Plan Text Plan: The United States federal government should substantially increase its exploration and development of the earths oceans by implementing a framework for sustainable ocean development and exploration through Hydrological ocean education Contention 1: The HyperseaStatus quo conceptions of the oceans are ones that posit it as a space to be independently dominated Astro 77 Distinguished Professor of English at Drexel University, Ph.D. American Literature, M.A. English, (Richard, VOYAGES INTO OCEAN SPACE: A VIEW FROM THE HUMANITIES, 1977, IEEXplore, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1154360, RSpec)-We do not endorse the gendered language within this card.Writing in 1847, Herman Melville affirmed that "from time immemorial many fine things have been said and sung of the sea. And the days have been, when sailors were considered veritable mermen; and the ocean itself as the peculiar theatre of the romantic and wonderful."" Indeed early maritime literature, whether of the sea or of inland waterways, promotes our glorious self-image of ourselves and our ability to subdue external nature. But Cooper, Melville and Conrad make what Melville calls the "poetry of salt- water" hard to relish. Indeed, what we learn from these writers' portrayals of explorations into the maritime frontier, almost all of which are rendered with great attention to precise nautical detail, is that man rarely possesses adequate physical or meta- physical means to achieve his ends. Amidst Conrad's raging sea storms, in the darkness and sterility of Cooper's Antarctic winter, and before the fury of Melville's great whale, we can assess the range of human ability, indeed of rational inquiry itself and mark their furthest limits. Yet still we push on. We talk about "the ocean as a new frontier of opportunity" and the cor- responding need for a national marine effort!' to further exploration and promote overseas markets. We realize that we have ravished our land frontiers, but we continue to be enraptured by the idea of growth in our attitudes toward the sea. We pay lip service to the need to maintain our marine environment, but our thirst for individual power propels us onward toward uncontrolled proliferation. The failure, our failure, to negotiate multilaterally acceptable laws of the sea has its roots in the thirst for power among those few nations--and we are one--which have the capital, the technology, and the perceived need to exploit ocean resources. This is not to say that we should not explore the seas. They offer us much if we employ their wealth wisely. But too often we do not. And the problem as it is and as it has been throughout our history is one of individual pride and our collective vision of empire. We want to control the world "out there." We want to make it part of ourselves, subject to our command. There is even an element of play involved here. For while we want and need to control our environment to keep it from hurting us, we take plea- sure from making it jump through our hoops. Indeed, whether for pleasure or for profit, we continue to reveal through our actions toward the sea the clean, sharp edges of imperial design.The relationship between water and knowledge prevents an easy schematization of water-knowledge for humankind. A fluid ontology of the Ocean allows us to access knowledge that heals in distinction from knowledge that colonizes we are a prereq to effective policy actionNeimanis 12 [Astrida PhD York, feminist theorist who works on questions relative to water & hydrologics. Gender Institute, London School of Economics - Talk given at Entanglements of New Materialisms Linkoping, Sweden May 25-26 2012 - accessed @ https://www.academia.edu/1932447/Thinking_with_Water_An_Aqueous_Imaginary_ and_An_Epistemology_of_Unknowability -]What does it mean to want knowledge? What can water teach me about the goal of knowledge? About the relationship between the knower and what she knows? What is the obligation of the knower to what she knows? Is everything meant to be known? What do we need to know, urgently, and what knowledge is better left unknown? I came to look at the question of knowledge because I, like many of us here, work in a university in a knowledge machine. I work in a place where I am paid to know to create knowledge and impart it to my students. I get ranked on how much knowledge I make. It is a system that, for the most part, prefers quantity of knowledge to quality. And I am constantly fed the message that knowledge is always, unquestionably, a good thing. And these questions are particularly urgent for me because if academia is sort of a knowledge machine, or a knowledge beast, then right now I work in the belly of the beast: I work at London School of Economic and Political Science in the UK, a world-class institution that has graduated global leaders and Nobel laureates, but whose pockets these days are almost exclusively lined by the benevolence of big business. The campus bookstore sells a t-shirt that students proudly wear to declare their academic allegiance: $ (LSE). In other words, I work in a place where knowledge is commodified, and where knowledge is seen as a