document.docDartmouth 2K9

1

A2 General Space causes an enlightenment – the knowledge created replicates the creation of the 16th frontier idealDudley-Flores and Gangale 07 (Marilyn, CEO/Chief Research Scientist, Thomas, Executive Director, OPS-Alaska, The Globalization of Space – The Astrosociological Approach, AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition 18 - 20 September 2007, Long Beach, California)

Lifting our gaze skyward, the question arises, what forms of governance shall we take with us, and what shall we leave behind? We have an opportunity for a revolution in human thought regarding human nature and human rights, the relationship of individual, society, and state, and to question the factors of production, the means of production, and modes of production. In short, as one writer on outer space law has remarked to the authors, we get to do the Enlightenment over again. Stewart B. Whitney (1984, pp. 11-12)34 wrote: We can challenge sociology to provide the conceptual basis of the social design for space settlement, to construct social models required for the successful adaptation of Humankind to space. Planning the social design of space settlements is necessary for the success of space industrialization; without appropriate social organization, accomplishment of industrialization tasks will fail. Rational planning for the social design of space settlements must rest on the knowledge of social scientists and scholars. This requirement presents a particularly difficult problem for those who plan the social aspects of space settlements. This does not constitute an insurmountable difficulty, however, because knowledge of human social responses to various types of problems and difficulties is available; this knowledge can be applied to analysis of the unique problems that are likely to require societal resolution in space settlements from which logical models of social design can be developed . These logical models can serve as a starting point for social planning and can be modified as additional knowledge and insight are developed. What were the forces and conditions present in the 17th and 18th centuries that set the Enlightenment in motion? Are there analogous forces and conditions present in the 21st century that might set in motion a new Enlightenment? From the early 16th to the mid-17th centuries, Europe was ravaged by religious wars and civil wars as the Protestant Reformation broke the temporal power of the Catholic Church, as well as its hold over knowledge and learning. Stepping into the voids left by the fading of the feudal order and the Holy Roman Empire were the nationstate political system, the capitalist production system, and the scientific knowledge system. The new order solved old problems and created new ones. There were still wars, persecutions, and injustices, and if anything, the problem of war was exacerbated. Whereas feudal lords were rarely able to raise armies of more than a few tens of thousands, a particular advantage of the nation-state was its ability to mobilize millions in the machinery of death, and its principal evil was its propensity to set that machine in motion again and again. The Enlightenment occurred just as a new ecological opportunity was opening for the Westphalian system. European colonies in the New World were reaching a level of development at which they could challenge their mother countries and gain independence. These new American nation-states were distinctly different in character from their European antecedents; whereas most of Europe was ruled by hereditary monarchs, the American states were theoretically republics.**************** With varying degrees of success, the ideals of the Enlightenment were expressed in the political entities that sprouted from the new soil of the Americas . A century and half after its birth, the strongest of these American republics was able to intervene decisively in a war that was devastating Europe, to do so again a generation later to defeat one form of totalitarianism, and to protect half of the continent for two more generations from another form of totalitarianism. Today, in its continuing lead role in NATO, the United States acts as the guarantor of European stability as the continent’s institutions expand their membership and deepen their level of integration. Europe is a union of peaceful, liberal, democratic states. Here on Earth, we face in the 21st century a possible receding of the nation-state system as international borders become more porous to trade, travel, and information. On top of this, humankind stands on the threshold of expanding into the new ecologies of the solar system. The nation-state does not exist out there, and the current body of international law makes it doubtful that it ever will. Since Article II of the Outer Space Treaty Outer prohibits “national appropriation by claim of sovereignty,” it seems that there can be no national sovereignty. As strange as it may sound, it appears that the nation-state has chosen not to extend itself into the cosmos, but to restrict itself to Earth. Seara Vázquez35 wrote (1965, 232): What is the reason for [the] renunciation of the right to the occupation of a res nullius for the particular benefit of one state? It might be judicial—a more lofty concept of justice and of international solidarity. It might be economic

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 1

document.docDartmouth 2K9

2

—the enormous cost of astronautic enterprises, which would make it difficult for a single nation to sustain the expenses involved. It is almost certain that the reason is political; the two principal protagonists in international politics today, the United States and Russia, do not yet know with certainty who will be the first to arrive and, mutually fearing the result of a triumph by the adversary, are trying to bring all the nations into the game, thus making a common cause with the winner and reducing the risks. It is vital, however, not to discard the possibility that this is due to an awakening of the universal legal conscience to the possibility of a cultural, economic and, in certain cases, political unification.

A2 General – Utopia Space allows us to open up space to create a utopian terrain – even the imagination would allow us to move beyond petty differences Shukaitis 09 (Stevphen Shukaitis is a lecturer at the University of Essex and a member of the Autonomedia editorial collective, Space is the (non)place: Martians, Marxists, and the outer space of the radical imagination, The Editorial Board of the Sociological Review)

Within the imaginal space created through the imagery of space travel one can find an outer space of social movement, a smooth space and exteriority made inhabitable through a labour of collective imagination. The image and idea of space, through its circulation and elaboration within stories, myths, and artistic forms, composes a terrain of possibility that operates as an outside to the world as is. For even if it is not possible literally to step outside the world or existing reality, the capacity to imagine other possible worlds creates a terrain where it becomes possible to work towards the creation of another world . Perhaps the best example of this is ‘Visit Port Watson’, an unsigned fake travel pamphlet written by Hakim Bey/Peter Lamborn Wilson and included in the Semiotext(e) SF Collection (Rucker et al., 1991). When Wilson received mail and questions about actually visiting the utopian destination of Port Watson described in the pamphlet, he responded by saying that Port Watson is that place where one is in the moment where one actually is when you believe that Port Watson could exist: a mobile territory of possibility rather than a fixed location. Port Watson is the location of realizing possible utopias that begins from the space of possibility opened in the imagination. At its best outer space operates in the same way, opening a space of possibility within the present through which other realities become possible.

A2 Social Tradeoff KSocial expenditures rack up 30x more than normal exploration – it’s possible to do both Dudley-Flores 08 (Marilyn, CEO and Chief Research Scientist, OPS-Alaska, Global Warming, Earthly Disasters, the Moon and Mars: Transfers of Knowledge (TOK) The American Problem, 46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit 7 - 10 January 2008, Reno, Nevada)

Space exploration also suffers from counter-stories. As one of the few scientists who studies micro to macro social issues connected to the expansion of humanity into space environments, I have run into the tired old argument that we should ditch the space enterprise for social expenditures. But, as anyone who can surf the Internet can see, the national budget is comprised of about 30% social expenditure already, with NASA’s budget hovering below 1%, along the lines of the National Park Service’s piece of the budgetary pie. Here’s another story that I have heard since being six years old in 1959: We will soon have living and work spaces on the Moon, in Low Earth Orbit, and on Mars. National leaders trot this fairy tale out with some periodicity. However, this story remains unrealized because it always winds up “time-slipped.” Thomas Gangale gives a graphic example of the “stretch it out” counter-stories that keep this story fiction (Gangale 2006) 14:

We can do both – their arguments that space has failed fail to realize that historically we have to expand Wang 08 (Director of Research at Next Big Future, The Value of Space Exploration, http://www.universetoday.com/13600/the-value-of-space-exploration/)

Lack of a space program will not solve anything else faster and a well planned program [not what we have been doing] can deliver massive benefits. History shows the logical flaw. There has been no historical

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 2

document.docDartmouth 2K9

3

example of any group “solving all of their problems before embarking on exploration/expansion/major project”. The solve all problems locally before advancing has not been shown to be a successful strategy. There has been major examples where the imperfect/highly flawed expander had major advantages over the non-expander (who was also flawed). The biggest one is China had the largest ocean going fleet in 1400′s. Then the emperor destroyed that fleet. The Western nations came a few hundred years later and forced China to give up Hong Kong and Macau for 99 years. The Europeans colonized North America and expanded economies because of those policies. The world has about a 60 trillion/year economy. There is not a shortage of resources in money or people to target problems. Well funded, well planned and well executed efforts can be directed at all of the problems simultaneously. Just putting ten times, a hundred times or a million times more money does not convert a failing plan, project against hunger, poverty, corruption into a successful plan. We better plans and better thinking.

A2 Environment Tradeoff KSpace allows us to create sweeping environmental change movements Dudley-Flores and Gangale 07 (Marilyn, CEO/Chief Research Scientist, Thomas, Executive Director, OPS-Alaska, The Globalization of Space – The Astrosociological Approach, AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition 18 - 20 September 2007, Long Beach, California)

Ecological Effects. The struggle to understand the ecology of the planet has certainly led to new social forms. Stewart Brand labeled the space satellite “an engine of the ecology movement (Drexler and Peterson 1991, p. 6).”4 Imaging the planet, a direct product of space exploration, has enabled our larger awareness of the biosphere. How like fetal imaging it has been! When fetal imaging became possible, the rights of the unborn were championed on a massive scale and abortion issues became a social problem. How like that process has been the images of the Earth from space. While conservation of regional resources was certainly a forerunner of today’s environmental movement, conservationism flowered into modern environmentalism owing to imagery from space and other instruments and processes of space research and development. The first truly global social movement is environmentalism. And, such movements have led to new social forms. And, we may expect other social forms to emerge as we grapple with the truly huge national boundarycrossing (transnational) problems of the decline side of oil, the epochal climate change that comes with global warming, and natural disasters in ever-increasing populated areas. Social Movements and Organizations. Whether we are speaking of more established social movements and organizations or emerging ones, none of these would be able to meet their goals today without information and communications technologies. High-tech industries have spurred trends in networking and cooperative organization. A “spin-off” of the environmental movement is an understanding of how ecosystems are organized and these are turned to for models for the human ecology. We speak of the “organic” growth of non-state actor organizations. And, as most commentators on globalization have remarked, much about the social formations of our modern world is characterized by “network” structures diffused from both the biological world and the worlds of broadcasting and the World Wide Web.

More evidence – space solves ecological hardshipDudley-Flores 08 (Marilyn, CEO and Chief Research Scientist, OPS-Alaska, Global Warming, Earthly Disasters, the Moon and Mars: Transfers of Knowledge (TOK) The American Problem, 46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit 7 - 10 January 2008, Reno, Nevada)

Several events connected to global warming are already occurring all over the world: more powerful hurricanes, droughts, coastal inundations and interior flooding, heat waves, salt water intrusions into freshwater aquifers, deforestation, ruined crops, increased populations of disease-bearing rodents and insects, die off of species important to the human food chain and other human activities, water tainted with flooded sewer lines, and air tainted with ground-level ozone and allergens. These are just the challenges we know about at present. We may expect other latent challenges to emerge. In a world becoming evermore extreme, the lag time in getting governments to underwrite environmental mitigation research and apply alternative energy sources will likely impede

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 3

document.docDartmouth 2K9

4

the timeliness to provide social needs at every level, from the individual right on up to the world system of societies. As events increase and impact a widening circle of the human family, business won’t be able to go on “as usual.” The most basic of social needs of millions, and then billions, will be a thunderous crescendo that cannot be ignored. Social needs of a global public will go under-met or unmet. To reprise Emile Durkheim, one of the fathers of sociology, the social demand in the post-Holocene world will be a cosmic force . My perspective is that global warming, as well as the decline side of oil and disasters that impact evermore increasing populations and infrastructures, are phenomena that bear human ecological kinship with the problems of humans living and working in extreme environments, as the human expansion into space must solve . The Earth is inevitably becoming a more extreme world and some of the problems in the coming decades and centuries will resemble ones that concern people living and working in space environments. I am talking about thermal regulation, uncontaminated water, waste management, disease mitigation, atmospheric composition not conducive to life, and so on.

And a strong aerospace industry would allow the industrial base to challenge warming Dudley-Flores 08 (Marilyn, CEO and Chief Research Scientist, OPS-Alaska, Global Warming, Earthly Disasters, the Moon and Mars: Transfers of Knowledge (TOK) The American Problem, 46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit 7 - 10 January 2008, Reno, Nevada)

For transfers of knowledge (TOK) to transfer to anywhere, national knowledge bases must be able to add value to the solutions of the problems of the Anthropocene and to its international partners cooperating on the solutions. America is in trouble on that note. This is a very big deal and every scientist, engineer, scholar, and educator should be talking about it to those in leadership positions at every echelon every chance they get. To review, which nations are “core” will be defined by those societies most able to meet the challenges of global warming, decline side of oil, and disasters in ever increasingly populated and infrastructure’d areas. (This includes things like their role in the functionality of a worldwide power-grid and leadership in space-based systems). A jockeying process is occurring in the here and now with societies re-assorting as core, semi-periphery, periphery, and external according to their operational readiness for the realities of the Anthropocene Epoch. The United States cannot remain a core (first world) society if it does not engage in a vigorous civil space program and other knowledge projects and programs that relate to energy, disaster mitigation and extreme environmental adaptation for a human stock that is approaching 10 billion persons by the end of the 21st century – in short, attend to the expansion of the human ecology on this world and off-world. So, here we are, at the dawn of the Anthropocene Epoch and America is falling away from the core of world societies. That is because we are starting from a weakened position regarding our knowledge base and the technological things we can do. No amount of public relations, advertising, and Hollywood “spin” can alter the hard reality of epochal climate change and the decline side of oil and the impact it has on people and societies. Unlike the Space Race of the Cold War, this time, Americans are not merely engaged in a race with other nations to upgrade our science, knowledge, and technology base in order to briefly touch down on some beachhead like the Moon a few times and proclaim victory. We, along with other humans, are in the bottleneck of epochal climate change. This time around, we are in a race for our survival on an Earth growing evermore extreme. It is as important to lead in this race as well as it is to cooperate with the other runners. In a world where the human species is in a fight for its survival, if we Americans do nothing, we may be assured that the first thing to go will be our ability to sustain our level of subsistence – our modes and standard of living -- and then, we will lose our ability to function as a nation. That, in turn, ties to our place in an interdependent world system of societies where some are more unequally interdependent than others. What can the United States do to ensure that it remains a core society and therefore a useful teamplayer against the challenges of the Anthropocene? The answers to that lie in the insight of those who have taught in the colleges and universities of the United States over the past several decades. Their historical memory is essential in this matter.

Science and philosophy accompanying space exploration spurs interest in the environment

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 4

document.docDartmouth 2K9

5

Daly and Frodeman 08 (Erin Moore, graduate student in the School of Life Sciences and the Center for Science, Policy, and Outcomes at Arizona State University, Separated at Birth, Signs of Rapprochement Environmental Ethics and Space Exploration, Ethics & the Environment, Volume 13, Number 1, Spring 2008, pp. 135-151 (Article))

Revolutions in philosophic understanding and cultural worldviews inevitably accompany revolutions in science. As we expand our exploration of the heavens, we will also reflect on the broader human implications of advances in space. Moreover, our appreciation of human impact on Earth systems will expand as we come to see the Earth within the context of the solar system. Most fundamentally, we need to anticipate and wrestle with the epistemological, metaphysical, and theological dimensions of space exploration, including the possibility of extraterrestrial life and the development of the space environment, as it pertains to our common understanding of the universe and of ourselves. Such reflection should be performed by philosophers, metaphysicians, and theologians in regular conversation with the scientists who investigate space and the policy makers that direct the space program. The exploration of the universe is no experimental science, contained and controlled in a laboratory, but takes place in a vast and dynamic network of interconnected, interdependent realities. If (environmental) philosophy is to be a significant source of insight, philosophers will need to have a much broader range of effective strategies for interdisciplinary collaborations, framing their reflections with the goal of achieving policy-relevant results. If it is necessary for science and policy-makers to heed the advice of philosophers, it is equally necessary for philosophers to speak in concrete terms about real-world problems . A philosophic questioning about the relatedness of humans and the universe, in collaboration with a pragmatic, interdisciplinary approach to environmental problems, is the most responsible means of developing both the science and policy for the exploration of the final frontier.

