Tournament: Shirley | Round: 3 | Opponent: Idaho State Doty-Ivanovic | Judge: Peters

Body Link (if in 1AC or CX)

The idea that we possess our bodies affirms a long history of western thought that concludes in the doctrine of possessive individualism that makes slavery possible.

Peterson ’7 Christopher Peterson visiting assistant prof. of literature @ Claremont McKenna College Kindred Specters: Death, Mourning, and American Affinity pg 38-40
Claiming that the master projects his body onto the slave, Butler implies that the
AND
body is his own does that body become¶ available for its denial.
?

Alterity DA

You posit  an originary that effaces otherness by reducing them to the same.

Peterson ’7 Christopher Peterson visiting assistant prof. of literature @ Claremont McKenna College Kindred Specters: Death, Mourning, and American Affinity pg 81
The novel thus centers on a primal scene of infanticide that it can never finally
AND
for the paradoxical possibility¶ that we can never finally get it entirely.
?

Asserting the Body

The affirmation of the body reduces the oppressed to the status of a mere thing.

Peterson ’7 Christopher Peterson visiting assistant prof. of literature @ Claremont McKenna College Kindred Specters: Death, Mourning, and American Affinity pg 58-59
That Sandy-as-wood remains sentient despite his uncontainability raises the question of
AND
logic that¶ reduces the slave to the status of mere thing?33

Irigaray – A2: Sexual Difference 1st
The exclusive focus on sexual difference prevents social change – exclusion of racial and colonial difference ? melancholia, self-hatred and the creation of a racialized other whom violence can be enacted upon
Flax 4 Dep’t of Poli Sci Howard University Jane Signs Chicago Journals
Thus, I want to press the question, what happens when we complicate psychoanalysis
AND
forms of racial "identity" with an almost unbearable but unspeakable melancholia.

The attempt to gain entry to the symbolic without acknowledging other categories of difference repeats the repression and power structures that they criticize
Flax 4 Dep’t of Poli Sci Howard University Jane Signs Chicago Journals
To theorize entrance into the symbolic without specifying its raced and heterosexed demands simply repeats
AND
psychic burden, so Nair suggests that this applies to postcoloniality as well.

Their argument relies on a dangerous binaries – there are other differences which produce commonalities of experience
Silverman, 88 (Kaja – Rhetoric Department and Film Studies @ University of California, Berkeley, The Acoustic Mirror: The Female Voice in Psychoanalysis and Cinema, p. 148)
Finally, Irigaray relies heavily upon binary opposition, itself a powerful form of symmetry
AND
want to lay out those assumptions in some detail before returning to Irigaray.

Irigaray reduces the feminine to bodily sex, removing the mind to something "out there"

Silverman, 88 (Kaja – Rhetoric Department and Film Studies @ University of California, Berkeley, The Acoustic Mirror: The Female Voice in Psychoanalysis and Cinema, p. 147-8)
Irigaray fails, in addition, to distinguish between sexuality and the body, treating
AND
feminism has anything to gain from buying into a myth of sexual immediacy.  
Irigaray fails to distinguish between sexuality and the body – dangerously blockades the feminist movement
Silverman, 88 (Kaja – Rhetoric Department and Film Studies @ University of California, Berkeley, The Acoustic Mirror: The Female Voice in Psychoanalysis and Cinema, p. 147-8)
Irigaray fails, in addition, to distinguish between sexuality and the body, treating
AND
feminism has anything to gain from buying into a myth of sexual immediacy. 

Perm

Undecidability is better than fixedness – Their alt presupposes an autoimmune community of identifiably lesbian bodies that become impervious to contestation

Oliver 9 (Kelly, "Sexual Difference, Animal Difference: Derrida and Difference ’’Worthy of Its Name’’", http://research.uvu.edu/albrecht-crane/3090/OliverSexualDifference.pdf)
Before we turn back to the human–animal opposition, it will be helpful
AND
, democracy,¶ and most importantly for my purposes here, difference itself.

Their standpoint argument implies a form of coercive authenticity that demonstrates exactly what’s wrong with the notion of community

Mollow 4 (Anna, published essays about feminism, queerness, disability, and chronic illness in the Disability Studies Reader, Women’s Studies Quarterly, Social Text Online, and other journals. She is the coeditor of Sex and Disability, http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?cc=mqr;c=mqr;c=mqrarchive;idno=act2080.0043.218;rgn=main;view=text;xc=1;g=mqrg)
Identity politics movements also often demand the authentication of one’s identity. Consider, for
AND
operate through the entrenchment of de-sexualizing and disempowering definitions of disability.

Tournament: Shirley | Round: 6 | Opponent: Rutgers-Newark Smith-Randall | Judge: Kelsie

A2: Standpoint Epistemology

Their standpoint argument implies a form of coercive authenticity that demonstrates exactly what’s wrong with the notion of community

Mollow 4 (Anna, published essays about feminism, queerness, disability, and chronic illness in the Disability Studies Reader, Women’s Studies Quarterly, Social Text Online, and other journals. She is the coeditor of Sex and Disability, http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?cc=mqr;c=mqr;c=mqrarchive;idno=act2080.0043.218;rgn=main;view=text;xc=1;g=mqrg)**
Identity politics movements also often demand the authentication of one’s identity. Consider, for
AND
operate through the entrenchment of de-sexualizing and disempowering definitions of disability.

Their criticism of Derrida 26 philosophy in general presumes deconstruction has a stopping point – It doesn’t – We solve their metaphysics links

Roothaan 13 (Angela, "White Mythology revisited", assistant professor at the Free University Amsterdam, http://angelaroothaan.wordpress.com/about/) 
More than forty years have passed since the publication of Derrida’s essay on ’White
AND
Spinoza could still be optimistic about the positive, edifying role of philosophy.
Alterity DA: The assumption of an originary understanding among those that hold marginalized positions effaces otherness.
Peterson ’7 Christopher Peterson visiting assistant prof. of literature @ Claremont McKenna College Kindred Specters: Death, Mourning, and American Affinity pg 81
The novel thus centers on a primal scene of infanticide that it can never finally
AND
for the paradoxical possibility¶ that we can never finally get it entirely.

The attempt to incorporate the other is inevitable and necessary for ethics but it inevitably fails solving your impacts

Peterson ’7 Christopher Peterson visiting assistant prof. of literature @ Claremont McKenna College Kindred Specters: Death, Mourning, and American Affinity pg 73
As in the biblical sacrifice of Isaac, 124 marks a site where "pure
AND
the sign of a certain¶ respect for the alterity of the other.
?

Tournament: Shirley | Round: 1 | Opponent: Nevada Las Vegas Jallits-Saxe | Judge: Cheek

Cross apply justice outweighs from case.

Turn deconstruction is key to the material

Cheah Professor of Rhetoric UC-Berkeley 2008 Pheng diacritics 38.1-2 project muse
Although the impossible is not of the order of presence, it is not without relation to concrete actuality, since it constitutes it. Indeed, the impossible is curiously more material and real than concrete actuality. In his later writings, Derrida repeatedly insists on the fundamental reality of this impossible relation to or coming of the other.
The deconstruction of logocentrism, of linguisticism, of economism (of the proper,
AND
~. ~"As If It Were Possible" 367, trans. modified~
This impossible coming of the other is not utopian. It is a force of precipitation that is experienced as an eruption within the order of presence and that in turn forces the experiencing subject to act. The impossible, Derrida writes, "gives their very movement to desire, action, and decision: it is the very figure of the real. It has its hardness, closeness, and urgency" ~"Not Utopia" 131~.