means to an end, which is profit. Here, more knowledge is always better . Leave no stone unturned. So it is on this backdrop that I began thinking about the question of what water might teach me about knowledge, and what it means to know something. Could water teach me to know not necessarily more, but better? And when I think knowledge with water, the feminist and anti-colonial preoccupations with power and responsibility that motivate my thinking with water again swim to the surface urgent questions circulating where knowledge and water collide. For, it also seems crucially important to know more about what we are doing to water, and to ourselves, as bodies of water. We do need more knowledge about the causes and effects of the pacific garbage patches, of the catastrophic damage being done by the Tar Sands in Northern Canada or the oilfields in the Niger Delta, about the levels of poison in our drinking water, about the levels of water in our aquifers that were draining far too rapidly. And again, these are ecological questions, but they are also feminist, and anti-colonial. This is because the harm that we do to water is never equally distributed across human bodies. The flows of biomatter also chart the flows of global power. But at the same time I started reading about things like the Census of Marine Life that promised to document every single species of life in the ocean; about exploratory vessels being sent into the depths to invade these fragile ecosystems. And I heard more and more so-called knowledge that was supposed to convince me that climate change was a hoax, or that mega-dams were necessary and beneficial - despite the documented loss of human life and livelihood, alongside the massive ecological upheaval, that such dams have brought in the Three Gorges region of China, the Naramada Valley in India, or the James Bay region of Northern Quebec in Canada. The relationship between knowledge and water didnt seem so simple. Understanding this relationship seemed also a question of distinguishing kinds of knowledge knowledge that colonizes, knowledge that generates necessary anger and action, knowledge that heals. Knowledge that builds communities, or knowledge that fractures them. Knowledge that responds, or knowledge that masters. In asking these questions here, today I engage in a thought experiment of sorts. I want tobring together critical materialist understandings of water as a matter with distinct physical properties, with Gayatri Spivaks thinking on subalternity and her concept of planetarity. As with all thought experiments, they dont always work out exactly right, and as always, they are fraught with pitfalls and dangers bad translations, ways of thinking might not fit together perfectly, I am interested in seeing what they illuminate about each other, and specifically, how feminist critical materialism might work with feminist thinking on coloniality and how both, together, might inform an epistemological project. If critical materialism is going to be a viable feminist practice, for me it also has to meaningfully engage with these questions of anti-coloniality and global justice. To move towards this, I want to return to waters logic of unknowability, and explore in more depth how this logic is manifest in waters material properties. In the first place, waters unknowability is a geographical question, connected to the question of what is liveable. The different bodies engendered by water (human, sunflower, toad, jellyfish) also display different capacities to live with water, and to live in water. Bodies are oriented in and towards water in species-specific ways; humans, it follows, are situated in relation to water in a very human-specific way. For example, while our kinship with air-breathing whales is well-documented and routinely mythologized, we eventually have to let go of the dorsal fin: the whale will always outswim us, diving to depths our own bodies could not fathom. Even the most sophisticated deepwater submersibles and assisted breathing apparatuses will only ever take us so far, for so longjust as a fish out of water suffocates, and dies, we too can only be fully immersed in water as a temporary gesture. Perhaps it is telling that the depths of the oceans remain less charted than the surface of the moon (the finalfrontier was less final than we thought). The seas are teeming with events that we will only ever glimpse. Water serves as a limit for all living bodies that determines which milieus are habitable, withstand-able, and thus knowable. Water remains one step ahead of, and beyond,the limits of any body (regardless of their watery orientation). In this way (and in resonancewith other feminist epistemological projects of situated knowledges), the grammar of water necessarily rejects total knowledge by any body. Because each body has a different relation to water as a matter of survival, no body can do the God Trick. No body can ever fully know water. For me, this underlines questions of incursion, hubris, and humility, as a necessary consideration for any epistemology. This unknowability is also connected to waters gestational capacity that is, the fact that water is