A2 Environment Focus BadThe negative is an extension of the totalitarian censorship of the Bush administration – the idea of no global warming was used to disguise it as a national security concern so we could shoot some more terrorists Masco 09 (Joseph, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at the University of Chicago, BadWeather: On Planetary Crisis, Social Studies of Science published online 28 September 2009, http://sss.sagepub.com/content/early/2009/09/28/0306312709341598)

Indeed, climate change was treated within the Bush administration as a threat not to the earth, but to its national security policies. Across a spectrum of government agencies devoted to studying the environment, news of the industrial contribution to greenhouse gases and climate change was stalled and at times actively repressed. Mirroring the initial security state reactions to scientific studies of the health effects of fallout in the 1950s, or of nuclear winter in the 1980s, climate change has been positioned as a threat to US military policy (see Kopp, 1979;Wang, 1999; Badash, 2001). This is most powerfully revealed in the protestations of NASA scientist James Hansen, Director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, who accused the Bush administration of trying to regulate his public speaking on climate change (Revkin, 2006).19 As one of the most prominent US scientists to advance a theory of global warming as imminent threat, Hansen was subjected to handlers that listened to his phone interviews and reviewed his public presentations. This is the kind of treatment once reserved for nuclear weapons scientists, those whose every utterance was believed to affect the stability the ‘free world’.20 Similarly, government reports on climate change were edited by federal officials to downplay evidence of human contributions to global warming and to emphasize uncertainty in climate models.21 Reports by government scientists pursuing a link between climate change and intensifying hurricanes were restricted, and the nationwide system of technical research libraries run by the EPA was closed due to ‘federal budget cuts’ – an act that drew protests from 10,000 scientists in 2006.22 In 2008, a survey of EPA scientists found that the majority had felt political pressure from political appointees within the Bush administration to distort or censor environmental assessments (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2008). Thus, while climate scientists debated the ‘tipping point’ in global warming – the date in which massive environmental changes are unstoppable due to green house gases – the Bush administration largely portrayed climate change as a ‘theory’ and worked to delay any serious regulatory action at home or

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 5

document.docDartmouth 2K9

6

abroad (Eilperin, 2006a).23 This struggle over the politics of planetary danger was about nothing less than the security state’s ability to monopolize definitions of threat and security.

The affirmative is key to break out of nuclear war – only a realistic analysis of environmental threats can break the stranglehold of state threats Masco 09 (Joseph, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at the University of Chicago, BadWeather: On Planetary Crisis, Social Studies of Science published online 28 September 2009, http://sss.sagepub.com/content/early/2009/09/28/0306312709341598)

Returning to the synthetic forest of 1953 (see Fig. 1), we can see in the fury of the nuclear blast a possible counter-narrative to the national security state, one grounded not in weapons but in a relationship towards the biosphere. For the lesson of these bent and broken trees is that if enough industrial force is applied to nature, it will break. The value of the 1953 synthetic forest is that it marks not only the power of the bomb, but also the fragility of even an artificially reinforced nature; it marks not only a new global effort to mediate international relations via nuclear technologies, but also the effects of industry on the biosphere. The mistaken lesson from Operation Upshot-Knothole is that war fighting and civil defense were all that were at stake in these experiments; for indeed, the nuclear blast that transformed 145 ponderosa pines into blades of grass blowing in an unnatural wind is but the most explicit manifestation of an industrial transformation of the natural world. The power of the bomb has been not only to link science and the state in a way that recognizes this fact, but also, to distort American political culture so that only international state threats are currently capable of mobilizing collective social action. In the early 21st century, the imbrications of nuclear weapons and planetary threat remain so profound as to block both thought and action, allowing the security implications of a warming planet to elude the national security state. However, the ties between the bomb and climate change remain ever present: today, the same supercomputers that maintain the US nuclear stockpile at the national laboratories are also modeling climate, even as the cars traveling the interstate highway system (designed by the Eisenhower administration as a part of a nuclear civil defense program) contribute to global warming every second of the day. Moreover, the increasing calls for a ‘Manhattan Project’ to deal with climate change still embed the biosphere within a purely militarized and nationalized logic, while presuming that a single state actor can remedy a global climate crisis.34 But to attend to the shrinking artic ice caps or the intensifying weather patterns is to reject the idea of a national security and replace it with a planetary vision of sustainability. The technoscientific questions of biospheric sustainability are profound, requiring the integration of states and diverse environmental problems as objects of collective responsibility, a proposition that offers a new means of coordinating global order . Today ‘security’ remains embedded within an extremely narrow concept of threat and national advantage in US political culture, both legacies of ColdWar stateand nation-building. But the lessons of the synthetic forest from 1953 – reiterated in the disappearing frogs, the melting ice caps, the intensifying hurricanes, and the dying coral reefs of today – are that more profound changes are at hand, and that securing the biosphere requires nothing less than a post-national vision of American power.

A2 Whitey KGlobal communication and space has allowed for greater communication between groups – the crazy writings are the minority of those who misunderstand literature Dudley-Flores and Gangale 07 (Marilyn, CEO/Chief Research Scientist, Thomas, Executive Director, OPS-Alaska, The Globalization of Space – The Astrosociological Approach, AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition 18 - 20 September 2007, Long Beach, California)

Concern for equal rights. With communication that permeates national boundaries, there is an awareness among people throughout the world of each other’s living conditions. While globe-trotting journalists and early radio and television did plenty toward this end, satellite broadcasting and the Internet have brought a hard reality, a sense of urgency, and a next-door-neighborliness that Marshall McLuhan called in the sixties “the global village”. The global village has never been so real as it is now. The atrocities of

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 6

document.docDartmouth 2K9

7

those nationalities that battled in the Balkans were like atrocities against your own neighbors. This breeds a concern for equal rights that doesn’t require the nicety of abstract thought to comprehend. It comes from a concrete level of seeing something as it happens with one’s own eyes. And, from this, we learn to care not only for those getting hurt and disrespected in distant places, but for all individuals in all places in all aspects of their lives, their pains and their joys. Global recognition was once reserved for nation-states and rare others. It is now being extended to the individual. This process gets at the taproot of innovation. While modern communication and transportation have made available the teachings and technologies of the world’s cultures to nearly everyone, it also makes available the wacko ideas of Rudy the Skinhead and Leroy Bandanna, as well as Joe Six-Pack making a better mousetrap in his basement. Of course, some shoppers in the great Mall of Ideas will not be able to discern the bad merchandise from the good and roll their carts down the aisles of intellectual and evolutionary dead-ends. But, most folks will not be suckered. They will know the difference between the teachings of Martin Luther and the writings of the Unabomber; the teachings of the Buddha and the ravings of teenage boys in trench coats with guns in their book bags. They will shop and compare, and most importantly, compare notes. It is a mathematical inevitability that deeper global understanding in all its many facets – and those yet to be discovered – will emerge. The quest for breakthrough ideas is in no danger of being called off.

Your K logic is circular – questioning the exploration of a different frontier paralyzes action Siegel 08 (Ethan, Astrophysicist, The Value of Space Exploration, http://www.universetoday.com/13600/the-value-of-space-exploration/)

This is like asking why we should spend money on making our city better when there are so many problems here in our own homes. Or why we should spend money on understanding our whole world when there are so many problems here in our own country. Space is something that we are not only a part of, but that encompasses and affects all of us. Learning about the grandest scales of our lives — about the things that are larger than us and will go on relatively unaffected by whatever we do — that has value! And it might not have a value that I can put a price tag on, but in terms of unifying everyone, from people in my city to people in a foreign country to people or intelligences on other planets or in other galaxies, space exploration is something that is the great equalizer. And the knowledge, beauty, and understanding that we get from it is something that one person, group, or nation doesn’t get to keep to itself; what we learn about the Universe can be, should be, and if we do our jobs right, will be equally available to everyone, everywhere. This is where our entire world came from, and this is the abyss our entire world will eventually return to. And learning about that, exploring that, and gaining even a small understanding of that, has the ability to give us a perspective that we can never gain just by looking insularly around our little blue rock.

The alternative fails – the utopia envisioned undermines the legitimacy of the social movement Eshun 03 (Kodwo, British writer and theorist. He is currently the course leader of the MA in Aural and Visual Cultures at Goldsmiths College, London., Further Considerations on Afrofuturism, CR: The New Centennial Review, Volume 3, Number 2, Summer 2003, pp. 287-302 (Article))

Futurism FatigueBecause the practice of countermemory defined itself as an ethical commitment to history, the dead, and the forgotten, the manufacture of conceptual tools that could analvze and assemble counter futures was understood as an unethical dereliction of duty. Futurological analysis was looked upon with suspicion, wariness, and hostility. Such attitudes dominated the academy throughout the 1980s.For African artists, there were good reasons for disenchantment with futurism. When Nkrumah was deposed in Ghana in 1966, it signalled the collapse of the first attempt to build the USAF. The combination of colonial revenge and popular discontent created sustained hostility towards the planned Utopias of African socialism. For the rest of the century, African intellectuals adopted variations of the position that Homi Bhabha (1992) termed "melancholia in revolt." This fatigue with futurity carried through to Black Atlantic cultural activists, who, little by little, ceased to participate in the process of building futures.

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 7

document.docDartmouth 2K9

8

Ext – Circular LogicTheir K is circular logic – without development we would still be living in caves Dunford 08 (Bill, Internal communications team at The Attachmate Group, The Value of Space Exploration, http://www.universetoday.com/13600/the-value-of-space-exploration/)

Why should we worry about what’s going on outside the cave? We have so many problems here inside in the cave. Why should we waste time trying to figure out agriculture? We have so much work to do hunting and gathering. Why should we spend so much effort messing about in boats? We have so many issues here on the land. Why should we fiddle with those computers? There is so much calculating that still needs to be done with these pencils. Why should we explore space? We have so many problems here on Earth. The answer to all these questions is the same: reaching for new heights often creates new solutions, new opportunity and elevated hope back on the ground. We should NOT spend indiscriminately in space. But moderately-funded space exploration — as one small part of an overall program of basic scientific research — has blessed lives in many ways over the years, from satellites measuring drought conditions to new imaging techniques in hospitals to global communication.

A2 Co-OperationThe ISS is literally the definition of co-operationDudley-Flores and Gangale 07 (Marilyn, CEO/Chief Research Scientist, Thomas, Executive Director, OPS-Alaska, The Globalization of Space – The Astrosociological Approach, AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition 18 - 20 September 2007, Long Beach, California)

Even among some government executives, it is widely billed that the ISS is an American-sponsored project where we “permit” the space agencies of other nations to participate. This is a gross oversimplification. We wouldn’t be able to have much of a space station without our Russian partners . It is an historical fact that the United States had to talk them into de-orbiting their beloved Mir to focus their effort to help us get the ISS up and running. And, we very much wanted them to honor their partnership. That is because there was much they were able to contribute from their generations of space station expertise that we did not possess, and that would have taken time to develop and to set up the necessary manufacturing infrastructure. Without willing collaboration, the civilian space endeavor worldwide would not be as far along as it is today. Those who look fondly back at the competitive days of the Space Race and yearn for another one, miss the mathematical fact that the principle of diffusion, another driver of innovation, works better when it is unimpeded. Even the Russian long-duration Humans-to-Mars effort is an international, inter-agency, intercorporate array of projects. It is a “makework” enterprise made possible through the auspices of an international non-proliferation program, the International Science and Technology Center (ISTC), that spends a few million dollars a year on former Soviet scientists and engineers to keep them from leaking their weaponizable expertise and materiel to “evil axis” states and terror warlords. The ISTC is an intergovernmental organization headquartered in Moscow, Russia, and whose governing board is chaired by Ronald Frank Lehman II, the Director of the Center for Global Security Research at the Department of Energy’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.†† NASA and the ESA are partners in this “transgovernmental” organization and Boeing is the big industry player.

A2 Cap KSpace allows us the ultimate solution to capitalism – new technologies would solve resource scarcity Dudley-Flores and Gangale 07 (Marilyn, CEO/Chief Research Scientist, Thomas, Executive Director, OPS-Alaska, The Globalization of Space – The Astrosociological Approach, AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition 18 - 20 September 2007, Long Beach, California)

It is true that we only have one Earth, yet we need not be limited to it forever. In the past, the political left has regarded the space program as “macho and polluting (McDougall 1985).”39 This is unfortunate, for many

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 8

document.docDartmouth 2K9

9

advocates for a vigorous space program are socially progressive and environmentally conscious. More to the point, for decades now, remote sensing from orbit has allowed us to discover new resources and manage them more intelligently, and to monitor environmental degradation. Looking forward, the development of extraterrestrial resources will certainly not provide complete solutions to overpopulation, over-consumption, resource depletion, and environmental degradation, but it will increasingly become part of the solution. The resources of the solar system are not available to us with current chemical propulsion technology, nor does this technology make it feasible for any but a handful of people to emigrate from Earth. Nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP), while more efficient, would engender much of the same social resistance as nuclear fission power plants (NTP technology was developed in the 1960s for human interplanetary missions, but has never been used in actual spaceflight). Even so, NTP would probably enable only limited extraterrestrial resource utilization, perhaps employing a few thousand or tens of thousands of off-planet workers. The dramatic breakout will probably have to wait for fusion propulsion technology, which will probably lag the development of Earth-based commercial fusion power generation by several decades. Fusion propulsion, of course, is only a gleam in the eyes of engineers, and its implications cannot yet be well understood. Potentially, however, it could enable the full flowering of a transplanetary economy in which tens of millions of people live and work off-planet in its initial stages. While it is doubtful that even this level of technology will enable enough people to emigrate from Earth to reduce its population by any appreciable degree, it should make it economically feasible to move a considerable portion of environmentally-destructive industries off-planet. The Moon, Mars, and the asteroids will become the new economic periphery, as core-like, predominately low-pollution, economic activity expands to encompass most of the Earth (the ultimate EKC). No doubt, new socioeconomic and political problems will arise in this multiplanetary venue, even as we solve some of our old ones. In any case, it is possible that the crisis in capitalism that Wallerstein foresees might either be averted or informed by economic expansion into the solar system, if we can keep the world economic system from hitting the wall before then.

The image of space and exploration creates a space of possibility to resistance – as opposed to co-option – cultural symbolism of the aliens reflects a distancing of the capitalist system Shukaitis 09 (Stevphen Shukaitis is a lecturer at the University of Essex and a member of the Autonomedia editorial collective, Space is the (non)place: Martians, Marxists, and the outer space of the radical imagination, The Editorial Board of the Sociological Review)

What is of interest here is the relation between the disappearance and destruction of certain forms of collectivism, and their reappearance in others. As Stimson and Sholette observe, the disappearance of collectivism from the political realm lead to these forms returning in a ‘mutated and often contradictory form within the cultural realm’ (2007: 8). It means that the rise of science fiction films in the 1950s with their imagery of bizarre alien races functioning by some sort of incomprehensible totalitarian collectivism, in many ways reflect the recoded and redirected imagery of communism (Smith et al., 2001). The spectre of communism reappears as a UFO. This is perhaps not a new argument in itself, for the imagery used in genre science fiction has been interpreted as coded for communism before, with Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956) as the most commonly used example (Brosnan, 1978; McCarthy and Gorman, 1999; Von Gunden and Stock, 1982). But what is interesting about the Stimson and Sholette spin is their argument for a displacement of energies from the economic and political sphere, embodied in working-class resistance, into mutated forms in the cultural sphere. This can be read as a form of recuperation or co-option in some senses; but it is not so straightforward. As I have previously argued (2007), the Plan 9 from the capitalist workplace is not a clear-cut case of the integration of energies of social resistance into the workings of capitalism, not one that is irreversible. The mutated and contradictory forms of collectivism that appear might start with imagery of an alleged collectivist communist-totalitarianism, but their ambivalence is also a space of possibility , one that can be turned to other uses. The despised other is often also the secretly desired other, a dynamic that can be viewed

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 9

document.docDartmouth 2K9

10

as imaginal forms, held out as examples of an Other to be rejected, start to be drawn back into other forms of politics, other forms of usage, and the pleasure of these usages. This is a dynamic that emerges more clearly in the 1960s and 1970s, as the utopian traces of a repressed communism, congealed within the imaginal form of outer space imagery, are slowly reclaimed and brought to other uses.

