Jump to content
Zarathustra07

Its Aff

Recommended Posts

Useful defs for this AFF - http://dictionary.re...owse/investment

 

Note: You'll also need to find some inherency evidence indicating that ITS is expanding now.

 

Plan: The United States federal government, through an act of Congress, its transportation infrastructure investment in the United States by immediately dismantling and removing all monitoring technologies from all forms of transportation infrastructure. Funding and enforcement are through normal means.

 

Securitization Adv.

 

A) In the post-9/11 environment, mobility and citizen have been reframed through a calculus of maximizing national security. Consequently, the state is expanding the capacities of surveillance in order to eliminate what it perceives as “threatsâ€.

 

Packer, ’07. (Jeremy Packer. “The Ethics of Mobility: Rethinking Place, Exclusion, Freedom and Environment.†2007. Date accessed December 19, 2009.

 

<http://books.google.com/books?id=0FzSI8CnJaIC&pg=PA46&lpg=PA46&dq="But+in+the+past+automotive+behavior+was+itself+the+object+of+surveillance"&source=bl&ots=TlZ_kznZ1h&sig=qcT6Qn_SEqKsetusJJTfGjb_ERY&hl=en&ei=SD8tSaiNI30McXDrfwI&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CA0Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22But%20in%20the%20past%20automotive%20behavior%20was%20itself%20the%20object%20of%20surveillance%22&f=false>.)

 

Whether at border crossings, airport terminals...for addressing such perceived threats.

 

B ) The State’s national security agenda creates an Other that is simultaneously within and “outside†our borders.

 

Lal, ’05. (Prerna P. Lal, social and media expert for the Change Organization. “Deconstructing the National Security State: Towards a New Framework of Analysis.†May 17, 2005. Date accessed January 35, 2010. <http://prernalal.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/css-deconstructing-the-nat-sec-state.pdf>.)

 

As a consequence, imagined enemies...the state and security elites.

 

C) The spectacle of terrorism and the agenda of fear promotion gives the state “the right to kill†and determine who may live and who must die.

 

Giroux, ’06. (Henry Giroux, Global TV Network Chair in Communication at McNaster University in Canada. “Beyond the Spectacle of Terrorism: Global Uncertainty and the Challenge of the New Media.†2006. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers. Print.)

 

In contrast, the spectacle of terrorism...connection between terrorism and security.

 

D) The extending of this logic leads to genocidal violence in the name of “preserving the populace†and the elimination of threats. Violence becomes inevitable and continuous because the state will always fabricate new threats.

 

Duffield, ’04. (Mark Duffield, Professor at the Department of Politics and International Relations. DANISH INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL STUDIES, “Carry on Killing: Global Governance, Humanitarianism and Terror.†2004. Date accessed December 27, 2009. <http://www.diis.dk/sw8141.asp AD 7/9/09>.)

 

This duality moreover underlies the...sovereignty within it can now be examined.

 

E) The power of ITS systems comes from a socially-constructed apparatus. Only by recognizing these systems as socially constructed and dismantling the institutionalization of these technologies can we begin to stop them.

 

Monahan, ’08. (Torin Monahan, Professor at Arizona State University, School of Justice and Social Inquiry. “War Rooms of the Street: Surveillance Practices in Transportation Control Centers.â€July 25, 2008. Date accessed November 10, 2009. <http://torinmonahan.com/papers/war_rooms.pdf>.)

 

Transportation resonates as both...with other systems (Monahan, 2005).

 

F) Our critical questioning of the spectacle of terrorism in the 1AC within the pedagogical site of the classroom is critical to develop an alternative politics and language to the status quo.

 

Giroux, ’06. (Henry Giroux, Global TV Network Chair in Communication at McNaster University in Canada. “Beyond the Spectacle of Terrorism: Global Uncertainty and the Challenge of the New Media.†2006. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers. Print.)

 

The spectacle of terrorism has no vision...promise of global democracy itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The plan text isn't coherent, cool aff though

 

It was a stab from two years back - I don't endorse it being a good one. ^_^ The idea was to completely do away with ITS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont see how this is a straightfoward investment though, it seems like this would hit T investment is monetary, because how im reading the aff seems like the investment here is an ontological one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont see how this is a straightfoward investment though, it seems like this would hit T investment is monetary, because how im reading the aff seems like the investment here is an ontological one

 

You could make those arguments, sure. But the reason for the inclusion of the definitions of investment that I put at the top is that you could select one that applies to monetary investments. And since you need to invest money into a project in order to augment or remove existing services and/or infrastructures, you would be able to get out of T-investment (in most instances). Mind you, I read this AFF on the college topic when it was "Resolved: That the United States Federal Government should substantially reform domestic transportation infrastructure," so, admittedly, you would have to change up the AFF A/T a little bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just realized this Aff has nothing to do with FXT. It's increasing a monetary investment by removing the IT monitoring systems from our transportation infrastructure.

Edited by Jame's CX Career

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Useful defs for this AFF - http://dictionary.re...owse/investment

 

Note: You'll also need to find some inherency evidence indicating that ITS is expanding now.

 

Plan: The United States federal government, through an act of Congress, its transportation infrastructure investment in the United States by immediately dismantling and removing all monitoring technologies from all forms of transportation infrastructure. Funding and enforcement are through normal means.

 

Securitization Adv.

 

A) In the post-9/11 environment, mobility and citizen have been reframed through a calculus of maximizing national security. Consequently, the state is expanding the capacities of surveillance in order to eliminate what it perceives as “threatsâ€.

 

Packer, ’07. (Jeremy Packer. “The Ethics of Mobility: Rethinking Place, Exclusion, Freedom and Environment.†2007. Date accessed December 19, 2009.

