1/15

WHS 2010 JG

CX questions:
Under your alt, can we do our plan? Does doing the plan preclude the alt? What exactly does your alt do? Does your kritik link to the status quo? What is the status of your Alternative?\ Are you fiating communism?

2/15

WHS 2010 JG

2AC FRAMEWORK
A) Interpretation the neg must defend the status quo or a competitive policy option enacted by the United States Federal Government and the aff must be able to weigh our advantages against the negs impacts. B) Violation they dont let us defend the status quo or a competitive policy option, and we cant weigh our advantages against the neg impacts. C) Standards

1) Limits there are an unlimited number of possible kritikal frameworks 2) Ground we lose all our ground when we cant weigh our aff 2b) [IF THE K LINKS TO SQUO] and the neg is stealing key aff ground by criticizing the status quo 3) Fairness the 1AC determines the ground; that includes framework 4) Education

I) We have the most real world education because it trains us to make good decisions as future policymakers II) We are key for topic specific education, a neg team can run ultragenerics like cap or security on every topic and never learn about the topic. III) No side bias when the neg goes one-off K, they have infinite prep too.
D) Voter for fairness, education, debatability.

3/15

WHS 2010 JG

NEG FIAT BAD

1. Fiat derives from the word should there is no implied should not words are in and left out of the resolution for a reason 2. Reciprocity doesnt check 3. Aff fiat is limited because it is confined by the resolution Neg would always claim unlimited fiat 4. Reciprocity is a lie they have presumption and the block thats not reciprocal 5. Kills Aff research burden the Neg ability to fiat explodes Aff research burden because there are infinite amounts of topical/nontopical CPs 6. Skews 2AC strat Neg fiat exponentially increases the number of worlds the Aff has to answer the 1AC is crafted to answer the Status quo 7. No reciprocity Aff fiat is confined by the resolution Neg fiat isnt

4/15

WHS 2010 JG

FLOATING PIKS ARE A VOTING ISSUE

1. Fairness-steals the entirety of the 1AC. Theres no predictable offense against our own aff with different discourse. 2. Education-they discourage in-depth critical debates if they can just isolate one representation and PIK out of it. 3. Also independently disproves the criticism. If our aff can be done through a different lensthen its a reason the perm is a good idea. 4. They dont have a solvency advocate. Having comparative evidence ensure debates have clash.

5/15

WHS 2010 JG

VAGUE ALTS BAD

1. Ground they keep the aff from generating stable offense against the alt. 2. Education we dont get quality education from a vague alt because we never get to the specifics. 3. Fairness we have to have a specific plan so the neg should have a specific alt 4. Real World precision is necessary in everyday life 5. The lack of specific alternative dooms the K there can be no worldwide transition and capitalists will resist transition. Kliman, professor of economics, Pace University, in 6
[Andrew, Not by Politics Alone, Presentation at Left Forum Conference, March 11, http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:W7WV0BP2LGoJ:akliman.squarespace.com/writings/not%2520by %2520politics%2520alone%25204.2.06.doc+alternative+to+capitalism&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=128&gl=us]

One is that it is hard to imagine that a break with capitalism will emerge throughout the world all at once. This presents a very serious problem of sustainability, since history has shown, I believe, that socialism in one country is indeed impossible. What can be done to defend the break with capitalism in the meantime, against both the inevitable attempt at counter-revolution and capitalisms totalizing tendency, its tendency to swallow up and incorporate everything within itself? I do not know. I do not know anyone who knows. But I do know that this is a question that needs to be thought through with extreme care and now. It cannot be put off until after the revolution. To assume that there will be time, at that point, to think it through or time to work it out through experimentation, is wishful thinking at best. It is quite hard to believe that there will be any time at all before the counter-revolution and the tentacles of the capitalist system go to work. In referring to sustainability, I also have several economic problems in mind that must be confronted. If the emergent new society does not deliver the goods, and if it does not move towards elimination of alienated labor and reduction of working time, there will be no popular mandate for it and indeed, no reason for its continued existence. At this point, it could be kept alive only through force, through suppression of mass opposition, so it would turn into its opposite.
There are several different issues that Im thinking of when I use the term sustainable.