A2 Coercion KLibertarians don’t know reality – it is impossible to explore space on the cheap Dudley-Flores and Gangale 07 (Marilyn, CEO/Chief Research Scientist, Thomas, Executive Director, OPS-Alaska, The Globalization of Space – The Astrosociological Approach, AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition 18 - 20 September 2007, Long Beach, California)

A number of space enthusiasts tout free enterprise as the wave of the future in space development, and take great delight in disparaging government space projects as building the wrong capabilities for too much money. These detractors are “space cowboys” with big ats and no cattle. The authors have no doubt that free enterprise will be important to space development, but we have grave doubts that it will have a significant impact in the near future. Yes, government programs are expensive, because there are extraordinary engineering challenges to getting into space on the cheap. It is one thing to accelerate to 3,500 km/hr and poke one’s head above an arbitrarily defined threshold for a few seconds, as SpaceShipOne did in 2004. At the top of that steep parabola, horizontal velocity was near zero. It is orders of magnitude more difficult to reach half again as much altitude and simultaneously accelerate to a horizontal velocity of 29,000 km/hr. Even more important is the requirement to withstand the deceleration and heat-loading of reentry from orbital velocity. A rudimentary calculation will serve to demonstrate. The ratio of orbital velocity to the peak velocity of SpaceShipOne is 8.3 to 1; however, the energy is a function of the square of the velocity, thus the energy ratio is 68.7 to 1. Clearly, the total heat-loading experienced by SpaceShipOne is inconsiderable compared to return from orbit. Solving these problems in the context of a credible business model is decades away. Some have defended the libertarian vision of private space development by mentioning such things as the federal Homestead Act. The SpaceShipOne flights are supposed evidence that private space tourism is not far in the future, and that private space travel to the Moon or Mars is not hopelessly romantic. The use of in situ resources, inflatable habitats, nanotechnology, and advances in computer tech/robotics should bring unanticipated capabilities and cost reductions. And so might pixie dust. Engineering solutions are based on technology in hand, not unobtainium beyond the horizon. The question is: “When?” Some space enthusiasts point to the rapid improvements in computer technology- -and the huge commercial industry it has spawned—as a model for projecting a coming explosion in commercial space travel. The authors urge caution. Nanotechnology is nothing more than the extension of Moore’s Law from the micrometer realm into the nanometer realm. It has been anticipated for decades. It does not represent a sudden, steep upswing in the rate of technological progress. There was none during the computer revolution in the late ‘80s, early ‘90s; it was steady, incremental progress. Moore’s Law of doubling chip capacity every two years has held for 40 years.

A2 Colonialism KYour K is a lie – the “under-developed” periphery will possess the most resources and the greatest likelihood for expansion Dudley-Flores and Gangale 07 (Marilyn, CEO/Chief Research Scientist, Thomas, Executive Director, OPS-Alaska, The Globalization of Space – The Astrosociological Approach, AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition 18 - 20 September 2007, Long Beach, California)

When pockets of people begin living sustainably off the Earth, an extraglobalization process begins to occur. If globalization is the increasing interconnectedness of Earthly societies and the globalization of space is how globalization has altered the space endeavor, then extraglobalization is the extension of these intertwined phenomena to those sustaining themselves indefinitely off the Earth and the dialectic – the multilectic, if you will -- set up among them and the Earth. Let us look forward to a distant time when low transportation costs make the

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 10

document.docDartmouth 2K9

11

extraction of primary resources from celestial bodies economically feasible. In the past, colonization led to exploitative relationships, in which colonial powers took advantage of cheap, unskilled labor in the colonies to extract raw materials. These residual trade relationships have persisted into the 21st century. Immanuel Wallerstein (1999) refers to the industrial core of the capitalist world-system, the semi-periphery of lesser industrialized states, and the underdeveloped periphery. However, space settlements will be high-tech by their very nature, and will be populated by highly-educated, highlyskilled workforces . Thus, once settlements are able to provide for their own subsistence, they will be able to turn to high value-added productive activities, many of which will be competitive with terrestrial products elsewhere in the solar system due to gravitational advantage. Should settlements develop on the Moon and Mars and even elsewhere, the most credible use of celestial resources is for either local use or use elsewhere in space . In the absence of commercial revenue from direct trade with Earth, interplanetary trade not involving Earth directly would necessarily involve government contracts to private companies to provide goods and services to government-owned operations. Earth is the source of investment capital for outer space, and the accumulation of hard currency in outer space will require the creation and exchange of something that is of value to Earth. It is such productive activities that must form the basis of a largely commercial, non-governmental, solar system economy.

More evidence – lower G means trade only goes one way Dudley-Flores and Gangale 07 (Marilyn, CEO/Chief Research Scientist, Thomas, Executive Director, OPS-Alaska, The Globalization of Space – The Astrosociological Approach, AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition 18 - 20 September 2007, Long Beach, California)

Meanwhile, there is an additional complexity when it comes to interplanetary trade. Extremely problematic environmental factors such as high atmospheric pressure (Venus, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune) or extremely long travel times (Pluto and 2003 UB313) will probably delay the establishment of settlement on these planets indefinitely. Even promising terrestrial-like moons of Jupiter might be off-limits owing to the magnetosphere of this gas giant that offers a deadly radiation environment for human explorers. The remaining list of celestial bodies on which settlements might be established are Mercury, the Moon, Mars and its satellites, and various asteroids.§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ These bodies have one thing in common: they are smaller, less massive than Earth. Because of this, they have less powerful gravitational fields, thus it takes less fuel to land on and launch from them, which makes them less expensive ports for moving goods. This translates as a permanent, gravitational advantage. Nature imposes a permanent, nonreciprocal tariff on terrestrial goods shipped to these bodies. As a result, it will be less expensive for extraterrestrial settlements to ship goods to each other and to Earth than it will be for Earth to ship goods to them. There may be persistent trade deficits/surpluses between planets. This situation has no analogue on Earth. Transoceanic cargo ships do not have to steam uphill on one leg of a voyage, nor do they have the advantage of gliding downhill on another. Of course there are ocean currents and prevailing winds, but these are negligible in comparison with the differences between the planets in their gravity wells.

The invocation of the “frontier” creates a space of border societies that creates social justice Redfield 96 (Peter, Associate Professor in the Department of Anthropology at University of North Carolina, Beneath a Modern Sky: Space Technology and its place on the Ground, Source: Science, Technology, & Human Values, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Summer, 1996), pp. 251-274, http://www.jstor.org/stable/689708)

This invocation of the term frontier in relation to technology is a deliberate appeal to colonial geography—to extensions, appendages, and the space of border societies. A frontier is a space of change, of boundaries and bridges, translations and things partly known or understood (Certeau 1984, 127). Its images prove useful in Kourou, where the space of technical activity varies across social and natural landscapes: actions correspond to decisions made in Europe; buildings that could stand anywhere rise in a place chosen for its

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 11

document.docDartmouth 2K9

12

particularity; and people living in an Amazonian landscape receive information and commodities directly from Paris. Migration occurs in several directions: skilled workers from Europe, manual labor from surrounding countries. Materials are transported to an open shoreline, only to be assembled and sent aloft. Below, however, rest the attendant technologies, the air-conditioning, computers, telephone booths, cars, and video equipment, for engineers, while they may hunt for pleasure, can hardly be expected to hunt and gather. The last point runs deeper than irony, for in the Guiana Space Center we have the anthropological story in miniature: different ends of "development" collapsing together, rain forest to rockets, the sudden transition of humanity from Stone Age to Space Age. As one visiting French executive pointed out, where else can you buy wooden arrows one day and watch a satellite launch (he next?" Irony lies on the surface here, but it is an irony born of technique. Beneath the swirl of unintended encounters (and attempts to talk about them) lies an instrumental rationale, translating the same set of local conditions into different languages of global possibilities. These encounters in turn call on other rationales and associated technologies, as production and consumption mingle together, as the culture of satellite extends back through the material of the rocket.

A2 Military Co-Option

Military co-option is non-unique – the military has empirically dominated all contracts, the affirmative is necessary to break out of the domination Hoey 06 (Matthew, Former senior research associate at the Institute for Defense and Disarmament Studies, where he researched and forecasted missile defense and space weaponization technologies, Military space systems: the road ahead, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/563/1)

In recent years military space contracts have been an “oligopoly” of the “Big 6” in the US defense industry: Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, General Dynamics (Spectrum Astro), and Orbital Sciences, which is slowly becoming a leading provider of space systems alongside the other five. These companies are listed by economic dominance over the past 12 months. Satellites developed by these companies typically range in size from 500 to 10,000 kilograms and in price from $25 million to $1 billion. Big companies, big satellites, and big price tags. This industry norm is now being challenged, however, and challenged effectively. The catalyst for change is affordability, which is leading to a realignment of the space systems industry. This affordability has not yet been realized in a profoundly beneficial sense, but dramatic advances towards affordability are coming. The space systems oligopoly of the present is slipping into the past and new players are appearing on the scene. Small space systems companies like Space Development Corporation (SpaceDev), Surrey Satellite Technology Limited (SSTL), Microcosm, Space Exploration Corp (SpaceX), AeroAstro, and MicroSat Systems are getting recognized and, in turn, are receiving space systems contracts and attention by the military and researchers alike. These companies are working in two main areas. The first is affordable launch services. Increased competition in the launch service industry was a driving factor behind the decision by Lockheed and Boeing to form a joint venture, United Launch Alliance, to reduce the cost of their launch services. Additional technologies are space asset protection systems, asset maintenance systems, and anti-satellite (ASAT) systems using small satellites. I will highlight the relationships among those applications. Government development of military space systems is being accelerated specifically regarding programs in the early stages of development, thanks in part to partnerships that blur the line between military research and commercial applications. This blurring is a result of dual-use systems—many military space systems have legitimate commercial applications. As various government agencies become more reliant on space, they are increasingly collaborating on space systems with each other , with support from industry- and university-based research teams. Collaborators on a single project might include military research laboratories, NASA, defense contractors, and university researchers.

All of their evidence is historical analysis – now there is a separation between civilian and military technologies

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 12

document.docDartmouth 2K9

13

CRS 01 (Marcia S. Smith, Resources, Science, and Industry Division, IB92011: U.S. Space Programs: Civilian, Military, and Commercial, May 11, 2001, http://ncseonline.org/nle/crsreports/science/st-57.cfm)

Civilian communications satellites have been chiefly a private sector activity since passage of the 1962 Communications Satellite Act (P.L. 87-624). Attempts to commercialize other aspects of space activities have yielded mixed success. Congress has passed several laws to facilitate the commercialization of space launch services for putting satellites into orbit (the 1984 Commercial Space Launch Act, the 1988 Commercial Space Launch Act Amendments, the 1990 Launch Services Purchase Act, and the 1998 Commercial Space Act ). The development of a U.S. commercial launch services industry has been largely successful. DOD and NASA continue to play a strong role in developing new launch vehicles, though private companies also are developing their own. The most controversial issues are the relative roles of the government versus the private sector in developing new systems, ensuring that U.S. companies can compete with foreign launch services companies, and trade and missile proliferation issues involved in exporting satellites to other countries for launch. These issues are discussed in CRS Issue Brief IB93062. Congress also sought to facilitate commercialization of land remote sensing satellites by privatizing the government's Landsat program through the 1984 Land Remote Sensing Commercialization Act ( P.L. 98-365). Such satellites provide imagery of the Earth that can be used for land-use planning, environmental studies, mineral exploration, and many other usesx. After a tumultuous 8 years that saw the effort to privatize Landsat fail, Congress repealed that Act and replaced it with the Land Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-555), bringing Landsat back under government sponsorship. The Act also promoted development of new systems by the private sector. Coupled with a 1994 Clinton Administration policy, these actions led several U.S. companies to initiate programs to build remote sensing satellites and offer imagery on a commercial basis. Those companies must obtain an operating license from NOAA for such systems. (The first successful launch of a commercial imaging satellite, Space Imaging's Ikonos 2, was achieved in September 1999. It provides 1-meter data.) Controversy over the fact that the imagery has military as well as civilian uses continues to complicate this commercial space effort, however. Though not as precise as military reconnaissance satellites, some of the private sector systems under development can produce imagery with 1 meter resolution (the ability to "see" an object or feature of a certain size) and a U.S. company (Space Imaging) has been given permission to build a satellite with half-meter resolution. Competitors to U.S. commercial satellite imaging companies include French, Russian, Indian, and Israeli companies that offer imagery with 10-meter, 2-meter, 6-meter, and 1-meter resolution respectively. Tensions between the U.S. government and the private sector in implementing the 1994 Clinton policy to ensure that national security is not harmed by commercial imagery sales prompted an interagency review. One major issue is when the government can exercise "shutter control," forcing companies to discontinue obtaining or distributing imagery of certain parts of the world in times of crisis. Shutter control is part of the 1994 policy, but the companies want greater guidance on when it could be exercised. Another issue is the government's role in controlling to whom the imagery is sold and which countries may invest in the U.S.-owned systems. U.S. companies want time limits on how long the government can take to decide whether particular sales or investments will be permitted so they can make wise business decisions. Under the 1992 Landsat Act, the Commerce Department has 120 days to accept or reject license applications. However, Clinton Administration policy requires that it consult with other agencies, including the Departments of State and Defense. Those departments have no time limits.

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 13

document.docDartmouth 2K9

14

A2 State KExploration destroys the state – the extra-globality of space breaks apart the ideal of the nation state

Dudley-Flores and Gangale 07 (Marilyn, CEO/Chief Research Scientist, Thomas, Executive Director, OPS-Alaska, The Globalization of Space – The Astrosociological Approach, AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition 18 - 20 September 2007, Long Beach, California)

The most immediate effects to Earth of a mature human presence on other celestial bodies in the solar system will be governmental and economical, impacting the nation-state system. Medieval Europe was characterized by the feudal mode of production. Sovereignty was dynastic, property belonged to hereditary nobilities, and productive labor was performed by serfs who were bound to the land. The overarching power was the Catholic Church, including its secular subsidiary, the Holy Roman Empire. The rise of the capitalist mode of production in towns and the interstate trade between them created new sources and stores of wealth rivaling those of the landed nobility. The rise of city-states and city-leagues challenged the power of the dynastic states and the Empire. The rise of literacy in the growing cities challenged the religious authority of the Church. An important result of the 1648 Peace of Westphalia that ended the Thirty Years’ War was that it laid to rest the idea of the Holy Roman Empire having secular dominion over all of Western Christendom. The loss of this overarching structure created the necessity for feudal entities to coalesce into larger, more centralized states to defend against each other. Imperial free cities were no longer adequately protected by the Empire, and joined the larger states that were forming. Spruyt (1994)29 writes as follows: At the end of the feudal era, a dramatic economic change occurred. Localized barter exchange started to give way to monetary exchange and translocal trade. By the beginning of the fourteenth century, a variety of new institutional forms had emerged for organizing political and economic life. Sovereign territorial states, city-leagues, and city-states all tried to tap into the new sources of economic wealth, particularly long-distance trade. Indeed, the city-based political organizations initially did very well. In the long run, however, roughly by the middle of the seventeenth century, city-states and city-leagues had fallen by the wayside.... I argue that the sovereign territorial state prevailed because it proved more effective at preventing defection by its members, reducing internal transaction costs, and making credible commitments to other units.... [S]overeign rulers were better at centralizing jurisdiction and authority. Consequently, they were in a better position to prevent free riding and to gradually rationalize their economies and standardize coinage and weights and measures. This economic rationalization corresponded with a greater capacity to wage war. The institutional makeup of sovereign territorial states thus gave them competitive advantages over other organizational possibilities. The so-called nation-state system was born. However, Spruyt’s use of the more general term “sovereign territorial state” is more appropriate. A nation-state is a specific form of state (a political entity), which exists to provide a sovereign territory for a particular nation (a cultural entity), and which derives its legitimacy from that function.... Typically it is a unitary state with a single system of law and government. It is almost by definition a sovereign state, meaning that there is no external authority above the state itself. ...The nation-state implies the parallel occurrence of a state and a nation. In the ideal nation-state, the population consists of the nation and only of the nation: the state not only houses it, but protects it and its national identity (i.e., they coincide exactly): every member of the nation is a permanent resident of the nation-state, and no member of the nation permanently resides outside it. There are no ideal nation-states, but examples of near ideal nation-states might include Japan and Iceland. This ideal has influenced almost all existing sovereign states, and they cannot be understood without reference to that model.... Thus, the term nation-state is also used, imprecisely, for a state that attempts to promote a single national identity, often beginning with a single national language.***************

