Traber Robinson McLoughlin Sosa Neg
| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NSD | 2 | Ethan Wu | Connor self |
|
|
| |
| NSD | 3 | Angelina Hu | Quinn Hughes |
|
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| NSD | 2 | Opponent: Ethan Wu | Judge: Connor self AC- whole rez |
| NSD | 3 | Opponent: Angelina Hu | Judge: Quinn Hughes AC- Hegel |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
NSD- CP- ConConTournament: NSD | Round: 2 | Opponent: Ethan Wu | Judge: Connor self The United States, through a limited constitutional convention called for by at least thirty-four of the States and ratified by at least thirty-eight of the States, should recognize an unconditional right of workers to strike.Solves and avoids politics.Elving '18 ~Ron; March 1; Senior Editor and Correspondent on the Washington Desk for NPR; NRP, "Repeal the Second Amendment? That's Not So Simple. Here's What It Would Take," https://www.npr.org/2018/03/01/589397317/repeal-the-second-amendment-thats-not-so-simple-here-s-what-it-would-take~~ | 7/9/21 |
NSD- DA- AntitrustTournament: NSD | Round: 2 | Opponent: Ethan Wu | Judge: Connor self Bipartisan antitrust package passes now but PC is keyGordon 6-23, AP reporter in Washington, covering business, fin issues and occasional scandals, now pandemic fallout, tech policy/politics. 6-23-21. "House panel pushes legislation targeting Big Tech's power" https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-technology-business-government-and-politics-f0f56ec111d85e5f70fe27bb5002e93f brett ====Getting labor reform through requires critical PC==== Tech sector monopoly threatens the DIB—-antitrust is key.Ganesh Sitaraman 20, Vanderbilt University Law School, 3/12/20, "The National Security Case for Breaking Up Big Tech," https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3537870 brett DIB is key to deter great power war—-uniquely requires innovationWilliam Greenwalt 19, Senior Fellow at the Atlanta Council, April 2019, "Leveraging the National Technology Industrial Base To Address Great-Power Competition", Atlanta Council, https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/images/publications/Leveraging_the_National_Technology_Industrial_Base_to_Address_Great-Power_Competition.pdf brett | 7/9/21 |
NSD- K- CapTournament: NSD | Round: 3 | Opponent: Angelina Hu | Judge: Quinn Hughes Capitalism is a system engendering massive violence and inevitable extinction – the foundational task is to find a way out – the Role of the Ballot is to endorse the best organizational tactics.Badiou '18 The telos of the 1ac's politics is the strike – that naturalizes capital's control and is parasitic on political organizing.Eidlin 20 Barry Eidlin (assistant professor of sociology at McGill University and the author of Labor and the Class Idea in the United States and Canada), 1-6-2020, "Why Unions Are Good – But Not Good Enough," Jacobin, https://www.jacobinmag.com/2020/01/marxism-trade-unions-socialism-revolutionary-organizing Recognizing a right to strike reduces revolutionary potential and fractures class organizing – turns the perm.Crépon 19 Mark Crépon (French philosopher), translated by Micol Bez "The Right to Strike and Legal War in Walter Benjamin's 'Toward the Critique of Violence,'" Critical Times, 2:2, August 2019, DOI 10.1215/26410478-7708331 Ethical abstraction erases the material basis of exploitation and experience as foundational to human social production – you should understand humanity as a historical agent instead.Eagleton '11 Capitalism is unsustainable and causes extinction – multiple intertwined crises make collapse inevitable which means its try-or-die – we got charts.von Weizsäcker and Wijkman '17 Vote neg to join the party – dual power organizing is the only path to revolutionary change.Escalante '18 | 7/9/21 |
NSD- NC- KantTournament: NSD | Round: 2 | Opponent: Ethan Wu | Judge: Connor self FrameworkEthics must be derived from the aprioriUncertainty- we could have an evil demon manipulating our worldview, or live in the matrix- apriori ethics solveIs/ought- there's a gap between physical world and questions of morality, because it can only tell us what is but not what ought to be- for instance I can observe cyanide is poisonous but that doesn't logically entail a maxim about how to actThis apriori ethic is practical reason, prefer:Internal motivation- any other theory can infinitely be questioned with "why" which is regressive- however asking why about practical reason concedes its authority.Induction- it's circular because we can only premise its reliability with further induction, but that's circularReflective endorsement is the correct procedure because we must endorse all reasons for action before we can act on them.Korsgaard '92 (Christine M. Korsgaard. "The Sources of Normativity." The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, Nov. 16 and 17, 1992, https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/k/korsgaard94.pdf. CHRISTINE M. KORSGAARD is currently Professor of Philosophy at Harvard University. She was educated at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and at Harvard, where she received her Ph.D. degree in philosophy in 1979. She has taught at several schools in the University of California system, including UC Santa Barbara, UCLA, and UC Berkeley, and at the University of Chicago. She is a member of the American Philosophical Association, the North American Kant Society, the Hume Society, and the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy. She has published and lectured extensively on Immanuel Kant.) Any reasonable ethic entails using universalizable maxims- reason is only able to reach the same conclusion or else it wouldn't be reasonable, ie 2+24 for me and everyone else because there isn't an apriori distinction between capacity to reason.