6/15

WHS 2010 JG

UTOPIAN ALTS BAD

1. Fairness the aff would never win if the neg got utopian alts. 2. Kills debate nobody plays a rigged game, but a fair system of debate is the strongest internal link to education 3. Education spend your time learning about something that will actually happen. 4. Real World key to usable education 5. Ground the aff must have real world advantages with solvency advocates, it should be reciprocal

7/15

WHS 2010 JG

2AC PERMS
1) Perm: Do Both

2)The perm solves - Capitalism can be reformed and revolutionized accepting that capitalism has the potential to massively improve the quality of life for people worldwide while also acknowledging the injustices it currently causes poses the question of social justice anew and leads to a more relevant type of activism their K is a dead end and our AFFs approach solves their impacts
Genovese, scholar in residence at University Center in Georgia, in 2000
[Eugene, The Collapse of Socialism, AEI, http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.17952,filter.all/pub_detail.asp]

World-historic events compel a reassessment of first principles as well as political and social policies. For those on the Left, that need not lead to a retreat from our lifelong struggle for social justice--our struggle against economic exploitation, racism, male supremacy, and the atomization of social life. But this struggle has often blinded us to the historic achievements of capitalism, upon which any civilized society must build, and not the least of those achievements has been an economic performance that has created expanded possibilities for individual freedom and political democracy for enormous numbers of people throughout the world. The Left wishes to forget Marx's materialist premise--and promise--namely, that a socialist society would outproduce its capitalist rival and thereby provide the material foundations for an unprecedented human liberation. The woeful failure of socialism as an economic system has laid bare the delusive nature of the dream. For better and worse, capitalism, not socialism, has once again emerged as the world's greatest revolutionary--and self-revolutionizing--system, and, in so doing, it has established its claims to being immeasurably more congruent with human nature. But it has not thereby refuted the charge of its also being an economic system that undermines the foundations of civilized life by atomizing individuals, and undermines the inspiring concept of citizenship that it created in the first place. Rather, when considered in the light of the failure of socialism, capitalism today poses anew the challenge to construct a decent social order. 3) Perm: Do the plan and all non-exclusive parts of the alt; either the alt can solve the marginal link caused by the plan or the alt cant solve anyway its a double bind 4) Perm: Do the aff as a starting point for the alt

6)The perm solves the anti-capitalist actions and rhetoric of the 1AC supercharge solvency and only the perm avoids transition wars.

8/15

WHS 2010 JG

A2: Alt includes aff

The alt cant solve for our aff - capitalism is key to Space Exploration corporate resources Matsunaga, Mamber, and Humphries in 94
[Matthew, Hawaii State Senator, Jeffrey, Managing Director, American Operations, Frederick, President Florida A&M University, Session 4: What is the Economic Value of Space Exploration? (Part II), http://cmex.ihmc.us/cmex/data/vse/session4.html]
"The

maturation of American-style capitalism" has led to a global economy that thrives on area is more poised to further blur the traditional political boundaries than tomorrows space exploration, [which] will require the resources of a multiplicity of corporations, working with international organizations, all powered by international capital," Mamber said. "Thus engaged, and perhaps only thus engaged, can we dare to think about a defense conversion that can bring about an era of job creation and not just the down-sizing now inflicting both the former Soviet Union and the United States. "The mobilization for Apollo was a war-time effort. The war is over, the question today is how to advance our societys values of democracy, of trade, of equality. That is the value today of human space exploration," he said. "Put differently, a robust exploration of space...has the potential to finally separate space exploration from military exploitation. Until that separation takes place, the space programs of Russia and the U.S. will remain in the shadow of our military programs as they have done since the beginning of the Space Age." "The [way] to a robust space industry is not to have Martin Marietta or Deutsche Aerospace or NPO Energia make only toasters.... That is not a doable defense conversion," he continued. We need to build a truly commercial space infrastructure that can stand apart from the military-industrial complex. "A true space exploration program is such a project: new space transportation vehicles unrelated to ballistic missiles, cargo ships from low Earth orbit to moon orbit,...housing on the moon for hundreds of workers, astronomy centers on the far side of the moon."
transactions not among nations but among multinational corporations. "No

