it reveals, but also what it lets us reject as false. The Patriot Act Section 215
domestic bulk telephony metadata program provided information that allowed analysts
to rule out some scenarios and suspects. The consensus view from interviews with current and former
intelligence officials is that while metadata collection is useful, it is the least useful of the collection programs available to
the intelligence community. If there was one surveillance program they had to give up, it would be 215, but this would not
come without an increase in risk. Restricting metadata collection will make it harder to
identify attacks and increase the time it takes to do this. Spying on Allies NSAs mass surveillance
programs for counterterrorism were carried out in cooperation with more than 30 countries. Unilateral U.S. collection
programs focused on national security problems: nonproliferation, counterintelligence (including Russian covert influence
operations in Europe), and arms sales to China. The United States failed to exercise sufficient oversight over intelligence
collection, but the objectives set for NSA reflect real security problems for the United States and its allies. The notion that
friends dont spy on friends is naive. The United States has friends that routinely spy on it and yet are strong security
partners. Relations among powerful states are complex and not explained by simple bromides drawn from personal life.
The most startling thing about U.S. espionage against Germany was the absence of a strategic calculation of risk and
benefit. There are grounds for espionage (what other major power has a former leader on Russias payroll?), but the
benefits were outweighed by the risk to the relationship. The case for spying on Brazil is even weaker. While Brazil is often
antagonistic, it poses no risk to national security. If economic intelligence on Brazil is needed, the private sector has
powerful incentives and legitimate means to obtain information and usually has the best data. Risk Is Not Going Away
surveillance programs since the 9/11 attacks to detect and prevent terrorist activity, often in cooperation with other
countries, including the United States. Precise metrics on risk and effectiveness do not exist for
surveillance, and we are left with conflicting opinions from intelligence officials and civil libertarians as to what
makes counterterrorism successful. Given resurgent authoritarianism and continuing jihad, the new context for the
surveillance debate is that the likelihood of attack is increasing. Any legislative change
because the NSA, a Defense Department agency created in 1952, falls under the category of a
"black" program in the federal budget, a term applied to classified efforts. The NSA is one of at
least 15 intelligence agencies, and combined the total U.S. intelligence budget in 2012 was $75
billion, said Steve Aftergood, director of the government secrecy program at the Federation of American Scientists, a
nonpartisan think tank that analyzes national and international security issues. The intelligence budget includes
funding for both classified and unclassified activities. Funding for classified programs has tracked
the upward trend in defense spending over the past decade, according to an analysis of fiscal year
2012 Defense Department budget request by Todd Harrison of the Center for Strategic and
Budgetary Assessments. Aftergood estimates about 14% of the country's total intelligence budget
-- or about $10 billion -- goes to the NSA.
AT: Recruitment
NSA recruiting is going extremely well
Libicki et al 14 [Libicki, Martin C., 2014, "Hackers Wanted: An Examination of the
Cybersecurity Labor Market," RAND, http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR430.html
jf]
The NSA is the countrys largest and leading employer of cybersecurity
professionals. In the face of the current stresses in the market for such professionals, officials there
believe they are doing quite wellfewer than 1 percent of their positions are vacant
for any significant length of time, and supervisors, queried after their new hires have been working for
six months, report being very happy with the personnel they get . NSA also has a very low turnover
rate (losing no more to voluntary quits than to retirements). One reason is that it pays attention to senior technical
development programs to ensure that employees stay current and engaged. Yet, to get to that point, our interview
indicates that NSA must and does pay a great deal of attention to workforce issues. If not its primary focus, then it is still
very high up on the list. Although only 80 people have recruitment as their full-time occupation, another 300 have
recruitment as an additional duty, and another 1,500 beyond that are involved in the whole recruitment and employment
process. All told, that is a great deal of effortsuggesting, from our perspective, that the difficulties of finding
Silicon valley jobs are comparatively a much bigger challenge for NSA recruitment
-- the NSA has already had to deal with recruitment issues in the past
Brumfiel 3/31 (science correspondent for NPR, 3/31/15, Geoff Brumfiel, NPR, MARCH 31,
2015, After Snowden, The NSA Faces Recruitment Challenge,
http://www.npr.org/2015/03/31/395829446/after-snowden-the-nsa-faces-recruitmentchallenge, accessed 7/17/15 JH @ DDI)
But Ziring says there's a much bigger problem: "I was at a Dartmouth career fair a few months ago," he says,
"and our table was right across from Facebook. And we are looking for some of the same things that they are." Ever
since the Snowden leaks, cybersecurity has been hot in Silicon Valley. I n part that's
because the industry no longer trusts the government as much as it once did. Companies want to develop
their own security, and they're willing to pay top dollar to get the same people the
NSA is trying to recruit. Students like Swann. Last summer Microsoft paid him $7,000 a month to work as an
intern. The company even rented him a car. "It was actually really nice," Swann says. "It was a Subaru Legacy." Ziring says
the agency can't compete on money, so he tries to sell it in other ways: "You know we have good health
benefits, and we're government, right? So we have a huge scope of insurance to choose from," he says.
Impact
Extend Cooper 13 currently, there are many individuals who have the desire and
capabilities to cause large-scale destruction, specifically through fatal bioweapons.
The spread of fatal diseases means that extinction is inevitable, and even if the
disease does not cause immediate extinction, resource wars over disease cures will
be inevitable, causing even more death.
Bioterrorism
Bioweapons are easily accessible by terrorists and have empirically cause deaths
Wilson 13 (Grant, 1/17/13, University of Virginia School of Law, MINIMIZING GLOBAL
CATASTROPHIC AND EXISTENTIAL RISKS FROM EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES THROUGH
INTERNATIONAL LAW, professor @ University of Virginia School of Law,
http://lib.law.virginia.edu/lawjournals/sites/lawjournals/files/3.%20Wilson%20-%20Emerging
%20Technologies.pdf, 7/15/15, SM)
ii. Risk of bioterrorism The threat of the malicious release of bioengineered organisms (i.e., bioterrorism) poses a
GCR/ER.75 Bioengineering enables a malicious actor to create an organism that is more deadly to
humans, animals, or plants than anything that exists in the natural world.76 Experts contend that the
barriers for a terrorist to order a DNA sequence for a highly pathogenic virus online or acquire a DNA synthesis machine
online are surmountable. 77 Alternatively, bioterrorists could break into laboratories housing
dangerous bioengineered organismslike the H5N1 virus, for exampleand release them.
Meanwhile, third world countries with laxer standards and lower laboratory accountability are
rapidly discovering and using bioengineering, which may give bioterrorists an easier pathway to
obtain deadly bioengineered organisms.78 There have already been several occasions in which groups
attempted to use or successfully used biological weapons. One unsophisticated example of bioterrorism occurred when
an individual contaminated salads and dressing with salmonella in what apparently was an attempt to decide a local
election.79 Another example occurred in 2001, when bioterrorists sent envelopes containing anthrax
spores through the mail, infecting twenty-two people and killing five of them. 80 While these
particular acts of bioterrorism did not cause widespread death, deploying extremely deadly bioengineered
organisms over a large area is a real possibility: tests by the United States in 1964 demonstrated
that a single aircraft can contaminate five thousand square kilometers of land with a deadly
bacterial aerosol.81 The recent engineering of an airborne H5N1 virus demonstrates societys
concern over risks of bioterrorism arising from bioengineering. Before scientists could publish their
results of their bioengineered airborne H5N1 virus in the widely read journals Nature and Science, the NSABB
determined that the danger of releasing the sensitive information outweighed the benefits to society, advising that the
findings not be published in their entirety.82 The main risk is that either a state or non-state actor could synthesize a
weaponized version of the H5N1 virus to create a disastrous pandemic.83 There is precedent of outside groups
recreating advanced bioengineering experiments, such as when many scientists immediately synthesized hepatitis C
replicons upon publication of its genetic code. 84 However, the NSABBs recommendation was nonbinding, and there is
nothing to stop other scientists from releasing similar data in the future. Furthermore, while the NSABB merely asserts
that the blueprints of the virus should not be printed, other biosecurity experts argue that the virus should never have
been created in the first place because of risks that the viruses would escape or be stolen.85
Terrorists using bioweapons can achieve the same mortality rates as with WMD
bioweapons are cheaper, more effective
SIU School of Medicine 14 (12/15/14, SIU School of Medicine, Overview of Potential Agents
of Biological Terrorism, http://www.siumed.edu/medicine/id/bioterrorism.htm#threat,
7/15/15, SM)
Biological weapons are very attractive to the terrorist because of several characteristics. Aerosols of biological agents
are invisible, silent, odorless, tasteless, and are relatively easily dispersed. They are 600 - 2000 times cheaper
than other weapons of mass destruction. It is estimated that the cost would be about 0.05% the cost of
a conventional weapon to produce similar numbers of mass casualties per square kilometer . The
production is relatively easy, using the common technology available for the production of some antibiotics, vaccines,
foods, and beverages. The delivery systems such as spray devices from an airplane, boat or car are commonly available.
The natural lead time provided by the organism's incubation period (3 to 7 days for most potential
organisms) would allow for the terrorists' escape before any investigation starts. In addition, the use of an
endemic infectious agent may cause confusion because of the inability to differentiate a biological warfare attack from a
natural epidemic. For some agents potential exists for secondary or tertiary transmission by person-to-person
transmission or natural vectors. The consequences of biological weapons use are many. They can
rapidly produce mass effect that overwhelms services and the health care system of the
communities. Most of the civilian population is susceptible to infections caused by these agents.
They are associated with high morbidity and mortality rates . The resulting illness is usually difficult to
diagnose and treat early, particularly in areas where the disease is rarely seen. One kilogram of anthrax powder
has the capability to kill up to 100,000 people depending on the mechanism of delivery (33). The economic
impact of a biological attack has been estimated to be from 478 million/100,000 persons exposed
(brucellosis scenario) to 26.2 billion/100,000 persons exposed (anthrax scenario) (34). ""Top Types of
Bioterrorism Attacks A bioterrorist attack may occur in 2 scenarios - overt and covert. In the past emergency
responses were prepared based on overt attacks like bombings and chemical agents that cause immediate and obvious
effects. However, attacks with biological agents are more likely to be covert. They pose different challenges and require
emergency planning with the involvement of the public health infrastructure. The attack by a biological agent will not have
an immediate impact because of the delay between exposure and onset of illness (i.e., the incubation period). Therefore,
the first victims of a bioterrorism action will need to be identified by physicians or other primary health care providers.
Based on the first wave of victims, pubic health officials will need to determine that an attack has occurred, identify the
organism and prevent more casualties through prevention strategies (e.g. mass vaccination, prophylactic treatment) and
infection control procedures (35). The clues to a potential bioterrorist attack include an outbreak of a rare or new disease,
an outbreak of diseases in a non-endemic area, a seasonal disease during an off season time, a known pathogen with
unusual resistance or unusual epidemiologic features, an unusual clinical presentation or age distribution, a genetically
identical pathogen emerging rapidly in different geographical areas (36).
Cyberterrorism
Cyberterrorists could break into computers and launch an attack on a nuclear state
triggers global nuclear war
Fritz 09 (Jason, May 2009, International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and
Disarmament, Hacking Nuclear Command and Control, Jason is a defense researcher, served as
a cavalry officer in the US Army for 6 years, masters in IR @ Bond University,
icnnd.org/documents/jason_fritz_hacking_nc2.doc, 7/15/15, SM)
In order to see how cyber terrorists could detonate a nuclear weapon it is important to identify the structures
which they would be attempting to penetrate. Nuclear command and control (NC2), sometimes referred to as nuclear
command and control and communications (NC3) includes the personnel, equipment, communications, facilities,
organisation, procedures, and chain of command involved with maintaining a nuclear weapon capability. A Command and
Control Centre is typically a secure room, bunker, or building in a government or military facility that operates as the
agency's dispatch centre, surveillance monitoring centre, coordination office and alarm monitoring centre all in one. A
state may have multiple command and control centres within the government and military branches which can act
independently or, more commonly, be used in the event a higher node is incapable of performing its function. A minimum
of eight states possess a nuclear arsenal, providing eight varying nuclear command and control structures for cyber
terrorist to target. The eight states which possess nuclear weapons are, in order of acquisition, the US, Russia (former
Soviet Union), the UK, France, China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea. South Africa formerly possessed nuclear
weapons, but has since dismantled its arsenal. Israel is also widely believed to have nuclear weapons, but has not officially
confirmed their status as a nuclear state. There are approximately 20,000 active nuclear weapons in the
world. The vast majority of these belong to the US and Russia, stemming from the Cold War.
Nuclear command and control has inherent weaknesses in relation to cyber warfare. The concept
of mutually assured destruction means a state must have the capability to launch nuclear weapons in the event
of a decapitating strike. This requires having nuclear weapons spread out in multiple locations (mobility and
redundancy), so an enemy could not destroy all of their capabilities . Examples of this include land based
mobile launch platforms and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM). This provides terrorists with multiple
locations for attaining access to these weapons. Further, under NATO nuclear weapons sharing, the US has supplied
nuclear weapons to Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey for storage and possible deployment. This
further increases the number of access points for terrorists, allowing them to assess
not only installations and procedures, but also which borders and state specific laws
may be easier to circumvent. The weapons themselves may all be under the complete control of the US, but
the operational plans of terrorists may include items such as reconnaissance, social engineering, and crossing borders
which remain unique between states. The potential collapse of a state also presents a challenge. Following the collapse of
the Soviet Union, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine were in possession of nuclear weapons. These have since been
transferred to Russia, but there was, and still is, considerable concern over the security and integrity of those weapons,
especially in the face of a destabilized government and civilian hardship. Mutually assured destruction also
promotes a hair trigger launch posture and the need for launch orders to be decided on quickly.