The alternative creates a community of supposedly pure anti-capitalists vs. capitalists. This is deconstructable and will always efface otherness. Everyone sells out to some degree. You are reading of a laptops21

This means that the community of the alt is autoimmune and will inevitably destroy itself.

By limiting itself to pure anti-capitalists  it means no one can participate and the revolution devolves into show trials and summary executions as everyone tries to burnish their anti-capitalist credentials.

The only value of the alt is if it helps the other, but if the very discussion of the specter must be banished then the alt hollows itself out of all value. That’s Miller.

Turn: use value is always already haunted by exchangeability which is the very condition of capital – spectorial analysis is key to understand capitalism

Derrida ’6  ~originally published in 1993~ Jacques Derrida Specters of Marx Translated by Peggy Kamuf p 201-203
Without disappearing, use-value becomes, then, a sort of limit,
AND
value" which arises out of the specific social function of money. 30

?

Perm do both

Perm solves with alterity net benefit.

Cheah Professor of Rhetoric UC-Berkeley 2008 Pheng diacritics 38.1-2 project muse
In dialectical materialism, the process of actualizing material reality is part of the epigenesis
AND
, in the event-ness of the event" ~SM 63~.
Yet, despite the scarring, dislocation, and tearing that it inflicts on presence
AND
other as the same, it closes off the experience of radical alterity.

Perm do aff and all noncompetitive parts of the alt

?

The alt is a metaphysics of the material: Action is irreducibly intertwined with concepts, this is proven by the fact that nothing in the 1NC would meet their own threshold of material action. Every action involves a decision which is permeated by otherness. Only the aff makes action possible, That’s Mcquillian.

The attempt to banish the ghost causes war and totalitarianism
Derrida ’6  ~originally published in 1993~ Jacques Derrida Specters of Marx Translated by Peggy Kamuf p 130-31
To make fear, to make oneself fear. 4 To cause fear in the
AND
" process of the totalitarian society was also responding to the same panic.
We must, it seems to me, take such an hypothesis seriously. Later
AND
ideological phantasm since the critique of ideology itself was inspired by nothing else.
?

Tournament: Shirley | Round: 1 | Opponent: Nevada Las Vegas Jallits-Saxe | Judge: Cheek

AT Cede The Political

Your argument was once true but is now wrong.  Engaging politics through parties and the state no longer functions within the new media conditions of politics; deconstruction is key
Derrida ’6  ~originally published in 1993~ Jacques Derrida Specters of Marx Translated by Peggy Kamuf p 127-8
Here is perhaps one of the strange motifs we should talk about this evening:
AND
The hypothesis is that this mutation has already begun; it is irreversible.
?

The media is constantly deconstructing the distinction between public and private.  Hauntology is key to conceptualize the very condition of the political, and interpretations transform what they interpret.
Derrida ’6  ~originally published in 1993~ Jacques Derrida Specters of Marx Translated by Peggy Kamuf p 62-3
Besides the reasons just given, we will privilege this figure of conjuration for still
AND
verschieden interpretiert; es kommt aber drauf an, sie zu veriindern ~") .

Deconstruction can deconstruct the politic system

Mitchell ’7 W. J. T. Mitchell Professor of English and Art History at the University of Chicago "Picturing Terror: Derrida’s Autoimmunity" Critical Inquiry 33 (Winter 2007) 
The second objection is drawn from Derrida’s own account of revolutionary¶ violence as that
AND
bloodless deconstruction¶ of a political system—perhaps a Velvet Revolution.26
?

Tournament: Usc | Round: 8 | Opponent: West Georgia Ard-Muhammad | Judge: Antonucci, Ewing, Green, Paone, Schultz

2AC Identity

Perm do both

~insert link~ 

Alterity DA: The assumption of an originary understanding among those that hold marginalized positions effaces otherness.
Peterson ’7 Christopher Peterson visiting assistant prof. of literature @ Claremont McKenna College Kindred Specters: Death, Mourning, and American Affinity pg 81
The novel thus centers on a primal scene of infanticide that it can never finally
AND
for the paradoxical possibility¶ that we can never finally get it entirely.

Perm do the aff and all noncompetitive parts

?

Just because knowledge comes from marginalized groups doesn’t mean it is innocent from imposition on otherness. Deconstruction is necessary.

Haraway 88 (Donna, Feminist Studies 14(3), "Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective", 575-599, http://faculty.washington.edu/pembina/all_articles/Haraway1988.pdf)**
Many currents in feminism attempt to theorize grounds for trusting especially the vantage points of
AND
partial perspectives that the possibility of sustained, rational, objective inquiry rests.
?

The ideal of a debater in the policy community is imbued with whiteness— deconstructing it is key.
Dr. Shanara Reid-Brinkley ’12
~"The Dr. Shanara Reid-Brinkley Interview." Interview with Dr. Shanara Reid-Brinkley conducted by Scott Odekirk on 2/13/2012 at the University of Texas debate tournament. Shanara is the first black woman director of debate in the country, a professor of communications at Pitt, and a general goddess of knowledge. http://puttingthekindebate.com/2012/04/02/the-dr-shanara-reid-brinkley/-http://puttingthekindebate.com/2012/04/02/the-dr-shanara-reid-brinkley/~~
Dr. Reid-Brinkley: I know21 And, I’m so sad I
AND
you were successful, and your blackness had nothing to do with it.
?
               
Notions of community like the debate community fail to address racism and cause white people to consume the other while assuming they have made a space free of white supremacy.
Brimmer ’05
~Allison Brimmer, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Division of Humanities, Farquhar College of Arts and Sciences. "Investigating Affective Dimensions of Whiteness in the Cultural Studies Writing Classroom: Toward a Critical, Feminist, Anti-Racist Pedagogy." A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Department of English, College of Arts and Sciences, University of South Florida, June 3, 2005.~
We "eat the Other," fetishizing students of color as representations and proof of
AND
power of uncertainty by interrogating what we believe and assume to be true.
?
Most white people are afraid of losing their privilege so they don’t speak out. White people speaking out is key to break the taboo remove the motivation for maintaining white priveledge.
Johnson 99
(Lara, Oakland Abolitionist, April 1999, Volume 2, Number 2, "Zero Tolerance") T. Snider
On 17 December 1998, I attended an anti-Iraq-war rally outside
AND
, following the mantra of "Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity."

Deconstruction exposes the propaganda surrounding 9/11 and how it was the result of autoimmune US actions. It also allows reconciliation between Islam and the west through hospitality and forgiveness

Machowski ’11 Matthew Machowski Research Fellow at Queen Mary, University of London "Derrida and the Other Islam: In What Ways If at All, Does Derrida Provide For a New Perception of Islam in the West Post 9/11?" MidEast Journal http://www.matthewmachowski.com/2010/09/derrida-islam-9-11.html**
This article therefore attempts to deconstruct these ideas and indicate a variety of possible ’
AND
accurate, even if still ambiguous, reading of Islam in the West.