always bathing new life into existence, facilitating plurality. Water is always proliferating something new. But the point here is also that this plurality, and the bodies and forms that water takes up are always part of a future still to come, and as of yet unknown. Water returns, and repeatsbut always different. Despite all of the harm we do to it, in one sense water is inexhaustiblethe things that it does and the bodies it proliferates cannot ultimately be predicted. Again, water is one step ahead of any body. Water evidences the impossibility of complete knowledge; as Karen Barad would say, it reminds us that the world is not a secret to be revealed by us humans (Barad, Living 174). It is rather in a constant process of intra-active emergence. Ultimately, it defies epistemological capture and containment despite our best efforts. So thinking with water, I suggest, might help me imagine, and cultivate, a much-needed epistemology of unknowability. Such an epistemology would be put into necessary conversation with dominant Western paradigms of knowledge. It would be, at its most basic, an understanding of and respect for what human beings do not and cannot know, as a necessary counter to our contemporary techno capitalized drive toward mastery, to know it all. To explore this proposition further, I draw on the work of postcolonial feminist critic GayatriSpivak to suggest that close attention to waters own grammar of unknowability might teach us something about this incitement to know.Absent a shift towards hydrologics, extinction is inevitable. The affirmation of existence is key and it starts with the education allotted by the affHenning 09 (Brian; Associate Professor of Philosophy at Gonzaga University; Trusting in the 'Efficacy of Beauty: A Kalocentric Approach to Moral Philosophy; Ethics & the Environment- Volume 14, Number 1)//RSWIn the opening decade of this new millennium, long-simmering conflicts have exploded into a rolling boil of fear, hostility, and violence. Whether we are talking about the rise of religious fundamentalism, the so-called "war on terror" or the much touted culture wars that define the [End Page 101] contemporary American political landscape, there is a move away from tolerance and appreciation of diversity toward the ever more strident formulation of absolutist positions. Dogmatism in its various forms seems to be on the rise as the rhetoric and reality of compromise and consensus building is replaced with the vitriol of moral superiority and righteousness. As the psychologist and philosopher William James noted more than a century ago, the problem is that we are in a world where "every one of hundreds of ideals has its special champion already provided in the shape of some genius expressly born to feel it, and to fight to death in its behalf" (James 1956 [1891], 20708). The force of this point was made brutally clear by the events of and following September 11, 2001. Given a world fraught with such conflict and tension, what is needed is not a moral philosophy that dogmatically advances absolute moral codes. More than ever, what is needed is an ethic that is dynamic, fallible, and situated, yet not grossly relativistic. This project takes on added urgency when we consider the environmental and social crises that threaten not only human civilization, but all forms of life on this planet. Unhealthy air and water, species extinction, overpopulation, soaring food prices, fresh water shortages, stronger storms, prolonged droughts, the spread of deserts, deforestation, melting ice caps and glaciers, the submersion of low-lying landsthere are no shortage of challenges facing us in this young century. Complex and multifaceted, these issues are at once technological, scientific, economic, social, and political. Yet we will have no hope of successfully addressing the root cause of these crises until we also squarely confront fundamental issues concerning epistemology, axiology, aesthetics, and metaphysics. Although debates over carbon taxes and trading schemes, over carbon offsets and compact fluorescents are important, our efforts will ultimately fail unless and until we also set about the difficult work of reconceiving who we are and how we are related to our processive cosmos. What is needed, I believe, are new ways of thinking and acting grounded in new ways of understanding ourselves and our relationship to the world, ways of understanding that recognize our fundamental interdependence and interconnection with everyone and everything in the cosmos, ways of understanding that recognize the intrinsic beauty and value of every form of existence. What is needed, I suggest, is a moral philosophy grounded in Alfred North Whitehead's philosophy of organism. Recognizing this [End Page 102] need, it is the primary aim of this essay to present the key elements and defend the value of a moral philosophy inspired by, though not dogmatically committed to, Whitehead's organic, beauty-centered conception of reality.Moral obligation to address new forms of sustainability within educational spheresBowers 08 Professor of Environmental Studies @ University of Oregon[C. A. Bowers (Ph. D. from the