9/15

WHS 2010 JG

No Alt Solvency
1)Crisis within capitalism doesnt cause it to collapse, just causes major war the alt cant completely escape the system which is what their Negri 9 evidence indicates is required for a successful revolution. Africa News Service, Dec 10, in 2 IN the late 19th Century, the chief author of the Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx, argued that the contradictions of capitalism would one day destroy the capitalist system. His predictions were followed by two world wars in the first half of the 20th Century. The 1914-1918 First World War was followed by a MarxistLeninist revolution in Russia in 1917 and the 1939-1945 Second World War was followed by a Maoist Revolution in China in 1949. The Great Depression in the West in the 1930s seemed to indicate that Karl Marx had been right. But there is something paradoxical about an economic system which is based on the law of the jungle, euphemistically referred to as "the market forces of supply and demand". It goes through periodical crises, in which it leaves behind a lot of casualties, but the basic pillars of the system always remain intact. Because of the attraction of human greed, the system is also always able to spawn up demagogic disciples who revive its fortunes by telling us that any economic system which does not take into account human selfishness and individual flair and creativity in its objectives is bound to fail.

A. The lack of specific alternative dooms the K there can be no

worldwide transition and capitalists will resist transition.

Kilman, professor of economics, Pace University, in 6

[Andrew, Not by Politics Alone, Presentation at Left Forum Conference, March 11, http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:W7WV0BP2LGoJ:akliman.squarespace.com/writings/not%2520by%2520politics %2520alone%25204.2.06.doc+alternative+to+capitalism&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=128&gl=us]

One is that it is hard to imagine that a break with capitalism will emerge throughout the world all at once. This presents a very serious problem of sustainability, since history has shown, I believe, that socialism in one country is indeed impossible. What can be done to defend the break with capitalism in the meantime, against both the inevitable attempt at counter-revolution and capitalisms totalizing tendency, its tendency to swallow up and incorporate everything within itself? I do not know. I do not know anyone who knows. But I do know that this is a question that needs to be thought through with extreme care and now. It cannot be put off until after the revolution. To assume that there will be time, at that point, to think it through or time to work it out through experimentation, is wishful thinking at best. It is quite hard to believe that there will be any time at all before the counter-revolution and the tentacles of the capitalist system go to work. In referring to sustainability, I also have several economic problems in mind that must be confronted. If the emergent new society does not deliver the goods, and if it does not move towards elimination of alienated labor and reduction of working time, there will be no popular mandate for it and indeed, no reason for its continued existence. At this point, it could be kept alive only through force, through suppression of mass opposition, so it would turn into its opposite.
There are several different issues that Im thinking of when I use the term sustainable.

B. The plan solves the links -- the aff unites and combines world resources and works towards common goals thus enabling safe colonization of space -- a communist revolution is unnecessarily violent -- thats Yi.

10/15

WHS 2010 JG

Cap Good
1) Capitalism is key to ending poverty Balko, senior editor at Reason magazine, in 2
[Radley- Previously- he was a policy analyst for the Cato Institute- specializing in vice and civil liberties issuesOctober 20- 2002- http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=1981]