AT No Muslims Think This

Deconstruction is rooted in Islamic Sufi theology.

Machowski ’11 Matthew Machowski Research Fellow at Queen Mary, University of London "Derrida and the Other Islam: In What Ways If at All, Does Derrida Provide For a New Perception of Islam in the West Post 9/11?" MidEast Journal http://www.matthewmachowski.com/2010/09/derrida-islam-9-11.html**

This research also indicates that deconstruction is not alien to Islamic thinking but in fact
AND
, he also demonstrates their heterogeneity from the ’true’ Islam.¶ solution.

Multiple Islamic scholars agree with Derrida

Machowski ’11 Matthew Machowski Research Fellow at Queen Mary, University of London "Derrida and the Other Islam: In What Ways If at All, Does Derrida Provide For a New Perception of Islam in the West Post 9/11?" MidEast Journal http://www.matthewmachowski.com/2010/09/derrida-islam-9-11.html**

But these bombs and weapons, as indicated above, are the tools used only
AND
Ibn al-’Arabi, one of the greatest Islamic Sufis and philosophers.
Derrida and Ibn al-’Arabi share, what Almond calls, "the absolute
AND
form to two individuals, nor in a single form twice."~38~

Tournament: Ndt | Round: 1 | Opponent: Berkeley Sergent-Leventhal-Wimsatt | Judge: Kennedy, Najor, Olney

1AC Debate

The policy debate community is deconstructable. Its construction involves the impossible bridging of the gaps between different people. In this way, the notion of a policy debate community itself is dangerous because it is always an imaginary that is imposed on Others. Our argument is not that groups shouldn’t exist but that they should extend themselves toward otherness rather than closing themselves off.

Miller ’7 J. Hillis Miller prof of comparative lit and English at UCI Derrida Enisled¶ Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter 2007), pp. 248-276¶ The University of Chicago Press¶ URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511493**
"There Are Only Islands"¶ All of these authors, except perhaps Blanchot,
AND
beyond of this modern tradition, another border structure,¶ another shore."33
?

The actions of those attempting to preserve what they call the debate community are autoimmune. The attempt to preserve what they see as the pure state of debate sacrifices otherness. This occurs through arguments like framework that attempt to preserve a pure policy focus in debate.

This has not been the best year for just debate practices. But flagrant instances of injustice in the past should not lessen our attention to current injustices. Community construction activities are not always obvious. Those inflating speaker points at Harvard did not announce their intensions beforehand, but that inflation had a real impact on individual debaters.

The PRL meeting at Wake took place in secrecy, and its specter still haunts the activity. Will there be major national tournaments that adopt requirements for plans? Might I or someone else be judged by someone who upholds a notion of the debate community that does violence to them?

There is never a neutral reasonable individual who can represent the debate community in deciding if a certain conduct is acceptable because there can be no neutral and non-violent construction of a debate community.

Community construction practices in debate attempt to foreclose the contestation of the meaning of debate by otherness, which is precisely what makes debate valuable. Without this contestation debate loses its connection to alterity. The specters of otherness will always haunt any attempt to construct community. We should be open to these others rather than sacrifice them.

Miller ’7 J. Hillis Miller prof of comparative lit and English at UCI Derrida Enisled¶ Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter 2007), pp. 248-276¶ The University of Chicago Press¶ URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511493**
Derrida’s concept of ethics, on the contrary, as expressed, for example,¶
AND
, the space and time of a spectralizing messianicity¶ beyond all messianism."

Don’t get it wrong. This is not about us, nor is it about you. The central question for ethics should be the specter. We should direct our ethics towards the other that is not present.

Derrida ’6  ~originally published in 1993~ Jacques Derrida Specters of Marx Translated by Peggy Kamuf p xviii
If I am getting ready to speak at length about ghosts, inheritance, and
AND
to ask the question "where?" "where tomorrow?" "whither?"

?

Challenging the sacrifice of otherness is key to justice. The framing question should be ’is any alterity effaced by the construction of the debate community?’. If yes then the only ethical response is deconstruction.

Derrida 1995, dir d’etudes @ Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales Jacques, The Gift of Death  83-7
What is thus found at work in everyday discourse, in the exercise of justice
AND
the other, who becomes for his part nothing more than a murderer?
?

Justice is the foremost ethical concern and the only undeconstrucatble impact. We disturb the text of the policy debate community by reading it against itself. Deconstruction must be infinite because every act of interpretation is an imposition on otherness.

MacDonald Department of Political Studies, Queens University 1999 Eleanor Science 26 Society 63.2 proquest
In an unusually direct moment in his article, "Force of Law: The
AND
, Derrida uses the term "infinite critique" to describe his approach:
A deconstructive thinking, the one that matters to me here, has always pointed
AND
the other and for the event. (Derrida, 1994, 90.)
What this experience of "infinite critique" or this "motif" of deconstruction
AND
about authorial intention, to set the text adrift, as it were.
And why is this "justice"?
First, because of the "aporia" that it introduces - the sense of
AND
is a necessary violence for which deconstruction is the just or ethical response.
What is true, then (in the understanding of the world that Derrida provides through deconstruction), is inadequation, non-commensurability, disjointedness. The ethical response is a recognition of this unknowability, a suspicion of all self-certainty. The political response is one of a corresponding openness, a promise of "democracy-to come" (a promise which Derrida also assures us can never be wholly realizable in the present, in any present).
At stake here is the very concept of democracy as concept of a promise that
AND
modality of a living present (Derrida, 1994, 64-5.)

?

Our response to the stabilizing notion of policy should be one of deconstruction. Policy itself is a logo-rhetorical illusion that assumes the discrete stages of thought, politics, and law when all of these things are impossibly intertwined. Policy education is dominated by think tanks and academics wedded to a technocratic apparatus whose highest goal is to make it onto the news.

Mcquillan 08 (Derrida and Policy: Is Deconstruction Really a Social Science? Derrida Today)
In order for politics to be thinkable there must be some moment at which thought
AND
properly philosophical and properly a ’political science’, if such a thing exists.¶
?

Our refusal to provide a concrete political proposal that decides the undecidable in advance is precisely the point. We should deconstruct the Western model of law and ethics rather than attempt to prewrite the future.

Mcquillan 08 (Derrida and Policy: Is Deconstruction Really a Social Science? Derrida Today)
One might think that Derrida’s invocation of International Law in his later writings would represent
AND
be of no use to anyone, except as a policy of resistance.
Here is the rub, the moment that one begins to attempt a thought experiment
AND
as such is on the side of the unconditional rather than the sovereign.

?

The construction of the policy debate community cumulates in the herd that destroys itself in autoimmunity. It makes ethics impossible because our responsibility to otherness is always deferred to an imaginary community. It is only through being detached that we can act responsibly and ethically. Vote aff to detach from the notion of a policy debate community.

Miller ’7 J. Hillis Miller prof of comparative lit and English at UCI Derrida Enisled¶ Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter 2007), pp. 248-276¶ The University of Chicago Press¶ URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511493**
How can these two features of the late Derrida’s thought be reconciled? What bridge
AND
-destructive autoimmune community¶ than of Williams’s community of kindness and mutuality.
?