University of California in educational studies with an emphasis on education and social thought),Toward a Post-Industrial Consciousness: Understanding the Linguistic Basis of Ecologically Sustainable Educational Reforms, pg. www.cabowers.net/pdf/Book%20on%20language.pdf]Nevertheless,administrators at all levels of the university can provide leadership that does not depend upon being a deep thinker about the cultural roots of the ecological crises. Rather,leadership can be exercised by constantly reminding faculty of what should be the focus of their scholarship and teaching.In addition to administrators speaking out on what is now the most important issue facing humankind (and what could be more important than ecosystems unable to renew themselves in ways that support the present forms of life?), they can also initiate ways of holding faculty accountable without violating the faculty members academic freedom. There is now a similar shift in the thinking of a majority of the public, with the ecological crises becoming the new focus of concern. Presidents and other administrators need to take a leadership role that goes beyond that of approving of the retrofitting of the campus infrastructure with more energy efficient technologies.They need to speak out on the importance of making an ecologically sustainable future the main mission of the college or university. This will send a message to faculty who are focused on personal pursuits that may lead to publications that few will read, except for a few other faculty interested in an esoteric and ecologically irrelevant area of inquiry. It will also provide support for environmentally oriented faculty who lead a largely marginalized existence within many departments.The education allotted by the affirmative allows for a reformulation of our relationship with nature as a species; we all share an equal role in the hydrological cycle. Independent reason to prefer environmental pragmatism as the decision calculusPagano 6 [Piergiacomo; Former biological researcher at the ENEA (Italian National Agency for New Technology, Visiting professor of environmental philosophy at UNT - Seeking Dialectical Integration between Anthropocentrism and Biocentrism: trans. from "Una nuova etica per l'ambiente." p117-131 2006 - accessed at filosofia-ambientale.it]*We do not endorse the gendered language within this cardOur anthropocentrist and our biocentrist are in agreement: we need scientific data, but we also need speculation and sensitivity to enjoy consciousness of the world we live in and even to work out an environmental philosophy which allows us to live in harmony with nature. Our anthropocentrist are in agreement: whether he is superior or not man enjoys a special status because of his characteristics. If [hu]man is made, as in fact [s]he is, of the same materials as the environment in which [s]he lives (the chemical components which make up the human body are the same as those which we find in the rest of the universe); if it is true (and it is) that the genetic basis of humanity, DNA, is the same as that of all the other living beings which inhabit planet Earth, then [hu]man[s] can not avoid acting on the environment. He can operate well or badly, wisely or stupidly, but he must operate, he must modify the environment around him. Moreover, if man is nature, the outcome of his operation is also nature, human actions are nature. [Hu]man and nature are not separate entities, they are integrated one with the other. We have to accept, without hesitation, that human beings, from the moment that they exist, do things, move around and modify the environment. All the same, unlike other living beings, man is extremely powerful. [S]he has a speculative mind, a complex language and cunning hands which allow him to harness nature. In other words, he can exploit natural laws for his own ends. He can fly; he can plunge into the depths of the oceans; he can live in inhospitable places, [s]he can even set out to explore and, at some future date, colonize distant worlds. [S]he could, if [s]he chose to do so, explode the current nuclear arsenal and destroy the entire Earth. Furthermore [hu]man[s], unlike other beings, is endowed with consciousness (our anthropocentrist would speak of consciousness and conscience.) Our biocentrist holds that even certain groups of higher animals may have a certain consciousness. However, the degree of human consciousness, if we can speak of degrees, is certainly higher than any other. It follows that man is the only living organism who can be a moral agent (the only one who can act with rational motives), all others being merely morally passive. [Hu]man is not, strictly speaking, "superior" but, as Passmore writes, [s]he can decide to kill or spare other species at will. That is beyond dispute. But as [s]he has great power (the great power to modify the environment) and consciousness (the ability to understand the consequences of his actions), [s]he also has a responsibility to nature, which, as the German philosopher Hans Jonas writes, extends into the future and involves even future generations. Moreover their responsibility is in proportion to his