The advent of SLBMs increased this high pressure tension, as the ability of a submarine to sneak up close to a states
border before launch significantly reduced response time. These short decision times make it easier for
terrorists to provoke a launch as little time, and little discussion, is given to assess a situation in
full. The desire to reduce the time it takes to disseminate plans to nuclear forces may expand the use of computers in
nuclear command and control, or lead to the introduction of fail-deadly and autonomous systems. This chapter is by no
means comprehensive, However it sheds some light on the operations of nuclear command and control and the difficulties
in defending those systems from cyber terrorism. Many of the details of nuclear command and control are classified, so
the information provided below may be outdated. However it points towards a pattern, and there is no certainty these
systems and procedures have been updated since entering open source knowledge. Further, terrorists do not have to
restrict themselves to unclassified data, and therefore may be able to obtain up to date information. The United States
The US employs a nuclear deterrence triad consisted of nuclear-capable long range bombers, SLBMs, and land based
intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), as well as an arsenal of nonstrategic (tactical) nuclear weapons. US nuclear
command and control covers a geographically dispersed force with the US President, as Commander in Chief, being the
highest authority in the decision to make a nuclear launch. There is a hierarchy of succession in the event the President
cannot perform this duty, such as if the President were killed in an attack. Additionally, once the order to launch is given,
it travels down a chain of command; the President does not press the button, so to speak, nor is the President physically
present at the launch location. These locations would be targets in a nuclear war, so it is imperative that the leader not be
there. Additionally, multiple independent launch locations make this impossible (except for cases in which multiple
missiles are tied together in a Single Integrated Operational Plan). So it is theoretically possible to subvert this control by
falsifying the order at any number of locations down that chain of command. The infrastructure that supports the
President in his decision to launch nuclear weapons is the Nuclear Command and Control System (NCCS). The NCCS
must support situation monitoring, tactical warning and attack assessment of missile launches, senior leader decision
making, dissemination of Presidential force-direction orders, and management of geographically dispersed forces
(Critchlow 2006). Key US nuclear command centres include fixed locations, such as the National Military Command
Center (NMCC) and the Raven Rock Mountain Complex (Site R), and mobile platforms, such as the E-4B National
Airborne Operations Center (NAOC) and the Mobile Consolidated Command Center (MCCC). The US seeks to integrate its
nuclear forces into its vision of command, control, computers, communications, intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance (C4ISR) hinting towards a greater reliance on computer technology in maintaining and upgrading its
nuclear force, not only to combat against Cold War style nuclear war, but also against perceived emerging threats from
China, Iran and North Korea. In particular the US recognises these states potential to use nuclear weapons detonated at
high altitude to create an electromagnetic pulse (EMP). The threat of EMP was known during the Cold War, and a
considerable amount of attention has been paid to hardening nuclear systems (Critchlow 2006). The Minimum Essential
Emergency Communications Network (MEECN) links to the ICBMs, bombers, and submarine forces. Information widely
available on the internet shows the US is seeking to upgrade the MEECNs satellite communications capability through
Advanced Extremely High Frequency and the Transformational Communications Satellite programs. Cyber terrorists may
use this knowledge to research these new forms, or to expose weaknesses in the old system before upgrades are completed.
Early warning systems and communications are essential to assessing whether a nuclear launch has been made and
communicating the orders to launch a retaliatory strike. Falsifying the data provided by either of these systems would be
of prime interest to terrorists. Commands emanating from the NAOC for example, include Extremely High Frequency and
Very Low Frequency/Low Frequency links, and its activation during a traditional terrorist attack, as happened on 9/11,
could provide additional clues as to its vulnerabilities. Blogging communities have also revealed that the 9/11 terrorist
attacks revealed insights into the US continuity of operations plan as high level officials were noted heading to specific
installations (Critchlow 2006). One tool designed by the US for initiating a nuclear launch is the nuclear football. It is a
specially outfitted briefcase which can be used by the President to authorize a nuclear strike when away from fixed
command centres. The President is accompanied by an aide carrying the nuclear football at all times. This aide, who is
armed and possibly physically attached to the football, is part of a rotating crew of Presidential aides (one from each of the
five service branches). The football contains a secure satellite communication link and any other material the President
may need to refer to in the event of its use, sometimes referred to as the playbook. The attack options provided in the
football include single ICBM launches and large scale pre-determined scenarios as part of the Single Integrated
Operational Plan. Before initiating a launch the President must be positively identified using a special code on a plastic
card, sometimes referred to as the gold codes or the biscuit. The order must also be approved by a second member of the
government as per the two-man rule (Pike 2006). In terms of detecting and analysing a potential attack, that is,
distinguishing a missile attack from the launch of a satellite or a computer glitch, the US employs dual phenomenology.
This means two different systems must be used to confirm an attack, such as radar and satellite. Terrorists trying to
engage a launch by falsifying this data would need to determine which two systems were being used in coordination at the
target location and spoof both systems. Attempting to falsify commands from the President would also be difficult. Even if
the chain of command is identified, there are multiple checks and balances. For example, doctrine recommends that the
President confer with senior commanders. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is the primary military advisor to the
President. However, the President may choose to consult other advisors as well. Trying to identify who would be consulted
in this system is difficult, and falsification may be exposed at any number of steps. The 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review
emphasizes that new systems of command and control must be survivable in the event of cyber warfare attacks. On the
one hand, this shows that the US is aware of the potential danger posed by computer network operations and are taking
action to prevent it. On the other hand, this shows that they themselves see computer network operations as a weakness in
their system. And the US continues to research new ways to integrate computer systems into their nuclear command and
control, such as IP-based communications, which they admit, has not yet been proven to provide the high degree of
assurance of rapid message transmission needed for nuclear command and control (Critchlow 2006). The US
nuclear arsenal remains designed for the Cold War. This means its paramount feature is to
survive a decapitating strike. In order to do so it must maintain hair-trigger posture on early
warning and decision-making for approximately one-third of its 10,000 nuclear weapons.
According to Bruce G. Blair, President of the Center for Defense Information, and a former Minuteman launch officer:
Warning crews in Cheyenne Mountain, Colo., are allowed only three minutes to judge whether initial
attack indications from satellite and ground sensors are valid or false. Judgments of this sort are
rendered daily, as a result of events as diverse as missiles being tested, or fired for example, Russias firing of Scud
missiles into Chechnya peaceful satellites being lofted into space, or wildfires and solar reflections off oceans and
clouds. If an incoming missile strike is anticipated, the president and his top nuclear advisors would quickly convene an
emergency telephone conference to hear urgent briefings. For example, the war room commander in Omaha would brief
the president on his retaliatory options and their consequences, a briefing that is limited to 30 seconds. All of the largescale responses comprising that briefing are designed for destroying Russian targets by the thousands, and the president
would have only a few minutes to pick one if he wished to ensure its effective implementation. The order would then be
sent immediately to the underground and undersea launch crews, whose own mindless firing drill would last only a few
minutes (Blair 2003). These rapid response times dont leave room for error. Cyber terrorists would
not need deception that could stand up over time; they would only need to be believable for the
first 15 minutes or so. The amount of firepower that could be unleashed in these 15 minutes,
combined with the equally swift Russian response, would be equivalent to approximately
100,000 Hiroshima bombs (Blair 2008).
Cyberterrorists could directly activate nuclear weaponstriggers nuclear war
Fritz 09 (Jason, May 2009, International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and
Disarmament, Hacking Nuclear Command and Control, Jason is a defense researcher, served as
a cavalry officer in the US Army for 6 years, masters in IR @ Bond University,
icnnd.org/documents/jason_fritz_hacking_nc2.doc, 7/15/15, SM)
Direct control of launch The US uses the two-man rule to achieve a higher level of security in nuclear affairs. Under this
rule two authorized personnel must be present and in agreement during critical stages of nuclear command and control.
The President must jointly issue a launch order with the Secretary of Defense; Minuteman missile operators must agree
that the launch order is valid; and on a submarine, both the commanding officer and executive officer must agree that the
order to launch is valid. In the US, in order to execute a nuclear launch, an Emergency Action Message (EAM) is needed.
This is a preformatted message that directs nuclear forces to execute a specific attack. The contents of an EAM change
daily and consist of a complex code read by a human voice. Regular monitoring by shortwave listeners and videos posted
to YouTube provide insight into how these work. These are issued from the NMCC, or in the event of destruction, from the
designated hierarchy of command and control centres. Once a command centre has confirmed the EAM, using the twoman rule, the Permissive Action Link (PAL) codes are entered to arm the weapons and the message is sent out. These
messages are sent in digital format via the secure Automatic Digital Network and then relayed to aircraft via singlesideband radio transmitters of the High Frequency Global Communications System, and, at least in the past, sent to
nuclear capable submarines via Very Low Frequency (Greenemeier 2008, Hardisty 1985). The technical details of VLF
submarine communication methods can be found online, including PC-based VLF reception. Some reports have noted a
Pentagon review, which showed a potential electronic back door into the US Navys system for
broadcasting nuclear launch orders to Trident submarines (Peterson 2004). The investigation showed that
cyber terrorists could potentially infiltrate this network and insert false orders for launch . The
investigation led to elaborate new instructions for validating launch orders (Blair 2003). Adding further to the
concern of cyber terrorists seizing control over submarine launched nuclear missiles ; The Royal Navy
announced in 2008 that it would be installing a Microsoft Windows operating system on its nuclear submarines (Page
2008). The choice of operating system, apparently based on Windows XP, is not as alarming as the advertising of such a
system is. This may attract hackers and narrow the necessary reconnaissance to learning its details and potential exploits.
It is unlikely that the operating system would play a direct role in the signal to launch, although this is far from certain.
Knowledge of the operating system may lead to the insertion of malicious code, which could be used to gain accelerating
privileges, tracking, valuable information, and deception that could subsequently be used to initiate a launch. Remember
from Chapter 2 that the UKs nuclear submarines have the authority to launch if they believe the central command has
been destroyed. Attempts by cyber terrorists to create the illusion of a decapitating
strike could also be used to engage fail-deadly systems. Open source knowledge is scarce as to
whether Russia continues to operate such a system. However evidence suggests that they have in the past. Perimetr, also
known as Dead Hand, was an automated system set to launch a mass scale nuclear attack in the event of a decapitation
strike against Soviet leadership and military. In a crisis, military officials would send a coded message to the bunkers,
switching on the dead hand. If nearby ground-level sensors detected a nuclear attack on Moscow, and if a break was
detected in communications links with top military commanders, the system would send low-frequency signals over
underground antennas to special rockets. Flying high over missile fields and other military sites, these rockets in turn
would broadcast attack orders to missiles, bombers and, via radio relays, submarines at sea. Contrary to some Western
beliefs, Dr. Blair says, many of Russia's nuclear-armed missiles in underground silos and on mobile launchers can be fired
automatically. (Broad 1993) Assuming such a system is still active, cyber terrorists would need to create a
crisis situation in order to activate Perimetr, and then fool it into believing a decapitating strike had
taken place. While this is not an easy task, the information age makes it easier. Cyber reconnaissance could help locate
the machine and learn its inner workings. This could be done by targeting the computers high of level officialsanyone
who has reportedly worked on such a project, or individuals involved in military operations at underground facilities, such
as those reported to be located at Yamantau and Kosvinksy mountains in the central southern Urals (Rosenbaum 2007,
Blair 2008)
obtained, a false alarm could be followed by something like a DDoS attack, so the operators
believe an attack may be imminent, yet they can no longer verify it. This could add pressure to the
decision making process, and if coordinated precisely, could appear as a first round EMP burst. Terrorist groups
could also attempt to launch a non-nuclear missile, such as the one used by Norway, in an attempt to
fool the system. The number of states who possess such technology is far greater than the number
of states who possess nuclear weapons. Obtaining them would be considerably easier, especially when enhancing
operations through computer network operations. Combining traditional terrorist methods with cyber
techniques opens opportunities neither could accomplish on their own. For example, radar stations
might be more vulnerable to a computer attack, while satellites are more vulnerable to jamming from a laser beam, thus
together they deny dual phenomenology. Mapping communications networks through cyber reconnaissance may expose
weaknesses, and automated scanning devices created by more experienced hackers can be readily found on the internet.
Intercepting or spoofing communications is a highly complex science. These systems are designed to protect against the
worlds most powerful and well funded militaries. Yet, there are recurring gaffes, and the very nature of asymmetric
warfare is to bypass complexities by finding simple loopholes. For example, commercially available software for voicemorphing could be used to capture voice commands within the command and control structure, cut these sound bytes into
phonemes, and splice it back together in order to issue false voice commands (Andersen 2001, Chapter 16). Spoofing
could also be used to escalate a volatile situation in the hopes of starting a nuclear war . In June
1998, a group of international hackers calling themselves Milw0rm hacked the web site of Indias Bhabha Atomic
Research Center (BARC) and put up a spoofed web page showing a mushroom cloud and the text If a nuclear war does
start, you will be the first to scream (Denning 1999). Hacker web-page defacements like these are often derided by critics
of cyber terrorism as simply being a nuisance which causes no significant harm. However, web-page defacements are
becoming more common, and they point towards alarming possibilities in subversion. During the 2007 cyber attacks
against Estonia, a counterfeit letter of apology from Prime Minister Andrus Ansip was planted on his political party
website (Grant 2007). This took place amid the confusion of mass DDoS attacks, real world protests, and accusations
between governments. The 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai illustrate several points. First, terrorists are using
computer technology to enhance their capabilities. To navigate to Mumbai by sea and to aid in reconnaissance of targets,
they used the Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite system and Google Earth (Bedi 2008, Kahn and Worth 2008).
They also used mobile phone SIM cards, purchased in foreign countries, VoIP phone calls, and online money transfers
(Part of 26/11 plot hatched on our soil, admits Pakistan 2009). Falsified identification and stolen credit cards may have
also been aided by online capabilities. Second, a false claim of responsibility was issued through an e-mail to media
outlets. Initial tracking of the IP address showed the e-mail to have been sent from a computer in Russia. It was later
revealed that the e-mail was sent from Pakistan and routed through Russia (Shashthi 2008). Voice-recognition software
was used to allow dictated text to be typed in the Devnagari font (Swami 2008). Lastly, the Mumbai attacks showed an
increasing reliance on information technology by the intended victims of terrorism. This included Twitter messages, Flickr
photos, a map of attack locations on Google Maps, and live text and video coverage of the attacks (Beaumont 2008).
Terrorists could insert disinformation into these systems in order to enhance destruction, evade
capture, or increase hostility between groups. Terrorist could even clandestinely enlist the aid of
their enemy to enhance destruction. For example, at the height of a terror attack they could claim to
have exclusive video footage of the attack, which requires a codec to be downloaded in order to be
viewed. This codec could contain a Trojan which uses the now infected computer to silently
launch DDoS attacks against their desired targets, such as communications networks. Building an infidel
botnet prior to an attack could take on a wide range of symbolism, from a pdf file about anti-terrorism to an unreleased
Hollywood film.
unprotected. We calculated that, based on current realities, in the first year after a full-scale EMP
event, we could expect about two-thirds of the national population 200 million Americans to
perish from starvation and disease, as well as anarchy in the streets. Skeptical? Consider who is capable
of engineering such measures before dismissing the likelihood. In his 2013 book, A Nation Forsaken, Michael Maloof
reported that the 2008 EMP Commission considered whether a hostile nation or terrorist group could attack
with a high-altitude EMP weapon and determined, any number of adversaries possess both the
ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons capabilities, and could attack within 15 years. That was six years ago.
North Korea, Pakistan, India, China and Russia are all in the position to launch an EMP attack
against the United States now, Maloof wrote last year. Maybe youll rest more comfortably knowing the House
intelligence authorization bill passed in May told the intelligence community to report to Congress within six months, on
the threat posed by man-made electromagnetic pulse weapons to United States interests through 2025, including threats
from foreign countries and foreign nonstate actors. Or, maybe thats not so comforting. In 2004 and again in 2008,
separate congressional commissions gave detailed, horrific reports on such threats. Now, Congress wants another report.
In his book, Maloof quotes Clay Wilson of the Congressional Research Service, who said, Several nations, including
reported sponsors of terrorism, may currently have a capability to use EMP as a weapon for cyberwarfare or
cyberterrorism to disrupt communications and other parts of the U.S. critical infrastructure. What would an EMP attack
look like? Within an instant, Maloof writes, we will have no idea whats happening all around us, because we will have
no news. There will be no radio, no TV, no cell signal. No newspaper delivered. Products wont flow into the nearby WalMart. The big trucks will be stuck on the interstates. Gas stations wont be able to pump the fuel they do have. Some police
officers and firefighters will show up for work, but most will stay home to protect their own families. Power lines will get
knocked down in windstorms, but nobody will care. Theyll all be fried anyway. Crops will wither in the fields until
scavenged since the big picking machines will all be idled, and there will be no way to get the crop to market anyway.