Deconstruction can never be accounted for within the traditional political order prescisly because it wishes to deconstruct such orders and center the spectral, which the metaphysics of a material politics of action always tries to exorcise.

McQuillan, 2k9 (Martin, MA, PhD, Glasgow, Deconstruction After 9/11, Routledge, pg. 100-103)

If, far from fallingithin the ambit of the New International, anti-capitalism
AND
the Poujadists to the anti-capitalists, have always attempted to foreclose.

Tournament: Shirley | Round: 1 | Opponent: Nevada Las Vegas Jallits-Saxe | Judge: Cheek

1AC Debate

Every community is always constructed on the basis of the positing of some stabilizing notion that is itself deconstructable. The construction of communities involves the impossible bridging of the gaps between different people. In this way, the notion of community itself is dangerous because it is always an imaginary that is imposed on Others. Rather than guarding community by clinging to these notions we should give unconditional hospitality to the other.

Miller ’7 J. Hillis Miller prof of comparative lit and English at UCI Derrida Enisled¶ Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter 2007), pp. 248-276¶ The University of Chicago Press¶ URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511493**
"There Are Only Islands"¶ All of these authors, except perhaps Blanchot,
AND
beyond of this modern tradition, another border structure,¶ another shore."33
?

The actions of those attempting to preserve what they call the debate community are autoimmune. The attempt to preserve what they see as the pure state of debate sacrifices otherness. This occurs through arguments like framework that attempt to preserve a pure policy focus in debate.

It also occurs through exclusionary practices like Eli and Chris not getting a round robin invite despite winning the NDT the previous year and judges deciding to raise their speaker points for teams that fit their ideal of debate community at Harvard while lowering the points they gave teams whose otherness threatened this notion.

What these self-proclaimed defenders of debate do not realize is that these practices are destroying debate itself. The contestation of the meaning of debate by otherness is precisely what makes debate valuable. Without this contestation debate loses its connection to alterity. The specters of otherness will always haunt any attempt to construct community. We should be open to these others rather than sacrifice them.

Miller ’7 J. Hillis Miller prof of comparative lit and English at UCI Derrida Enisled¶ Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter 2007), pp. 248-276¶ The University of Chicago Press¶ URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511493**
Derrida’s concept of ethics, on the contrary, as expressed, for example,¶
AND
, the space and time of a spectralizing messianicity¶ beyond all messianism."

Don’t get it wrong. This is not about us, nor is it about you. The central question for ethics should be the specter. We should direct our ethics towards the other that is not present.

Derrida ’6  ~originally published in 1993~ Jacques Derrida Specters of Marx Translated by Peggy Kamuf p xviii
If I am getting ready to speak at length about ghosts, inheritance, and
AND
to ask the question "where?" "where tomorrow?" "whither?"

?

Challenging the sacrifice of otherness is key to justice. The framing question should be ’is any alterity effaced by the construction of the debate community?’. If yes then the only ethical response is deconstruction.

Derrida 1995, dir d’etudes @ Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales Jacques, The Gift of Death  83-7
What is thus found at work in everyday discourse, in the exercise of justice
AND
the other, who becomes for his part nothing more than a murderer?
?

Justice is the foremost ethical concern and the only undeconstrucatble impact. We disturb the text of the debate community by reading it against itself. Deconstruction must be infinite because every act of interpretation is an imposition on otherness.

MacDonald Department of Political Studies, Queens University 1999 Eleanor Science 26 Society 63.2 proquest
In an unusually direct moment in his article, "Force of Law: The
AND
, Derrida uses the term "infinite critique" to describe his approach:
A deconstructive thinking, the one that matters to me here, has always pointed
AND
the other and for the event. (Derrida, 1994, 90.)
What this experience of "infinite critique" or this "motif" of deconstruction
AND
about authorial intention, to set the text adrift, as it were.
And why is this "justice"?
First, because of the "aporia" that it introduces - the sense of
AND
is a necessary violence for which deconstruction is the just or ethical response.
What is true, then (in the understanding of the world that Derrida provides through deconstruction), is inadequation, non-commensurability, disjointedness. The ethical response is a recognition of this unknowability, a suspicion of all self-certainty. The political response is one of a corresponding openness, a promise of "democracy-to come" (a promise which Derrida also assures us can never be wholly realizable in the present, in any present).
At stake here is the very concept of democracy as concept of a promise that
AND
modality of a living present (Derrida, 1994, 64-5.)

?

Our response to the stabilizing notion of policy should be one of deconstruction. Policy itself is a logo-rhetorical illusion that assumes the discrete stages of thought, politics, and law when all of these things are impossibly intertwined. Policy education is dominated by think tanks and academics wedded to a technocratic apparatus whose highest goal is to make it onto the news.

Mcquillan 08 (Derrida and Policy: Is Deconstruction Really a Social Science? Derrida Today)
In order for politics to be thinkable there must be some moment at which thought
AND
properly philosophical and properly a ’political science’, if such a thing exists.¶
?

Our refusal to provide a concrete political proposal that decides the undecidable in advance is precisely the point. We should deconstruct the Western model of law and ethics rather than attempt to prewrite the future.

Mcquillan 08 (Derrida and Policy: Is Deconstruction Really a Social Science? Derrida Today)
One might think that Derrida’s invocation of International Law in his later writings would represent
AND
be of no use to anyone, except as a policy of resistance.
Here is the rub, the moment that one begins to attempt a thought experiment
AND
as such is on the side of the unconditional rather than the sovereign.

?

Even if the notion of debate community is deconstructable, why not cling to the code of the resolution and make the best of it? It is because there is only one kind of community, the herd that destroys itself in autoimmunity. Not only do we lose ourselves but we lose others as well. It is only through being detached that we can act responsibly and ethically. Vote aff to detach from the notion of a debate community.

Miller ’7 J. Hillis Miller prof of comparative lit and English at UCI Derrida Enisled¶ Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter 2007), pp. 248-276¶ The University of Chicago Press¶ URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511493**
How can these two features of the late Derrida’s thought be reconciled? What bridge
AND
-destructive autoimmune community¶ than of Williams’s community of kindness and mutuality.
?

Deconstruction can never be accounted for within the traditional political order prescisly because it wishes to deconstruct such orders and center the spectral, which the metaphysics of a material politics of action always tries to exorcise.

McQuillan, 2k9 (Martin, MA, PhD, Glasgow, Deconstruction After 9/11, Routledge, pg. 100-103)

If, far from fallingithin the ambit of the New International, anti-capitalism
AND
the Poujadists to the anti-capitalists, have always attempted to foreclose.

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 1 | Opponent: Missouri State HR | Judge: Kelly Winfrey
Living in the truth is key
Glaser 5
(John S., “Living Within the Truth”, CL)

One purpose of ideology... ...outcome was so uncertain.

Our language of criticism is a radical reclamation of democratic hope as a language of criticism and agency that overtakes the currents of cynicism and violence in American political culture. Their ideology quashes a culture of questioning
Giroux 13
(Henry, “Hope in a Time of Permanent War”, 9.4.13, http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/18578-hope-in-a-time-of-permanent-war, CL)

The current limits of the... ...social order can be constructed.           

Don't tell me what to do MOM
Butler 4
(Maxine Elliot Professor in Rhetoric and Comparative Literature at UC-Berkeley 2004 Judith Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence, page xix-xvi, GM)

Dissent and debate depend... ...about the effects of war.