consciousness. A newborn child, for example, is less responsible than an adult because his or her consciousness is undeveloped. In addition, we also know that consciousness goes hand in hand with knowledge. An ignorant person is less responsible for his actions. If [s]he kills an animal from an endangered species, [s]he is less responsible than someone who knows exactly what [s]he is doing. Our anthropocentrist and our biocentrist are in agreement: the greater the consciousness, the greater the responsibility; the more we know the more we love. This is the way to act. We need to extend our knowledge of the world we live in. Anthropocentrists need to extend their knowledge of non-humans world and seek to achieve empathy with other living beings. At the same time they need to take care to avoid anthropomorphization and to understand them for what they are. Taylor writes: "we need not, for example, consider them to have consciousness. Some of them may be aware of the world around them and others may not. Nor need we deny that different kinds and levels of awareness are exemplified the consciousness in some form is present. On their part, the biocentrists need to recognize that human beings form part of nature and therefore cannot avoid acting on the environment. Biocentrists should resist misanthropy, since man can and should develop his knowledge in the fields of science and technology since he must fulfil himself. The [hu]man who loves nature must also love [hu]man[s], for [s]he knows man to be the highest expression of evolution and cannot destroy himself, since to kill oneself would also be to impoverish nature. In conclusion: the greater the knowledge, the better chance there is of making the right choices. This constitutes an objective basis for respecting nature. If we think that there is nothing after death, our respect for nature will be purely subjective and will depend on our feelings. For example, it could happen that someone who has a good environmental education will have an inner ecological impulse which will cause him to respect non-human organisms and future generations. If we realize that we need to extend our knowledege and thereby our consciousness, we shall explicitly declare ourselves to be ignorant. We know that nature exists, but we do not know what its value is. It is this obecjtive awareness of our ignorance which should guide our choices: respect for nature derives from our awareness of the fact that we do not know the value of nature. As knowledge increases, our behavior will automatically undergo change and we shall feel more responsible for our action. On the other hand, as we made clear at the beginning of this essay with regard to choices, there may be someone who chooses to believe that the world has a teleological end, and that humanity forms part of a wider deisgn. But it will always be a personal and hence subjective choice in any case. In brief: without knowledge is subjective; only knowledge carries with it real and objective responsibility.Unabated, the status-quo nature-culture relationship causes extinction and makes war inevitableBookchin 87(Murray Bookchin, co-founder of the Institute of Social Ecology, 1987, "An Appeal For Social and Psychological Sanity," The Modern Crisis, Published by Black Rose Books Ltd., ISBN 0920057624, p. 106-108)Industrially and technologically, we are moving at an ever-accelerating pace toward a yawning chasm with our eyes completely blindfolded. From the 1950s onward,we have placed ecological burdens upon our planet that have no precedent in human history. Our impact on our environment has been nothing less than appalling. The problems raised by acid rain alone are striking examples of [end page 106] innumerable problems that appear everywhere on our planet. The concrete-like clay layers, impervious to almost any kind of plant growth, replacing dynamic soils that once supported lush rain forests remain stark witness to a massive erosion of soil in all regions north and south of our equatorial belt. The equatora cradle not only of our weather like the ice caps but a highly complex network of animal and plant lifeis being denuded to a point where vast areas of the region look like a barren moonscape. We no longer "cut" our foreststhat celebrated "renewable resource" for fuel, timber, and paper. We sweep them up like dust with a rapidity and "efficiency" that renders any claims to restorative action mere media-hype.Our entire planet isthusbecoming simplified, not only polluted. Its soil is turning into sand. Its stately forests are rapidly being replaced by tangled weeds and scrub, that is, where vegetation in any complex form can be sustained at all. Itswildlife ebbs and flows on the edge of extinction, dependent largely on whetherone or two nationsorgovernmental administrationsagree that certainsea and land mammals, birdspecies, or, for that matter, magnificent treesare "worth" rescuing as lucrative items on corporate balance sheets.With each such loss, humanity, too,loses a portion of its own character structure: its sensitivity toward life as such, including human life, and its rich wealth of sensibility. If we can learn to ignore the destiny