Space destroys the state – extra-globalization leads to the destruction of the state’s ability to control the populace Dudley-Flores and Gangale 07 (Marilyn, CEO/Chief Research Scientist, Thomas, Executive Director, OPS-Alaska, The Globalization of Space – The Astrosociological Approach, AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition 18 - 20 September 2007, Long Beach, California)

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 14

document.docDartmouth 2K9

15Marxist ideology predicted the ultimate demise of the Westphalian system, to be replaced by an international workers’ union; however, the capitalist world-system has outlived the centrally-planned economic system. Ironically, capitalist globalization has often been cited as a process that threatens the sovereignty of the state, and therefore has great implications for the future character of the nation-state system. By the late 20th century, transnational production systems had enhanced the ability of corporations to bypass the nationally-based political influence of trade unions and environmental movements. In the view of many scholars, the various interrelated processes of globalization, which are making national borders more porous to trade in goods and services, to capital, and to information, including sociopolitical ideas and norms, are rendering the nation-state increasingly less relevant. Gilpin (2000, p. 22)30 writes: As a consequence, multinational firms have become extremely important in determining the economic, political, and social welfare of many nations. Controlling much of the world’s investment capital, technology, and access to global markets, such firms have become major players not only in international economic, but political affairs as well. Steger (2000, pp. 28-29)31 writes: Most of the debate on political globalization involves the weighing of conflicting evidence with regard to the fate of the modern nation-state. In particular, two questions have moved to the top of the research agenda. First, what are the political causes for the massive flows of capital, money, and technology across territorial boundaries? Second, do these flows constitute a serious challenge to the power of the nation-state? These questions imply that economic globalization might be leading to the reduced control of national governments over economic policy. The latter question, in particular, involves an important subset of issues pertaining to the principle of state sovereignty, the growing impact of intergovernmental organizations, and the prospects for global governance. One influential group of scholars sees politics as being “rendered almost powerless in the face of an unstoppable and irreversible technoeconomic juggernaut that will crush all governmental attempts to reintroduce restrictive policies and regulations.” And, not only are political institutions no longer in control of national economies, but now economic interests are in control of national policies. According to this view, we are now “in a new phase in world history in which the role of government will be reduced to that of a handmaiden to free-market forces (Steger 2000, p. 29).” Not that this is a particularly novel insight, for Karl Marx characterized government as the handmaiden of the bourgeoisie a century and a half ago, as the 19th century era of globalization was in full swing. In any case, in the most extreme expression of this view, national borders will ultimately cease to be meaningful concepts, and the fate of the planet will be entirely in the hands of global capitalist forces.

A2 Tech KA totalizing rejection of space technology ignores the positive effects of technology Redfield 96 (Peter, Associate Professor in the Department of Anthropology at University of North Carolina, Beneath a Modern Sky: Space Technology and its place on the Ground, Source: Science, Technology, & Human Values, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Summer, 1996), pp. 251-274, http://www.jstor.org/stable/689708)

Replaying the historical sequence in explicitly technical terms gives us a first point to consider: wilderness can have its uses, even for high technology. Or, more pointedly, space technology did not erase wilderness but rather found parts of it useful once it was properly redefined. Unlike a factory or railroad, which might value uninhabited land only in terms of its potential for development, for its transformation into a different kind of productive space, or for a destination, the space center found value in the openness of the land itself, in its marginal status relative to human networks, and in its position. Here, then, we have an example of a modern technology that acknowledges place.7 Yet the space program in French Guiana would also entail the construction of its own infrastructure—bridges, an expanded port, and an airport, to name a few—as well as inspiring waves of migration by creating labor markets for both skilled and unskilled workers. Engineers and technicians arrived from Europe, and laborers arrived from elsewhere in South America and the Caribbean. Social issues tied to development crept through the back door; the space center served as a catalyst for transformation, changing the local setting even while using certain of its physical and social attributes . As a consequence of the space program—partly planned and partly unintended— Kourou grew from a quiet Creole village of 650 into a town of 14,000. the second largest in French Guiana, one with a significant migrant population and many of

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 15

document.docDartmouth 2K9

16

the goods and services common to a European landscape. And French Guiana grew with Kourou. Its population, which in the mid-1960s hovered around 40,000, has more than tripled since then. Even more significant from the perspective of local politics, much of the growth has come from legal and illegal immigration, particularly from Haiti, Surinam, and Brazil. Guyanais Creoles, the largest single ethnic group, now no longer represent a majority of the resident population. Although the space center has not been the only causal factor involved in this social transformation, it is the most prominent, and the wider influence is recognized by both its supporters and its detractors (Bilby 1990; Jolivet 1982; Mam-Lam-Fouck 1992).8

Technology spinoffs from Cold war rocket tech allowed the construction of institutions necessary to stop global warming Masco 09 (Joseph, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at the University of Chicago, BadWeather: On Planetary Crisis, Social Studies of Science published online 28 September 2009, http://sss.sagepub.com/content/early/2009/09/28/0306312709341598)

Producing experimental evidence of climate change, however, requires more than the accumulation of data sets in specific scientific disciplines; it requires a systematic means of measuring environmental conditions over time and of integrating diverse and huge data sets into a collective portrait of the biosphere. The early Cold War period is the moment many of the key scientific institutions were established that would ultimately provide the evidence for climate change.6 The World Meteorological Association was formed in 1951 to regularize weather data collection across nation-states (Miller, 2001; Edwards, 2006). The World-Wide Network of Standard Seismographic Stations was established to listen for nuclear explosions and support international treaties; it revolutionized seismology by creating the first real-time system for measuring movement in the earth, enabling new understandings of continental drift, plate tectonics, and the constitution of the sea floor (see Oliver & Murphy, 1971; Barth, 1998, 2003).The first ice core samples were taken from the arctic poles by the US military in the early Cold War period, as bombers and intercontinental missiles transformed the arctic zones into highly militarized spaces (see Roucek, 1983; Doel, 2003). Similarly, concerns about biological and chemical warfare funded new research in oceanography, meteorology, and space sciences, and supported the longstanding military investment both in predicting weather patterns during combat and in weather modification as a potential weapon (see Harper, 2003).7 (The DoD today describes weather as a ‘force multiplier’, considers the value of weather modification as not unlike ‘the splitting of the atom’, and desires to ‘own the weather’ via the development of a ‘global, precise, real-time, robust, systematic weather modification capability’ [House et al., 1996].)

Even if the technology is bad – space tech allows us to do useful things like monitor crop cycles Salam and Rahman 10 (M.A., Senior Scientific Officer, H., Principal Scientific Officer & Head, ROLE OF SPACE TECHNOLOGY FOR CROP MONITORING AND FOOD SECURITY PLANNING IN BANGLADESH, http://www.a-a-r-s.org/acrs/proceeding/ACRS2008/Papers/TS%2017.4.pdf)

About 52 percent of this population is engaged in agriculture sector and contribution of agricultural production on Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is 21.84 percent (BBS 2006). Therefore its economic development largely depends on the growth of agricultural production. As the land is limited here due to the high pressure of population growth therefore it has been given the emphasis on the concept of increase the production ‘vertically’ instead of ‘horizontally’. The main concern of the country is to feed its people. Therefore it is essential to develop an effective food security system, which requires the development of an efficient crop information system (CIS) over the country. For this purpose it needs to monitor crop condition, crop growth, crop acreage estimation and as well as crop yield for short and long term basis . Food is one of the basic human rights like other as cloth, shelter, medicine and education. Food security is the condition, in which all people at all times have both physical and economic access to sufficient food to meet their dietary needs for a productive and healthy life. When the food is available to all the people of a nation only then it could be said that the nation is laying on a food secure condition. Felicity et. al, 1992 define the ‘national food security’ as ‘a country should have enough food for everybody’. Satellite remote sensing along with its repetitive and synoptic viewing facilities offers an

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 16

document.docDartmouth 2K9

17

effective means for monitoring crop condition at large scale on a repetitive basis. Now a day, the use of remote sensing technology has been largely multiplied over the world (Ruimy et al., 1994) and particularly the agriculture is one of the major sectors where such a technology has acquired considerable momentum. Various studies have been conducted for monitoring of the condition of vegetation and agricultural crops using remote sensing (Sellers, 1985). The AVHRR on board NOAA satellite is perhaps one of the best existing facilities for environmental monitoring at the regional or global scale (Rahman, 1996). Rice is the main food grain in Bangladesh and this food grain is the principal component of food security of the country. In this paper it will be discussed the application of remote sensing and Geographic information system (GIS) technique for rice crop monitoring in Bangladesh and the use of this information by the policy makers of the country for food security planning.

The idea of the bomb and the later Apollo missions allowed us to forge environmental legislation under the guise of world peace – geopolitical strategy had nothing to do with it Masco 09 (Joseph, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at the University of Chicago, BadWeather: On Planetary Crisis, Social Studies of Science published online 28 September 2009, http://sss.sagepub.com/content/early/2009/09/28/0306312709341598)

Perhaps the purest illustration of this structural linkage between the bomb and biosphere in American political culture is that the first nuclear arms control treaty is also the first international environmental protection treaty. The 1963 Limited Test Ban Treaty (LTBT) eliminated nuclear detonations in the oceans, on land, in the air, and in outer space. Sold in the aftermath of the Cuban Missile Crisis as a means of reducing international nuclear tension, the LTBT was also a means of quieting public concerns about the effects of atmospheric fallout while continuing nuclear weapons production. The LTBT is now remembered at Los Alamos predominantly as a ‘public health’ initiative, one that took nuclear testing underground, and stabilized its experimental regime from 1963 to 1992 (Masco, 2004b). Without the visual evidence of new nuclear tests, as well as the protests over fallout, the move to underground testing also secured the bomb at the center of US national security logics for the remainder of the 20th century. The LTBT marks an important achievement for the environmental sciences as well: it demonstrated that industrial processes could damage the global biosphere, that negative environmental effects could be both cumulative and transnational, and that international agreements could be forged to limit future damage. Thus, while insuring 30 more years of the arms race, the LTBT also implicitly recognized a post-national form of security, one that was planetary in scope. The early ColdWar nuclear program thus enabled a changing understanding of the planet. Radioactive fallout, as well as intercontinental ballistic missiles, transformed specific kinds of threat into a global phenomenon, even as Cold War earth scientists were documenting the fragility of ecosystems within a collective biosphere. This notion of a planet under ecological threat achieved a new kind of visual coherence with the first Apollo mission photograph of planet earth rising above the moon in 1968 (see Jasanoff, 2001) and with the first NASA satellite portrait of the global biosphere in 1980.9Within US security culture, however, a basic conflict was established between nuclear threats and climate threats, between the bomb as a state technology and the cumulative effects of industrial civilization on the biosphere. As we shall see, an evolving notion of planetary threat would eventually pit the national security logics of the state against a new, post-national view of security focused on a fragile biosphere.

A2 Nuke Reps Nuclear representations of terror key to protecting the environment – shifts focus onto the post war effects on the globe Masco 09 (Joseph, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at the University of Chicago, BadWeather: On Planetary Crisis, Social Studies of Science published online 28 September 2009, http://sss.sagepub.com/content/early/2009/09/28/0306312709341598)

The ‘nuclear winter’ Science papers began with an assessment of nuclear war (Ehrlich et al., 1983: 1293): Recent

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 17

document.docDartmouth 2K9

18

studies of large-scale nuclear war (5000- to 10,000-MT yields) have estimated that there would be 750 million immediate deaths from blast alone; a total of about 1.1 billion deaths from the combined effects of blast, fire, and radiation; and approximately an additional 1.1 billion injuries requiring medical attention. Thus, 30 to 50 percent of the total human population could be immediate casualties of nuclear war.T he vast majority of the casualties would be in the Northern Hemisphere, especially in the United States, the USSR, Europe and Japan. These enormous numbers have typically been taken to define the full potential catastrophe of such a war. New evidence presented here, however, suggests that the longer term biological effects resulting from climatic changes may be at least as serious as the immediate one. Climactic effects at least as serious. This portrait of mass death relies on an understanding of nuclear war built up over nearly four decades of US military planning and civil defense, a security discourse that frequently identified nuclear war itself as ‘unthinkable’ . Two decades after Herman Kahn (1960) first asked, ‘if the survivors would envy the dead’, the nuclear winter studies offered a portrait of a ‘post-war’ environment almost as traumatic as the initial nuclear firestorm. Erhlich et al. summarized their report this way (1983: 1293): Subfreezing temperature, low light levels, and high doses of ionizing and ultraviolet radiation extending for many months after a large-scale nuclear war could destroy the biological support systems of civilization, at least in the Northern Hemisphere. Productivity in natural and agricultural ecosystems could be severely restricted for a year or more. Postwar survivors would face starvation as well as freezing conditions in the dark and be exposed to near-lethal doses of radiation. If, as now seems possible, the Southern Hemisphere were affected also, global disruption of the biosphere could ensue. In any event, there would be severe consequences, even in the areas not affected directly, because of the interdependence of the world economy. In either case the extinction of a large fraction of the Earth’s animals, plants, and microorganisms seems possible. The population size of Homo sapiens conceivably could be reduced to prehistoric levels or below, and extinction of the human species itself cannot be excluded. Nuclear war could destroy the biological support systems of civilization. Placing humanity firmly on the path of the dinosaurs, the exploding bomb is positioned here to not simply as a military tool but as a transformational event for the planet. There is a direct line of research connecting the early ‘tracer’ studies of strontium-90 from above ground nuclear detonations to this depiction of ‘nuclear winter’.10 However, the political coordinates of the research have been inverted: while the fallout studies of 1950s were directly harnessed to the military expansion of the nuclear state, the ‘nuclear winter’ concept was mobilized to reduce nuclear arsenals and diminish the geopolitical reliance on the bomb for the sake of environmental security.

Proliferation is good – it affirms our own commitment to the environment Masco 09 (Joseph, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at the University of Chicago, BadWeather: On Planetary Crisis, Social Studies of Science published online 28 September 2009, http://sss.sagepub.com/content/early/2009/09/28/0306312709341598)

No conspiracy of madmen could bring about a global environmental catastrophe. Here, we have a new definition of climate crisis mobilized to enable nuclear disarmament. The ‘nuclear winter’ research undercut ‘national security’ in favor of a new kind of planetary security, producing vigorous scientific and political debate.13 A coalition of 200 scientists (the Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment of the International Council of Scientific Unions [SCOPE]) from 30 nations participated in a nuclear winter study that re-affirmed the global threat of smoke induced climate change from nuclear warfare.14 The SCOPE study also became a prototype of the kind of multidisciplinary, multi-national scientific collaboration that has enabled recent science on CO2 emissions and global warming. What the original ‘nuclear winter’ theorists ultimately sought was a de-militarization of the biosphere by replacing an international nuclear confrontation with a planetary notion of security – in effect, using one kind of catastrophe to critique another. Revising the dream of many Manhattan Project scientists that atomic weapons would make war obsolete, these researchers sought to mobilize the science of climate change, as well as images of a damaged and destabilized biosphere, to promote global nuclear disarmament and an end to the ColdWar arms race.