Tournament: Kentucky RR | Round: 2 | Opponent: Kentucky | Judge: Repko
Status quo drone policy is a form of targeted killing that makes murder as commonplace as playing a flight simulator – this routinizes killing and depoliticizes bureaucratic murder
Asaro 13 (Peter M., School of Media Studies at The New School, NY, published in Social Semiotics 2013, Routledge Taylor and Francis Group, “The Labor of Surveillance and Bureaucratized Killing: New Subjectivities of Military Drone Operators”, CL)
There has been a massive increase … attempts to describe this work.

Drones distance operators, policymakers, and the public from the ethical consequences of murder – the kill chain produces an internal distance between the self and the consequences of individual decisions
Delmont 13 (Matt, published in American Quarterly by Johns Hopkins University, Vol. 65 No. 1, 193-202, “Drone Encounters: Noor Behram, Omer Fast, and Visual Critiques of Drone Warfare”, March 2013, CL)
While aspects of the narrative… visual superiority drones claim.

When the State can kill anyone suspected of being an immanent security threat there can be no politics – targeted killing is the exercise of sovereign power that makes murder the currency of social life
Reddy 3 (Rupa, researcher at the Centre for Capital Punishment Studies, based at the School of Law in the University of Westminster, has multiple degrees in law, “The Changing Face of the Killing State”, 2003, http://www.westminster.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/43403/Occasional_2.pdf, CL)
State killing symbolizes … the currency of social life.

Politics at a distance is hollow – the model of violence created by modern war practices erases ethical authorship and makes violence inevitable
Bauman 95 (Zygmunt, Emeritus professor of Sociology at the University of Leeds, “Life in Fragments: Essays in Postmodern Morality, p. 195-96, CL)
Such conditions … bearers of moral significance.

This mentality of war generates vicious circles of violence that transforms US interventionism into cruise missile diplomacy. This disengages the public from war weariness, making war politics into a shell game
Singer 9 (Peter W., Director of the Center for 21st Century Security and Intelligence at Brookings, Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy, “Robots at War: The New Battlefield”, Winter 2009, http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2009/01/robots-at-war-singer, CL)
Nations often go to war … weapons substituting for thunderbolts.

This expanding regime of violence is just the tip of the iceberg – the American defense establishment is on track to entirely dehumanize warfare with nuclear robotics that could end all life on earth.
Chester 9 (Mitch, attorney and civic activist, “Failsafe Revisited… Psychology and Robotic Delivery of the Bomb”, 12.26.09, http://sharedemergency.wordpress.com/2009/12/26/failsafe-revisited-psychology-and-robotic-delivery-of-the-bomb/, CL)
It’s not too soon to ask if aircraft… was too late to contain.

The authority to kill is not ethically distinct from murder – the only basis for value in life is a universal solidarity against death that refuses to accept any truth or judgment above life itself
Camus 57 (Albert, French-Algerian rebel and pro-lifer, “Reflections on the Guillotine”, Resistance, Rebellion, and Death, translated from the French and with an introduction by Justin O’Brien, published 1957, pg. 169-174, CL)
Bernard Fallot of the Masuy gang… reasons of realism.

Chris and I affirm that the war powers authority of the President of the United States should be substantially restricted in the area of so-called targeted killing.

In the moment of our refusal of the authority to kill we find existential rebellion – this affirms the empathetic solidarity of the human condition that ties life together and refuses that an agent should be vested with the authority to murder
Camus 56 (Albert, French-Algerian rebel and pro-lifer, “The Rebel”, published 1956, from The Fastidious Assassin’s chapter, CL)
Far from this source of life … is a protest against death.

Transcendent politics is nihilism that puts resentment in place of revolutionary love – without claiming to solve anything the 1AC embodies an ante-political way of acting and thinking that can confront its problems. All that remains to us is to rebel on behalf of those who can still be saved
Camus 56 (Albert, French-Algerian rebel and pro-lifer, “The Rebel”, published 1956, Beyond Nihilism, CL)
There does exist… and destiny of all men.

We must refuse the terms of politics when they’re built on fear – before anything else we must decide whether or not murder is legitimate
Camus 46 (Albert, avid pro-lifer, “Neither Victims nor Exeuctioners”, Combat, ‘The Century of Fear’, 11.19.46, http://adamgomez.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/camus-neither-victims-nor-executioners.pdf, CL)
The seventeenth century was … questions and answer them."

The 1AC’s decision against murder re-politicizes the individual in relation to power and political violence – only this act of living in the truth produces praxis
Otruba 12 (Alexander P., Visiting Scholar and Lecturer in Political Theory at San Francisco State University. “A Case for Applied Political Theory: Popescu’s Political Action in Vaclav Havel’s Thought”, muse.jhu.edu/journals/theory_and_event/v016/16.1.otruba.htmlmuse.jhu.edu/journals/theory_and_event/v016/16.1.otruba.html, CL)
Delia Popescu’s sets… of Western democracy” (55).

Tournament: Shirley | Round: 1 | Opponent: Nevada Las Vegas Jallits-Saxe | Judge: Cheek

Your interpretation is an attempt to create community

Your interpretation is the deconstructable structure on which you posit this community, but you cannot bridge the gaps there is no debate community. Lots of teams fall outside your interpretation. Because of this unbridgeable gap all communities are autoimmune, which means your interp is destined to implode on itself

The language of your interp is meaningless

Who’s to say what we do is not a policy? Policy is logo-rhetorical illusion, nothing could be more vauge, why is the USFG key?

Your division of policy action vs the aff assumes metaphysics of material action when thought, politics and law are impossibly intertwined, Mquillian

Turing debate into a community reduces us to member of a herd which makes ethics impossible. Alterity becomes merely a predictable object for us to reflect our arguments off of. We become not responsible for how we act because our actions are  predetermined by the community.

The only ethical option is hospitality on an individual level that’s Miller.

Not having previously agreed ground is good.

Hicks ’2 Darrin Hicks is Associate Professor of Communication at the University of Denver in Denver, Colorado. "The Promise(s) of Deliberative Democracy Rhetoric 26 Public Affairs 5.2 (2002) 223-260 Project Muse
The very possibility of argumentation, it seems, trades upon the existence of some
AND
-spirited actors that makes it so valuable for theories of deliberative democracy.

Everyone comes prepared to debate about debate. Proven by theory arguments against counter plans. Every round has an implicit resolution that we are and should be debating it.

Alterity DA

Your interpretation requires the sacrifice of alterity for its smooth function. This is unjust. Justice outweighs education and fairness, which are deconstructable. Why is your education good if it teaches us to be unjust? How can something be fair if it is unjust, That’s Derrida and Macdonald.

This is auto-immunity because the connection with altertity is precisely what makes debate valuable. If debate is only about the five people in the room then it is worthless for ethics and politics. Only the connection to and extension towards otherness can imbue value in the activity that’s Miller.

Your framework argument is an attempt once again to conjure away the specter but this repressive effort is doomed to fail and merely leaves the unexamined specter to return again making all of your impacts inevitable
Derrida ’6  ~originally published in 1993~ Jacques Derrida Specters of Marx Translated by Peggy Kamuf p 123-4
In the Manifesto of the Communist Party, let us recall, a first noun
AND
hunt ~zueiner heiligen Hetzjagd~ against this specter ~gegen dies Gespenst~.