==== Furthermore, if maxims must be universalizable then any violations of freedom are impermissible- if one person's freedom is violated it justifies violating everyone's which is a contradiction in conception because it assumes we have the freedom to violate someone's freedom.Thus the standard is consistency with a Kantian ethic.Impact calculus:Universalizable maxims or violations of freedom are impermissible. Impacts are irrelevantYes act omission and intent foresight distinctionCulpability- there is an infinite amount of foreseen impacts or omissions which means we either have infinite culpability or noneHumans' will has infinite value.Korsgaard 83 bracketed for gendered language (Christine M., "Two Distinctions in Goodness," The Philosophical Review Vol. 92, No. 2 (Apr., 1983), pp. 169-195, JSTOR) sosaThe argument shows how Kant's idea of justification works. It can be read as a kind of regress upon the conditions, starting from an important assumption. The assumption is that when a rational being makes a choice or undertakes an action, ~they~ he or she supposes the object to be good, and its pursuit to be justified. At least, if there is a categorical imperative there must be objectively good ends, for then there are necessary actions and so necessary ends (G 45-46/427-428 and Doctrine of Virtue 43-44/384-385). In order for there to be any objectively good ends, however, there must be something that is unconditionally good and so can serve as a sufficient condition of their goodness. Kant considers what this might be: it cannot be an object of inclination, for those have only a conditional worth, "for if the inclinations and the needs founded on them did not exist, their object would be without worth" (G 46/428). It cannot be the inclinations themselves because a rational being would rather be free from them. Nor can it be external things, which serve only as means. So, Kant asserts, the unconditionally valuable thing must be "humanity" or "rational nature," which he defines as "the power set to an end" (G 56/437 and DV 51/392). Kant explains that regarding your existence as a rational being as an end in itself is a "subjective principle of human action." By this I understand him to mean that we must regard ourselves as capable of conferring value upon the objects of our choice, the ends that we set, because we must regard our ends as good. But since "every other rational being thinks of his existence by the same rational ground which holds also for myself' (G 47/429), we must regard others as capable of conferring value by reason of their rational choices and so also as ends in themselves. Treating another as an end in itself thus involves making that person's ends as far as possible your own (G 49/430). The ends that are chosen by any rational being, possessed of the humanity or rational nature that is fully realized in a good will, take on the status of objective goods. They are not intrinsically valuable, but they are objectively valuable in the sense that every rational being has a reason to promote or realize them. For this reason it is our duty to promote the happiness of others-the ends that they choose-and, in general, to make the highest good our end. Prefer additionally:Performativity-arguing against the framework concedes it's authority because you need the reason and freedom to do soContentionI negate the resolution that a just government ought to recognize the unconditional right of workers to strikeUses others as a mere means to an endFourie 17 Johan Fourie 11-30-2017 "Ethicality of Labor-Strike Demonstrates by Social Workers" https://www.otherpapers.com/essay/Ethicality-of-Labor-Strike-Demonstrates-by-Social-Workers/62694.html (Johan Fourie is professor of Economics and History at Stellenbosch University.) JG An unconditional right to strike is unethical since it treats all strikes as morally neutral which is incorrect.Loewy 2K, Erich H. "Of healthcare professionals, ethics, and strikes." Cambridge Q. Healthcare Ethics 9 (2000): 513. (Erich H. Loewy M.D., F.A.C.P., was born in Vienna, Austria in 1927 and was able to escape first to England and then to the U.S. in late 1938. He was initially trained as a cardiologist. He taught at Case Western Reserve and practiced in Cleveland, Ohio. After 14 years he devoted himself fully to Bioethics and taught at the University of Illinois for 12 years. In 1996 he was selected as the first endowed Alumni Association Chair of Bioethics at the University of California Davis School of Medicine and has taught there since.) JG It would seem then that the ethical considerations for workers striking in an industry such as a shoe factory or a chain grocery store are quite different from the ethical considerations for workers in sanitation, police, or fire departments, or for professionals such as teachers or those involved directly in healthcare. Even in the latter "professional" category, there are subtle but distinct differences of "rights" and obligations. However, one cannot conclude that for workers in essential industries strikes are simply ethically not permissible, whereas they are permissible for workers in less essential industries. Strikes, by necessity, injure another, and injuring another cannot be ethically neutral. Injuring others is prima facie ethically problematic—that is, unless a good and weighty argument for doing so can be made, injuring another is not ethically proper. Striking by a worker, in as much as doing so injures another or others, is only a conditional right. A compelling ethical argument in favor of striking is needed as well as an ethical argument in favor of striking at the time and in the way planned. It remains to delineate the conditions under which strikes, especially strikes by workers in essential industries and even more so by persons who consider themselves to be "professionals," may legitimately proceed and yet fulfill their basic purpose.Other options that don't violate freedom exist- nothing uniquely keyBrudney 21, James J., Joseph Crowley Chair in Labor and Employment Law, Fordham Law School. Yale Journal of International Law, 2021. "The Right to Strike as Customary International Law" https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1710andcontext=yjil brett | 7/9/21 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|---|---|---|
7/9/21 | 223255@cghsflorg |
| |
7/9/21 | 223255@cghsflorg |
|