World poverty is down. And the reasons for all of this are, to the protesters' chagrin, none other than capitalism, globalization, and free trade. The first study is the 2002 edition of the United Nations' annual "Human Development Report." The report informs us that as of 2002, 140 of the world's 200 countries -- 70 percent -now hold multi-party elections. Eighty-two countries representing 57 percent of the human population are fully democratic, the highest percentage in human history. After a century in which totalitarianism -- Nazism, fascism and communism -- killed more than 170 million people, a clear move toward universal political freedom is afoot. The numbers on world economics are good, too. World poverty fell more than 20 percent between 1990 and 1999, a decade of aggressive globalization. The number of world Internet users is expected to double by 5 to one billion. In those regions of the world most sympathetic to liberal reform, the news is even better. In ten years, poverty halved in in East Asia and the Pacific regions. Since 1990, 800 million people have gained new access to improved water supplies, and 750 million to improved sanitation. In the last 30 years, infant mortality rates have dropped from 96 deaths per 1,000 live births to just 56. A study from the Institute for International Studies boasts even more good news. The author of that study, Surjit S.
Bhalla, employed accounting statistics based on individual incomes instead of national incomes, which allowed him to more accurately measure wealth and poverty rates. Bhalla concludes that the world poverty rate has declined even more dramatically

than the U.N. reports, from 44 percent in 1980 to just 13 percent in 2000. Bhalla attributes the decline to progress in China and India, the two most populous nations in the world, and two nations that have made significant moves toward more economic freedom in the last 20 years. But not all the news is good. Huge swaths of humanity still fester in abject poverty. Not surprisingly, the regions witnessing the most poverty also happen to house those cultures and regimes most averse to markets and capitalism -- sub-Saharan Africa and the Arab world.

11/15

WHS 2010 JG

Transition Wars
Capitalist elites will resist, causing global war Harris, Atlanta Writer, in 2
[Lee, Policy Review, December, p3(13) The intellectual origins of America-Bashing]

This is the immiserization thesis of Marx. And it is central to revolutionary Marxism, since if capitalism produces no widespread misery, then it also produces no fatal internal contradiction: If everyone is getting better off through capitalism, who will dream of struggling to overthrow it? Only genuine misery on the part of the workers would be sufficient to overturn the whole apparatus of the capitalist state, simply because, as Marx insisted, the capitalist class could not be realistically expected to relinquish control of the state apparatus and, with it, the monopoly of force. In this, Marx was absolutely correct. No capitalist society has ever willingly liquidated itself, and it is utopian to think that any ever will. Therefore, in order to achieve the goal of socialism, nothing short of a complete revolution would do; and this means, in point of fact, a full-fledged civil war not just within one society, but across the globe. Transition wars away from cap cause omnicide Kothari, Prof. of Poli Sci @ U. of New Delhi, in 82
[Towards a Just Social Order, P. 571]

Attempts at global economic reform could also lead to a world racked by increasing turbulence, a greater sense of insecurity among the major centers of powerand hence to a further tightening of the structures of domination and domestic repression producing in their wake an intensification of the old arms race and militarization of regimes, encouraging regional conflagrations and setting the stage for eventual global holocaust. 5) Perm: Do the plan then the alternative. The plan provides the beginning of an easy transition which means the perm doesnt result in the transition wars of the 1NC

12/15

WHS 2010 JG

No Impact Cap not RC

Capitalism is not the root cause of war Dandeker, Professor of Military Sociology in the Department of War Studies at Kings College London, in 92
[Christopher , The Causes of War and the History of Modern Sociological Theory, Effects of War on Society, Edited by Giorgio Ausenda, Published by the Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Social Stress by Boydell & Brewer Ltd, p. 44-46]
All these

arguments presuppose two specious sociological contentions: first that capitalism, as the most the source of modern militarism, and second, that socialism, preferably on a world scale would involve the abolition of war. The deficiencies in these views, and
historically developed and dynamic form of class exploitation, is indeed of those associated with the industrial society thesis discussed earlier, can be revealed by drawing on Machiavellian themes which can then be set out more explicitly in the next section. Despite the fact that industrial capitalism has produced two world