Nothing thats been invented in the last 50 years based on computer chips, microelectronics or
digital technology will work. And it will get worse.
Turns Econ
Cyberterrorism targets vulnerable power grids and has large economic impacts
NBC 13 (2/19/13, NBC, Successful hacker attack could cripple U.S. infrastructure, experts say,
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/19/17019005-successful-hacker-attack-couldcripple-us-infrastructure-experts-say?lite, 7/14/15, SM)
Kevin Mandia, the founder and chief executive of Mandiant, discusses cyber-attacks on US companies and organizations.
A report tying the Chinese military to computer attacks against American interests has sent a chill through cyber-security
experts, who worry that the very lifelines of the United States its energy pipelines, its water supply, its banks are
increasingly at risk. The experts say that a successful hacker attack taking out just a part of the nations
electrical grid, or crippling financial institutions for several days, could sow panic or even lead to
loss of life. I call it cyberterrorism that makes 9/11 pale in comparison, Rep. Mike Rogers, a
Michigan Republican and chair of the House Intelligence Committee, told NBC News on Tuesday. An American
computer security company, Mandiant, reported with near certainty that members of a sophisticated Chinese hacking
group work out of the headquarters of a unit of the Chinese army outside Shanghai. The report was first detailed in The
New York Times, which said that the hacking groups focus was increasingly on companies that work with American
infrastructure, including the power grid, gas lines and waterworks. The Chinese embassy in Washington told The Times
that its government does not engage in computer hacking. As reported, the Chinese attacks constitute a sort of
asymmetrical cyberwarfare, analysts said, because they bring the force of the Chinese government and military against
private companies. To us thats crossing a line into a class of victim thats not prepared to withstand that type of attack,
Grady Summers, a Mandiant vice president, said on the MSNBC program Andrea Mitchell Reports. The report comes
as government officials and outside security experts alike are sounding ever-louder alarms about the vulnerability of the
systems that make everyday life in the United States possible. A new report confirmed by U.S. intelligence officials has
pinpointed a building in Shanghai where those working for the Chinese military launched cyberattacks against 141 US
companies spanning 20 industries. NBC's Andrea Mitchell reports. Outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta warned in
October that the United States was facing a threat that amounted to cyber Pearl Harbor and raised
the specter of intentionally derailed trains, contaminated water and widespread blackouts . This
is a pre-9/11 moment, Panetta told business executives in New York. The attackers are plotting.
RELATED: Report: Chinese army tied to widespread U.S. hacking The Times report described an attack on Telvent, a
company that keeps blueprints on more than half the oil and gas pipelines in North and South America and has access to
their systems. A Canadian arm of the company told customers last fall that hackers had broken in, but it immediately cut
off the access so that the hackers could not take control of the pipelines themselves, The Times reported. Dale Peterson,
founder and CEO of Digital Bond, a security company that specializes in infrastructure, told NBC News that these attacks,
known as vendor remote access, are particularly worrisome. If you are a bad guy and you want to attack a lot of different
control systems, you want to be able to take out a lot, he said. The dirty little secret in these control systems is
once you get through the perimeter, they have no security at all. They dont even have a four-digit pin like
your ATM card. Carlos Barria / Reuters Locals walks in front of 'Unit 61398', a secretive Chinese military unit, in the
outskirts of Shanghai. The unit is believed to be behind a series of hacking attacks, a U.S. computer security company
said. The 34-minute blackout at the Super Bowl earlier this month highlighted weak spots in the nations power system.
A National Research Council report declassified by the government last fall warned that a coordinated strike on the
grid could devastate the country. That report considered blackouts lasting weeks or even months
across large parts of the country, and suggested they could lead to public fear, social turmoil and a
body blow to the economy. Vital systems do not have to be taken down for very long or across a
particularly widespread area, the experts noted, to cause social disorder and to spread fear and
anxiety among the population. Last fall, after Hurricane Sandy battered the Northeast, it took barely two days for
reports of gasoline shortages to cause hours-long lines at the pumps and violent fights among drivers. Peterson described
being in Phoenix, Ariz., during a three-day gas pipeline disruption when people were waiting in line six hours and not
going to work. You can imagine someone does these things maliciously, with a little more smarts, something that takes
three months to replace. Similarly, hacking attacks last fall against major American banks believed by some security
experts and government officials to be the work of Iran amounted to mostly limited frustration for customers, but
foreshadowed much bigger trouble if future attacks are more sophisticated. What worries Dmitri Alperovitch, co-founder
of the computer security company CrowdStrike, is a coordinated attack against banks that modifies, rather
than destroys, financial data, making it impossible to reconcile transactions. You could wreak
absolute havoc on the worlds financial system for years, he said. It would be impossible to roll
that back.
coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
(Code of Federal Regulations Title 28 Section 0.85 Set. (2007). Government Inst.) This concept is fairly easy to grasp and
most Americans have an understanding of what terrorism is. But when talking about cyberterrorism there seems to be
some confusion as to its components. In February of 2002 Executive Assistant Director of the FBI Dale Watson gave
testimony before congress stating that cyberterrorism-meaning the use of cyber tools to shut down
counterterrorism expert and special advisor to President Bush on cyberspace security, described
our vulnerability to a cyber terrorist attack as a digital Pearl Harbor . One where you would never see it
coming and would have devastating effects. We can no longer turn a blind eye to these possibilities. In moving forward it
is imperative to imagine the ways terrorists could disrupt the nations information infrastructure and the
computer networks that control telecommunications, the electric grid, water supplies and air
traffic. (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?
res=9804E1D7123BF934A25752C1A9679C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1) METHODOLOGY This research was
conducted using open source documents that are open to the public. All documents are unclassified and openly available
for viewing. References used for the analysis of the topic were found via the Internet. Examples of works cited are
unclassified government documents found on government websites using search terms related to the topic. Internationally
distributed newspapers were also used to support the construction of the paper. Other valid and reliable sources used in
collecting data were government websites for agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigations. Additional research
was pursued utilizing college and university websites that posted studies of similar matters. Furthermore, books written
by experts were examined and relevant information was extracted to reinforce the views within this text. In reviewing
the literature it was important to disseminate that which was reputable and worthy of noting. Information that was not
corroborated or from a source that was not credible was examined and excluded from use based on its merit. Data from
respectable scholars and universities were studied and surveyed. Ideas were compared and contrasted and then used to
support my thesis. Inquiries into this particular field produced numerous results. A logical analysis of the material was
conducted and presented in this paper. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Critical Infrastructure Critical
infrastructure is defined by the USA Patriot Act as systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the
United States that the incapacity or destruction of such systems and assets would have a
debilitating impact on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or
any combination of those matters. (United State, 2001) It can be said that this infrastructure represents
the backbone of the United States. Minimizing our vulnerabilities to terrorist threats is a shared responsibility
that falls on federal, state, and local government as well as private industry. According to the National Strategy for the
Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructure and Key Assets, we must commit to secure(ing) the infrastructure and assets
vital to our national security, governance, public health and safety, economy, and public confidence. (United States,
2003. Pg vii). This network is made up of the institutions that our country relies on to function as a
may increase manyfold because potential foreign investors shift their investments to other,
presumably safer, destinations. Abadie and Gardeazabal (2008) showed that a relatively small increase in the
perceived risk of terrorism can cause an outsized reduction in a countrys net stock of foreign direct
investment and inflict significant damage on its economy. We analyzed 78 developing economies over the period 1984
2008 (Bandyopadhyay, Sandler, and Younas, 2014) and found that on average a relatively small increase in a
countrys domestic terrorist incidents per 100,000 persons sharply reduced net foreign direct
investment. There was a similarly large reduction in net investment if the terrorist incidents
originated abroad or involved foreigners or foreign assets in the attacked country. We also found that greater official
aid flows can substantially offset the damage to foreign direct investmentperhaps in part because the increased aid
allows recipient nations to invest in more effective counterterrorism efforts. Most countries that experienced aboveaverage domestic or transnational terrorist incidents during 19702011 received less foreign direct investment or foreign
aid than the average among the 122 in the sample (see table). It is difficult to assess causation, but the table suggests a
troubling association between terrorism and depressed aid and foreign direct investment, both of which are crucial for
developing economies. It is generally believed that there are higher risks in trading with a nation afflicted by terrorism,
which cause an increase in transaction costs and tend to reduce trade. For example, after the September 11 attacks on New
York City and the Washington, D.C., area, the U.S. border was temporarily closed, holding up truck traffic between the
United States and Canada for an extended time. Nitsch and Schumacher (2004) analyzed a sample of 200 countries over
the period 196093 and found that when terrorism incidents in a pair of trading countries double in one year, trade
between them falls by about 4 percent that same year. They also found that when one of two trading partners
suffers at least one terrorist attack, it reduces trade between them to 91 percent of what it would
be in the absence of terrorism. Blomberg and Hess (2006) estimated that terrorism and other internal and
external conflicts retard trade as much as a 30 percent tariff. More specifically, they found that any trading partner that
experienced terrorism experienced close to a 4 percent reduction in bilateral trade. But Egger and Gassebner (2015) found
more modest trade effects. Terrorism had few to no short-term effects; it was significant over the medium term, which
they defined as more than one and a half years after an attack/incident. Abstracting from the impact of transaction costs
from terrorism, Bandyopadhyay and Sandler (2014b) found that terrorism may not necessarily reduce trade, because
resources can be reallocated. If terrorism disproportionately harmed one productive resource (say land) relative to
another (say labor), then resources would flow to the labor-intensive sector. If a country exported labor-intensive goods,
such as textiles, terrorism could actually lead to increased production and exportation. In other words, although terrorism
may reduce trade in a particular product because it increases transaction costs, its ultimate impact may be either to raise
or reduce overall trade. These apparently contradictory empirical and theoretical findings present rich prospects for future
study. Of course terrorism has repercussions beyond human and material destruction and the economic effects discussed
in this article. Terrorism also influences immigration and immigration policy. The traditional gains and losses from the
international movement of labor may be magnified by national security considerations rooted in a terrorism response. For
example, a recent study by Bandyopadhyay and Sandler (2014a) focused on a terrorist organization based in a developing
country. It showed that the immigration policy of the developed country targeted by the terrorist group can be critical to
containing transnational terrorism. Transnational terrorism targeted at well-protected developed countries tends to be
more skill intensive: it takes a relatively sophisticated terrorist to plan and successfully execute such an attack.
Immigration policies that attract highly skilled people to developed countries can drain the pool of highly skilled terrorist
recruits and may cut down on transnational terrorism.
http://www.utdallas.edu/~tms063000/website/Econ_Consequences_ms.pdf)
Terrorism can impose costs on a targeted country through a number of avenues. Terrorist incidents have
economic consequences by diverting foreign direct investment (FDI), destroying infrastructure,
redirecting public investment funds to security, or limiting trade. If a developing country loses enough
FDI, which is an important source of savings, then it may also experience reduced economic growth. Just as capital may
take flight from a country plagued by a civil war (see Collier et al., 2003), a sufficiently intense terrorist campaign may
greatly reduce capital inflows (Enders and Sandler, 1996). Terrorism, like civil conflicts, may cause spillover costs 2 among
neighboring countries as a terrorist campaign in a neighbor dissuades capital inflows, or a regional multiplier causes lost
economic activity in the terrorism-ridden country to resonate throughout the region .1 In some
instances, terrorism may impact specific industries as 9/11 did on airlines and tourism (Drakos, 2004; Ito and Lee, 2004).
Another cost is the expensive security measures that must be instituted following large attacks e.g., the
massive homeland security outlays since 9/11 (Enders and Sandler, 2006, Chapter 10). Terrorism also raises the
costs of doing business in terms of higher insurance premiums, expensive security precautions,
and larger salaries to at-risk employees.
Terrorism will destroy the US econ along with those of other countries
Weil 7/16 (Dan Weil, 7-16-2015, Celente: Terrorist Attack Would Crash World Economy,
Newsmax, http://www.newsmax.com/Finance/StreetTalk/terrorist-gold-silverHomelandSecurity/2011/07/07/id/402861)
Another terrorist attack would create a global economic disaster , says economic and political guru Gerald
Celente, director of The Trends Research Institute. The wise investment strategy in such a scenario would be to buy silver
and gold while selling currencies, he tells King World News. What will another major terror strike mean should an attack
hit one of the major NATO nations? Celente says. The effects this time will go global. Bank holidays will be called,
the U.S. and other fragile economies will crumble, gold and silver will soar, and already troubled
currencies will crash. Economic martial law will be declared, promised as a temporary measure. Once in place it will
remain in place. And dont expect your ATM card to be of much use. With banks closed and economic martial
law in place, restrictions will be set on the amounts, times and frequencies of withdrawals (of
cash). It will be essential to have a stash of cash on hand, Celente says.
A terrorist attack would crush the economy
Bandyopadhyay et al 15 (Subhayu Bandyopadhyay is Research Officer at the Federal Reserve
Bank of St. Louis and Research Fellow at IZA, Bonn, Germany. Todd Sandler is Vibhooti Shukla
Professor of Economics and Political Economy at the University of Texas at Dallas. Javed
Younasis Associate Professor of Economics at the American University of Sharjah, United Arab
Emirates. The Toll of Terrorism
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2015/06/bandyopa.htm)
*modified for ableist language*
New technology has lowered transportation costs and increased trade and capital flows across
nations. But the same technology that has fostered international economic growth has also allowed
terrorism to spread easily among countries whose interests are tightly interwoven . Terrorism is no
longer solely a local issue. Terrorists can strike from thousands of miles away and cause vast
destruction. The effects of terrorism can be terrifyingly direct. People are kidnapped or killed.
Pipelines are sabotaged. Bombers strike markets, buses, and restaurants with devastating effect.
But terrorism inflicts more than human casualties and material losses. It can also cause serious
indirect harm to countries and economies by increasing the costs of economic transactions for
example, because of enhanced security measures to ensure the safety of employees and customers or higher
insurance premiums. Terrorist attacks in Yemen on the USS Cole in 2000 and on the French tanker Limburg in 2002
seriously damaged that countrys shipping industry. These attacks contributed to a 300 percent rise in insurance
premiums for ships using that route and led ships to bypass Yemen entirely (Enders and Sandler, 2012). In this article we
explore the economic burden of terrorism. It can take myriad forms, but we focus on three: national income
losses and growth-[slowing]retarding effects, dampened foreign direct investment, and disparate
The September 11 th attacks gave the authorities a new and apparently unassailable legitimation
for long-standing legislative ambitions. Before the dust had settled on Manhattan, the security
establishment had mobilized to expand and intensify their surveillance capabilities, justifying
existing proposals as necessary tools to fight the new war against terrorism . Ultimately, the police,
military and security establishment reaped an unanticipated windfall of increased funding, new technology and loosened
legislative constraints by strategically invoking fears of future attacks. There are several examples of such opportunism.