 

<http://books.google.com/books?id=0FzSI8CnJaIC&pg=PA46&lpg=PA46&dq="But+in+the+past+automotive+behavior+was+itself+the+object+of+surveillance"&source=bl&ots=TlZ_kznZ1h&sig=qcT6Qn_SEqKsetusJJTfGjb_ERY&hl=en&ei=SD8tSaiNI30McXDrfwI&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CA0Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22But%20in%20the%20past%20automotive%20behavior%20was%20itself%20the%20object%20of%20surveillance%22&f=false>.)

 

Whether at border crossings, airport terminals...for addressing such perceived threats.

 

B ) The State’s national security agenda creates an Other that is simultaneously within and “outside†our borders.

 

Lal, ’05. (Prerna P. Lal, social and media expert for the Change Organization. “Deconstructing the National Security State: Towards a New Framework of Analysis.†May 17, 2005. Date accessed January 35, 2010. <http://prernalal.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/css-deconstructing-the-nat-sec-state.pdf>.)

 

As a consequence, imagined enemies...the state and security elites.

 

C) The spectacle of terrorism and the agenda of fear promotion gives the state “the right to kill†and determine who may live and who must die.

 

Giroux, ’06. (Henry Giroux, Global TV Network Chair in Communication at McNaster University in Canada. “Beyond the Spectacle of Terrorism: Global Uncertainty and the Challenge of the New Media.†2006. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers. Print.)

 

In contrast, the spectacle of terrorism...connection between terrorism and security.

 

D) The extending of this logic leads to genocidal violence in the name of “preserving the populace†and the elimination of threats. Violence becomes inevitable and continuous because the state will always fabricate new threats.

 

Duffield, ’04. (Mark Duffield, Professor at the Department of Politics and International Relations. DANISH INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL STUDIES, “Carry on Killing: Global Governance, Humanitarianism and Terror.†2004. Date accessed December 27, 2009. <http://www.diis.dk/sw8141.asp AD 7/9/09>.)

 

This duality moreover underlies the...sovereignty within it can now be examined.

 

E) The power of ITS systems comes from a socially-constructed apparatus. Only by recognizing these systems as socially constructed and dismantling the institutionalization of these technologies can we begin to stop them.

 

Monahan, ’08. (Torin Monahan, Professor at Arizona State University, School of Justice and Social Inquiry. “War Rooms of the Street: Surveillance Practices in Transportation Control Centers.â€July 25, 2008. Date accessed November 10, 2009. <http://torinmonahan.com/papers/war_rooms.pdf>.)

 

Transportation resonates as both...with other systems (Monahan, 2005).

 

F) Our critical questioning of the spectacle of terrorism in the 1AC within the pedagogical site of the classroom is critical to develop an alternative politics and language to the status quo.

 

Giroux, ’06. (Henry Giroux, Global TV Network Chair in Communication at McNaster University in Canada. “Beyond the Spectacle of Terrorism: Global Uncertainty and the Challenge of the New Media.†2006. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers. Print.)

 

The spectacle of terrorism has no vision...promise of global democracy itself.

 

If I'm understanding what you're saying correctly, I recently had a similar idea: since the resolution merely calls for us to invest in transportation infrastructure, could we invest in destroying/dismantling it? That basically leaves the aff with advantages like Security, and it leaves the neg scratching their respective heads and saying "Oh s**t, that turns all of our DAs."

 

EDIT: That makes the De-Dev aff pretty blatantly topical, too....Crap.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I recently had a similar idea: since the resolution merely calls for us to invest in transportation infrastructure, could we invest in destroying/dismantling it?

 

THIS! GUYS! THIS! LOOK AT THIS! EVERYONE LOOK AT THIS! THIS IS AMAZING! GUYS! AND GIRLS! LOOK! THIS IS A FANTASTIC ARGUMENT!

 

I congratulate you on being a genius. Congratulations, genius. Because you are one. I like this idea a lot.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THIS! GUYS! THIS! LOOK AT THIS! EVERYONE LOOK AT THIS! THIS IS AMAZING! GUYS! AND GIRLS! LOOK! THIS IS A FANTASTIC ARGUMENT!

 

I congratulate you on being a genius. Congratulations, genius. Because you are one. I like this idea a lot.

 

I................like you too? :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liek distorting the framers intent.

 

Seriously though, I love how every debater's first reaction when a new topic comes out is "To what extent can I twist the resolution toward an entirely different meaning and still get away with it?"

 

Debaters these days...tsk tsk.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is always my reaction. On the Social Services topic I figured out that moon colonization could be considered topical. I like T debates as the affirmative.

 

I think it's fun to be ridiculous and get away with it. At the same time though, I think legitimately good affirmatives could involve dismantling certain forms of infrastructure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THIS! GUYS! THIS! LOOK AT THIS! EVERYONE LOOK AT THIS! THIS IS AMAZING! GUYS! AND GIRLS! LOOK! THIS IS A FANTASTIC ARGUMENT!

I congratulate you on being a genius. Congratulations, genius. Because you are one. I like this idea a lot.

What's the net benefit of destroying/dismantling transportation infrastructure, because invest means gaining some sort of profit?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey has anyone been able to find any definitions that would support destruction or dismantling as investment? Or any cards saying how much taking this stuff down would cost? I had a similar idea and can't find anything!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't do it. To me it sounds like investing in yourselves to destroy/dismantle infrastructure. In the resolution the investment is defined as transportation infrastructure, not destruction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you CAN say that the GOVERNMENT can do it, and it will probably not take much to destroy infrastructure, we already have the tech. in the status quo, and you can use typical impact turns such as Dedev (collapse of the econ is good), War good, De-development, wipeout, Nietzsche, and typical chaos good args. It can have a lot of adv. and can avoid a lot of typical disads, and k's, and cp's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...