of whales and condorsindeed, turn their fate into chic clicheswe can learn to ignore the destiny of Cambodians in Asia, Salvadorans in Central America,[end page 107]and, finally,the human beings who people our communities. If we reach this degree of degradation, we will then become so spiritually denuded that we will be capable of ignoring the terrors of thermonuclear war. Like the biotic ecosystems we have simplified with our lumbering and slaughtering technologies, we will have simplified the psychic ecosystems that give each of us our personal uniqueness. We will have rendered our internal mileau as homogenized and lifeless as our external milieuand a biocidal war will merely externalize the deep sleep that will have already claimed our spiritual and moral integrity. The process of simplification, even more significantly than pollution,threatens to destroy the restorative powers of nature and humanitytheir common ability to efface the forces of destruction and reclaim the planet for life and fecundity.A humanity disempowered of its capacity to change a misbegotten "civilization," ultimately divested of its power to resist, reflects a natural world disempowered of its capacity to reproduce a green and living world.Using hydro-logics, education is able to overcome humanistic thought and affirm interconnectedness.Neimanis 12 [Astrida PhD York, feminist theorist who works on questions relative to water & hydrologics. Gender Institute, London School of Economics - Talk given at Entanglements of New Materialisms Linkoping, Sweden May 25-26 2012 - accessed @ https://www.academia.edu/1932447/Thinking_with_Water_An_Aqueous_Imaginary_ and_An_Epistemology_of_Unknowability - PART I: THINKING WITH WATER(AN AQUEOUS IMAGINARY)]My own work in thinking with water began by thinking through the question of embodiment. For, as soon as we consider, from a critical materialist perspective, that our bodies are mostly water, continuously transformed through water, and continuously giving back to other bodies of water, for better of worse (drinking, urinating, sweating, transfusing, ejaculating, siphoning, breastfeeding, sponging, weeping) it becomes quite clear that human bodies are hardly separate from the myriad other watery bodies - freshwater mussel, water filtration plant, seagrass, sunflower, raincloud, grandmother- with which we coexist,now and acrossother times as well. And as I began to tease apart the details of these imbrications and relations, it became clear that the ways and means through which we are connected are not uniform. All of these bodies of water- us included- exist according to various logics of water what we might call our planetary hydro-logics. Such logics are the movements and modes of existence according to which bodies of water make themselves intelligible, and the patterns of existence according to which certain bodies come to affectother bodies. Bodies transform, and transform each other, through these different hydro-logics. These hydro-logics seep through every aspect of our material existence. We experience these movements viscerally, in the superabundance, acute paucity, or mere banality of the rain, sleet and snow that dominate our daily weather reports. In everyday language, these transformations are described as the hydrological cycle, but this cycle is in fact a complex and multivalent choreography of qualities and modalities. Elsewhere, I have begun to make a provisionally schematized inventory (what Eve Sedgewick might have described as a sort ofnonce taxonomy 10) of these movements, even as I realize that water will always ultimately escape such taxonomic efforts. But, as with all nonce taxonomies, such categorizations give us tools for explaining our everyday lives, and their relation to broader political and ethicalquestions.Among the various modalities of water I include:1. Gestationality. Waters gestational logic refers to a sort of watery posthumanist sexuality, agiving-milieu for the proliferation of life in myriad ways which are not limited to heteronormative reprosexuality. Gestationality is thus waters capacity to bathe plural life into being, in a partial dissolving of itself into new iterations and manifestations. While this logic challenges the view of water as instrumentalized passive backdrop, it also (as MielleChandler and I explore elsewhere) importantly challenges the binary structure of agency versus inertia, or the active versus the passive, to which much if not most new materialistthinking, in its emphasis on agency, acting and doing, still subscribes.2. Dissolution is waters capacity to wash away life and recycle its matter(s). Sometimeserroneously referred to as a universal solvent, water still can affect many other bodies bydissolving them altogether. In thelanguage of meteorology, this also refers to tsunami,flood and hurricane. Waters logics are neither benign nor benevolent towards all bodies. Communication refers to a logic whereby water is medium and messenger. As the bearer ofboth good and bad news, of communications both planned and unplanned (as oceancurrent carrying islands of plastic; as flooded lands bearing refugees and migrants; as acidrain bearing toxic industrial run-off; in the intercorporeal circulations within our bodies, as well as those that circulate, intra-corporeally, among and with other bodies into which we pee or out of which we drink), water articulates certain bodies with others.4. Differentiation is a tricky logic. It calls on us to recall that watery bodies do not all flow into one amorphous puddle. Each body takes up a new instantiation, in always new forms, discerned by various thresholds and membranes that function in accordance with waters various speeds and slownesses. 