***Citizenry GoodCitizens Good – Technocracy

Active citizenry is key to check the worst abuses of technocracy Dudley-Flores and Gangale 07 (Marilyn, CEO/Chief Research Scientist, Thomas, Executive Director, OPS-Alaska, The

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 18

document.docDartmouth 2K9

19Globalization of Space – The Astrosociological Approach, AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition 18 - 20 September 2007, Long Beach, California)

Since the traditional treatments of globalization focus on its political-economic aspects, and since our current phase of globalization has depended on aerospace production, let us take a look at the political-economic picture that bears on the future of the globalization of space – all other things being equal. An activist citizenry has a positive role to play in promoting the “outward course of empire” (Dudley-Rowley 1999),8 in inculcating a general awareness that outer space is already an important sector of the global economy, and that the importance of outer space will continue to grow. This might have small effects on technoeconomy, educating entrepreneurs on the possibilities of outer space for profit-making enterprises. As threads in the fabric of the emerging civil society of outer space, they can be a valuable adjunct to the professional aerospace organizations, speaking as “the people,” rather than as groups with obvious vested interests. Not having self-serving agendas accords them a certain specie in the corridors of power, an ability to be a faint, but uncorrupted voice in the wilderness. Operating in this venue, they can have an impact on technocratic decisions . However, space enthusiast groups also have the defect of their virtue. They can be founded on certain unquestioned basic assumptions that should have been and ought to be questioned. As a case in point, the L-5 Society’s misinterpretation of the Moon Agreement set it up to be co-opted into a corporate-led effort whose real target was the Law of the Sea Convention, whereas the torpedoing of the Moon Agreement was arguably against the interests of outer space development, the very mission of the L-5 Society (Gangale 2006).9 Space enthusiast organizations can be insular and polarized, preaching to their own choirs, either damning NASA, the major aerospace contractors, or the government-industrial complex in general as the Forces of Darkness, or singing hosannas to them as the Givers of Light. Often, the governance of these organizations is saddled with self-appointed

Now Key Now is key – we only have a limited time to convert an Industrial base Dudley-Flores and Gangale 07 (Marilyn, CEO/Chief Research Scientist, Thomas, Executive Director, OPS-Alaska, The Globalization of Space – The Astrosociological Approach, AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition 18 - 20 September 2007, Long Beach, California)

H. Time Is Running Out So, a tried and true formula on how to proceed is available, but time is running out to solve for “big science” problems and the fewer wheels that have to be reinvented the better off we are. The authors have made a calculation based on known oil reserves, national populations, and consumption rates. According to these figures, we have about 29 years remaining to make a conversion to alternate power sources -- if the United States can bring its oil consumption down to the Japanese rate and if Asian societies rise to the Japanese rate (Table 2 below).

Edu about Space Good/A2 CoercionEducation about space is good – checks space enthusiasm and teaches citizens about the use of government money Dudley-Flores and Gangale 07 (Marilyn, CEO/Chief Research Scientist, Thomas, Executive Director, OPS-Alaska, The Globalization of Space – The Astrosociological Approach, AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition 18 - 20 September 2007, Long Beach, California)

The citizen space community is small, fractured, and appears to lack a cohesive core of expertise. The pool of expertise that it possesses is diffused among a general population of enthusiasts, which makes it difficult to focus that expertise to a productive purpose. In a positive development, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, a professional organization that draws its membership from industry, government, and academia, has begun to increase its efforts in the policy arena, both through its annual Congressional Visit Day and through greater visibility of its Public Policy Committee. The citizen group ProSpace’s annual “March Storm” on Capitol Hill

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 19

document.docDartmouth 2K9

20

is a noble effort; however, an informed voice that speaks both to civil society and in the corridors of power is sorely needed. The general public is ignorant of space to a large degree. As a society, we have a poor understanding of our place in the solar system: the relative distances between Earth, the Moon, the sun, and the various planets and their moons; the relative sizes of these celestial bodies; the environmental conditions on them. In 2003, author Gangale observed firsthand how bogus satellite imagery of the 1 February destruction of Columbia and the 14 August electrical blackout of the northeastern US and eastern Canada passed uncritically through the email system among engineers at one of the nation’s largest utility companies. One would have thought that such technically-trained people would not have been so easily duped. Jim Pass’ (2004)*** distinction is apt; we have yet to become a true spacefaring civilization, we are merely a space-capable civilization. The public generally supports the civil human space program, although it has little knowledge of what it is actually doing. And not only does the public not know what it is getting for its tax dollar, neither does it have any idea of what it is paying for. Polls show that the only about ten percent of the public correctly estimates that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration budget represents less than one percent of federal spending, whereas approximately twenty percent of the public believes that the NASA budget accounts for more than a quarter of federal expenditures (Launius 2003).11 This suggests that there would be much greater support for the civil space program if the public knew what a bargain they were getting, and might support spending levels several times higher than the actual ones. A number of space enthusiasts tout free enterprise as the wave of the future in space development, and take great delight in disparaging government space projects as building the wrong capabilities for too much money. These detractors are “space cowboys” with big hats and no cattle. The authors have no doubt that free enterprise will be important to space development, but we have grave doubts that it will have a significant impact in the near future. Yes, government programs are expensive, because there are extraordinary engineering challenges to getting into space on the cheap.

Debate Good Debate helps to stimulate involvement in school, neighborhoods, and current politics Maddox No Date (Betty, Consultant, Atlanta Public Schools, http://www.dallasurbandebate.org/web/page/about)

Students who are disengaged in a traditional classroom setting gravitate to debate. The excitement of debate tournaments ignites their intellectual curiosity. Once their mind catches fire, the curiosity spreads to other areas of their life. They begin to ask critically-informed questions about their history textbooks, their neighborhoods, and the nightly news. I've seen the reading scores of students who join debate jump two grade levels in a single semester. They learn how to read passages critically and actively.

Debate is key to developing speaking skills to project ideas Laccoca No Date (Lee, CEO of Chrysler, Developing Leaders, http://www.dallasurbandebate.org/web/page/about)

...I joined the debating team, which was sponsored by Mr. Virgil Parks, our Latin teacher. That's where I developed my speaking skills and learned to think on my feet. At first I was scared to death. I had butterflies in my stomach - and to this day I still get a little nervous before giving a speech. But the experience of being on the debating team was crucial. You can have brilliant ideas, but if you can't get them across, your brains won't get you anywhere.

Resolutional focus promoted good study skills and self-confidence Salazar No Date (W T White ’10, SMU ’14, http://www.dallasurbandebate.org/web/page/about)

If it weren't for debate, there is no doubt in my mind that I would not be in college right now. Prior to joining the team, I had no interest in being involved at school, could care less about my grades, and was perfectly content with going to community college upon graduation. Luckily for me, I decided to attend one of the

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 20

document.docDartmouth 2K9

21

team's meetings on a whim and immediately fell in love with the activity. Debate opened my eyes to all sorts of issues that would have never crossed my mind, and each year at the end I felt like an expert on whatever resolution was accepted. Besides becoming more knowledgeable of the topic, the studying skills I learned applied to each and every class. Writing papers for English was a breeze, and math wasn't dragging my GPA down anymore. When you feel smart, it does wondrous things to your self-confidence that translate well academically. Debate gave me all the necessary tools I needed to succeed.

Resolutional depth creates intense, real world topics that pertain to lives NAUDL 09 (The National Association for Urban Debate Leagues, URBAN DEBATE LEAGUE CASE STATEMENT, http://www.urbandebate.org/casestatement.pdf)

Urban Debate Leagues create exceptional relationships and school-based communities where students feel recognized and cared for by mentors and fellow engaged students. Debaters must work together and learn to know and adapt to each other’s strengths and weaknesses. Teachers and coaches develop relationships with students that enable them to feel accepted and confident as learners. Debaters also receive mentoring from college students, recruiters, and community member volunteers who provide valuable feedback, perspective, and connections. Relevant, real world learning creates the conditions for in-depth education, by allowing students to explore topics which directly and obviously impact many of their lives and communities (e.g., the 2009/10 resolution concerns poverty). Competitions motivate and recognize hard work where it is due, in an atmosphere of friendly competition, fun, and celebration. Tournaments, unlike standardized tests, orient activity and demand performance in a manner students deem relevant to their lives.

Switch side debate is goodStrother No Date (Luke, W T White ’12, “Policy Debate's Academic Advantage” http://www.dallasurbandebate.org/web/page/about)

During my novice year, debate was the place where I learned skills that I wouldn't be taught otherwise. I learned how to become a better critical thinker. I learned how to become a more articulate and better-spoken person. Debate also helped me learn to cope with my dysgraphia, a written expression disorder that has haunted me throughout my school career. I learned research skills that I wouldn't have learned in a normal school environment. I also learned something that wasn't as predictable as thinking, speaking, note-taking, and researching; I learned how to be open-minded. I was so engrossed in my ideas that I forgot about the other side of the argument. My experience in debate exposed me to the other side and taught me to listen. Debate has also led me to meet people and make friends that I wouldn't have met otherwise. All of that happened in year one.

Debate also helps build communities and spread education Reich No Date (Robert B., Professor of Public Policy, University of California Berkeley, former U.S. Secretary of Labor, http://www.dallasurbandebate.org/web/page/about)

"The economy of the United States depends to an even greater extent on the productivity and preparedness of all of our workforce. To protect and secure our way of life, we must provide all of our youth with a world-class education. Urban Debate Leagues take us a solid step closer to that goal. UDLs work with teachers to build creative and innovative classrooms. These debate leagues can help reduce the educational-opportunity gap that separates rich and poor communities and thus they can help our children's chances and our nation's future."

***By RequestRorty

Omission is not exclusion; NO discursive act can include everything; this doesn't mean we reject or marginalize these concernsRorty 02 , Professor of Comparative Literature @ Stanford, `02 (Richard, Peace Review, vol. 14, no. 2, p. 152-153)

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 21

document.docDartmouth 2K9

22

I have no quarrel with Cornell's and pivak's claim that "what is missing in a literary text or historical narrative leaves its mark through the traces of its expulsion." For that seems simpl ty o say that any text will presup osp e the existence of people, things, and institutions that it hardly mentions. So the readers of a literary text will always be able to ask themselves questions such as: "Who prepared the sumptuous dinner the lovers enjoyed?" "How did they get the money to afford that meal?" The reader of a historical narrative will always be able to wonder about where the money to finance the war came from and about who got to decide whether the war would take place. "Expulsion," however, seems too pejorative a term for the fact that no text can answer all possible questions about its own background and its own presuppositions . Consider Captain Birch, the agent of the East Indian Company

charged with persuading the Rani of Sirmur not to commit suicide. Spivak is not exactly "expelling" Captain Birch from her narrative by zeroing in on the Rani, even though she does not try to find out much about Birch's early days as a subaltern, nor about the feelings of pride or shame or exasperation he may have experienced in the course of his conversations with the Rani. In the case of Birch, Spivak does not try to "gently blow precarious ashes into their ghostly shape," nor does she speculate about the possible sublimity of his career. Nor should she. S.ivak has her own fish to and her own witness to bear just as Kipling had

his when he spun tales of the humiliations to which newly arrived subalterns were subjected in the regimental messes of the Raj. So do all authors of literary texts and historical narratives, and such texts and narratives should not alwa s be read as disin enuous exercises in repression. They should be read as one version of a story that could have been told, and should be told, in many other ways.

OwenThere are no prior questions to problem oriented IR- empirical validity is a sufficient justification for action – we get to weigh our affOwen 02 David Owen, 2 Reader of Political Theory at the Univ. of Southampton, Millennium Vol 31 No 3 2002 p. 655-7

Commenting on the ‘philosophical turn’ in IR, Wæver remarks that ‘[a] frenzy for words like “epistemology” and “ontology” often signals this philosophical turn’, although he goes on to comment that these terms are often used loosely.4 However, loosely deployed or not, it is clear that debates concerning ontology and epistemology play a central role in the contemporary IR theory wars. In one respect, this is unsurprising since it is a characteristic feature of the social sciences that periods of disciplinary disorientation involve recourse to reflection on the philosophical commitments of different theoretical approaches, and there is no doubt that such reflection can play a valuable role in making explicit the commitments that characterise (and help individuate) diverse theoretical positions. Yet, such a philosophical turn is not without its dangers and I will briefly mention three before turning to consider a confusion that has, I will suggest, helped to promote the IR theory wars by motivating this philosophical turn. The first danger with the philosophical turn is that it has an inbuilt tendency to prioritise issues of ontology and epistemology over explanatory and/or interpretive power as if the latter two were merely a simple function of the former. But while the explanatory and/or interpretive power of a theoretical account is not wholly independent of its ontological and/or epistemological commitments (otherwise criticism of these features would not be a criticism that had any value), it is by no means clear that it is, in contrast, wholly dependent on these philosophical commitments. Thus, for example, one need not be sympathetic to rational choice theory to recognise that it can provide powerful accounts of certain kinds of problems, such as the tragedy of the commons in which dilemmas of collective action are foregrounded. It may, of course, be the case that the advocates of rational choice theory cannot give a good account of why this type of theory is powerful in accounting for this class of problems (i.e., how it is that the relevant actors come to exhibit features in these circumstances that approximate the assumptions of rational choice theory) and, if this is the case, it is a philosophical weakness—but this does not undermine the point that, for a certain class of problems, rational choice theory may provide the best account available to us. In other words, while the critical judgement of theoretical accounts in terms of their ontological and/or epistemological sophistication is one kind of critical judgement, it is not the only or even necessarily the most important kind . The second danger run by the philosophical turn is that because prioritisation of ontology and epistemology promotes theory-construction from philosophical first principles, it cultivates a theory-driven rather than problem-driven approach to IR. Paraphrasing Ian Shapiro, the point can be put like this: since it is the case that there is always a

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 22

document.docDartmouth 2K9

23

plurality of possible true descriptions of a given action, event or phenomenon, the challenge is to decide which is the most apt i n terms of getting a perspicuous grip on the action, event or phenomenon in question given the purposes of the inquiry; yet, from this standpoint, ‘theory-driven work is part of a reductionist program’ in that it ‘dictates always opting for the description that calls for the explanation that flows from the preferred model or theory’.5 The justification offered for this strategy rests on the mistaken belief that it is necessary for social science because general explanations are required to characterise the classes of phenomena studied in similar terms. However, as Shapiro points out, this is to misunderstand the enterprise of science since ‘whether there are general explanations for classes of phenomena is a question for social-scientific inquiry, not to be prejudged before conducting that inquiry’ .6 Moreover, this strategy easily slips into the promotion of the pursuit of generality over that of empirical validity. The third danger is that the preceding two combine to encourage the formation of a particular image of disciplinary debate in IR—what might be called (only slightly tongue in cheek) ‘the Highlander view’—namely, an image of warring theoretical approaches with each, despite occasional temporary tactical alliances, dedicated to the strategic achievement of sovereignty over the disciplinary field. It encourages this view because the turn to, and prioritisation of, ontology and epistemology stimulates the idea that there can only be one theoretical approach which gets things right , namely, the theoretical approach that gets its ontology and epistemology right. This image feeds back into IR exacerbating the first and second dangers, and so a potentially vicious circle arises.

TuathailExclusive focus on representations makes effective policy analysis impossible.Tuathail, 96 (Gearoid, Department of Georgraphy at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Political Geography, 15(6-7), p. 664, science direct)

While theoretical debates at academic conferences are important to academics, the discourse and concerns of foreign-policy decision- makers are quite different, so different that they constitute a distinctive problem- solving, theory-averse, policy-making subculture. There is a danger that academics assume that the discourses they engage are more significant in the practice of foreign policy and the exercise of power than they really are. This is not, however, to minimize the obvious importance of academia as a general institutional structure among many that sustain certain epistemic communities in particular states. In general, I do not disagree with Dalby’s fourth point about politics and discourse except to note that his statement-‘Precisely because reality could be represented in particular ways political decisions could be taken, troops and material moved and war fought’-evades the important question of agency that I noted in my review essay. The assumption that it is representations that make action possible is inadequate by itself. Political, military and economic structures, institutions, discursive networks and leadership are all crucial in explaining social action and should be theorized together with representational practices . Both here and earlier, Dalby’s reasoning inclines towards a form of idealism. In response to Dalby’s fifth point (with its three subpoints), it is worth noting, first, that his book is about the CPD, not the Reagan administration. He analyzes certain CPD discourses, root the geographical reasoning practices of the Reagan administration nor its public-policy reasoning on national security. Dalby’s book is narrowly textual; the general contextuality of the Reagan administration is not dealt with. Second, let me simply note that I find that the distinction between critical theorists and post- structuralists is a little too rigidly and heroically drawn by Dalby and others. Third, Dalby’s interpretation of the reconceptualization of national security in Moscow as heavily influenced by dissident peace researchers in Europe is highly idealist, an interpretation that ignores the structural and ideological crises facing the Soviet elite at that time. Gorbachev’s reforms and his new security discourse were also strongly self- interested, an ultimately futile attempt to save the Communist Party and a discredited regime of power from disintegration. The issues raised by Simon Dalby in his comment are important ones for all those interested in the practice of critical geopolitics. While I agree with Dalby that questions of discourse are extremely important ones for political geographers to engage, there is a danger of fetishizing this concern with discourse so that we neglect the institutional and the sociological, the materialist and the cultural, the political and the geographical contexts within which particular discursive strategies become significant. Critical

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 23

document.docDartmouth 2K9

24geopolitics, in other words, should not be a prisoner of the sweeping ahistorical cant that sometimes accompanies ‘poststructuralism nor convenient reading strategies like the identity politics narrative; it needs to always be open to the patterned mess that is human history.