Since at least 1999, when Congress initially turned down their request, the U.S. Justice Department has lobbied for the
development of new "secret search" provisions. Likewise, prior to the attacks, the FBI and the National
Telecommunications and Information Systems Security Committee had a lengthy shopping list of desired surveillancerelated measures including legal enhancements to their wiretapping capabilities, legal constraints on the public use of
cryptography, and provisions for governmental agents to compel Internet service providers to provide information on
their customers (Burnham, 1997). All of these proposals were recycled and implemented after the
September 11th attacks now justified as integral tools in the "war on terrorism." New provisions
requiring banks to exercise "due diligence" in relation to their large depositors were originally justified by the authorities
as a means to counter the "war on drugs." The opportunism of many of these efforts was inadvertently revealed by an
RCMP Sergeant when, during a discussion about new official antiterrorism powers to monitor financial transactions, he
noted that: "We've been asking for something like this for four years. It's really our best weapon against biker gangs"
[emphasis added] (Corcan, 2001). In Canada, the Federal Privacy Commissioner was particularly alarmed by the
development of what he referred to as a "Big Brother database." This amounts to a detailed computerized record of
information about Canadian travelers. Although justified as a means to counter terrorism, the data will be made available
to other government departments for any purpose they deem appropriate. Such provisions raise the specter of
informational "fishing expeditions." Indeed, the Canadian government has already indicated that this ostensible
anti-terrorist database will be used to help monitor tax evaders and catch domestic criminals. It will also be used to
scrutinize an individual's travel history and destinations, in an effort to try and determine whether they might be a
pedophile or money launderer (Radwanski, 2002). While these are laudable goals, they also reveal how a host of other
surveillance agendas have been furthered by capitalizing on the new anti-terrorism discourse.
Lone wolf terror attacks are used to justify disproportionate increases in
surveillance and military operations abroad
Lennard 14 (Senior News Analyst for Vice News, 10/27/14, Natasha Lennard, Brooklyn-based
Senior News Analyst for Vice News, VICE News, October 27, 2014, 'Lone Wolf' Terrorist Acts
Will Be Used to Justify the Surveillance State https://news.vice.com/article/lone-wolf-terroristacts-will-be-used-to-justify-the-surveillance-state, accessed 7/17/15 JH @ DDI)
The phenomenon of individuals committing violent and murderous acts in the name of an
ideology is nothing new in the US. The FBI's Operation Lone Wolf investigated white supremacists encouraging
autonomous violent acts in the 1990s. Why, then, are we seeing pundits and politicians newly focus on the "lone wolf"
category? There's no simple answer, but we can at the very least see that the old binary, distinguishing terror as the act of
networked groups versus lone madman mass killings a distinction that has tacitly undergirded post-9/11 conceptions of
terrorism doesn't serve the latest iteration of the war on terror. California Senator Dianne Feinstein, speaking on CNN's
State of the Union on Sunday, suggested that "the Internet, as well as certain specific Muslim extremists,
are really firing up this lone-wolf phenomenon." Whether intentionally or not, the Senate
Intelligence Committee chair performed a lot of political work with that one comment.
Crystallizing "lone wolves" as a key threat domestically helps legitimize the US's current military
operation against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. With or without established connections, the Islamic
State's far-reaching tentacles of online influence encouraging individuals worldwide cement the group as a threat to the
homeland which is always useful for politicians struggling to legally justify another protracted war. In this way,
attributing attacks to homegrown "lone wolves" is more useful for current US political interests than attributing them to
threat already bodes ill for civil liberties. If the hunt for terrorist networks has been plagued by
ethnic profiling and overreaching spycraft, an established threat of "lone wolf" attacks gives a
defensive imprimatur for unbounded NSA-style surveillance anyone can wield a hatchet with ideological
ire. As Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee Michael McCaul said on This Week, finding such lone
actors in advance of attacks is like "finding a needle in a haystack." And as Feinstein said the same day,
"You have to be able to watch it, and you have to be able to disrupt them." As such, the era of the "lone wolf"
terrorist does not only spell the end of the bunk distinction between motivated group and deranged individual. It ushers
in the dawn of a new era of justification for our totalized state of surveillance and national
security paranoia.
Surveillance would increase after a terrorist attack
Feaver 1/13 (Peter D., 1/13/15, Foreign Policy, 10 Lessons to Remember After a Terrorist
Attack, Peter is a professor of political science and public policy and Bass Fellow @ Duke
University, and director of the Triangle Institute for Security Studies and the Duke Program in
American Grand Strategy, http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/01/13/ten-lessons-to-remember-aftera-terrorist-attack/, 7/16/15, SM)
In particular, it is striking how some of the things that were obvious in the days and weeks after 9/11, but
then were gradually forgotten, have become obvious again: Terrorists succeed when they are abetted by
intelligence failures. Or, put another way, terrorists only need to get lucky once to succeed, whereas counterterrorism
has to be lucky all the time to succeed. Even robust intelligence and law enforcement may not guarantee 100 percent
safety and security. By global standards certainly by the standards of Western democracies France has a particularly
formidable counterterrorist structure. But it failed in this instance. When terrorists succeed in an attack,
citizens demand that the government do more to protect them even if they have already been
doing a lot. And steps that would have seemed heavy handed before the attack, say
aggressive surveillance of suspected terrorists or visible demonstrations of presence by the security
forces, are deemed not just tolerable but necessary. Moreover, savvy political leaders will understand
that one of the benefits of a stronger official response is that it is a hedge both against dangerously stronger vigilantism
and also against additional pressure from some segments of the public to do more than is wise.
<<Politics DA Link>>
Obama will fight to maintain NSA surveillance Recent
court case proves
Ackerman 6/9 (Spencer Ackerman: National security editor for Guardian, Obama lawyers
asked secret court to ignore public court's decision on spying, The Guardian, 6/9/2015,
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/09/obama-fisa-court-surveillance-phone-records,
Accessed: 7/17/15, RRR)
The Obama administration has asked a secret surveillance court to ignore a federal court
that found bulk surveillance illegal and to once again grant the National Security Agency
the power to collect the phone records of millions of Americans for six months. The legal request,
filed nearly four hours after Barack Obama vowed to sign a new law banning precisely the bulk collection he asks the secret court to approve, also
suggests that the
administration may not necessarily comply with any potential court order
demanding that the collection stop. US officials confirmed last week that they would ask the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court better known as the Fisa court, a panel that meets in secret as a step in the surveillance
process and thus far has only ever had the government argue before it to turn the domestic bulk collection spigot back
on.
<<Elections DA Link>>
Moderate Dems support domestic surveillance curtailing it
causes them to flip flop and vote for the Republicans
Silver 13 [Nate Silver, Nate Silver is the founder and editor in chief of FiveThirtyEight, he is also a statistical genius.
Domestic Surveillance Could Create a Divide in the 2016 Primaries,
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/domestic-surveillance-could-create-a-divide-in-the-2016primaries/?_r=0, June 11th, 2013//Rahul]
A poll released on Monday by the Pew Research Center and The Washington Post found a partisan
shift in the way Americans view the National Security Agencys domestic
surveillance programs. In the survey, slightly more Democrats than Republicans said
they found it acceptable for the N.S.A. to track Americans phone records
and e-mails if the goal is to prevent terrorism. By comparison, when Pew Research asked a
similar question in 2006, Republicans were about twice as likely as Democrats to support the N.S.A.s activities. The poll is
a reminder that many Americans do not hold especially firm views on some issues and instead may adapt them depending
on which party controls the executive branch.
Politicians who are normally associated with being on the far left and the far
right may find common cause with grass-roots voters in their objection to domestic surveillance programs, fighting
against a party establishment that is inclined to support them. Take, for example, the Houses vote
in May 2011 to extend certain provisions of the Patriot Act including the so-called
library records provision that the government has used to defend the legality of sweeping searches of telephone and e-mail
records. The bill passed with 250 yes votes in the House against 153 no votes, receiving more of its support from
Republicans. (In the Senate, the bill passed, 72-23, winning majority support
from both parties.) However, the House vote was not well described by a traditional left-right political
spectrum. In the chart below, Ive sorted the 403 members of the House who voted on the bill from left to right in order of
their overall degree of liberalism or conservatism, as determined by the statistical system DW-Nominate. Members of the
House who voted for the bill are represented with a yellow stripe in the chart, while those who voted against it are
represented in black. The no votes are concentrated at the two ends of the spectrum.
The 49 most liberal members of the House (all Democrats) who voted on the
bill each voted against it. But so did 14 of the 21 Republicans deemed to be the most conservative by DWNominate. By contrast, 46 of the 50 most moderate Republicans voted for the Patriot
Act extension, as did 38 of the 50 most moderate Democrats.
CX Questions
Customers are shifting to foreign products now why
does the plan reverse that trend?
1NC
NSA spying shifts tech dominance to China but its fragile
reversing the trend now kills China
Li and McElveen 13
(Cheng Li; Ryan Mcelveen. Cheng Li received a M.A. in Asian studies from the University of
California, Berkeley and a Ph.D. in political science from Princeton University. He is director of
the John L. Thornton China Center and a senior fellow in the Foreign Policy program at
Brookings. He is also a director of the Nationsal Committee on U.S.-China Relations. Li focuses
on the transformation of political leaders, generational change and technological development
in China. "NSA Revelations Have Irreparably Hurt U.S. Corporations in China," Brookings
Institution. 12-12-2013. http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2013/12/12-nsarevelations-hurt-corporations-china-li-mcelveen//ghs-kw)
about its years of intellectual property theft from U.S. firms, the Sunnylands meeting forced Obama to resort to a
defensive posture. Reflecting on how the tables had turned, the media reported that President Xi chose to stay off-site at a
nearby Hyatt hotel out of fear of eavesdropping. After the Sunnylands summit,
the Chinese
compare with that of the United States. The U.S. government spends $6.5 billion annually on cyber security, whereas
The
Chinese governments investment in both cyber espionage and cyber
security will continue to increase, and that investment will
overwhelmingly benefit Chinese technology corporations. Chinas
China spends $400 million, according to NetentSec CEO Yuan Shengang. But that will not be the case for long.
U.S. industrial and commercial interests when it comes to U.S. foreign policy. This has occurred over the
last few years as
putting intelligence
gathering first and foremost. Indeed, policy decisions by the U.S.
intelligence community have reverberated throughout the global
economy. If the U.S. tech industry is to remain the leader in the
commercial challenge to U.S. technology companies, all the while
among the fastest growing economies in the world, the countrys growth rates have decreased notably
interruption following the Asian financial crisis of 1997. Despite a relatively quick recovery after the global
financial crisis, declining export rates resulting from the economic distress of Chinas main trading partners
has
naturally
That challenge is
complicated by demographic trends, which are set to have a strongly negative impact on the Chinese
economy within the next decade. Researchers anticipate that as a consequence of the countrys one-child
policy, introduced in 1977, China will soon experience a sharp decline of its working-age population,
leading to a substantial labor force bottleneck. A labor shortage is likely to mean climbing wages,
threatening Chinas cheap labor edge. The challenge is well described in a recent article published by the
Entrepreneurship is
widely recognized as an important engine for economic growth: It
contributes positively to economic development by fuelling job
International Monetary Fund. Replacing the Cheap Labor Strategy
As former
and entrepreneurship,
it
could sustain its growth rates and secure a key role in the
international world order. Indeed, increasing levels of entrepreneurship in
the Chinese private sector are likely to lead to technological
innovation and productivity increases. This could prove particularly useful in
offsetting the workforce bottleneck created by demographic trends.
Greater innovation would also make China more competitive and less
dependent on the knowledge and technology of traditional Western trading partners such as the EU and
the U.S.
for the
moment, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) appears to be weathering the storm. But
tactics, and over 200 intermediate and lower-level judges were also called in for special training.13 Beijing's stimulus was insufficient At least
if in the next several years the economy slumps again or simply fails to return to its previous pace, Beijing's
troubles will mount . The regime probably has enough repressive capacity
to cope with a good deal more turbulence than it has thus far encountered, but a protracted
crisis could eventually pose a challenge to the solidarity of the party's
leadership and thus to its continued grip on political power. Sinologist MinxinPei points out that
the greatest danger to CCP rule comes not from below but from
above. Rising societal discontent 'might be sufficient to tempt some members of the
elite to exploit the situation to their own political advantage' using
'populist appeals to weaken their rivals and, in the process, open[ing] up divisions within the party's seemingly unified
upper ranks'.14 If this happens, all bets will be off and a very wide range of outcomes, from a democratic transition to
become plausible.
suddenly
Precisely because it is aware of this danger, the regime has been very careful to keep whatever differences exist over
how to deal with the current crisis within bounds and out of view. If there are significant rifts they could become apparent in the run-up to the pending change in leadership
http://english.epochtimes.com/news/5-8-4/30931.html
Since the Partys life is above all else, it would not be surprising if the CCP resorts
to the use of biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons in its attempt to
extend its life. The CCP, which disregards human life, would not hesitate to kill two hundred
million Americans, along with seven or eight hundred million Chinese, to achieve its
ends. These speeches let the public see the CCP for what it really is. With evil filling its every cell the
CCP intends to wage a war against humankind in its desperate attempt to
cling to life. That is the main theme of the speeches. This theme is murderous and utterly evil. In China
we have seen beggars who coerced people to give them money by threatening to stab themselves with
knives or pierce their throats with long nails. But we have never, until now, seen such a gangster who
would use biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons to threaten the world, that all will die together with
him. This bloody confession has confirmed the CCPs nature: that of a monstrous murderer who has killed
80 million Chinese people and who now plans to hold one billion people hostage and gamble with their
lives.
2NC UQ
NSA spying boosts Chinese tech firms
Kan 13
(Kan, Michael. Michael Kan covers IT, telecommunications, and the Internet in China for the
IDG News Service. "NSA spying scandal accelerating China's push to favor local tech vendors,"
PCWorld. 12-3-2013. http://www.pcworld.com/article/2068900/nsa-spying-scandal-acceleratingchinas-push-to-favor-local-tech-vendors.html//ghs-kw)
China
wants to favor local brands; they feel their technology is getting better, the executive said.