wars, as Aron (1954) and more recently Michael Mann (1984) have argued, there is no special relationship between capitalism and militarismor the tendency to waronly one of historical indifference. All the pre-dispositions of capitalist states to use warfare calculatively as a means of resolving their disputes with other states predate the formation of capitalism as an economic system. Of course, it

could be argued that capitalism merely changes the form of militarism. That is to say, pre-capitalist patterns of militarism were still expressions of class relations and modern capitalism has just increased the destructive power of the industrialised means of war available to the state. But this argument will not do. Socialist societies in their use of industrialised power show that the technological potential

for war is transferable and can be reproduced under non-capitalist conditions. Furthermore, the military activities of socialist states cannot be explained in terms of a [end page 44] defensive war against capitalism or even an aggressive one, as national and geopolitical power motives are arguably just as significant in the determination of state behaviour. Furthermore, imperial expansion not only of capital accumulation face major difficulties. The association between economic boom and military spending has been

predates capitalism but it is also difficult to reduce the causes of wars then and now to the interests of dominant economic classes (Mann 1984:25-46). Meanwhile, modern attempts to explain patterns of military expenditure in terms of the imperatives revealed as an empirical association not an inherent connection; indeed the evidence from Germany and Japan indicates that low levels of military spending might well be associated with economic performances superior to those of societies which commit more of their GNP to defence expenditure. Furthermore, the idea that war and the threat of war are weapons of national mythology used by

dominant classes to confuse the working class and weaken their natural affinity with international socialism faces the problem that, as in the case of Europe in 1914, national enthusiasms were such that truly remarkable powers would have to be attributed to ruling classes in order to make sense of them while in any case alternative explanations are at hand (Howard 1976:108-15). The
problems of economic determinism in Marxist social theory are compounded by two further difficulties. The first of these concerns is its emphasis on endogenous, unfolding models of social change. The tendency is to view state behaviour in terms of the

imperatives of internal class relations with warfare being regarded as the externalisation of the contradictory nature of those relations. Marxism finds it difficult to view inter-state relations as characterised by structural interdependencies of a politico-strategic nature. The drift of Marxism is to
regard the state as a class actor not as a geopolitical one. This failing derives not just from the internalist bias of Marxist social theory but also from its failure to provide a satisfactory account of the conditions under which the human species has become differentiated into separate societies and, more specifically, why it is that the modern capitalist economic system has developed in the context of a system of competing nation-statesa political system extending from the core of Europe to the rest of the globe during the course of the twentieth century. As Michael Mann has suggested there is

nothing in capitalism as an economic system which presupposes or requires such a political system although there is a strong [end page 45] case in favour of the view that the development and triumph of modern capitalism benefited from the constant power struggle amongst the emergent nation-states of European civilisation (Hall 1986; Mann 1988). In Marxist theory, the rise of nation-states has

been interpreted as an early stage in the political expression of the universality of the capitalist market, an expression which will change with the demands of capital accumulation (Semmel 1981: 166-73). A contemporary case in point would be the current shift to European integration in the context of global competition amongst the major capitalist blocs. However, nationalism is not a bourgeois phenomenon created to provide ideological and legal conditions favourable for capitalist economic relations. Nor are modern nationalisms, when suitably decoded, enthusiastic proletarian movements ready to take the stage vacated by their less distinguished Western comrades. Nationalism is a far more significant motor of human history than classa fact which was recognised by some Marxists in the early twentieth century: Mussolini was one of them (Ashworth and Dandeker 1986:82-7; Dandeker 1985:349-67; Gregor 1974:145-7; Smith 1983:47-50). The inability of Marxism to provide a satisfactory account of nationalism is part of a broader failure to explain why societies exist at all. That is to say, in relation to the four clusters of modernity distinguished earlier, it is through the conjoining of industrialism, capitalism, bureaucratic surveillance and the state monopolisation of the means of violence that modern societies have emerged. As Anthony Giddens has suggested, societies are actually products of modernity (and not one dimension of modernity, i.e., class relations within capitalism). If by society one means a clearly demarcated and internally well articulated social entity it is only relatively recently that large human populations have lived under such arrangements and these have been the achievements of modern nation-states (Dandeker 1990:51; Giddens 1985:172).