Education is autoimmune.

Your interp destroys education because it reduces debates to the same and makes the insular.

It is important for students to have these debates about how their community should be. Right now the conversation is dominated by coaches.

Policy education controlled by think tanks. The sole goal of your scholarship is to justify itself on the news.

Fiat assumes and alchemical transition from what we do here to the USFG, which is devastating for education. It’s an unbridgeable gap. That’s Mcquillain.

Fairness assumes a community standard practices

It’s autoimmune you create un-predictability by assuming that all politics takes place within a predictable community, which means you will never be ready when confronted by inevitable unpredictability and alterity, that’s Mcquillain.

We control uniqueness debate is unfair now:

FW is an assumed norm that privileges a particular argument style that not everyone has access to rigging the game.

At Harvard Towson JR and HW, and OU CL didn’t break despite being 5-3 because policy debate was privileged in terms of speaker points.

Some teams have to battle even to gain access to this space like Towson against their administration or Eli and Christopher not getting invited to the round robin.

The only fair response, the only Just response is hospitality.

?

No T Version

Wants to assimilate us into a debate community. The US is another community that links to our argument. Miller evidence says you shouldn’t accept communities  and try to make the best of them because they destroy ethics and make self-destructive autoimmunity inevitable.

Policy decides undecidable in advance. Makes justice impossible because it prescribes an endpoint. Deconstruction can’t take place within traditional politics because that is precisely what we deconstruct.

The purpose of deconstruction is to center the spectral, that which is not present within traditional discourse. The metaphysics of material action always effaces the spectral because it is presumed to be the center of politics. They cannot be combined, that’s Mcquialian.

Competing interps links.

It assumes a community for which you are setting a standard.

Ethical decision making can only take place on an individual level. Justice flips what you prioritize. You should prioritize whose vision of debate is most hospitable. You shouldn’t use a standard of competing interps or even reasonability because both assume unjust tests of community.

Tournament: Pitt RR | Round: 3 | Opponent: Minnesota | Judge: Bricker

1AC Terrorism

?

Every community is always constructed on the basis of the positing of some stabilizing notion that is itself deconstructable. The construction of communities involves the impossible bridging of the gaps between different people. In this way, the notion of community itself is dangerous because it is always an imaginary that is imposed on Others.

Miller ’7 J. Hillis Miller prof of comparative lit and English at UCI Derrida Enisled¶ Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter 2007), pp. 248-276¶ The University of Chicago Press¶ URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511493**
"There Are Only Islands"¶ All of these authors, except perhaps Blanchot,
AND
beyond of this modern tradition, another border structure,¶ another shore."33
?

The U.S. constructs itself as a community against terrorists, but the war on terror is autoimmune. The U.S. targets and kills immigrants, refugees, and even those who are supposedly part of the putative U.S. community. These are the specters of the war on terror and their sacrifice breeds more terrorism. Further, it is impossible to distinguish U.S. actions from terrorism. No wonder we attack ourselves.

Miller ’7 J. Hillis Miller prof of comparative lit and English at UCI Derrida Enisled¶ Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter 2007), pp. 248-276¶ The University of Chicago Press¶ URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511493**
Miller ’7 J. Hillis Miller prof of comparative lit and English at UCI Derrida Enisled¶ Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter 2007), pp. 248-276¶ The University of Chicago Press¶ URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511493**
Derrida’s concept of ethics, on the contrary, as expressed, for example,¶
AND
Department of Homeland¶ Security was so focused on a potential terrorist attack.
?

Every military-aged male killed in a strike zone is assumed to be a terrorist. These strikes kill lots of civilians and are highly inaccurate

Greenwald 13
(Robert, The Rutherford Institute, "5 Myths Used to Justify Drone Assasinations", 8.15.13, https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/freedom_watch/5_myths_used_to_justify_drone_assassinations-https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/freedom_watch/5_myths_used_to_justify_drone_assassinations, ~CL~)

Only two percent of drone strikes have killed "high value targets," former counter
AND
"unknown militants" killed. This strike actually killed around 40 civilians.
Myth No. 2: Drones Are Accurate¶ The Pentagon rhetoric touting "pinpoint
AND
drones fall far short of the hyped rhetoric coming from the Obama administration.
?

The US doesn’t even acknowledge many strikes, let alone disclose particulars. No data can be trusted.

Amnesty International OCTOBER 22, 2013""Will I be Next?" US Drone Strikes in Pakistan" http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/reports/will-i-be-next-us-drone-strikes-in-pakistan-http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/reports/will-i-be-next-us-drone-strikes-in-pakistan**
On a sunny afternoon in October 2012, 68-year-old Mamana Bibi
AND
have been killed in these attacks and at least 600 people seriously injured.
?

This isn’t limited to civilian death data, it is a larger epistemological crisis surrounding terrorism studies – the construction of terrorist threats are produced by imaginative fantasy

Jackson ’12 August 22, 2012 Richard Jackson former prof of international politics at Aberystwyth U and current Deputy Director of the National Peace and Conflict Studies center at U of Otago "Fantasy and the Epistemological Crisis of Counter-terrorism" http://richardjacksonterrorismblog.wordpress.com/2012/08/22/fantasy-and-the-epistemological-crisis-of-counter-terrorism/**
In an earlier blog, I discussed a very weird experience a colleague of mine
AND
and your duty free alcohol confiscated, for some time to come yet.
?

Our ethical imperative is to challenge the War on Terror because it sacrifices Otherness – this is the only internal link to justice

Derrida 1995, dir d’etudes @ Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales Jacques, The Gift of Death  83-7
What is thus found at work in everyday discourse, in the exercise of justice
AND
the other, who becomes for his part nothing more than a murderer?
?

We outweigh – Justice is the only undeconstructable impact because other impacts are self-defeating when brought to their limits. Prioritizing life at all costs can always end in the reversibility of the tyranny of survival and the logic of killing to save. Deconstruction must be infinite because every act of interpretation is an imposition on otherness.

MacDonald Department of Political Studies, Queens University 1999 Eleanor Science 26 Society 63.2 proquest
In an unusually direct moment in his article, "Force of Law: The
AND
, Derrida uses the term "infinite critique" to describe his approach:
A deconstructive thinking, the one that matters to me here, has always pointed
AND
the other and for the event. (Derrida, 1994, 90.)
What this experience of "infinite critique" or this "motif" of deconstruction
AND
about authorial intention, to set the text adrift, as it were.
And why is this "justice"?
First, because of the "aporia" that it introduces - the sense of
AND
is a necessary violence for which deconstruction is the just or ethical response.
What is true, then (in the understanding of the world that Derrida provides through deconstruction), is inadequation, non-commensurability, disjointedness. The ethical response is a recognition of this unknowability, a suspicion of all self-certainty. The political response is one of a corresponding openness, a promise of "democracy-to come" (a promise which Derrida also assures us can never be wholly realizable in the present, in any present).
At stake here is the very concept of democracy as concept of a promise that
AND
modality of a living present (Derrida, 1994, 64-5.)

?