HarveyNo policy failure. Language is clear enough to use common assumptions. Policy and theory do succeed on this basis.Harvey ’97 (Frank, Associate Prof. Pol. Sci. – Dalhousie U., “The Future’s Back: Nuclear Rivalry, Deterrence Theory, and Crisis Stability after the Cold War”, p. 138-139)

Linguistic Relativism. One approach of postmodernists is to point to the complex nature of language and meaning as a critique of positiv¬ism; this critique is, in turn, relevant to the overwhelming amount of work in IR (Phillips 1977; Giddens 1979; George and Campbell 1990). Although a comprehensive assessment of the linguistic relativism debate is beyond the scope of this project, it is possible to address the underlying philosophical argument, which is fairly straightforward. Building on the work of Wittgenstein (1968), the linguistic variant of the criticism contends that any attempt to reduce everyday terms "to a singular essentialist meaning" is problematic given "the multiplicity of meaning to be found in social activity" (George and Campbell 1990, 273). By implication, a concept, term, word, or symbol cannot correspond "to some ... externally derived foundation or object" and ulti¬mately is context-dependent. Similarly, Phillips argues that the validity of theory cannot be determined because "There is no standard or objective reality (always fixed, never changing) against which to com¬pare a universe of discourse ... nothing exists outside of our language and actions which can be used to justify ... a statement's truth or falsity" (1977, 273). Of course, it is not entirely clear how this "multiplicity of meaning" is sufficient to render meaningless an approach that assumes the existence of an objective reality. An important distinction must be drawn between the assertion that these discrepancies might have a significant impact on scientific theorizing and the assertion that they do have such an effect. In most cases, errors of interpretation and generalization produced by linguistic nuances are relatively insignificant and ultimately have very little impact on the generalizability of social theories. There are numerous words, symbols, concepts, and ideas, for example, that are commonly understood, regardless of other linguistic variations, but the implications of this standardized concep¬tual framework are frequently overlooked and ignored in the post¬modern critique. In any case, it is contingent upon the theorist to specify the precise meaning of any variable or symbol that is central to a theory. Although definitions may vary — possibly partly, but not entirely, as a conse¬quence of language — scholars nevertheless are more likely than not to understand and agree on the underlying meaning of most words, symbols and phrases. The point is that theorists generally do have a common starting point and often suspend, at least temporarily, coun¬terproductive debates over meaning in order to shift emphasis towards the strength and logical consistency of the theory itself, a more important issue that has nothing to do with language. Evaluating the internal consistency of the central assumptions and propositions of a theory, that is, criticising from within, is likely to be more conducive to theoretical progress than the alternative, which is to reject the idea of theory building entirely. Finally, the lack of purity and precision, another consequence of linguistic relativism, does not necessarily imply irrelevance of purpose or approach. The study of international relations may not be exact, given limitations noted by Wittgenstein and others, but precision is a practical research problem, not an insurmountable barrier to progress. In fact, most observers who point to the context-dependent nature of language are critical not so much of the social sciences but of the incorrect application of scientific techniques to derive overly precise measurement of weakly developed concepts. Clearly, our understanding of the causes of international conflict — and most notably war — has improved considerably as a consequence of applying sound scientific methods and valid operationalizations (Vasquez 1987, 1993). The alternative approach, implicit in much of the postmodern literature, is to fully accept the inadequacy of positivism, throw one's hands up in failure, given the complexity of the subject, and repudiate the entire enterprise. The most relevant question is whether we would know more or less about

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 24

document.docDartmouth 2K9

25

international relations if we pursued that strategy.

BernsteinYes value to life. Our status as beings inheres an affirmation of life in the face of extinction and nonbeing.Bernstein 02 (Richard J., Vera List Prof. Phil. – New School for Social Research, “Radical Evil: A Philosophical Interrogation”, p. 188-192)

This is precisely what Jonas does in The Phenomenon of Life, his rethinking of the meaning of organic life. He tealizes that his philosophical project goes against many of the deeply embedded prejudices and dogmas of contemporary philosophy. He challenges two well-entrenched dogmas: that there is no metaphysical truth, and that there is no path from the "is" to the "ought". To escape from ethical nihilism, we must show that there is a metaphysical ground of ethics, an objective basis for value and purpose in being itself. These are strong claims; and, needless to say, they are extremely controversial. In defense of Jonas, it should be said that he approaches this task with both boldness and intellectual modesty. He frequently acknowledges that he cannot "prove" his claims, but he certainly believes that his "premises" do "more justice to the total phenomenon of man and Being in general" than the prevailing dualist or reductionist alternatives. "But in the last analysis my argument can do no more than give a rational grounding to an option it presents as a choice for a thoughtful person — an option that of course has its own inner power of persuasion. Unfortunately I have nothing better to offer. Perhaps a future metaphysics will be able to do more." 8 To appreciate how Jonas's philosophical project unfolds, we need to examine his philosophical interpretation of life. This is the starting point of his grounding of a new imperative of responsibility. It also provides the context for his speculations concerning evil. In the foreword to The Phenomenon of Life, Jonas gives a succinct statement of his aim. Put at its briefest, this volume offers an "existential" interpretation of biological facts. Contemporary existentialism, obsessed with man alone, is in the habit of claiming as his unique privilege and predicament much of what is rooted in organic existence as such: in so doing, it withholds from the organic world the insights to be learned from the awareness of self. On its part, scientific biology, by its rules confined to the physical, outward facts, must ignore the dimension of inwardness that belongs to life: in so doing, it submerges the distinction of "animate" and "inanimate." A new reading of the biological record may recover the inner dimension — that which we know best -- for the understanding of things organic and so reclaim for psycho-physical unity of life that place in the theoretical scheme which it had lost through the divorce of the material and the mental since Descartes. p. ix) Jonas, in his existential interpretation of bios, pursues "this underlying theme of all of life in its development through the ascending order of organic powers and functions: metabolism, moving and desiring, sensing and perceiving, imagination, art, and mind — a progressive scale of freedom and peril, culminating in man, who may understand his uniqueness anew when he no longer sees himself in metaphysical isolation" (PL, p. ix). The way in which Jonas phrases this theme recalls the Aristotelian approach to bios, and it is clear that Aristotle is a major influence on Jonas. There is an even closer affinity with the philosophy of nature that Schelling sought to elaborate in the nineteenth century. Schelling (like many post- Kantian German thinkers) was troubled by the same fundamental dichotomy that underlies the problem for Jonas. The dichotomy that Kant introduced between the realm of "disenchanted" nature and the realm of freedom leads to untenable antinomies. Jonas differs from both Aristotle and Schelling in taking into account Darwin and contemporary scientific biology. A proper philosophical understanding of biology must always be compatible with the scientific facts. But at the same time, it must also root out misguided materialistic and reductionist interpretations of those biological facts. In this respect, Jonas's naturalism bears a strong affinity with the evolutionary naturalism of Peirce and Dewey. At the same time, Jonas is deeply skeptical of any theory of evolutionary biology that introduces mysterious "vital forces" or neglects the contingencies and perils of evolutionary development.' Jonas seeks to show "that it is in the dark stirrings of primeval organic substance that a principle of freedom shines forth for the first time within the vast necessity of the physical universe" (PL 3). Freedom, in this broad sense, is not identified exclusively with human freedom; it reaches down to the first glimmerings of organic life, and up to the type of freedom manifested by human beings. " 'Freedom' must denote an objectively discernible mode of being, i.e., a manner of executing existence, distinctive of the organic per se and thus shared by all members but by no nonmembers of the class: an ontologically descriptive term which can apply to mere physical evidence at first" (PL 3). This coming into being of freedom is not just a success story. "The privilege of freedom carries the burden of need and means precarious being" (PL 4). It is with biological metabolism that this principle of freedom first arises. Jonas goes "so far as to maintain that metabolism, the basic stratum of all organic existence, already displays freedom — indeed that it is the first form freedom takes." 1 ° With "metabolism — its power and its need — not-being made its appearance in the world as an alternative embodied in being itself; and thereby being itself first assumes an emphatic sense: intrinsically

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 25

document.docDartmouth 2K9

26qualified by the threat of its negative it must affirm itself, and existence affirmed is existence as a concern" (PL 4). This broad, ontological understanding of freedom as a characteristic of all organic life serves Jonas as "an Ariadne's thread through the interpretation of Life" (PL 3). The way in which Jonas enlarges our understanding of freedom is indicative of his primary argumentative strategy. He expands and reinterprets categories that are normally applied exclusively to human beings so that we can see that they identify objectively discernible modes of being characteristic of everything animate. Even inwardness, and incipient forms of self; reach down to the simplest forms of organic life. 11 Now it may seem as if Jonas is guilty of anthropomorphism, of projecting what is distinctively human onto the entire domain of living beings. He is acutely aware of this sort of objection, but he argues that even the idea of anthropomorphism must be rethought. 12 We distort Jonas's philosophy of life if we think that he is projecting human characteristics onto the nonhuman animate world. Earlier I quoted the passage in which Jonas speaks of a "third way" — "one by which the dualistic rift can be avoided and yet enough of the dualistic insight saved to uphold the humanity of man" (GEN 234). We avoid the "dualistic rift" by showing that there is genuine continuity of organic life, and that such categories as freedom, inwardness, and selfhood apply to everything that is animate. These categories designate objective modes of being. But we preserve "enough dualistic insight" when we recognize that freedom, inwardness, and selfhood manifest themselves in human beings in a distinctive manner. I do not want to suggest that Jonas is successful in carrying out this ambitious program. He is aware of the tentativeness and fallibility of his claims, but he presents us with an understanding of animate beings such that we can discern both continuity and difference.' 3 It should now be clear that Jonas is not limiting himself to a regional philosophy of the organism or a new "existential" interpretation of biological facts. His goal is nothing less than to provide a new metaphysical understanding of being, a new ontology. And he is quite explicit about this. Our reflections [are] intended to show in what sense the problem of life, and with it that of the body, ought to stand in the center of ontology and, to some extent, also of epistemology. . . The central position of the problem of life means not only that it must be accorded a decisive voice in judging any given ontology but also that any treatment of itself must summon the whole of ontology. (PL 25) The philosophical divide between Levinas and Jonas appears to be enormous. For Levinas, as long as we restrict ourselves to the horizon of Being and to ontology (no matter how broadly these are conceived), there is no place for ethics, and no answer to ethical nihilism. For Jonas, by contrast, unless we can enlarge our understanding of ontology in such a manner as would provide an objective grounding for value and purpose within nature, there is no way to answer the challenge of ethical nihilism. But despite this initial appearance of extreme opposition, there is a way of interpreting Jonas and Levinas that lessens the gap between them. In Levinasian terminology, we can say that Jonas shows that there is a way of understanding ontology and the living body that does justice to the nonreducible alterity of the other (l'autrui). 14 Still, we might ask how Jonas's "existential" interpretation of biological facts and the new ontology he is proposing can provide a metaphysical grounding for a new ethics. Jonas criticizes the philosophical prejudice that there is no place in nature for values, purposes, and ends. Just as he maintains that freedom, inwardness, and selfhood are objective modes of being, so he argues that values and ends are objective modes of being. There is a basic value inherent in organic being, a basic affirmation, "The Yes' of Life" (IR 81). 15 "The self-affirmation of being becomes emphatic in the opposition of life to death. Life is the explicit confrontation of being with not-being. . . . The 'yes' of all striving is here sharpened by the active `no' to not-being" (IR 81-2). Furthermore — and this is the crucial point for Jonas — this affirmation of life that is in all organic being has a binding obligatory force upon human beings. This blindly self-enacting "yes" gains obligating force in the seeing freedom of man, who as the supreme outcome of nature's purposive labor is no longer its automatic executor but, with the power obtained from knowledge, can become its destroyer as well. He must adopt the "yes" into his will and impose the "no" to not-being on his power. But precisely this transition from willing to obligation is the critical point of moral theory at which attempts at laying a foundation for it come so easily to grief. Why does now, in man, that become a duty which hitherto "being" itself took care of through all individual willings? (IR 82). We discover here the transition from is to "ought" — from the self-affirmation of life to the binding obligation of human beings to preserve life not only for the present but also for the future. But why do we need a new ethics? The subtitle of The Imperative of Responsibility — In Search of an Ethics for the Technological Age — indicates why we need a new ethics . Modern technology has transformed the nature and consequences of human ac-tion so radically that the underlying premises of traditional ethics are no longer valid. For the first time in history human beings possess the knowledge and the power to destroy life on this planet, including human life. Not only is there the new possibility of total nuclear disaster; there are the even more invidious and threatening possibilities that result from the unconstrained use of technologies that can destroy the environment required for life. The major transformation brought about by modern technology is that the consequences of our actions frequently exceed by far

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 26

document.docDartmouth 2K9

27anything we can envision. Jonas was one of the first philosophers to warn us about the unprecedented ethical and political problems that arise with the rapid development of biotechnology. He claimed that this was happening at a time when there was an "ethical vacuum," when there did not seem to be any effective ethical principles to limit ot guide our ethical decisions. In the name of scientific and technological "progress," there is a relentless pressure to adopt a stance where virtually anything is permissible, includ-ing transforming the genetic structure of human beings, as long as it is "freely chosen." We need, Jonas argued, a new categorical imperative that might be formulated as follows: "Act so that the effects of your action are compatible with the permanence of genuine human life"; or expressed negatively: "Act so that the effects of your action are not destructive of the future possibility of such a life"; or simply: "Do not compromise the conditions for an indefinite continuation of humanity on earth"; or again turned positive: "In your present choices, include the future wholeness of Man among the objects of your will." (IR 11)

Gow

West isn’t exclusionary – it has fuzzy edges based on self-perceptionGow 5 James, Professor of International Peace and Security, and Director of the International Peace and Security Programme. Gow is a permanent non-resident scholar with the Liechtenstein Institute, Princeton University. He has held visiting positions at the University of Sheffield, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington D.C., the Institute of War and Peace Studies, Columbia University, and the Centre of International Studies, Princeton University. Professor Gow is currently Chair of the Association for the Study of Ethnicity and Nationalism Advisory Council, a member of the British Film Institute In-View Advisory Board and a member of the ESRC/AHRC ‘Global Uncertainties’ Development Panel, Book: Defending the West, Polity Press, (pg. 7)

That which needs to be defended - the West - is , of course, a con struction. It is a phenomenon created by factors such as geography, history, culture, politics, religion, philosophy and identity. While it would not be impossible to seek through rigorous logic to pin down a narrow definition of the West, this might also be unsatisfactory when considering defence of the West. There are key features that can be described as being generally applicable to the content of the West -especially their co-occurrence. To take this approach, as can be seen below, is to offer a soft definition of the West, but one that is defens ible , both in intellectual terms for the present purpose and (because of that purpose) for those engaged in the practice of defending the West. Thus, the West has fuzzy edges for security purposes and is ultimately to be defined in terms of other- and self-perception of security. The West to be defended is a construction emerging from the interaction of those who believe themselves to be part of that which is threatened or part of the collectivity that must participate in protecting the West. Those interactions include the political discourse of security and practical and operational security commitments. This sense; of the West is somewhat more flexible and open than that offered by Samuel Huntington, who nonetheless provides an excellent discussion of the West and its complements and competitors - indeed it would be hard to produce a better or more condensed reading of that which has fed into and constitutes the West. However, Huntington's context for the use of that term is a little more problem atic and leads him to miss reflexivity as one of the essential qualities of 'the West' whatever its content,9 as discussed below. This is one of the reasons to recognize the need for a flexible and inclusive approach to definition of the West (while acknowledging that ultimately any such terms will always of necessity be exclusive 10). However, this less than rigid definition of 'the West' has to take account of the major features that can be generally described as characterizing the West.