Snowden has just caused this to accelerate incrementally. Last month, other U.S.
enterprise vendors including Cisco and Qualcomm said the U.S. spying scandal
has put strains on their China business. Cisco reported its revenue from the
country fell 18 percent year-over-year in the last fiscal quarter. The Chinese government has yet to
release an official document telling companies to stay away from U.S. vendors, said the manager of a large
state-owned telecom
operators have already stopped orders for certain U.S. equipment to
power their networks, he added. Instead, the operators are relying on
Chinese vendors such as Huawei Technologies, to supply their
telecommunications equipment. It will be hard for certain networking
equipment made in the U.S. to enter the Chinese market , the manager
said. Its hard for them (U.S. vendors) to get approval, to get
certification from the related government departments. Other
companies, especially banks, are concerned that buying enterprise
gear from U.S. vendors may lead to scrutiny from the central
government, said Bryan Wang, an analyst with Forrester Research. The NSA issue has
data center, who has knowledge of such developments. But
been having an impact , but it hasnt been black and white, he added. In the future,
China could create new regulations on where certain state
industries should source their technology from, a possibility some
CIOs are considering when making IT purchases , Wang said. The
obstacles facing U.S. enterprise vendors come at a time when
Chinas own homegrown companies are expanding in the enterprise
market. Huawei Technologies, a major vendor for networking equipment, this August came out with a
new networking switch that will put the company in closer competition with Cisco. Lenovo and ZTE
are also targeting the enterprise market with products targeted at
government, and closing the technology gap with their foreign rivals ,
push back from U.S. lawmakers concerned with the two companies alleged ties to the Chinese
government. A Congressional panel eventually advised that U.S. firms buy networking gear from other
vendors, calling Huawei and ZTE a security threat.
economy, German and Chinese companies have core strengths ... and that's why cooperation is a natural
choice," she said. Chinese vice premier Ma Kai also attended the show, which featured a keynote from
Alibaba founder Jack Ma. China is CeBIT's 'partner country' this year, with over 600 Chinese companies -
The UK is
also keen on further developing a historically close relationship: the ChinaBritain Business Council is in Hannover to help UK firms set up meetings
with Chinese companies, and to provide support and advice to UK
companies interested in doing business in China. "China is mounting the
including Huawei, Xiaomi, ZTE, and Neusoft - presenting their innovations at the show.
biggest CeBIT partner country showcase ever. Attendees will clearly see that Chinese companies are up
this
activity is a result of the increasingly sophisticated output of
Chinese tech companies who are looking for new markets for their
products. Firms that have found it hard to make headway in the US,
such as Huawei, have been focusing their efforts on Europe instead.
European tech companies are equally keen to access the rapidly
growing Chinese market. Revelations about mass interception of
communications by the US National Security Agency (including allegations
that spies had even tapped Angela Merkel's phone) have not helped US-European relations,
there with the biggest and best of the global IT industry," said a spokesman for CeBIT. Some of
either. So it's perhaps significant that an interview with NSA contractor-turned-whistleblower Edward
Snowden is closing the Hannover show.
Koreas high-tech exporters are also far more productive than Americas and, according to the most recent
Internet of Things, was born in America, so perhaps it seems natural that America will lead. Many U.S.
commentators spin a myth that America is No. 1 in high tech, then extend it to claims that Europe is
lagging because of excessive government regulation, and hints that Asians are not innovators and
entrepreneurs, but mere imitators with cheap labor. This is jingoistic nonsense that could not be more
wrong. Not only does Germany, a leader of the European Union, lead the U.S. in high tech, but EU member
states fund CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, which invented the World Wide Web
and built the Large Hadron Collider, likely to be a source of several centuries of high-tech innovation. (U.S.
government intervention killed Americas equivalent particle physics program, the Superconducting Super
Collider, in 1993 an early symptom of declining federal investment in basic research.) Asia, the alleged
technology in the iPhone was invented in, and is exported by, Asian countries.
2NC Link
If the US loses its tech dominance, Chinese and Indian
innovation will quickly replace it
Fannin 13 (Rebecca Fannin, 7-12-2013, forbes magazine contributor "China Still
Likely To Take Over Tech Leadership If And When Silicon Valley Slips," Forbes,
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rebeccafannin/2013/07/12/china-still-likely-to-takeover-tech-leadership-if-and-when-silicon-valley-slips)
Will Silicon Valley continue to maintain its market-leading position for technology innovation ?
Its a question
thats often pondered and debated, especially in the Valley, which has the
most to lose if the emerging markets of China or India take over
leadership. KPMG took a look at this question and other trends in its annual
Technology Innovation Survey, and found that the center of gravity may not
be shifting quite so fast to the East as once predicted. The KPMG survey of
811 technology executives globally found that one-third believe the
Valley will likely lose its tech trophy to an overseas market within
just four years.
That percentage might seem high, but it compares with nearly half (44 percent) in last years
survey. Its a notable improvement for the Valley, as the U.S. economy and tech sector pick up. Which country will lead in
disruptive breakthroughs? Here, the U.S. again solidifies its long-standing reputation as the worlds tech giant while China
has slipped in stature from a year ago, according to the survey. In last years poll, the U.S. and China were tied for the top
spot. But today, some 37 percent predict that the U.S. shows the most promise for tech disruptions, little surprise
considering Google GOOG +2.72%s strong showing in the survey as top company innovator in the world with its Google
glass and driver-less cars. Meanwhile, about one-quarter pick
commentary recently on the Chinese economy has been about its slowing growth and challenges. In
information technology, its just the opposite, Frank Gens, IDCs chief analyst, said in an
interview. China has a roaring domestic market in technology. In 2015, IDC
estimates that nearly 500 million smartphones will be sold in China,
three times the number sold in the United States and about one
third of global sales. Roughly 85 percent of the smartphones sold in
China will be made by its domestic producers like Lenovo, Xiaomi,
Huawei, ZTE and Coolpad. The rising prowess of Chinas homegrown smartphone makers will
make it tougher on outsiders, as Samsungs slowing growth and profits recently reflect. More than
680 million people in China will be online next year, or 2.5 times the
number in the United States. And the China numbers are poised to
grow further, helped by its national initiative, the Broadband China Project, intended to give 95
percent of the countrys urban population access to high-speed broadband networks. In all, Chinas
spending on information and communications technology will be
more than $465 billion in 2015, a growth rate of 11 percent. The
expansion of the China tech market will account for 43 percent of
tech-sector growth worldwide.
technology-shifts-accelerate-and-china-rules-idcpredicts///ghs-kw)
Beyond the detail, a couple of larger themes stand out. First is
commentary recently on the Chinese economy has been about its slowing growth and challenges. In
information technology, its just the opposite, Frank Gens, IDCs chief analyst, said in an
interview. China has a roaring domestic market in technology. In 2015, IDC
estimates that nearly 500 million smartphones will be sold in China,
three times the number sold in the United States and about one
third of global sales. Roughly 85 percent of the smartphones sold in
China will be made by its domestic producers like Lenovo, Xiaomi,
Huawei, ZTE and Coolpad. The rising prowess of Chinas homegrown smartphone makers will
make it tougher on outsiders, as Samsungs slowing growth and profits recently reflect. More than
680 million people in China will be online next year, or 2.5 times the
number in the United States. And the China numbers are poised to
grow further, helped by its national initiative, the Broadband China Project, intended to give 95
percent of the countrys urban population access to high-speed broadband networks. In all, Chinas
spending on information and communications technology will be
more than $465 billion in 2015, a growth rate of 11 percent. The
expansion of the China tech market will account for 43 percent of
tech-sector growth worldwide.
said Xie Hongguang, deputy chief of the NBS. China should work toward greater
investment in "soft infrastructure"like innovationinstead of "hard infrastructure" to climb the global value
chain, said Zhang Monan, an expert with the China Center for International Economic Exchanges. Indeed,
The Beijing Axis First published: May 27, 2010 Last updated: June 3, 2010
Significant progress has already been achieved with the MLP, and it is not hard to
identify signs of Chinas rapidly improving innovative abilities. GERD increased to 1.54 per
cent in 2008 from 0.57 per cent in 1995. Occurring at a time when its GDP was growing exceptionally
fast, Chinas GERD now ranks behind only the US and Japan. The number of triadic
patents (granted in all three of the major patent offices in the US, Japan and Europe) granted to
China remains relatively small, reaching 433 in 2005 (compared to 652 for Sweden and 3,158 for
Korea), yet Chinese patent applications are increasing rapidly. Chinese patent applications to the
World Intellectual Property Office (WIPO), for example, increased by 44 per cent in 2005 and by a
further 57 per cent in 2006. From a total of about 20,000 in 1998, Chinas output of scientific
papers has increased fourfold to about 112,000 as of 2008, moving China to second place
in the global rankings, behind only the US. In the period 2004 to 2008, China produced about
400,000 papers, with the major focus areas being material science, chemistry, physics,
mathematics and engineering, but new fields like biological and medical science also gaining
prominence.
delivered at the first session of the 10th National Peoples Congress in 2003 , Zhu implored his
successors to energetically promote information technology (IT) applications and use IT
to propel and accelerate industrialization so that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can
continue to build a well-off society.1
Few moments in modern financial history were scarier than the week of
Sept. 15, 2008, when first Lehman Brothers and then American
International Group collapsed. Who could forget the cratering stock markets, panicky
bailout negotiations, rampant foreclosures, depressing job losses and decimated retirement accounts -- not
to mention the discouraging recovery since then?
poorly-understood financial market and spread dramatically from there illustrates the capacity for
Lehman and
AIG, remember, were just two financial firms out of dozens . Opaque
misjudging contagion risk," Adam Slater wrote in a July 14 Oxford Economics report.
dealings and off-balance-sheet investment vehicles made it virtually impossible even for the managers of
The
term "shadow banking system" soon became shorthand for potential
instability and contagion risk in world markets. Well, China is that and
those companies to understand their vulnerabilities -- and those of the broader financial system.
more . China surpassed Japan in 2011 in gross domestic product and it's gaining on the U.S. Some
World Bank researchers even think China is already on the verge of becoming No. 1 (I'm skeptical). China's
world-trade weighting has doubled in the last decade. But the real explosion has been in the financial
sector. Since 2008, Chinese stock valuations surged from $1.8 trillion to $3.8 trillion and bank-balance
sheets and the money supply jumped accordingly. China's broad measure of money has surged by an
incredible $12.5 trillion since 2008 to roughly match the U.S.'s monetary stock. This enormous money
buildup fed untold amounts of private-sector debt along with public-sector institutions. Its scale, speed and
opacity are fueling genuine concerns about a bad-loan meltdown in an economy that's 2 1/2 times bigger
than Germany's. If that happens, at a minimum it would torch China's property markets and could take
down systemically important parts of Hong Kong's banking system. The reverberations probably wouldn't
stop there, however, and would hit resource-dependent Australia, batter trade-driven economies Japan,
Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan and whack prices of everything from oil and steel to gold and corn.
"Chinas
system,
importance for the world economy and the rapid growth of its financial
mean that there are widespread concerns that a financial crisis in China
would also turn into a global crisis ," says London-based Slater. "A bad asset problem
on this scale would dwarf that seen in the major emerging financial crises seen in Russia and Argentina in
1998 and 2001, and also be more severe than the Japanese bad loan problem of the 1990s." Such risks
belie President Xi Jinping's insistence that China's financial reform process is a domestic affair, subject
neither to input nor scrutiny by the rest of the world. That's not the case. Just like the Chinese pollution
that darkens Asian skies and contributes to climate change, China's financial vulnerability is a global
problem. U.S. President Barack Obama made that clear enough in a May interview with National Public
Radio. We welcome Chinas peaceful rise," he said. In many ways, it would be a bigger national security
problem for us if China started falling apart at the seams. China's ascent obviously preoccupies the White
House as it thwarts U.S. foreign-policy objectives, taunts Japan and other nations with territorial claims in
the Pacific and casts aspersions on America's moral leadership. But China's frailty has to be on the minds
of U.S. policy makers, too
China are real . What worries bears such as Patrick Chovanec of Silvercrest Asset Management in
New York, is Chinas unaltered obsession with building the equivalent of new Manhattans almost
overnight even as the nation's financial system shows signs of buckling. As policy makers in Beijing
generate even more credit to keep bubbles from bursting, the shadow banking system continues to grow.
The longer China delays its reckoning, the worst it might be for China -- and perhaps the rest of us.
months, but only briefly, as large-scale Irhind-the-scenes stimulus meant that it quickly retumed to
overheating. Given its 910 percent "trend" growth rate, and 30 per. cent import ratio, China is nearly
twice as powerful a global growth locomotive as the United States, based on its implied import gain. So
surrounding export hubs, whose growth prospects are a "second derivative" of what
would suffer most directly from Chinese slowing, the
knock to global growth would be significant. Voracious Chinese demand
has also been a crucial driver of global commodity prices, particularly
metals and oil, so they too may face a hard landing if Chinese
demand dries up.
while the
transpires in China,
At the onset, I believe the odds of a China asset bub- ble bursting are very low. It is difficult to argue that
Chinese asset markets, particularly real estate, are indeed already in a 'bubble. " Property prices in tier two
and tier three cities are actually quite cheap, but for pur- poses of discussion, there is always the danger
that asset values could get massively inflated over the next few years. If so, a crash would be inevitable. In
fact, China experienced a devastating real estate meltdown and "growth recession" in 199394, when
then-premier Zhu Rongii initiated a credit crackdown to rein in spreading inflation and real estate
speculation. Property prices in major cities dropped by over 40 per- cent and private sector GDP growth
dropped to 3 per. cent from double-digit levels. Non-performing loans soared to 30 pernt of total banking
sector assets. It took more than seven years for the government to clean up the financial mess and
case, bank credit is the lifeline for large state-owned companies, and a credit crunch could choke off
growth of these enterprises quickly. The big difference between today's situation and the early 1990s,
however, is that the Chinese authorities have accumulated '.ast reserves _ China also runs a huge cun-ent
account surplus. In the early 1990s, China's reserves had dwindled to almost nothing and the current
account was in massive deficit. As a real estate meltdown led to a collapse in the Chinese currency in 1992
93. In other words, Beijing today has a lot of resources at its disposal to stimulate the economy or to
recapitalize the banking system, whenever necessary. Therefore, the impact of a bursting bubble on
growth could be very sham and even severe, but it would be short-lived because of supp-an from public
to note that there has been virtually no domestic spending in Japan in recent years and the country's
economic growth has been leveraged almost entirely on exports to China
A bursting China
Wadhwa found in his surveys that companies go offshore for reasons of cost and where the
markets are. Meanwhile, Asian immigrants are driving enterprise growth in the United States.
Twenty-five percent of technology and engineering firms launched in the last decade and 52% of
Silicon Valley startups had immigrant founders. Indian immigrants accounted for one-quarter of
these. Among Americas new immigrant entrepreneurs, more than 74 percent have a masters or a
PhD degree. Yet the backlog of U.S. immigration applications puts this stream of talent
in limbo. One million skilled immigrants are waiting for the annual quota of 120,000 visas, with caps
of 8,400 per country. This is causing a reverse brain drain from the U nited S tates back
to countries of origin, the majority to India and China. This endangers U.S. innovation and
economic growth. There is a high likelihood, however, that returning skilled talent will
create new linkages to U.S. companies , as they are doing within General
Electric, IBM, and other companies. Jai Menon of IBM Corporation began his survey of IBMs
view of global talent recruitment by suggesting that aa. IBM pursues growth of its operations as a
global entity. There are 372,000 IBMers in 172 countries; 123,000 of these are in the Asia-Pacific
region. Eighty percent of the firms R&D activity is still based in the United States. IBM supports open
standards development and networked business models to facilitate global collaboration. Three
factors drive the firms decisions on staff placement and location of recruitment -- economics, skills
and environment. IBM India has grown its staff tenfold in five years; its $6 billion investment in three
years represents a tripling of resources in people, infrastructure and capital. Increasingly, as Vivek
Wadhwa suggested, people get degrees in the United States and return to India for their first jobs.