Our refusal to provide a concrete political proposal that decides the undecidable in advance is precisely the point. We should deconstruct the Western model of law and ethics rather than attempt to prewrite the future.

Mcquillan 08 (Derrida and Policy: Is Deconstruction Really a Social Science? Derrida Today)
One might think that Derrida’s invocation of International Law in his later writings would represent
AND
be of no use to anyone, except as a policy of resistance.
Here is the rub, the moment that one begins to attempt a thought experiment
AND
as such is on the side of the unconditional rather than the sovereign.

?

We should detach ourselves from the US construction of community against terrorism. In community not only do we lose ourselves but we lose others as well. It is only through being detached that we can act responsibly and ethically.

Miller ’7 J. Hillis Miller prof of comparative lit and English at UCI Derrida Enisled¶ Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter 2007), pp. 248-276¶ The University of Chicago Press¶ URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511493**
How can these two features of the late Derrida’s thought be reconciled? What bridge
AND
-destructive autoimmune community¶ than of Williams’s community of kindness and mutuality.
?

There is no topical version of the aff – politics can’t be deconstructed because it’s always built on a deconstructable foundation that buries the spectral and closes off encounters with the Other that is not present – the 1AC is a radical rethinking of politics as such

McQuillan, 2k9 (Martin, MA, PhD, Glasgow, Deconstruction After 9/11, Routledge, pg. 100-103)

If, far from fallingithin the ambit of the New International, anti-capitalism
AND
the Poujadists to the anti-capitalists, have always attempted to foreclose.

Tournament: Pitt RR | Round: 3 | Opponent: Minnesota | Judge: Bricker

Util is bad

Bias: It is no accident that utilitarianism is being used to justify the sacrifice of others to make us safe. The Spector isn’t present so it never makes it into utilitarian calculations. The U.S. won’t even avow the strike that killed it. Those that fall outside putative communities will always be sacrificed that is Miller and Derrida.

Surrenders responsibility to a rule

Thurschwell Visiting Professor of Law at Georgetown 2003 Adam Cordozo Law Review lexis
~*1202~  Thus, as Derrida puts it, "ethics enjoins a politics
AND
to say, determined on the basis of something that resembles pure faith.

Effaces alterity by reducing it to a data point. If we win our community argument that there are unbridgeable gaps between people you can never know otherness to calculate it and the attempt to effaces it. That’s Miller.

Links to epistemology: focus on big consequences in the context of terrorism causes the epistemological crisis because highly unlikely possible events become threats that demand responses. This creates ineffective responses to terrorism and makes the sacrifice of otherness for dubious increases in safety inevitable. That’s Jackson. 

Terrorism DA

WOT Sacrifices otherness: 50 Civilians killed for every HVT

Autoimmunity: The attempt to suppress terrorism creates more terrorists in an infinite cycle. The US’s actions are indistinguishable from those of the terrorist which causes extinction. Only hospitality can solve.

Machowski 2010 ( Derrida and the Other Islam: In What Ways If at All, Does Derrida Provide For a New Perception of Islam in the West Post 9/11? http://www.matthewmachowski.com/2010/09/derrida-islam-9-11.html
A very innovative reading of terrorism and the 9/11 attacks, pursued by
AND
in Derrida’s view, the only way forward and the only peaceful solution.

Epistemological Crisis: Lack of knowledge about when and where terrorists will strike means you must use your imagination which inevitability leads to fantasy and your impact scenarios. The focus on terrible consequence makes extremely unlikely events into threats that require sacrificial responses. The construction of WMD terrorism enables a dismissal of all historical knowledge of terrorist events. None of which have risen to that level.

The WOT and the knowledge of the terrorist threat are only tenable because of the suppression of alternate knowledge and perspectives that challenge them, and conceal the root of terrorism which is U.S. violence abroad. You should presume against their impacts. That’s Jackson

Don’t trust any of their evidence about the effectiveness of strikes. The U.S. doesn’t release information about particular strikes. Their evidence takes the word of a government who assumes every male killed was a terrorist and doesn’t even acknowledge many strikes. We know estimates of civilian deaths are too low, why should also assume that estimates of high value target deaths are too high. They don’t even know who they are killing most of the time, that’s Greenwald and Amnesty.

?

The WMD terrorist threat is a scare tactic used to justify endless violence abroad.

Esobar 2004 (Deconstructing the war on terror Asia times http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FJ14Aa01.html)
A cursory look both at the Bush administration’s record and the neo-con agenda
AND
same stock or common soil of what I would call an ’Abrahamic’ revelation". 

This causes the US to attack itself
Esobar 2004 (Deconstructing the war on terror Asia times http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FJ14Aa01.html)

Derrida always comes back to something absolutely crucial: the world order is based on
AND
declaring a war against terrorism, the US has engendered a war against itself

Tournament: Pitt RR | Round: 3 | Opponent: Minnesota | Judge: Bricker

Terrorism FW 2AC

Counter interpretation the aff has to be in the direction of the resolution.

Framework is an attempt to create community

It is the deconstructable structure on which you posit this community, but you cannot bridge the gaps there is no debate community. Lots of teams fall outside your interpretation. Because of this unbridgeable gap all communities are autoimmune, which means your framework is destined to implode on itself

Turing debate into a community reduces us to member of a herd which makes it impossible. Alterity becomes merely a predictable for us to reflect our arguments off of. We become not responsible for how we act because our actions are  predetermined by the community.

The only ethical option is hospitality on an individual level that’s Miller.

Our response to the stabilizing notion of policy should be one of deconstruction. Policy itself is a logo-rhetorical illusion that assumes the discrete stages of thought, politics, and law when all of these things are impossibly intertwined. Policy education is dominated by think tanks and academics wedded to a technocratic apparatus whose highest goal is to make it onto the news.

Mcquillan 08 (Derrida and Policy: Is Deconstruction Really a Social Science? Derrida Today)
In order for politics to be thinkable there must be some moment at which thought
AND
properly philosophical and properly a ’political science’, if such a thing exists.¶ 

Alterity DA

Framework requires the sacrifice of alterity for its smooth function. This is unjust. Justice outweighs education and fairness, which are deconstructable. Why is your education good if it teaches us to be unjust? How can something be fair if it is unjust, That’s Derrida and Macdonald.

This is auto-immunity because the connection with alterity is precisely what makes debate valuable. If debate is only about the five people in the room then it is worthless for ethics and politics. Only the connection to and extension towards otherness can imbue value in the activity that’s Miller.

Education is autoimmune.

Framework destroys education because it reduces debates to the same and makes the insular.

Fiat assumes and alchemical transition from what we do here to the USFG, which is devastating for education. It’s an unbridgeable gap. That’s Mcquillain.

Fairness assumes a community standard practices

It’s autoimmune you create un-predictability by assuming that all politics takes place within a predictable community, which means you will never be ready when confronted by inevitable unpredictability and alterity, that’s Mcquillain.

We control uniqueness debate is unfair now:

FW is an assumed norm that privileges a particular argument style that not everyone has access to rigging the game.

At Harvard Towson JR and HW, and OU CL didn’t break despite being 5-3 because policy debate was privileged in terms of speaker points.

Some teams have to battle even to gain access to this space like Towson against their administration or Eli not getting invited to the round robin.

The only fair response, the only Just response is hospitality.