2) Cap is not the root cause of war, but securitization is, the use of racist orientalist is the reason, the Aff is the prerequisite to solve wars. Its a scenario that alt cant solve.

13/15

WHS 2010 JG

3) A. Cooperation over a mutual agreed goal can break down competition

between the United States and China

Deng, Associate Professor of Political Science at the United States Naval Academy, in '6
[Yong, "Reputation and the Security Dilemma: China Reacts to the China Threat Theory" published in "New Directions in the Study of China's Foreign Policy" by Alastair Johnston and Robert Ross, p 186-206] Studies in social

psychology suggest yet another alternative mechanism for building trust through cooperative pursuit of a commonly desired and only jointly attainable superordinate goal."4 Such cooperation reduces intergroup rivalry and allows for the pursuit of absolute gains to prevail over considerations of relative gains. Chinese commentators took notice of the changes in the U.S. attitudes toward China resulting from the U.S.-led campaign against global terrorism.

4) This break down of competition, signals to the rest of the allies for cooperation, thus limiting and eventually getting rid of the capitalist mind set.

14/15

WHS 2010 JG

Communism Fails
Communist/ Socialist societies collapse - empirically proven over the last few decades Norberg, Cato Institute, in 3
[Johan, In Defense of Global Capitalism p.63-64]
During the past two decades, this

system has spread throughout the world via the process termed globalization. The communist dictatorships in the East and the military dictatorships of the Third World collapsed, and the walls they had raised against ideas, people, and goods collapsed with them. Instead, we have seen the dissemination and widespread acceptance of the idea that creativity cannot be centralized, that it can only be encouraged by entitling citizens to decide for themselves, to create, to think, to work. Capitalism means that no one is subject to arbitrary coercion by others. Because we have the

option of simply refraining from signing a contract or doing a business deal if we prefer some other solution, the only way of getting rich in a free market is by giving people something they want, something they will pay for of their own free will. Both parties to a free exchange have to

feel that they benefit from it; otherwise there won't be any deal. Economics, then, is not a zerosum game. The bigger a person's income in a market economy, the more that person has done to offer people what they want. Bill Gates and Madonna earn millions, but they don't steal that money; they earn it by offering software and music that a lot of people think are worth paying for. In this sense, they are essentially our servants. Firms and individuals struggle to develop better goods and more efficient ways of providing for our needs. The alternative is for the government to take our resources and then decide which types of behavior to encourage. The only question is why the government knows what we want and what we consider important in our lives better than we ourselves do.

15/15

WHS 2010 JG

No Link
1) The aff doesnt engage in the rhetoric of capitalism the neg criticizes; we are working in the interests of humanity. 2) If anything, the aff is anti-capitalist because it promotes dialogue and cooperation between those that capitalism would have compete against each other 3) We approach colonization as citizens of the Earth, not of competing countries, thats our Mitchell and Staretz in 10 card.

Case Outweighs
1) 8) Case Outweighs: A. Nuclear war with china will happened in the short term --- turns the k because empirically war causes the powerful elites to seize control and exploit the poor underclass. B. Try or die: theyve conceded that extinction is inevitable because of climate change, resource wars, and sun expansion space exploration and tech development is key to getting off the rock C. Theres no brink to their impacts its impossible to quantify how much capitalism triggers an arms race or poverty the plan certainly doesnt push cap past the brink because the aff is a step in the right direction towards cooperation and not competition.

Value To Life
1) Value to life- You cannot determine value to life, we should always value life first because life is prerequisite to value. artist, musicians teachers find value to life, you can find value through family. Cap turns value to life and makes people richer, before cap, people were poor. Cap solves poverty (Balko). So if Cap solve poverty it is embracing value to life.