Tournament: Augustana | Round: Semis | Opponent: KCKCC CG | Judge: Short, Henry, Archer

The F word inherently conflates sexual behavior with rage –this creates a culture where it is difficult to distinguish violence from sex and sexual violence becomes normalized.

Schwyzer, 9

(Hugo Schwyzer, Gender studies professor at Pasadena College:
"Penetrate" v. "Engulf" and the multiple meanings of the "f" word: a note on feminist language, 4 November 2009)
In every women’s studies class I’ve taught here at PCC, and in many guest
AND
as part of building a more pleasurable, safe, just and egalitarian world

The "F" word embodies aggression inherit within all violent acts, this turns their impacts.  They should not be able to claim psychological violence as an impact and then perpetrate that same type of violence.
Hamer, 10
(Mary Hamer, 1/28/2010, Counter Currents, "Apology for the "F" word and war," http://www.countercurrents.org/hamer280110.htm)
APOLOGY: I apologize for the human cruelty of the "F" word,
AND
I apologize for this swear word 26 the harm it does to others.

Tournament: Augustana | Round: 4 | Opponent: Augustana OB | Judge: Hennigan

The affirmative isolates war as something that is only understood through or affected by policy institutions. The affirmative has constructed war scenarios that they believe they prevent but they haven’t questioned what created those wars in the first place.

Hillman 2004, James Hillman, internationally renowned psychologist, professor at University of Chicago and Yale, A Terrible love of War (Chapter 1: War is Normal, p3) AS
Fallen from the higher mind’s central contemplation, war tends to be examined piecemeal by
AND
theology of war’s deepest mind. That is the purpose of this book. 

War has become so normalized, so engrained in our psyche that it is impossible for us to imagine solutions to its horror. We have left war alone and unquestioned so much that we have forgotten its terrible imagery.

Hillman 2004, James Hillman, internationally renowned psychologist, professor at University of Chicago and Yale, A Terrible love of War (Chapter 1:War is Normal, p21-22) AS
To declare war "normal" does not eliminate the pathologies of behavior, the
AND
, more rats in the lab, and tax rebates for urban renewal.

The myth that peace is the result of ending war functions as a collective amnesia for the effects of war that allows continued repression of our desire for war. This is a fantasy, and an ignorant one as it means we will continue to repress our desire to make war.

Hillman, 4 (James, retired Director of the Jung Institute, "A Terrible Love of War", The Penguin Press, ISBN 1-59420-011-4-http://debatecoaches.org/wiki/index.php?title=Special:BookSources/1594200114, pgs 3o-31)
When Neville Chamberlain and his umbrella returned from Munich in 1938 after utterly failing to
AND
dead anesthetized by that major syndrome of the public psyche: "peace."

War is the articulation of individual psychic repressions via state mediated politics.  In attempts to create unity, a polity necessarily creates an enemy other that must be destroyed.  This happens at the level of the imagination and means that new enemies and new wars will always be created.  This is a never-ending cycle – their impacts are inevitable. They don’t solve war – they just create more war.

Hillman, 4 (James, retired Director of the Jung Institute, "A Terrible Love of War", The Penguin Press, ISBN 1-59420-011-4-http://debatecoaches.org/wiki/index.php?title=Special:BookSources/1594200114, pgs 24-27)
War certainly does rely upon the individual’s repressions and/or aggressions, pleasure in
AND
that process from the intolerable through the barely endurable to the merely normal. 

The alternative is to psychologically enter into war. Once we sympathetically imagine the phenomenon of war we can understand our irrational and complete love for it. Only then can we begin to know prevention of further wars or total peace.

Hillman 2004, James Hillman, internationally renowned psychologist, professor at University of Chicago and Yale, A Terrible love of War (Chapter 1: War is Normal, p1-2) AS
We can never prevent war or speak sensibly of peace and disarmament unless we enter
AND
burning and its aftermath are unimaginable, their cause, war, is not

Tournament: Augustana | Round: Finals | Opponent: KCKCC FG | Judge: Short, Archer, Girouard

The affirmative approaches identities from the perspective of intersectionality, identity is expressed in a set of characteristics across some matrix of determinability. This freeze-frame taxonomizing opens identity politics to cooption.

Puar, 2012. (Jasbir, Prof of women’s and gender studies at Rutgers). "’I would rather be a cyborg than a goddess’: Becoming-Intersectional in Assemblage Theory." philoSOPHIA. 2.1.
Project Muse. ZDS

There’s obviously much more to say about such an example; certainly one can note
AND
roadmaps of precisely these not quite fully understood relations between discipline and control.