IBM follows a comparable approach in China, with 10,000+ IBM employees involved
in R&D, services and sales. In 2006, for the first time the number of service workers overtook
the number of agricultural laborers worldwide. Thus the needs of a service economy comprise an
issue looming for world leaders.
new governments announcing more modest growth targets of 7.5 percent a year, sent Chinese equities
plunging and led to a slew of commentary in the United States saying China would be the next shoe to
drop in the global system. Yet there is more here than simple alarm over the viability of Chinas economic
growth. There is the not-so-veiled undercurrent of rooting against China. It is difficult to find someone who
explicitly wants it to collapse, but the tone of much of the discourse suggests bloodlust. Given that China
largely escaped the crises that so afflicted the United States and the eurozone, the desire to see it stumble
may be understandable. No one really likes a global winner if that winner isnt you. The need to see China
fail verges on jingoism. Americans distrust the Chinese model, find that its business practices verge on the
immoral and illegal, that its reporting and accounting standards are sub-par at best and that its system is
one of crony capitalism run by crony communists. On Wall Street, the presumption usually seems to be
that any Chinese company is a ponzi scheme masquerading as a viable business. In various conversations
and debates, I have rarely heard Chinas economic model mentioned without disdain. Take, as just one
example, Gordon Chang in Forbes: Beijings technocrats can postpone a reckoning, but they have not
consequences of a Chinese
collapse, however, would be severe for the United States and for the
world. There could be no major Chinese contraction without a concomitant
contraction in the United States. That would mean sharply curtailed Chinese
purchases of U.S. Treasury bonds, far less revenue for companies like
General Motors, Nike, KFC and Apple that have robust business in China (Apple made $6.83
billion in the fourth quarter of 2012, up from $4.08 billion a year prior), and far fewer Chinese
imports of high-end goods from American and Asian companies. It would also
mean a collapse of Chinese imports of materials such as copper, which would
in turn harm economic growth in emerging countries that continue to be
a prime market for American, Asian and European goods. China is now
the worlds second-largest economy, and property booms have been one aspect of its
repealed the laws of economics. There will be a crash. The
growth. Individual Chinese cannot invest outside of the country, and the limited options of Chinas stock
exchanges and almost nonexistent bond market mean that if you are middle class and want to do more
than keep your money in cash or low-yielding bank accounts, you buy either luxury goods or apartments.
That has meant a series of property bubbles over the past decade and a series of measures by state and
local officials to contain them. These recent measures are hardly the first, and they are not likely to be the
last. The past 10 years have seen wild swings in property prices, and as recently as 2011 the government
took steps to cool them; the number of transactions plummeted and prices slumped in hot markets like
Shanghai as much as 30, 40 and even 50 percent. You could go back year by year in the 2000s and see
similar bubbles forming and popping, as the government reacted to sharp run-ups with restrictions and
then eased them when the pendulum threatened to swing too far. China has had a series of property
bubbles and a series of property busts. It has also had massive urbanization that in time has absorbed the
excess supply generated by massive development. Today much of that supply is priced far above what
workers flooding into Chinas cities can afford. But that has always been true, and that housing has in time
been purchased and used by Chinese families who are moving up the income spectrum, much as U.S.
suburbs evolved in the second half of the 20th century. More to the point, all property bubbles are not
created equal. The housing bubbles in the United States and Spain, for instance, would never had been so
disruptive without the massive amount of debt and the financial instruments and derivatives based on
them. A bursting housing bubble absent those would have been a hit to growth but not a systemic crisis. In
China, most buyers pay cash, and there is no derivative market around mortgages (at most theres a small
shadow market). Yes, there are all sorts of unofficial transactions with high-interest loans, but even there,
the consequences of busts are not the same as they were in the United States and Europe in recent years.
Two issues converge whenever China is discussed in the United States: fear of the next global crisis, and
distrust and dislike of the country. Concern is fine; we should always be attentive to possible risks. But
Chinas property bubbles are an unlikely risk, because of the absence of derivatives and because the
central government is clearly alert to the markets behavior. Suspicion and antipathy, however, are not
constructive. They speak to the ongoing difficulty China poses to Americans sense of global economic
dominance and to the belief in the superiority of free-market capitalism to Chinas state-managed
capitalism. The U.S. system may prove to be more resilient over time; it has certainly proven successful to
Its success does not require Chinas failure, nor will Chinas
success invalidate the American model. For our own self-interest we
should be rooting for their efforts, and not jingoistically wishing for them
to fail.
date.
2NC Impact UQ
Latest data show Chinese economy is growing now
ignore stock market claims which dont accurately reflect
economic fundamentals
Miller and Charney 7/15
(Miller, Leland R. and Charney, Craig. Mr. Miller is president and Mr. Charney is research
director of China Beige Book International, a private economic survey. Chinas Economy Is
Recovering, Wall Street Journal, 7/15/2015. http://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-economy-isrecovering-1436979092//ghs-kw)
is improving after several disappointing quarters -- just not for the reasons
given by Beijing. The China Beige Book (CBB), a private survey of more than 2,000
Chinese firms each quarter, frequently anticipates the official story.
We documented the 2012 property rebound, the 2013 interbank credit crunch and the 2014 slowdown in
The modest but broadbased improvement in the Chinese economy that we tracked in the second quarter
may seem at odds with the headlines of carnage in the country's
financial markets. But stock prices in China have almost nothing to
do with the economy's fundamentals. Our data show sales revenue,
capital expenditure before any of them showed up in official statistics.
data suggest deflation may have peaked. With the explosive stock market run-up occupying
all but the final weeks of the quarter, it might seem reasonable to conclude that this rally was the impetus
behind the better results. Not so. Of all our indicators, capital expenditure should have responded most
than last quarter, led by the Southwest and North. The results were also an improvement over
the second quarter of last year, if somewhat less so, with residential construction the sector's major
investment, for years the driver of double-digit percentage growth in China, is down as the government
seeks to rely more on consumer demand - itself slow to pick up. In recent weeks, the Shanghai stock
market has been falling sharply, albeit after a huge boom in months leading up to the crash.
more sure-footed recovery. The preliminary purchasing managers index for China published by HSBC and
compiled by Markit, a data analysis firm, edged up to 49.6 in June. It was the surveys highest level in three
months but still below the 50 mark, which would have pointed to an expansion. The final reading for May
reading reinforces our view that the economy has started to find its footing. But companies stepped up
layoffs, the survey showed, shedding jobs at the fastest pace in more than six years. Annabel Fiddes, an
economist at Markit, said: Manufacturers continued to cut staff. This suggests companies have relatively
muted growth expectations. She said that she expected Beijing to step up their efforts to stimulate
growth and job creation.
much
survey, a quarterly report by China Beige Book International, a data analysis firm, describing a
broad-based recovery in the second quarter, led primarily by
Chinas interior provinces. Among major sectors, two developments
stand out: a welcome resurgence in retail which saw rising
revenue growth despite a slip in prices and a broad-based
rebound in property, said the reports authors, Leland Miller and Craig Charney.
Manufacturing, services, real estate, agriculture and mining all had
year-on-year and quarterly
gains,
they said.
Yiwei 07 Wang yiwei, Center for American Studies @ Fudan University, China's Rise: An Unlikely Pillar of US Hegemony,
Harvard International Review, Volume 29, Issue 1 Spring7, pp. 60-63.
Chinas rise is taking place in this context. That is to say, Chinese development is merely one facet of
Asian and developing states economic progress in general. Historically, the United States has
provided the dominant development paradigm for the world. But today, China has come up with
development strategies that are different from that of any other nation-state in history and are a
consequence of the global migration of industry along comparative advantage lines. Presently, the
movement of light industry and consumer goods production from advanced industrialized countries to
China is nearly complete, but heavy industry is only beginning to move. Developed countries
past, developing countries were often in a position only to respond to globalization, but now,
developed countries must respond as well. Previously the United States believed that globalization
was synonymous with Americanization, but todays world has witnessed a United States that is
feeling the influence of the world as well. In the past, a sneeze on Wall Street was followed by a
downturn in world markets. But in February 2007, Chinese stocks fell sharply and Wall Street
responded with its steepest decline in several years. In this way, the whirlpool of globalization is no
longer spinning in one direction. Rather, it is generating feedback mechanisms and is widening into
an ellipse with two focal points: one located in the United States, the historical leader of the
developed world, and one in the China, the strongest country in the new developing world power
bloc. Combating Regionalization It is important to extend the discussion beyond platitudes regarding
US decline or the rise of China and the invective-laden debate over threats and security issues
that arises from these. We must step out of a narrowly national mindset and reconsider what Chinese
development means for the United States. One of the consequences of globalization has
been that countries such as China, which depend on exporting to US markets, have
accumulated large dollar reserves. This has been unavoidable for these countries, as they must
purchase dollars in order to keep the dollar strong and thus avoid massive losses. Thus, the United
States is bound to bear a trade deficit, and moreover, this deficit is inextricably tied
to the dollars hegemony in todays markets. The artificially high dollar and the US
economy at large depend in a very real sense on Chinas investment in the dollar.
Low US inflation and interest rates similarly depend on the thousands of Made in
China labels distributed across the United States. As Paul Krugman wrote in The New York
Times, the situation is comparable to one in which the American sells the house but the money to
buy the house comes from China. Former US treasury secretary Lawrence Summers even affirms
that China and the United States may be in a kind of imprudent balance of financial terror. Today,
the US trade deficit with China is US$200 billion. China holds over US$1 trillion in foreign exchange
reserves and US$350 billion in US bonds. Together, the Chinese and US economies account for half of
global economic growth. Thus, a fantastic situation has arisen: Chinas rise is actually supporting US
hegemony. Taking US hegemony and Western preeminence as the starting point, many
have concluded that the rise of China presents a threat. The premise of this logic is that
the international system predicated on US hegemony and Western preeminence would be
destabilized by the rise of a second major power. But this view is inconsistent with the
phenomenon of one-way globalization. The so-called process of one-way globalization
can more truly be called Westernization. Todays globalization is still in large part
driven by the West, inasmuch as it is tinged by Western unilateralism and entails the
dissemination of essentially Western standards and ideology. For example, Coca Cola has become
a Chinese cultural icon, Louis Vuitton stores crowd high-end shopping districts in Shanghai, and,
as gender equality progresses, Chinese women look to Western women for
inspiration. In contrast, Haier, the best-known Chinese brand in the United States, is still relatively
unknown, and Wang Fei, who is widely regarded in China as the pop star who was able to make it in
the United States, has less name-recognition there than a first-round American Idol cut.
In 2001, Gordon Chang authored a global bestseller "The Coming Collapse of China." To suggest that the
worlds largest nation of 1.3 billion people is on the brink of collapse is understandably for many, a deeply
unnerving theme. And many seasoned China Hands rejected Changs thesis outright. In a very real
sense, they were of course right. Chinas expansion has continued over the last six years
without a hitch. After notching up a staggering 10.7 percent growth last year, it is now the 4th largest
economy in the world with a nominal GDP of $2.68trn. Yet there are two Chinas that concern us here; the
800 million who live in the cities, coastal and southern regions and the 500 million who live in the
countryside and are mainly engaged in agriculture. The latter which we in the West hear very little about
are still very poor and much less happy. Their poverty and misery do not necessarily spell an impending
cataclysm after all, that is how they have always have been. But it does illustrate the inequity of Chinese
monetary policy. For many years, the Chinese yen has been held at an artificially low value to boost
manufacturing exports. This has clearly worked for one side of the economy, but not for the purchasing
power of consumers and the rural poor, some of who are getting even poorer. The central reason for this
has been the inability of Chinese monetary policy to adequately support both Chinas. Meanwhile, rural
unrest in China is on the rise fuelled not only by an accelerating income gap with
the coastal cities, but by an oft-reported appropriation of their land for little or no
compensation by the state. According to Professor David B. Smith, one of the Citys most accurate
and respected economists in recent years, potentially far more serious though is the impact that Chinese
monetary policy could have on many Western nations such as the UK. Quite simply, Chinas undervalued
currency has enabled Western governments to maintain artificially strong currencies, reduce inflation and
keep interest rates lower than they might otherwise be. We should therefore be very worried about how
vulnerable Western economic growth is to an upward revaluation of the Chinese yuan. Should that
revaluation happen to appease Chinas rural poor, at a stroke, the dollar, sterling and the euro would
quickly depreciate, rates in those currencies would have to rise substantially and the yield on government
bonds would follow suit. This would add greatly to the debt servicing cost of budget deficits in the USA, the
UK and much of euro land. A reduction in demand for imported Chinese goods would quickly entail a
decline in Chinas economic growth rate. That is alarming. It has been calculated that to keep
As already argued, the economic advance of China has taken place with relatively few corresponding
changes in the political system, although the operation of political and economic institutions has seen
some major changes. Still, tools are missing that would allow the establishment of political and legal
foundations for the modem economy, or they are too weak. The tools are efficient public administration,
the rule of law, clearly defined ownership rights, efficient banking system, etc. For these reasons, many
an economic crisis in China. Considering the importance of the state for the
would have serious global
repercussions. Its political ramifications could be no less dramatic owing to the special position the
experts fear
military occupies in the Chinese political system, and the existence of many potential vexed issues in East
Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, Only Makes You Stronger,
The New Republic, 2/4/9, http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=571cbbb92887-4d81-8542-92e83915f5f8
The greatest danger both to U.S.-China relations and to American power
itself is probably not that China will rise too far, too fast; it is that the current
crisis might end China's growth miracle. In the worst-case scenario, the turmoil in the
international economy will plunge China into a major economic downturn . The
Chinese financial system will implode as loans to both state and private enterprises go bad.
Millions or even tens of millions of Chinese will be unemployed in a country
without an effective social safety net . The collapse of asset bubbles in the
stock and property markets will wipe out the savings of a generation of the Chinese middle
class. The political consequences could include dangerous unrest --and a
bitter climate of
of Weimar Germany , when both Nazi and communist politicians blamed the West for
Germany's economic travails.) Worse,
Assistant Secretary of State during the Clinton administration. She was in the
Bureau of East Asia and Pacific Affairs (People's Republic of China, Taiwan,
Hong Kong and Mongolia). She is currently a professor at the Graduate School
of International Relations and Pacific Studies at the University of California,
San Diego. She is also a Senior Director of Albright Stonebridge Group, a
global strategy firm, where she assists clients with issues related to East Asia.
China: Fragile Superpower, Book
By sustaining high rates of economic growth, Chinas leaders create
new jobs and limit the number ofunemployed workers who might go
to the barricades. Binding the public to the Party through nationalism also helps preempt opposition. The trick is to find a
foreign policy approach that can achieve both these vital objectives simultaneously. How long can it last? Viewed objectively, Chinas
communist regime looks surprisingly resil- ient. It may be capable of surviving for years to come so long as the economy continues to grow
and create jobs. Survey research in Beijing shows wide- spread support (over 80 percent) for the political system as a whole linked to
sentiments of nationalism and acceptance of the CCPs argument about stability first.97 Without making any fundamental changes in the
CCP- dominated political systemleaders from time to time have toyed with reform ideas such as local elections but in each instance have
backed away for fear of losing controlthe Party has bought itself time. As scholar Pei Minxin notes, the ability of communist regimes to use
their patronage and coercion to hold on to power gives them little incentive to give up any of that power by introducing gradual
democratization from above. Typically, only when communist systems implode do their political fun- damentals change.98 As Chinas leaders
Japan, Taiwan, or the U nited S tates because from their point of view not lashing
out might endanger Party rule.