NyeDebate should only include discussions that are policy relevant- their K self maginalizes itself out of politics and is therefore uselessNye and Harvard 09 Joseph Nye, professor at Harvard University and former dean of the Harvard Kennedy School. , BA suma cum laude Princeton, PhD Harvard, Former Chair National Intelligence Council, Former Asst. Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, you know who he is, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/12/AR2009041202260_pf.html 4-13-09

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 27

document.docDartmouth 2K9

28

President Obama has appointed some distinguished academic economists and lawyers to his administration, but few high-ranking political scientists have been named. In fact, the editors of a recent poll of more than 2,700 international relations experts declared that "the walls surrounding the ivory tower have never seemed so high." While important American scholars such as Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski took high-level foreign policy positions in the past, that path has tended to be a one-way street. Not many top-ranked scholars of international relations are going into government, and even fewer return to contribute to academic theory. The 2008 Teaching, Research and International Policy (TRIP) poll, by the Institute for Theory and Practice in International Relations, showed that of the 25 scholars rated as producing the most interesting scholarship during the past five years, only three had ever held policy positions (two in the U.S. government and one in the United Nations). The fault for this growing gap lies not with the government but with the academics. Scholars are paying less attention to questions about how their work relates to the policy world, and in many departments a focus on policy can hurt one's career. Advancement comes faster for those who develop mathematical models , new methodologies or theories expressed in jargon that is unintelligible to policymakers. A survey of articles published over the lifetime of the American Political Science Review found that about one in five dealt with policy prescription or criticism in the first half of the century, while only a handful did so after 1967. Editor Lee Sigelman observed in the journal's centennial issue that "if 'speaking truth to power' and contributing directly to public dialogue about the merits and demerits of various courses of action were still numbered among the functions of the profession, one would not have known it from leafing through its leading journal." As citizens, academics might be considered to have an obligation to help improve on policy ideas when they can. Moreover, such engagement can enhance and enrich academic work, and thus the ability of academics to teach the next generation. As former undersecretary of state David Newsom argued a decade ago, "the growing withdrawal of university scholars behind curtains of theory and modeling would not have wider significance if this trend did not raise questions regarding the preparation of new generations and the future influence of the academic community on public and official perceptions of international issues and events. Teachers plant seeds that shape the thinking of each new generation; this is probably the academic world's most lasting contribution ." Yet too often scholars teach theory and methods that are relevant to other academics but not to the majority of the students sitting in the classroom before them. Some academics say that while the growing gap between theory and policy may have costs for policy, it has produced better social science theory, and that this is more important than whether such scholarship is relevant. Also, to some extent, the gap is an inevitable result of the growth and specialization of knowledge. Few people can keep up with their subfields, much less all of social science. But the danger is that academic theorizing will say more and more about less and less . Even when academics supplement their usual trickle-down approach to policy by writing in journals, newspapers or blogs, or by consulting for candidates or public officials, they face many competitors for attention. More than 1,200 think tanks in the United States provide not only ideas but also experts ready to comment or consult at a moment's notice. Some of these new transmission belts serve as translators and additional outlets for academic ideas, but many add a bias provided by their founders and funders .

As a group, think tanks are heterogeneous in scope, funding, ideology and location, but universities generally offer a more neutral viewpoint. While pluralism of institutional pathways is good for democracy, the policy process is diminished by the withdrawal of the academic community . The solutions must come via a reappraisal within the academy itself. Departments should give greater weight to real-world relevance and impact in hiring and promoting young scholars. Journals could place greater weight on relevance in evaluating submissions. Studies of specific regions deserve more attention. Universities could facilitate interest in the world by giving junior faculty members greater incentives to participate in it. That should include greater toleration of unpopular policy positions. One could multiply such useful suggestions, but young people should not hold their breath waiting for them to be implemented. If anything, the trends in academic life seem to be headed in the opposite direction.

CampbellOur ethical obligation to secure justice demands calculative thought—the alternative is the continuation of violence and oppression

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 28

document.docDartmouth 2K9

29

Campbell 99 (David, Prof of Int’l Politics @ Univ. of Newcastle, Moral Spaces, p. 46-7)

That undecidability resides within the decision, Derrida argues, "that justice exceeds law and calculation, that the unpresentable exceeds the determinable cannot and should not serve as alibi for staying out of juridico-political battles, within an institution or a state, or between institutions or states and others."9' Indeed, "incalculable justice requires us to calculate." From where does this insistence come? What is behind, what is animating, these imperatives? It is both the character of infinite justice as a heteronomic relationship to the other, a relationship that because of its undecidability multiplies responsibility, and the fact that "left to itself, the incalculable and giving (donatrice) idea of justice is always very close to the bad, even to the worst, for it can always be reappropriated by the most perverse calculation."92 The necessity of calculating the incalculable thus responds to a duty, a duty that inhabits the instant of madness and compels the decision to avoid "the bad," the "perverse calculation," even "the worst." This is the duty that also dwells with deconstruction and makes it the starting point, the "at least necessary condition," for the organization of resistance to totalitarianism in all its forms. And it is a duty that responds to practical political concerns when we recognize that Derrida names the bad, the perverse, and the worst as those violences "we recognize all too well without yet having thought them through, the crimes of xenophobia, racism, anti-Semitism, religious or nationalist fanaticism." Furthermore, the duty within the decision, the obligation that recognizes the necessity of negotiating the possibilities provided by the impossibilities of justice, is not content with simply avoiding, containing, combating, or negating the worst violence-though it could certainly begin with those strategies. Instead, this responsibility, which is the responsibility of responsibility, commissions a "utopian" strategy. Not a strategy that is beyond all bounds of possibility so as to be considered "unrealistic," but one which in respecting the necessity of calculation, takes the possibility summoned by the calculation as far as possible, "must take it as far as possible, beyond the place we find ourselves and beyond the already identifiable zones of morality or politics or law, beyond the distinction between national and international, public and private, and so on."94 As Derrida declares, "The condition of possibility of this thing called responsibility is a certain experience and experiment of the possibility of the impossible: the testing of the aporia from which one may invent the only possible invention, the impossible invention."95 This leads Derrida to enunciate a proposition that many, not the least of whom are his Habermasian critics, could hardly have expected: "Nothing seems to me less outdated than the classical emancipatory ideal. We cannot attempt to disqualify it today, whether crudely or with sophistication, at least not without treating it too lightly and forming the worst complicities." 6

KrishnaThe permutation is the only way to effectuate real change—the alt fails and is politically divisiveKrishna, ’93 – Prof Poli Sci @ U of Hawaii (Summer, Sankaran, Alternatives, “The Importance of Being Ironic: A Postcolonial View on Critical International Relations Theory”, pg. 399-401)

In this regard, Der Derian's point that the nature of antiwar protest movements has to change, has to recognize the fact that one can no longer wait for the body bags to come home, is one that merits attention. He notes, in a sharp attack on the left's anti-Gulf War movement: "Like old generals the anti-war movement fought the last war ... a disastrous war of position, constructing ideologically sound bunkers of facts and history while the 'New* World Order fought a highly successful war of maneuver ... with high speed visuals and a high-tech aesthetics of destruction." (AD: 176-77) While this point is, perhaps, debatable, Der Derian's further assertion, that a postmodern critique of the Gulf War mobilization would be somehow more effective, sounds less convincing. An alternative, late-modern tactic against total war was to war on totality itself, to delegitimize all sovereign truths based on class, nationalist, or internationalist metanarratives ... better strategically to play with apt critiques of the powerful new forces unleashed by cyberwar than to hold positions with antiquated tactics and nostalgic unities. (AD: 177-178; emphasis in original) The dichotomous choice presented in this excerpt is straightforward: one either indulges in total critique, delegitimizing all sovereign truths, or one is committed to "nostalgic," essentialist unities that have become obsolete and have been the grounds for all our oppressions. In

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 29

document.docDartmouth 2K9

30

offering this dichotomous choice, Der Derian replicates a move made by Chaloupka in his equally dismissive critique of the more mainstream nuclear opposition, the Nuclear Freeze movement of the early 1980s, that, according to him, was operating along obsolete lines, emphasizing "facts" and "realities" while a "postmodern" President Reagan easily outflanked them through an illusory Star Wars program. (See KN: chapter 4) Chaloupka centers this difference between his own supposedly total critique of all sovereign truths (which he describes as nuclear criticism in an echo of literary criticism) and the more partial (and issue-based) criticism of what he calls "nuclear opposition" or "antinuclearists" at the very outset of his book. (KN: xvi) Once again, the unhappy choice forced upon the reader is to join Chaloupka in his total critique of all sovereign truths or be trapped in obsolete essentialisms. This leads to a disastrous politics, pitting groups that have the most in common (and need to unite on some basis to be effective) against each other. Both Chaloupka and Der Derian thus reserve their most trenchant critique for political groups that should, in any analysis, be regarded as the closest to them in terms of an oppositional politics and their desired futures. Instead of finding ways to live with these differences and to (if fleetingly) coalesce against the New Right, this fratricidal critique is politically suicidal. It obliterates the space for a political activism based on provisional and contingent coalitions, for uniting behind a common cause even as one recognizes that the coalition is comprised of groups that have very differing (and possibly unresolvable) views of reality. Moreover, it fails to consider the possibility that there may have been other, more compelling reasons for the "failure" of the Nuclear Freeze movement or anti-Gulf War movement Like many a worthwhile cause in our times, they failed to garner sufficient support to influence state policy. The response to that need not be a totalizing critique that delegitimizes all narratives. The blackmail inherent in the choice offered by Der Derian and Chaloupka, between total critique and "ineffective" partial critique, ought to be transparent. Among other things, it effectively militates against the construction of provisional or strategic essentialisms in our attempts to create space for an activist politics. In the next section, I focus more widely on the genre of critical international theory and its impact on such an activist politics.

JarvisTheir K assumes that postmodernists have a more pure vantage point than do positivists—they ignore that traditional IR theory does not exclude postmodernist ideasJarvis, 2K – Prof Philosophy @ U South Carolina (Darryl, Studies in International Relations, “International Relations and the Challenge of Postmodernism”, pg. 32-33)

The battle lines are thus drawn: a discipline that attempts to develop theory and knowledge in the pursuit of better understanding and, hopefully, better policy and better worlds; or a postmodern sensibility that calls for the end of International Relations amid a regime of word games , a diaspora of previous knowledge and understanding, and the pursuit of intertextuality and interpretivism. There is, to coin a postmodern phrase, a distinct change in the "structure of feeling" in the discipline, a growing sense of uncivil war as Kalevi Holsti calls it. "The objects of attack from the new methodologies/epistemologies are not likely to concede gracefully," notes Holsti, "that 2,500 years of the study of politics based on observation, classification, and comparison—the Aristotelian legacy— should be thrown out because Nietzsche and a few other continental philosophers of despair have declared that rationalism and empiricism are the sources of all that ails the world today."112 Nor, indeed, are postmodern adversaries likely to halt their campaign because of derision of their new intellectual luminaries. Attempts to reinvent or simply abolish International Relations thus persist. No longer is the discipline conceived in the image of exploration, observation, and investigation of the causes of things in the world, but reconceived as a project that attempts to change it. As Mark Hoffman notes, "The point of International Relations theory is not simply to alter the way we look at the world, but to alter the world. It must offer more than mere description and an account of current affairs. It must also offer us a significant choice and a critical analysis of the quality and

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 30

document.docDartmouth 2K9

31

direction of life."113 These comments, however, neglect our disciplinary history, assuming that better government and better worlds have not before been uppermost in the minds of theorists and practitioners alike, and that, somehow, postmodernists and critical theorists have a monopoly on this virtue. More pernicious, though, is the implication that scholarship in International Relations has had nefarious purposes, whereby thoughtful reflection based on observation, prudent comparison, and resignation to a life of books, readings, teaching, and, where possible, the conveyance of professional knowledge and advice to policy makers is responsible for causing our problems rather than merely elucidating them. Traditionalists now stand accused of "totalitarianism," their work of little substance, shallow, sterile, and prone to primitivism.114 For postmodernists the means to progress (conceived in nonteleological terms) lie in standing outside of this tradition and celebrating, instead, resistance to it, dissidence from it, and the deconstruction of it. The very purpose of scholarship, in other words, is transformed by postmodernists. Does one, as William Wallace notes (and Ralf Dahrendorf and David Martin before him), attend the London School of Economics for professional and scholarly training, or does one take up cloth at the "London School of Friars" as preacher, prophet, and Jesuit whose mission is earthy change in this life rather than salvation in the next?115 Reference to prior readings, of course, would show these antithetical themes to be perennial in International Relations, reflecting the epistemological dualism of our disciplinary ancestry, idealism and realism, or, as Edward Hallett Carr put it, "the inclination to ignore what was and what is in contemplation of what should be, and the inclination to deduce what should be from what was and what is."116 Postmodern discourse might thus reflect little more than a new neoidealist sentiment in International Relations, albeit one unaware of its own intellectual pedigree.

Feminist postmodernism pre-judges the failure of generalizing theories—leads to dogmatismJarvis, 2K – Prof Philosophy @ U South Carolina (Darryl, Studies in International Relations, “International Relations and the Challenge of Postmodernism”, pg. 166-167)

Politically, progressives obviously see a danger in this type of discourse and, from a social scientific perspective, understand it to be less than rigorous. Generalizing, as with theorizing, for example, has fallen victim to postmodern feminist reactions against methodological essentialism and the adoption of what Jane Martin calls the instillation of false difference into identity discourse. By reacting against the assumption that "all individuals in the world called 'women' were exactly like us" (i.e. white, middle class, educated, etc.), feminists now tend "a priori to give privileged status to a predetermined set of analytic categories and to affirm the existence of nothing but difference." In avoiding the "pitfall of false unity," feminists have thus "walked straight into the trap of false difference."107 Club words now dominate the discourse. Essentialism, ahistoricism, universalism, and androcentrism, for example, have become the "prime idiom[s] of intellectual terrorism and the privileged instrument[s] of political orthodoxy."108 While sympathetic to the cause, even feminists like Jane Martin are critical of the methods that have arisen to circumvent the evils of essentialism, characterizing contemporary feminist scholarship as imposing its own "chilly climate" on those who question the methodological proclivity for difference and historicism. Postmodern feminists, she argues, have fallen victim to compulsory historicism, and by "rejecting one kind of essence talk but adopting another," have followed a course "whose logical conclusion all but precludes the use of language."109 For Martin, this approaches a "dogmatism on the methodological level that we do not countenance in other contexts. ... It rules out theories, categories, and research projects in advance; prejudges the extent of difference and the nonexistence of similarity."110 In all, it speaks to a methodological trap that produces many of the same problems as before, but this time in a language otherwise viewed as progressive, sensitive to the particularities of identity and gender, and destructive of conventional boundaries in disciplinary knowledge and theoretical endeavor.

Postmodernism makes itself politically irrelevantJarvis, 2K – Prof Philosophy @ U South Carolina (Darryl, Studies in International Relations, “International Relations and the Challenge of Postmodernism”, pg. 31-32)

Such self-imposed closure from the world of policy and a willingness to ridicule those who dare to dabble in its murky

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 31

document.docDartmouth 2K9

32waters is indicative of postmodern perspectives that tend increasingly toward scholasticism. Wallace defines this as a condition that develops when "practitioners shift from attempts to address common questions from different perspectives to competition among different 'schools' in which each multiplies definitions and explanations, develops its own deliberately obscure terminology, and concentrates much of its efforts on attacking the methods and terminology of competing groups."111 Much debate in International Relations is of this nature—obtuse, terminologically confusing, and antagonistic. Postmodern discourse, however, has perhaps perfected this art, developing its own intellectual idioms and nomenclature in an attempt to dismantle competing modernist schools and the theories associated with them. Calls for deconstruction, the celebration of estrangement from the mainstream, and the abandonment of intellectual precepts associated with Enlightenment thought are all uniform in their attempt to reduce to rubble International Relations and start afresh.

KurasawaJust because we can’t predict the future with total certainty does not mean that we cannot make educated guesses. And, scenario planning is key to making responsible choices. We are obligated to take care of the planet if we have a significant role to play. Kurasawa, 04 (Professor of Sociology, York University of Toronto, Fuyuki, Constellations Volume 11, No 4, 2004).