Western legal strategies to regulate warfare are rooted in the human-nonhuman distinction that values some lives over others and informs what counts as acceptable tactics of war.  The aff’s promotion of species differentiation is an endorsement of violence that ensures the plan will fail.

Deckha, 10 (Maneesha, Associate Professor at the University of Victoria Faculty of Law in Victoria, Canada. ¶ Professor Deckha’s research interests include critical animal studies, intersectionality, feminist analysis of law, law ¶ and culture, animal law, and bioethics, The Subhuman as a Cultural Agent of Violence, Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 2010, http://www.criticalanimalstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/JCAS-Special-Issue-Women-of-Color-November-FINAL-2010.pdf-http://www.criticalanimalstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/JCAS-Special-Issue-Women-of-Color-November-FINAL-2010.pdf, p.42-43)
The resonance of the subhuman figure may also be found in western ¶ jurisprudence relating
AND
¶ practices, the subhuman figure is critical to producing violence against humans.

And, the end point of their epistemology is a liberation exclusive to humans. Their concept of politics is always closed off to the non-human. This is their solvency author.

Henze 2000
Brent R.Henze 2000 "Who Says Who Says?: The Epistemological Grounds for Agency in Liberatory Political Projects." Found in Reclaiming Identity: Realist theory and the predicament of postmodernism. Edited by Paula Moya and Michael Hames-Garcia

¶ AGENCY IN EPISTEMIC PRIVILEGE¶ In this chapter I make an argument about some
AND
with become better able to represent their members in political struggles against oppression.

Categories of identity are best interpreted as events, or encounters between bodies rather than simply the attributes of subjects.

Puar, 2012. (Jasbir, Prof of women’s and gender studies at Rutgers). "I would rather be a cyborg than a goddess": Becoming-Intersectional in Assemblage Theory. philoSOPHIA. 2.1. Project Muse.  ZDS

"Assemblage" is actually an awkward translation of the French term agencement. The
AND
eluding certain simplistic conceptions concerning class struggle. (Guattari 2009, 26)

Identities as constructed by the affirmative always precede political engagement and limit out successful, radical politics. Homonationalism proves the ability of normative power to selectively incorporate perspectives to protect its hegemonic power.

Ruffolo, 2009. (David, lecturer at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education). Post-Queer Politics. ZDS

Foucault’s question why must one govern is central to Butler’s earlier work that troubles discourses
AND
always precedes the subject and therefore limits its potential to be thought otherwise.

Correlationist ontology is the root of all violence and ecological destruction—we must recognize the ontologies of the object to understand the world.

Bryant 2012
Levi R. Bryant, author of Difference and Givenness: Deleuze’s Transcendental Empiricism and the Ontology of Immanence, co-editor of the forthcoming The Speculative Turn with Nick Srnicek and Graham Harman, and author of a number of articles on Deleuze, Badiou, Zizek, Lacan, and political theory, The Stakes of SR/NFM/OOO/Onticology: Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Wolves? June 5, http://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/2012/06/05/the-stakes-of-srnfmoooonticology-whos-afraid-of-the-big-bad-wolves/-http://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/2012/06/05/the-stakes-of-srnfmoooonticology-whos-afraid-of-the-big-bad-wolves/

By SR I mean "speculative realism", by "NFM" new materialist feminism
AND
very much the spirit of what’s unfolding with the new materialisms and realisms.

The alternative is to reject the affirmative’s vertical ontology and embrace a flat ontology. Our approach is key to decentering the human from ontology and recognizing that contribution that non-humans can make. Only when we start form the perspective of becoming can we resist the taxonomizing of identity in favor of a politics of unintelligibility that communicates resistance.

Bryant 2012
Levi R. Bryant, author of Difference and Givenness: Deleuze’s Transcendental Empiricism and the Ontology of Immanence, co-editor of the forthcoming The Speculative Turn with Nick Srnicek and Graham Harman, and author of a number of articles on Deleuze, Badiou, Zizek, Lacan, and political theory , " Flat Ontology/Flat Ethics" Larval Subjects, June 1 2012, http://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/2012/06/01/flat-ontologyflat-ethics/-http://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/2012/06/01/flat-ontologyflat-ethics/

Returning to the questions of an earlier post-http://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/2012/05/29/ethics-and-politics-what-are-you-asking/, it seems to me that perhaps
AND
other words, flat ontology rejects the anthropocentrism implicit in most contemporary theory.