Jump to content
aznguy930

Kritiks of national service

Recommended Posts

wow, that was interesting... I guess I get the strategic aim of combating colonialism/militarism, but I'm a bit shocked that Chomsky endorses such an extreme degree of utility on this position (ie embracing involuntary military servitude in the name of making change in the inner-workings of the Armed Forces). I'm generally with the Noam, but not this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Others are with you. There is a follow-up in Counterpunch where the author explains why he thinks Chomsky is wrong on this one.

do you have a link to that?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agamben would work well against people who talk about the citizen in their 1ac...it would have been better before the topic was reworded though

 

agemben will work well against almost any affirmative that actually defends national service. one word: security.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and how does security link more to national service than other topics?

 

whoever gave me neg rep for saying that obviously doesnt understand my point. i wasnt talkin shit to that person, rather expressing how i think this topic has some unique ground for security critiques. this might just be because i have never really liked agamben (i guess i am more of a foucault purist in this aspect) and i have begun to read some stuff by him and others who write in a similar style (edkins, etc.), and to my suprise, this was one of two places i was actually able to find topic specific evidence as far as critiques that appeal to me go. the evidence i have found has talked about how national service projects in particular are an attempt to relocate the coordinates of ideological security, blurring the line between something or other, leading to bad stuff (like i said, agamben isnt necessarily a strong point of mine. im still working on it). in particular, i think that the fact that at least one of the agencies was established in the wake of the world trade center attacks in 01 attests to the fact that the state of emergency argument can be particular strong if used in the correct way.

while i wont argue with you that there was a lot of ground on this argument in the past, i think this year opens something new which we havent had access to before. just speaking from the years ive been debating, the environment topic had its own specific links to security, but i never really debated it because i didnt really know how to run k's then, but looking through backfiles, it looks like a good topic, but not really the same as it is this year (with the military and stuff being involved). the u.n. topic just dealt ith international issues, which was awesome! but not the same as what we have now. last year was just different because a lot of the security ground was on the affirmative, and it got focused around certain specific parts of the topic which didnt deal with the possible literature surrounding a unique topic like this one, which deals more with domestic issues of 'securitization'.

throw in the fact that this topic has to deal more with the military and other organizations maintained by volunteers, i think it has new ground for security critiques to branch out to.

just my thoughts...

 

on a side note: people need to like chill out on these forums. everyone takes things too seriously and feels some need to protect an anonymous internet ego. i wasnt trying to make that person feel stupid and wasnt saying they were wrong, just puttin in my two cents.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
agemben will work well against almost any affirmative that actually defends national service. one word: security.

 

Like, duh. The security links to Agamben are freakin' sweet. Holla!

 

The Rob Show

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm pretty sure Rand is generally dismissed by most of acedemia.

The literary world, on the other hand, thinks very highly of her novels.:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The literary world, on the other hand, thinks very highly of her novels.:rolleyes:

 

 

Her novels aren't bad.

Her philosophy can make sense when she can just conjur up reactions and intitutions of her philosophy in very specific contexts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...