Chinese Growth Key to Military Restraint on TaiwanDecline of Economic Influence Causes China to Resort to
Military Aggression
Lampton, 3 (David, Director Chinese Studies, Nixon Center, FDCH, 3/18)
The Chinese realize that power has different faces--military, economic, and
normative (ideological) power. Right now, China is finding that in the era of
globalization, economic power (and potential economic power) is the form of
power it has in greatest abundance and which it can use most effectively. As long as
economic influence continues to be effective for Beijing, as it now seems to be in
dealing with Taiwan, for example, China is unlikely to resort to military intimidation
as its chief foreign policy instrument.
of rivals . This internal competition was enshrined as party practice a little more than a year ago. In
October 2007, President Hu surprised many China watchers by abandoning the partys normally
straightforward succession procedure and designating not one but two heirs apparent. The Central
Committee named Xi Jinping and Li Keqiangtwo very different leaders in their early 50s
to the nine-member Politburo Standing Committee, where the rulers of China are groomed. The future
roles of these two men, who will essentially share power after the next party congress meets in 2012, have
since been refined: Xi will be the candidate to succeed the president, and Li will succeed
Premier Wen Jiabao. The two rising stars share little in terms of family background, political association,
leadership skills, and policy orientation. But they are each heavily involved in shaping economic policy
and they are expected to lead the two competing coalitions that will be relied upon to
craft Chinas political and economic trajectory in the next decade and beyond.
A similar argument may be made with respect to China. China is a country that has had its share of
upheavals in the past. While there is no expectation today of renewed internal turmoil, it is important to
remember that closed authoritarian societies are subject to deep crisis in moments of sudden change. The
breakup of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, and the turmoil that has ravaged many members of the
former communist bloc are examples of what could happen to China. A severe economic crisis, rebellions
in Tibet and Xinjiang, a reborn democracy movement and a party torn by factions could be the ingredients
of an unstable situation. A vulnerable Chinese leadership determined to bolster its shaky position by an
aggressive policy toward India or the United States or both might become involved in a major crisis with
India, perhaps engage in nuclear saber-rattling. That would encourage India to adopt a stronger nuclear
posture, possibly with American assistance.
Pakistan are spoiling to fight. But even a minor miscalculation by any of them could
destabilize Asia, jolt the global economy and even start a nuclear war. India, Pakistan
and China all have nuclear weapons, and North Korea may have a few , too. Asia lacks
the kinds of organizations, negotiations and diplomatic relationships that helped keep
an uneasy peace for five decades in Cold War Europe. Nowhere else on Earth are the stakes
as high and relationships so fragile, said Bates Gill, director of northeast Asian policy studies at the
Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. We see the convergence of great power interest overlaid
with lingering confrontations with no institutionalized security mechanism in place. There are elements for
potential disaster. In an effort to cool the regions tempers, President Clinton, Defense Secretary William
S. Cohen and National Security Adviser Samuel R. Berger all will hopscotch Asias capitals this month. For
America, the stakes could hardly be higher. There are 100,000 U.S. troops in Asia committed to defending
Taiwan, Japan and South Korea, and the United States would instantly become embroiled if Beijing moved
against Taiwan or North Korea attacked South Korea. While Washington has no defense
commitments to either India or Pakistan, a conflict between the two could end the
global taboo against using nuclear weapons and demolishthe already shaky
international nonproliferation regime. In addition, globalization has made a stable Asia _ with its
massive markets, cheap labor, exports and resources _ indispensable to the U.S. economy. Numerous U.S.
firms and millions of American jobs depend on trade with Asia that totaled $600 billion last year, according
to the Commerce Department.
Since the Partys life is above all else, it would not be surprising if
the CCP resorts to the use of biological, chemical, and nuclear
weapons in its attempt to postpone its life. The CCP,that disregards human
life, would not hesitate to kill two hundred million Americans, coupled
with seven or eight hundred million Chinese, to achieve its ends . The
speech, free of all disguises, lets the public see the CCP for what it really is: with evil filling its every cell,
deterrence pales in comparison to the great risk these weapons pose just sitting in vials in laboratories.
While a nuclear winter, resulting from a massive exchange of nuclear weapons, could also kill off
are easier to
control. Biological weapons, on the other hand, can get out of
control very easily, as the recent anthrax attacks has demonstrated. There is no way to
guarantee the security of these doomsday weapons because very tiny amounts can be stolen or
accidentally released and then grow or be grown to horrendous proportions. The
most of life on earth and severely compromise the health of future generations, they
Black Death of the Middle Ages would be small in comparison to the potential damage bioweapons could
cause. Abolition of chemical weapons is less of a priority because, while they can also kill millions of people
outright, their persistence in the environment would be less than nuclear or biological agents or more
localized. Hence, chemical weapons would have a lesser effect on future generations of innocent people
and the natural environment. Like the Holocaust, once a localized chemical extermination is over, it is over.
With nuclear and biological weapons, the killing will probably never end. Radioactive elements last tens of
thousands of years and will keep causing cancers virtually forever. Potentially worse than that, bio-
ebola viruses are just a small example of recently emerging plagues with no known cure or vaccine. Can
Concerns about
are hardly new, but they have been given
added weight by the government itself. Recognizing that a rapid implosion of the
real estate bubbles during a widely watched 60 Minutes expos this past weekend.
soaring property prices throughout China
property market would disrupt economic growth, the central government recently announced far-reaching
measures designed to dent the rampant speculation. Higher down payments, limiting the purchases of
investment properties, and a capital gains tax on real estate transactions designed to make flipping
properties less lucrative were included. These measures, in conjunction with the new governments
announcing more modest growth targets of 7.5 percent a year, sent Chinese equities plunging and led to a
slew of commentary in the United States saying China would be the next shoe to drop in the global system.
Yet there is more here than simple alarm over the viability of Chinas
economic growth. There is the not-so-veiled undercurrent of rooting
against China . It is difficult to find someone who explicitly wants it
to collapse, but the tone of much of the discourse suggests
bloodlust. Given that China largely escaped the crises that so
afflicted the United States and the eurozone, the desire to see it
stumble may be understandable. No one really likes a global winner
if that winner isnt you. The need to see China fail verges on
jingoism . Americans distrust the Chinese model, find that its
business practices verge on the immoral and illegal, that its
reporting and accounting standards are sub-par at best and that its
system is one of crony capitalism run by crony communists. On Wall
Street, the presumption usually seems to be that any Chinese
company is a ponzi scheme masquerading as a viable business. In
various conversations and debates, I have rarely heard Chinas
economic model mentioned without disdain. Take, as just one
example, Gordon Chang in Forbes: Beijings technocrats can
postpone a reckoning, but they have not repealed the laws of
economics. There will be a crash. The consequences of a Chinese
collapse, however, would be severe for the United States and for
the world . There could be no major Chinese contraction without a
concomitant contraction in the United States. That would mean
sharply curtailed Chinese purchases of U.S. Treasury bonds , far
less revenue for companies like General Motors, Nike, KFC and
Apple that have robust business in China (Apple made $6.83 billion in the fourth
quarter of 2012, up from $4.08 billion a year prior), and far fewer Chinese imports of
crisis more than a decade ago did not manifest itself in a property price surge, whereas the 2008-9
stimulus did. Over the past decade, no other factor has been as important as rising property values in
influencing growth patterns and perceptions of financial risks. The weakening impact of credit on growth is
largely explained by the divergence between fixed asset investment (FAI) and gross fixed capital formation
(GFCF). Both are measures of investment. FAI measures investment in physical assets including land while
GFCF measures investment in new equipment and structures, excluding the value of land and existing
assets. This latter feeds directly into GDP, while only a portion of FAI shows up in GDP accounts. Until
recently, the difference between the two measures did not matter in interpreting economic trends: both
were increasing at the same rate and reached about 35 per cent of GDP by 2002-03. Since then, however,
they have diverged and GFCF now stands at 45 per cent of GDP while the share of FAI has jumped to 70
per cent. Overall credit levels have increased in line with the rapid growth in FAI rather than the more
modest growth in GFCF. Most of the difference between the ratios is explained by rising asset prices. Thus
a large share of the surge in credit is financing property related transactions which explains why the
Land in China is an asset whose market value went largely unrecognised when it was totally controlled by
the State. Once a private property market was created, the process of discovering lands intrinsic value
began, but establishing such values takes time in a rapidly changing economy. The Wharton/NUS/Tsinghua
Price Index indicates that from 2004-2012, land prices have increased
approximately fourfold nationally, with more dramatic increases in major cities such as
Land
Beijing balanced by modest rises in secondary cities. Although this may seem excessive, such growth rates
are similar to what happened in Russia after it privatised its housing stock. Once the economy stabilised,
high given Chinas large population, its shortage of plots that are suitable for
construction and its rapid economic growth. Nationally, the ratio of incomes to housing prices has
improved and is now comparable to the levels found in Australia, Taiwan and the UK. In Beijing and
Much of the
recent surge in the credit to GDP ratio is actually evidence of
financial deepening rather than financial instability as China moves
toward more market-based asset values. If so, the higher credit ratios
are fully consistent with the less alarming impressions that come
from scrutiny of sector specific financial indicators.
Shanghai prices are similar to or lower than Delhi, Singapore and Hong Kong.
2NC AT Stocks
Chinas stock market is loosely tied to its economy
structural factors are fine and stock declines dont
accurately reflect growth
Rapoza 7/9
(Kenneth Rapoza. Contributing Editor at Forbes. "Don't Mistake China's Stock Market For
China's Economy," Forbes. 7-9-2015. http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2015/07/09/dontmistake-chinas-stock-market-for-chinas-economy///ghs-kw)
little while, and recent moves to change rules on margin, and even utilize a circuit-breaker mechanism to
temporarily delist fast-tanking companies from the mainland stock market, might have worked if the
Athens. For better or for worse, Beijing now has no choice but to go all-in to defend equities, some
investors told FORBES. But
The Bad and the Ugly To get a more detailed picture of what is driving Chinas growth slowdown, it is
necessary to look at a broader array of economic and financial indicators. The epicenter of Chinas
problems are the industrial and property sectors. Shares of the Shanghai Construction Group, one of the
largest developers listed on the Shanghai stock exchange, is down 42.6% in the past four weeks, two times
worse than the Shanghai Composite Index. China Railway Group is down 33%, also an underperformer.
Growth in real industrial output has declined from 14% in mid-2011 to 5.9% in April, growth in fixed-asset
investment declined 50% over the same period and electricity consumption by primary and secondary
industries is in decline. Chinas trade with the outside world is also falling, though this data does not
always match up with other countries trade figures. Real estate is in decline as Beijing has put the breaks
on its housing bubble. Only the east coast cities are still seeing price increases, but construction is not
booming in Shanghai anymore. The two main components of that have prevented a deeper downturn in
activity are private spending on services, particularly financial services, and government-led increases in
transportation infrastructure like road and rail. Retail sales, especially e-commerce sales that have
benefited the likes of Alibaba and Tencent, both of which have outperformed the index, have been growing
faster than the overall economy. Electricity consumption in the services sector is expanding strongly.
Growth in household incomes is outpacing GDP growth. China has begun the necessary rebalancing
towards a more sustainable, consumption-led growth model, says Jeremy Lawson, chief economist at
Standard Life Investments in the U.K. He warns that its still too early to claim success. Since 2011,
developed markets led by the S&P 500 have performed better than China, but for one reason and one
reason only: The central banks of Europe, the U.K., Japan and of course the U.S. have bought up assets in
unprecedented volumes using printed money, or outright buying securities like the Feds purchase of
bonds and mortgage backed securities. Why bemoan Chinas state intervention when central bank
intervention has been what kept southern Europe afloat, and the U.S. stock market on fire since March
2009?
clue on China , says Jan Dehn, head of research at Ashmore in London, a $70 billion emerging
market fund manager with money at work in mainland China securities. They dont see the
big picture. And they forget it is still an emerging market. The
Chinese make mistakes and will continue to make mistakes like all
governments. However, they will learn from their mistakes. The
magnitude of most problems are not such that they lead to
systematic meltdown. Each time the market freaks out, value
often deep value starts to emerge. Long term, these volatile
episodes are mere blips. They will not change the course of internationalization and maturing
of the market, Dehn told FORBES. China is still building markets. It has a large
environmental problem that will bode well for green tech firms like BYD. Its middle class is not
shrinking. Its billionaires are growing in numbers. They are
reforming all the time. And in the long term, China is going to win. Markets are impatient and
love a good drama. But investing is not a soap opera. Its not Keeping up with the Kardashians youre
buying, youre buying the worlds No. 2 economy, the biggest commodity consumer in the world, and
home to 1.4 billion people, many of which have been steadily earning more than ever. Chinas transition
will cause temporary weakness in growth and volatility, maybe even crazy volatility. But you have to break
with trust funds and brokerages accounting for a little over half of the leverage. Margin financing via
brokerages is down from 2.4 trillion yuan to 1.9 trillion yuan and lets not forget that Chinese GDP is about
has a 49% savings rate. Even if they lost half of it, they would be
saving more than Americans, the highly indebted consumer society
the world loves to love. During the rally over the past twelve months, the stock
market bubble did not trigger a boost in consumption indicating that
higher equity gains didnt impact spending habits too much. The
Chinese stock market is only 5% of total social financing in China.
Stock markets only finance 2% of Chinese fixed asset investment.
Only 1% of company loans have been put up with stocks as
collateral, so the impact on corporate activity is going to be limited.
The rapid rally and the violent correction illustrate the challenges of capital account liberalization, the
need for a long-term institutional investor base, index inclusion and deeper financial markets, including
foreign institutional investors, Dehn says. The A-shares correction is likely to encourage deeper financial
reforms, not a reversal.
<<Gender Privacy K
Links>>
Privacy
Fineman 94 its in the 1NC shell
Democracy
Representations of democracy exclude the non-male--the public/private split inhibits participation
Romany 93 (Celina Romany, A Professor of Law, Practicing Attorney, Mediator and Arbitrato,
1993, Women as Aliens: A Feminist Critique of the Public/Private Distinction in International
Human Rights Law. Pg. 100-101. //MV)
Both the family and the state are units of government within which actors play fiduciary
roles, while the market is deemed pre-political. Both the family and the state lack the
relative freedom from rules which the market enjoys since family and state decisions are
informed by "overarching ideals. '71 Both the family and the state share similar discourses whereby political
philosophy refers to family ideals while family theorists allude to political ideals, sharing an arsenal of linguistic imagery of the
market as a cornerstone of consent.72 The dichotomization of the public and private spheres cripples
women's citizenship. It inhibits the authoritative speech and dialogue that derive from selfdetermination and thus impairs the successful participation of women in democratic life. 73 ii.