A radically postmodern line of thinking, for instance, would lead us to believe that it is pointless, perhaps even harmful, to strive for farsightedness in light of the aforementioned crisis of conventional paradigms of historical analysis. If, contra teleological models, history has no intrinsic meaning, direction, or endpoint to be discovered through human reason, and if, contra scientistic futurism, prospective trends cannot be predicted without error, then the abyss of chronological inscrutability supposedly opens up at our feet. The future appears to be unknowable, an outcome of chance. Therefore, rather than embarking upon grandiose speculation about what may occur, we should adopt a pragmatism that abandons itself to the twists and turns of history; let us be content to formulate ad hoc responses to emergencies as they arise. While this argument has the merit of underscoring the fallibilistic nature of all predictive schemes, it conflates the necessary recognition of the contingency of history with unwarranted assertions about the latter’s total opacity and indeterminacy. Acknowledging the fact that the future cannot be known with absolute certainty does not imply abandoning the task of trying to understand what is brewing on the horizon and to prepare for crises already coming into their own. In fact, the incorporation of the principle of fallibility into the work of prevention means that we must be ever more vigilant for warning signs of disaster and for responses that provoke unintended or unexpected consequences (a point to which I will return in the final section of this paper). In addition, from a normative point of view, the acceptance of historical contingency and of the self-limiting character of farsightedness places the duty of preventing catastrophe squarely on the shoulders of present generations. The future no longer appears to be a metaphysical creature of destiny or of the cunning of reason, nor can it be sloughed off to pure randomness. It becomes, instead, a result of human action shaped by decisions in the present – including, of course, trying to anticipate and prepare for possible and avoidable sources of harm to our successors. Combining a sense of analytical contingency toward the future and ethical responsibility for it, the idea of early warning is making its way into preventive action on the global stage.

ChernoffPredictions key to effective policymakingChernoff 05 – Harvey Picker Professor International Relations and Director of the International Relations Program at Colgate University (Fred, “The Power of International Theory: Reforging the link to foreign policy-making through scientific enquiry”, p. 9)

Even though many of these authors hope that IR theory can lead to ‘human emancipation’, their meta-theory undercuts its ability to do so. This trend in the theoretical literature in IR severs the link

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 32

document.docDartmouth 2K9

33

between IR theory and any significant ability to aid policy-makers to bring about emancipation or any other foreign policy goal. If they do not leave room for rationally grounded expectations about the future, that is, scientific-style prediction, then it will be impossible to formulate policies that can be expected to achieve various aims, including the emancipation of oppressed groups. Without the ability to say that a given action option has a higher probability than any of the other options of achieving the objective, e.g., a greater degree of emancipation of the target group, these theorists cannot recommend courses of action to achieve their desired goals. The loss of this essential capability has been largely overlooked by constructivists and reflectvists in the IR literature. All policy decisions are attempts to influence or bring about some future state of affairs. Policy-making requires some beliefs about the future, whether they are called ‘expectations’, ‘predictions’, ‘forecasts’ or ‘prognostications’. The next step in the argument is to show how such beliefs can be justified.

GirouxCombining a focus on discursive power with political practice is the only way to ensure that the critique engages with the real world. Giroux, 6. Henry (Penn State Chair of Education and Cultural Studies), Dirty Democracy and States of Terrorism: The Politics of the New Authoritarianism

in the United States in Comparative Studies of South Asia Volume 26 Number 6, p 176-177.

Abstracted from the ideal of public commitment, the new authoritarianism represents a political and economic practice and form of militarism that loosen the connections among substantive democracy, critical agency, and critical education. In opposition to the rising tide of authoritarianism, educators across the globe must make a case for linking learning to progressive social change while struggling to pluralize and critically engage the diverse sites where public pedagogy takes place. In part, this suggests forming alliances that can make sure every sphere of social life is recognized as an important site of the political, social, and cultural struggle that is so crucial to any attempt to forge the knowledge, identifications, effective investments, and social relations that constitute political subjects and social agents capable of energizing and spreading the basis for a substantive global democracy. Such circumstances require that pedagogy be embraced as a moral and political practice, one that is directive and not dogmatic, an outgrowth of struggles designed to resist the increasing depoliticization of political culture that is the hallmark of the current Bush revolution. Education is the terrain where consciousness is shaped, needs are constructed, and the capacity for individual self-reflection and broad social change is nurtured and produced. Education has assumed an unparalleled significance in shaping the language, values, and ideologies that legitimize the structures and organizations that support the imperatives of global capitalism. Efforts to reduce it to a technique or methodology set aside, education remains a crucial site for the production and struggle over those pedagogical and political conditions that provide the possibilities for people to develop forms of agency that enable them individually and collectively to intervene in the processes through which the material relations of power shape the meaning and practices of their everyday lives. Within the current historical context, struggles over power take on a symbolic and discursive as well as a material and institutional form. The struggle over education is about more than the struggle over meaning and identity; it is also about how meaning, knowledge, and values are produced, authorized, and made operational within economic and structural relations of power. Education is not at odds with politics; it is an important and crucial element in any definition of the political and offers not only the theoretical tools for a systematic critique of authoritarianism but also a language of possibility for creating actual movements for democratic social change and a new biopolitics that affirms life rather than death, shared responsibility rather than shared fears, and engaged citizenship rather than the stripped-down values of consumerism. At stake here is combining symbolic forms and processes conducive to democratization with broader social contexts and the institutional formations of power itself. The key point here is to understand and engage educational and pedagogical practices from the

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 33

document.docDartmouth 2K9

34

point of view of how they are bound up with larger relations of power. Educators, students, and parents need to be clearer about how power works through and in texts, representations, and discourses, while at the same time recognizing that power cannot be limited to the study of representations and discourses, even at the level of public policy. Changing consciousness is not the same as altering the institutional basis of oppression; at the same time, institutional reform cannot take place without a change in consciousness capable of recognizing not only injustice but also the very possibility for reform, the capacity to reinvent the conditions and practices that make a more just future possible. In addition, it is crucial to raise questions about the relationship between pedagogy and civic culture, on the one hand, and what it takes for individuals and social groups to believe that they have any responsibility whatsoever even to address the realities of class, race, gender, and other specific forms of domination, on the other hand. For too long, the progressives have ignored that the strategic dimension of politics is inextricably connected to questions of critical education and pedagogy, to what it means to acknowledge that education is always tangled up with power, ideologies, values, and the acquisition of both particular forms of agency and specific visions of the future. The primacy of critical pedagogy to politics, social change, and the radical imagination in such dark times is dramatically captured by the internationally renowned sociologist Zygmunt Bauman. He writes, Adverse odds may be overwhelming, and yet a democratic (or, as Cornelius Castoriadis would say, an autonomous) society knows of no substitute for education and self-education as a means to influence the turn of events that can be squared with its own nature, while that nature cannot be preserved for long without "critical pedagogy"—an education sharpening its critical edge, "making society feel guilty" and "stirring things up" through stirring human consciences. The fates of freedom, of democracy that makes it possible while being made possible by it, and of education that breeds dissatisfaction with the level of both freedom and democracy achieved thus far, are inextricably connected and not to be detached from one another. One may view that intimate connection as another specimen of a vicious circle—but it is within that circle that human hopes and the chances of humanity are inscribed, and can be nowhere else.

ShivelyGateway issue— a prerequisite to educational claims. The neg has the burden of the rejoinderShively, 00 (Edward, Professor of Political Theory at Texas A&M Univ, Adolf, nqa, Ruth, Associate Professor of Political Science at Texas A&M, “Political Theory and Partisan Politics,” SUNY Press, pg 108-109 //ag)

The requirements given thus far are primarily negative. The ambiguists must say "no" to—they must reject and limit—some ideas and actions. In what follows, we will also find that they must say "yes" to some things. In particular, they must say "yes" to the idea of rational persuasion. This means, first, that they must recognize the role of agreement in political contest, or the basic accord that is necessary to discord. The mistake that the ambiguists make here is a common one. The mistake is in thinking that agreement marks the end of contest—that consensus kills debate. But this is true only if the agreement is perfect—if there is nothing at all left to question or contest. In most cases, however, our agreements are highly imperfect. We agree on some matters but not on others, on generalities but not on specifics, on principles but not on their applications, and so on. And this kind of limited agreement is the starting condition of contest and debate. As John Courtney Murray writes: We hold certain truths; therefore we can argue about them. It seems to have been one of the corruptions of intelligence by positivism to assume that argument ends when agreement is reached. In a basic sense, the reverse is true. There can be no argument except on the premise, and within a context, of agreement. (Murray 1960, 10) In other words, we cannot argue about something if we are not communicating: if we cannot agree on the topic and terms of argument or if we have utterly different ideas about what counts as evidence or good argument. At the very least, we must agree about what it is that is being debated before we can debate it. For instance, one cannot have an argument about euthanasia with someone who thinks euthanasia is a musical group. One cannot successfully stage a sit-in if one's target audience simply thinks everyone is resting or if those doing the sitting have no complaints. Nor can one demonstrate resistance to a policy if no one knows that it is a policy. In other words, contest is meaningless if there is a lack of agreement or communication about what is being contested. Resisters, demonstrators, and debaters must have some shared ideas about the subject and/or the terms of their disagreements. The participants and the target of a sit-in must share an understanding of the complaint at hand. And a demonstrator's audience must know what is being resisted. In short, the contesting of an idea presumes some agreement about what that idea is and how one might go about intelligibly contesting it. In other words, contestation rests on some basic agreement or harmony.

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 34

document.docDartmouth 2K9

35

ValbjornReps focus fails – dooms the alternativeValbjørn 4 [Morten, PhD Poli. Sci. @ Aarhus, “Culture Blind and Culture Blinded: Images of Middle Eastern Conflicts in International Relations,” in Middle East and Palestine: Global Politics and Regional Conflict, p. 67-8]

As mentioned before, the relational perspective is a critique of both the neglect of the issue of Otherness by the IR mainstream and the way in which proponents of an essentialist approach relate to the Other. For this reason, it would be natural to assume that proponents of this second attempt to "culturalize" the study of international relations would be particularly keen to address the question of how to acknowledge cultural diversity without committing the sins of orientalism. Indeed, this is also what Said is stressing in the introduction to Orientalism: The most important task of all would be to undertake studies in contemporary alternatives to Orientalism, to ask how one can study other cultures and peoples from a libertarian, or nonrepressive and non-manipulative perspective. (1995: 24) However, he then goes on to add that "these are all tasks left embarrassingly incomplete in this study" (Said, 1995: 24). Looking at other analyses based on a relational conception of culture, it becomes apparent that the latter remark is very telling for this kind of understanding of culture as a whole (e.g. Doty , 1993: 315). Despite a blank rejection of the universalism of IR mainstream and, at least in principle, a recognition of the existence of different Others who are not only projections of own fantasies and desires, in practice, proponents of this alternative approach nonetheless usually leave the question of how to address and approach the actual cultural Other unanswered. This might very well be an unintended outcome of the previously mentioned radical constructivism associated with this approach. Thus, by stressing how the representation of the Other is intimately related to the construction of identities or a subtle way of performing power, one risks being caught in a kind of epistemological and moral crisis, characterized by a nagging doubt about whether it really is possible to gain any knowledge of Others or if we are just projecting our own fantasies, and by a pronounced fear that our representations are silencing voices so that we unwittingly are taking part in a subtle performance of power (Hastrup, 1992: 54). In merely dealing with the relationship between the representer and his representations, these dilemmas can be "avoided." However, at the same time one writes off the opportunity to relate to cultural diversity as anything but discursive products of one's own fantasies and projections. This is precisely the critique that supporters of the relational understanding of culture have been facing. From this perspective, it appears less surprising that Said has had so much more to offer on the dynamics of Western representations of the Middle East than on real alternatives to the orientalist depiction of the region. Unfortunately, this second bid for a culturalistic approach to the study of international relations is not only aligned with a number of very welcome critical qualities that may enrich the study of international relations. It is also related to a problematic tendency to overreact when it comes to addressing the prevalent Blindness to the Self within IR mainstream and among subscribers to the essentialist conception of culture. Thus, aspirations of promoting a larger self consciousness in the study of international relation end up becoming self-centeredness, just as the attempt to promote a larger sensitivity toward the Other in reality becomes oversensitivity to saying anything substantial when it comes to actual Other. This is problematic, partly because we are left without any real idea as to how to approach actual Middle Eastern international relations rather than Western representations of these; and partly because there is the risk of losing sight of the material and very concrete consequences that specific representations may engender (Krishna, 1993). Also, the proponents of this second "culturalistic" alternative seem to be better at asking important and critical questions than at offering attractive answers.

OngPost-colonialism essentializes oppression and makes resistance impossible. Ong, 99 Aihwa Ong, Professor of Anthropology at UC Berkeley, Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logic of Transnationality, 1999, p. 33-34

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 35

document.docDartmouth 2K9

36

More broadly, postcolonial theorists focus on recovering the voices of subjects silenced by patriarchy and colonial rule (The Empire Writes Back is the title of one popular collection); they assume that all contemporary racial, ethnic, and cultural oppressions can all be attributed to Western colonialisms. American appropriations of postcolonial theory have created a unitary discourse of the postcolonial that refers to highly variable situations and conditions throughout the world; thus, Gayatri Spivak is able to talk about “the paradigmatic subaltern woman,” as well as “New World Asians (the old migrants) and New Immigrant Asians (often ‘model minorities’) being disciplinarized together?” Other postcolonial feminists also have been eager to seek structural similarities, continuities, conjunctures, and alliances between the postcolonial oppressions experienced by peoples on the bases of race, ethnicity, and gender both in formerly colonized populations in the third world and among immigrant populations in the United States, Australia, and England.16 Seldom is there any attempt to link these assertions of unitary postcolonial situations among diasporan subjects in the West to the historical structures of colonization, decolonization, and contemporary developments in particular non-Western countries. Indeed, the term postcolonial has been used to indiscriminately describe different regimes of economic, political, and cultural domination in the Americas, India, Africa, and other third-world countries where the actual historical experiences of colonialism have been very varied in terms of local culture, conquest, settlement, racial exploitation, administrative regime, political resistance, and articulation with global capitalism. In careless hands, postcolonial theory can represent a kind of theoretical imperialism whereby scholars based in the West, without seriously engaging the scholarship of faraway places, can project or “speak for” postcolonial situations elsewhere. Stuart Hall has warned against approaches that universalize racial, ethnic, and gender oppressions without locating the “actual integument of power...in concrete institutions.” A more fruitful strand of postcolonial studies is represented by subaltern scholars such as Partha Chatterjee, who has criticized the Indian national projects, which are based on Western models of modernity and bypass “many possibilities of authentic, creative, and plural development of social identities,” including the marginalized communities in Indian society. He suggests that an alternative imagination that draws on “narratives of community” would be a formidable challenge to narratives of capital. This brilliant work, however, is based on the assumption that both modernity and capitalism are universal forms, against which non-Western societies such as India can only mobilize “pre-existing cultural solidarities such as locality, caste, tribe, religious community, or ethnic identity.” This analytical opposition between a universal modernity and non-Western culture is rather old-fashioned it is as if Chatterjee believes the West is not present in Indian elites who champion narratives of the indigenous community. Furthermore, the concept of a universal modernity must be rethought when, as Arif Dirlik observes, “the narrative of capitalism is no longer the narrative of the history of Europe; non-European capitalist societies now make their own claims on the history of capitalism.”20 The loose use of the term “the postcolonial,” then, has had the bizarre effect of contributing to a Western tradition of othering the Rest; it suggests a postwar scheme whereby “the third world” was followed by “the developing countries,” which are now being succeeded by “the postcolonial.” This continuum seems to suggest that the further we move in time, the more beholden non-Western countries are to the forms and practices of their colonial past . By and large, anthropologists have been careful to discuss how formerly colonized societies have developed differently in relation to global economic and political dominations and have repositioned themselves differently vis-a-vis capitalism and late modernity. By specifying differences in history, politics, and culture, anthropologists are able to say how the postcolonial formation of Indonesia is quite different from that of India, Nicaragua, or Zaire.

Last printed 9/4/2009 07:00:00 PM 36