Not having previously agreed ground is good.

Hicks ’2 Darrin Hicks is Associate Professor of Communication at the University of Denver in Denver, Colorado. "The Promise(s) of Deliberative Democracy Rhetoric 26 Public Affairs 5.2 (2002) 223-260 Project Muse
The very possibility of argumentation, it seems, trades upon the existence of some
AND
-spirited actors that makes it so valuable for theories of deliberative democracy.

?

No T Version

Wants to assimilate us into a debate community. The US is another community that links to our argument. Miller evidence says you shouldn’t accept communities  and try to make the best of them because they destroy ethics and make self-destructive autoimmunity inevitable.

Policy decides undecidable in advance. Makes justice impossible because it prescribes an endpoint. Deconstruction can’t take place within traditional politics because that is precisely what we deconstruct.

The purpose of deconstruction is to center the spectral, that which is not present within traditional discourse. The metaphysics of material action always effaces the spectral because it is presumed to be the center of politics. They cannot be combined, that’ Mcquialian.

Tournament: Usc | Round: 2 | Opponent: NYU DeJohn-Zhan | Judge: Glass

1AC Debate

Every community is always constructed on the basis of the positing of some stabilizing notion that is itself deconstructable. The construction of communities involves the impossible bridging of the gaps between different people. In this way, the notion of community itself is dangerous because it is always an imaginary that is imposed on Others. Rather than guarding community by clinging to these notions we should give unconditional hospitality to the other.

Miller ’7 J. Hillis Miller prof of comparative lit and English at UCI Derrida Enisled¶ Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter 2007), pp. 248-276¶ The University of Chicago Press¶ URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511493**
"There Are Only Islands"¶ All of these authors, except perhaps Blanchot,
AND
beyond of this modern tradition, another border structure,¶ another shore."33
?

The actions of those attempting to preserve what they call the debate community are autoimmune. The attempt to preserve what they see as the pure state of debate sacrifices otherness. This occurs through arguments like framework that attempt to preserve a pure policy focus in debate.

The latest and most blatant example of the attempt to construct a policy debate community is the NOPD Round Robin

Hardy ’13 Aaron Hardy "NODPD RR 2014 Invite" https://www.tabroom.com/index/tourn/index.mhtml?tourn_id=2558**
The Rule¶ The tournament will use the following rule:¶ The affirmative side must
AND
Evanston. If you have any questions, please direct them to me.

What these self-proclaimed defenders of debate do not realize is that these practices are destroying debate itself. The contestation of the meaning of debate by otherness is precisely what makes debate valuable. Without this contestation debate loses its connection to alterity. The specters of otherness will always haunt any attempt to construct community. We should be open to these others rather than sacrifice them.

Miller ’7 J. Hillis Miller prof of comparative lit and English at UCI Derrida Enisled¶ Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter 2007), pp. 248-276¶ The University of Chicago Press¶ URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511493**
Derrida’s concept of ethics, on the contrary, as expressed, for example,¶
AND
, the space and time of a spectralizing messianicity¶ beyond all messianism."

Don’t get it wrong. This is not about us, nor is it about you. The central question for ethics should be the specter. We should direct our ethics towards the other that is not present.

Derrida ’6  ~originally published in 1993~ Jacques Derrida Specters of Marx Translated by Peggy Kamuf p xviii
If I am getting ready to speak at length about ghosts, inheritance, and
AND
to ask the question "where?" "where tomorrow?" "whither?"

?

Challenging the sacrifice of otherness is key to justice. The framing question should be ’is any alterity effaced by the construction of the debate community?’. If yes then the only ethical response is deconstruction.

Derrida 1995, dir d’etudes @ Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales Jacques, The Gift of Death  83-7
What is thus found at work in everyday discourse, in the exercise of justice
AND
the other, who becomes for his part nothing more than a murderer?
?

Justice is the foremost ethical concern and the only undeconstrucatble impact. We disturb the text of the debate community by reading it against itself. Deconstruction must be infinite because every act of interpretation is an imposition on otherness.

MacDonald Department of Political Studies, Queens University 1999 Eleanor Science 26 Society 63.2 proquest
In an unusually direct moment in his article, "Force of Law: The
AND
, Derrida uses the term "infinite critique" to describe his approach:
A deconstructive thinking, the one that matters to me here, has always pointed
AND
the other and for the event. (Derrida, 1994, 90.)
What this experience of "infinite critique" or this "motif" of deconstruction
AND
about authorial intention, to set the text adrift, as it were.
And why is this "justice"?
First, because of the "aporia" that it introduces - the sense of
AND
is a necessary violence for which deconstruction is the just or ethical response.
What is true, then (in the understanding of the world that Derrida provides through deconstruction), is inadequation, non-commensurability, disjointedness. The ethical response is a recognition of this unknowability, a suspicion of all self-certainty. The political response is one of a corresponding openness, a promise of "democracy-to come" (a promise which Derrida also assures us can never be wholly realizable in the present, in any present).
At stake here is the very concept of democracy as concept of a promise that
AND
modality of a living present (Derrida, 1994, 64-5.)

?

Our response to the stabilizing notion of policy should be one of deconstruction. Policy itself is a logo-rhetorical illusion that assumes the discrete stages of thought, politics, and law when all of these things are impossibly intertwined. Policy education is dominated by think tanks and academics wedded to a technocratic apparatus whose highest goal is to make it onto the news.

Mcquillan 08 (Derrida and Policy: Is Deconstruction Really a Social Science? Derrida Today)
In order for politics to be thinkable there must be some moment at which thought
AND
properly philosophical and properly a ’political science’, if such a thing exists.¶
?

Our refusal to provide a concrete political proposal that decides the undecidable in advance is precisely the point. We should deconstruct the Western model of law and ethics rather than attempt to prewrite the future.

Mcquillan 08 (Derrida and Policy: Is Deconstruction Really a Social Science? Derrida Today)
One might think that Derrida’s invocation of International Law in his later writings would represent
AND
be of no use to anyone, except as a policy of resistance.
Here is the rub, the moment that one begins to attempt a thought experiment
AND
as such is on the side of the unconditional rather than the sovereign.

?

Even if the notion of debate community is deconstructable, why not cling to the code of the resolution and make the best of it? It is because there is only one kind of community, the herd that destroys itself in autoimmunity. Not only do we lose ourselves but we lose others as well. It is only through being detached that we can act responsibly and ethically. Vote aff to detach from the notion of a debate community.

Miller ’7 J. Hillis Miller prof of comparative lit and English at UCI Derrida Enisled¶ Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Winter 2007), pp. 248-276¶ The University of Chicago Press¶ URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511493**
How can these two features of the late Derrida’s thought be reconciled? What bridge
AND
-destructive autoimmune community¶ than of Williams’s community of kindness and mutuality.
?

Deconstruction can never be accounted for within the traditional political order prescisly because it wishes to deconstruct such orders and center the spectral, which the metaphysics of a material politics of action always tries to exorcise.

McQuillan, 2k9 (Martin, MA, PhD, Glasgow, Deconstruction After 9/11, Routledge, pg. 100-103)

If, far from fallingithin the ambit of the New International, anti-capitalism
AND
the Poujadists to the anti-capitalists, have always attempted to foreclose.
?