"Private" Terror in the Patriarchal Family The family, through canonization, becomes the refuge for the
flour- ishing of those spheres of privacy and freedom which lie at the core of the nonpolitical foundations of the liberal state. At the root of the enshrinement of family in
conventional human rights law lies a con- vergence of narratives which legitimates a
hierarchical ordering of intimate relations; this convergence is hidden behind the notion
that the family as a social unit is beyond the purview of the state. Love and intimacy become guards on
the borders that place the family unit "beyond justice."
<<Neolib K Links>>
The
seemingly inexorable march of freedom that began in the late 1980s has not only come to a halt
but may have reversed its course. Expressions like freedom recession have begun to break out of the thinktank circuit and enter the public conversation. In a state of quiet desperation, a growing number of Western
policymakers began to con- cede that the Washington Consensusthat set
of dubious policies that once promised a neoliberal paradise at deep discounts has been superseded by the Beijing
environments, the first decade of the new millennium was marked by a sense of bitter disappointment, if not utter disillusionment.
Consensus, which boasts of delivering quick- and-dirty prosperity without having to bother with those pesky institutions of democracy. The
West has been slow to discover that the fight for democracy wasnt won back in 1989. For two decades it has been resting on its laurels,
a laissez-faire approach to
democratization has proved rather toothless against resurgent
authoritarianism, which has masterfully adapted to this new, highly globalized world. Todays authoritarianism is of the
expecting that Starbucks, MTV, and Google will do the rest just fine. Such
hedonism- and consumerism-friendly variety, with Steve Jobs and Ashton Kutcher commanding far more respect than Mao or Che Guevara. No
wonder the West appears at a loss. While the Soviets could be liberated by waving the magic wand of blue jeans, exquisite coffee machines,
and cheap bubble gum, one cant pull the same trick on China. After all, this is where all those Western goods come from. Many of the signs
that promised further democratization just a few years ago never quite materialized. The so-called color revolutions that swept the former
Soviet Union in the last decade produced rather ambiguous results. Ironically, its the most authoritarian of the former Soviet republics
Russia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstanthat found those revolutions most useful, having discovered and patched their own vulnerabilities. My own
birthplace, Belarus, once singled out by Condoleezza Rice as the last outpost of tyranny in Europe, is perhaps the shrewdest of the lot; it
continues its slide into a weird form of authoritarianism, where the glorification of the Soviet past by its despotic ruler is fused with a growing
frivolous interpretations of international law, these two wars gave democracy promotion such a bad name that anyone eager to defend it is
considered a Dick Cheney acolyte, an insane idealist, or both. It is thus easy to forget, if only for therapeutic purposes, that the West still has
an obligation to stand up for democratic values, speak up about violations of human rights, and reprimand those who abuse their office and
their citizens. Luckily, by the twenty-first century the case for promoting democracy no longer needs to be made; even the hardest skeptics
abuse at Abu Ghraib were the result, if only indirectly, of one particular approach to promoting democracy. It did not exactly work as
advertised. Unfortunately, as the neoconservative vision for democratizing the world got discredited, nothing viable has come to fill the
vacuum. While George Bush certainly overdid it with his excessive freedom- worshiping rhetoric, his successor seems to have abandoned the
rhetoric, the spirit, as well as any desire to articulate what a post-Bush freedom agenda might look like. But there is more to
Obamas silence
than just his reasonable attempt to present himself as anti-Bush. Most likely his silence
is a sign
The resilience of authoritarianism in places like Belarus, China, and Iran is not for lack of trying by their Western partners to
fallacy . Since the Soviet Union eventually fell, those strategies are
presumed to have been extremely effectivein fact, crucial to the whole endeavor. The
implications of such a view for the future of democracy promotion are tremendous, for they
suggest that large doses of information and communications
technology are lethal to the most repressive of regimes. Much of the
present excitement about the Internet, particularly the high hopes
that are pinned on it in terms of opening up closed societies , stems
from such selective and , at times, incorrect readings of history,
rewritten to glorify the genius of Ronald Reagan and minimize the
role of structural conditions and the inherent contradictions of the
Soviet system . Its for these chiefly historical reasons that the Internet excites so many seasoned and sophisticated decision
makers who should really know better. Viewing it through the prism of the Cold War,
they endow the Internet with nearly magical qualities ; for them, its the ultimate
cheat sheet that could help the West finally defeat its authoritarian adversaries. Given that its the only ray of
light in an otherwise dark intellectual tunnel of democracy
promotion, the Internets prominence in future policy planning is
assured . And at first sight it seems like a brilliant idea. Its like Radio Free Europe on steroids. And its cheap, too: no need to pay
for expensive programming, broadcasting, and, if everything else fails, propaganda. After all, Internet users can discover the truth about the
horrors of their regimes, about the secret charms of democracy, and about the irresistible appeal of universal human rights on their own, by
turning to search engines like Google and by following their more politically savvy friends on social networking sites like Facebook. In other
army of bloggers? Its hardly surprising, then, that the only place where the West (especially the United States) is still unabashedly eager to
promote democracy is in cyberspace. The Freedom Agenda is out; the Twitter Agenda is in. Its deeply symbolic that the only major speech
about freedom given by a senior member of the Obama administration was Hillary Clintons speech on Internet freedom in January 2010. It
looks like a safe bet: Even if the Internet wont bring democracy to China or Iran, it can still make the Obama administration appear to have
the most technologically savvy foreign policy team in history. The best and the brightest are now also the geekiest. The Google Doctrinethe
enthusiastic belief in the liberating power of technology accompanied by the irresistible urge to enlist Silicon Valley start-ups in the global fight
for freedomis of growing appeal to many policymakers. In fact, many of them are as upbeat about the revolutionary potential of the Internet
bubbles , on the other hand, could easily lead to carnage . The idea that
the Internet favors the oppressed rather than the oppressor is marred
stuck to a populist account of how technology empowers the people, who, op- pressed by years of authoritarian rule, will inevitably rebel,
mobilizing themselves through text messages, Facebook, Twitter, and whatever new tool comes along next year. (The people, it must be
My own story is fairly typical of idealistic young people who think they are onto
I
was drawn to a Western NGO that sought to promote democracy and
media reform in the former Soviet bloc with the help of the Internet. Blogs, social networks,
something that could change the world. Having watched the deterioration of democratic freedoms in my native Belarus,
wikis: We had an arsenal of weapons that seemed far more potent than police batons, surveillance cameras, and
handcuffs. Nevertheless, after I spent a few busy years circling the former Soviet region and meeting with activists and
bloggers, I lost my enthusiasm. Not only were our strategies failing, but we also noticed a significant push back from the
governments we sought to challenge. They were beginning to experiment with censorship, and some went so far as to
start aggressively engaging with new media themselves, paying bloggers to spread propaganda and troll social
networking sites looking for new information on those in the opposition. In the meantime, the Western obsession with the
Internet and the monetary support it guaranteed created numerous hazards typical of such ambitious development
Sometimes, they are even eager to acknowledge that it takes more than bytes to foster, install, and
environment , and, as such, is deaf to the social, cultural, and political subtleties and indeter- minacies. Internetcentrism is a highly disorienting drug; it ignores context and entraps policymakers into believing that
they have a useful and powerful ally on their side. Pushed to its extreme, it leads to hubris,
arrogance, and a false sense of confidence ,
established effective command of the Internet. All too often, its practitioners fashion themselves as possessing full mastery of their favorite
tool, treating it as a stable and finalized technology, oblivious to the numerous forces that are constantly reshaping the Internet not all of
them for the better.
companies like Google and Facebook. As the Internet takes on an even greater role in the politics of both authoritarian and democratic states,
giving in to cyber-utopianism and Internetcentrism is akin to agreeing to box blindfolded. Sure, every now and
then we may still strike some powerful blows against our authoritarian
adversaries, but in general this is a poor strategy if we want to win .
geopolitical environment requires. In a sense,
The struggle against authoritarianism is too important of a battle to fight with a voluntary intellectual handicap, even if that handicap allows
us to play with the latest fancy gadgets.
challenge the non-determination of privacy as control definitions (e.g., Wacks 2010, 40f.; Solove 2008,
25); they argue that these theories fail to define the content of privacy. In fact, control theories deal with
the freedom to choose privacy (Wacks 2010, 41), rather than a determination of the content to be
deemed private. Here, privacy is what is subjectively seen as private; such theories, therefore, foster
individuals exclusive control over their data, and do not want to and cannot lay claim to privacy within a
good society and a happy fulfilled life (Jaggar 1983, 174). Access theories differ on this point; these
theories can denote a realm of privacy that is not at the disposal of the individuals choice by any means
(Fuchs 2011b, 223). For instance, such determinations of privacy could include the agreement that
individuals bodies, homes or financial issues such as bank secrecy, are inherently private. In access
theories, privacy is what is objectively private and, therefore, theories as these can conjure up constraints
It is crucial to understand
that access theories may allow thinking about what privacy should
be in a good society, but not as a matter of necessity. In fact, access
theories of privacy are also most often situated within the liberal
to individuals control over their data in terms of certain values.
four aspects: the right to use, to abuse, to alienate or exchange something, as well as the right to receive
the fruits that the usage of something generates (Munzer 2005, 858). Private property can be or probably
has always been constrained by state or society (Christman 1996). However, it may be called an absolute
right in two senses: it is a right to dispose of, or alienate, as well as to use; and it is a right which is not
conditional on the owners performance of any social function (Macpherson 1978, 10). CC: Creative
(Lessig 2002, 250). Consequently, there is much discussion about how, on the one hand, to understand,
justify, and criticize intangible private property, and on the other hand, to analyse, welcome, or mourn the
Further
similarities between privacy and private property can be found in
their dependence on peoples class status (Goldring 1984, 313;
Papacharissi 2010). It makes an important difference if one has
private property only in things that one needs for life, or if one has
much more private property than he or she needs for life. There are
rich private property owners who possess far more housing space
than they can ever use. On the other hand, there are poor private
property owners, being on welfare, who only possess their labour
power. In terms of privacy, there are, for instance, people who rely
on sharing the flat with other people that brings along several
constraints in temporarily withdrawing from other people, or they
may be forced to report their whole private life to state authorities
blurring between the public and private realm online (with respect to SNS: boyd 2007).
(Gilliom 2001). However, there are people who have far more
privacy. For instance, people who live in castles are well protected
from any unappreciated intrusions, be they from other people,
noise, or anything else. These people may be able to circumvent
reporting their financial status to state authorities, using the law
effectively on their behalf by means of tax and investment
consultants. As much as private property, privacy is also good for different
things depending on ones class status. In capitalism, all people rely on having
private property in order to satisfy their material and cultural needs. For the rich and powerful, private
property ensures that they have the right to own the means of production and use them for their own
purpose. For the poor, private property is essential because only via private property can they reproduce
consequences from the outlined close connection between the individualistic control theory of privacy and
private property by conceptualising the right to privacy as a right to property (Laudon 1996, 93; Lessig
2002; Kang 1998; Varian 1997). Property, according to the previously outlined identifying processes, is for
these authors always to be understood as private property. Privacy as property would strengthen the
individual control of personal data (Laudon 1996, 93; 97) and would prevent privacy invasions that occur
The privacy as
property-approach demands that everyone possesses information
about themselves that would be valuable under some circumstances
to others for commercial purposes. Everyone possesses his or her
own reputation and data image. In this sense, basing privacy on the
value of ones name is egalitarian. Even the poor possess their
identity. In the current regime of privacy protection, not even the wealthy can protect their personal
when personal data is accessed non-consensually (Laudon 1996, 99).
information (Laudon 1996, 102). Admittedly, with other political implications in mind, Lessig says, in the
context of privacy as property, that property
2015. <http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/issue/view/25>.)
the properties of the dominant
privacy notion competitive individualism, exclusive control,
exchangeable private property have their very origin in the
commodity exchange. The commodity exchange hides human
sociality. Value appears as property of things and not as a social
relation. Hence, it is important to own things for realising their
value. But sociality asserts itself behind peoples back and establishes pressures to perform that are
By employing Marxs theory, I have thus far shown that
not controlled by the individuals. They perceive themselves as competitors. C.B. Macpherson (1962)
detected the great influence of the outlined objective forms of thought within the most influential
philosophical and political thinking, from Hobbes to Locke, and labelled it possessive individualism.
(Habermas 1991, 74; Lyon 1994, 186, 196; Etzioni 1999, 194), but for the evaluation of these critiques, it is
important to keep in mind that privacys origin in possessive individualism is not arbitrary; rather, this style
Aspect: Privacy and Class Domination Ideology was defined as a specific form of human association
it is in
the associational form of commodi- ty exchange that ideology is
falsified and thus makes privacy one-sided and individualistic. But what
that evokes a false consciousness and a structure of political domination. I have shown that
about the political dimension of ideology? I am stuck for an answer that addresses why ideology and
therefore ideological notions of privacy are tied to implicit class domination and are therefore problematic.
Marx gives an answer to this question within his capital theory. It is important to stress that there is a
logical unity between the value theory and capital theory in Marx. The unity exists because commodity
exchange and exploitation take place in capitalist reality at the same time. This means that commodity
exchange and its objective forms of thought are necessarily interwoven with capitalism, i.e. we cannot
value (Marx 1867/1976, 257); in short, M-C-M: in the sphere of circulation, money (M) is invested for a
specific commodity production (C) and results then, if the sale was successful, in more money (M). Why
are investments profitable? Marx gives the following answer. Self-processing value is possible due to the
commodification of the workforce. The workforce is a certain commodity as it is able to produce more
value than it costs to reproduce. For instance, food and opportunities for regeneration, such as free time,
sleeping, etc. that have to be produced, are reproduction costs of the workforce. The difference between
these costs and the surplus produced by workers is appropriated by the buyers of the workforce. In this
capitalists are steadily able to appropriate the societallyproduced surplus by workers. They become therefore richer and
more powerful than workers. Consequently, a structural class
division in society becomes inevitable. Why is such appropriation
legitimate? It is legitimate because the principle of equivalence, do
ut des, I give that you may give, no one cheats anyone, remains
intact and therefore the mutual recognition as private property
owners is not affected. On the contrary, fair commodity exchange
manner,
to the worker in capitalism is a political fiction (Pateman and Mills 2007, 17f.) since the inalienable part of
the individual that enters into employment contracts cannot be separated from the individuals alienable
aspects. When employers buy work force, it is demanded that the worker brings in his or her knowledge,
skills, etc., which in fact is his or her person. Labour cannot be separated from person-being and
personbecoming (Marx 1976, 283). The same applies to privacy and personal data. It is a fiction to assume
that users can exchange their personal data and that this exchange would not affect their person, which
also has to be conceptualised as non-alienable in order to speak meaningfully of free and voluntary
exchanges on privacy markets. Pateman argues that contracts, although entered voluntarily, enable
superiority and subordination. Hence, there is also a subordination of the users at stake when they accept
commercial SNSs terms of use. Such subordination is a precondition for exploitation and class domination
ultimately. Ellerman refers to this fiction as a personthing mismatch (Ellerman 2005, 463) as if aspects of
ideology, but also directly to exploitation. In Table 1, I summarise what we can learn
from Marx in terms of understanding privacy in (informational) capitalism.