12 Bodies are only intelligible because they are differentiated, and watery bodies, no less. Attending to waters logic of differentiation reminds us to temper the romantic overtones of waters relational logic. Just as dissolution is a necessary counteror simply the other side of the cointo gestationality, differentiation balances waters capacity for confluence.5.Archive refers to waters material capacity for storage and memory. Not only are flotsam, chemicals, bodies, detritus, sunken treasure and other chronicles of our pasts harboured inthe oceans depths; water, as various oral traditions show, is a literal container of story and history that serve collective cultural remembrances. 13 6.Finally, unknowability, somewhat ironically, refers to waters capacity to elude our efforts to contain it with any apparatus of knowledge. Unknowability is the logic of refusal. Or, put otherwise: despite all of our dam-building, mega-irrigation schemes, and cloud seeding efforts, water will always elude our total control, and our efforts to fully know it. In these multiple translations and transformations, a six-fold schematization of waters complex hydro-logics thus emerges: gestation, dissolution, communication, differentiation, archive, unknowability. In one sense, these descriptions just restate the truths of science, and the banal facticity of waters existence. The importance of water for the maintenance and proliferation oflife is not news to any contemporary biologist or ecologist, just as the fact that mammals pee, that water washes, that lakes evaporate, that pollution travels, or that the ocean is very, very deep, is no great revelation. But if we recall that how we act in the world depends on how we imagine it, I wonder: how can paying attention to the way in which water evidences these processes in its matter inits matter that is also me, or at least about 70% of me giveme some new imaginative resources for rethinking both water, and the questions to which it asks me to attend (sexuality, death, communication, difference, story, knowledge)? And how might this encourage me to change my practice? In the second part of this talk, then, I want to spend some more time reflecting onjust one ofthese modalities that is, waters unknowabilityStatus quo instrumentalization of the ocean supports modernity, racism, slavery, ecological collapse and ongoing systems of colonial brutality the aff is a step against modernityJacques 12Environmental Governance: Power and Knowledge in a Local-Global World, ed Gabriela Ktting, Ronnie Lipschutz. Peter Jacques, Ph.D. Department of Political Science University of Central Florida Education Ph.D., Political Science, Northern Arizona University, 2003, with distinction. Masters in Public Administration (M.P.A.), environmental policy focus, Northern Arizona University, 2000. B.A., Philosophy, Montana State University, with honors, 1993. B.A., Film and Theater Arts, Montana State University, with honors,1993Natural law here is important to the construction of power also, because it normalizes a specific ontology as infallible. Thus, I have argued that it was not that Grotius made the ocean open for all to use that set up matrices of world power and marine crises, but rather it was what he made it open for that became so disastrous. Even after the open pool regime is closed, the purpose remains the sameinstrumental enterpriseand closing mare liberum fails to change the essential place that the World Ocean holds in the minds of technocratic elite of the modern nation-state. During modernity, such violence is unaccountable to the living spaces of the World Ocean whether as the source of life, a home, an organism, an integrated part in the universe that creates identity, or other purpose, because what had been as common once as light and air had been bound in logos that precludes non-instrumental ontologies and converts the oceans into a global water closet and avenue to other lockers, just like South Africa became for Grotius Netherlands. Where mare liberum originates a few years after the Dutch East India Company, the Dutch colonial seeds are soon thereafter spread to South Africa in 1652. One space on the ocean became the same as any other in its function and purpose. Thus, with a natural law of European privileged trade and accumulation via a World Ocean, all other purposes, histories, and geographies are erased or shrouded. See, for example, Hegel's view on Africa as a subject of such globalization that is only possible after social relations and human-ocean relations are commodified and open up the world to barbaric subjugation: Africa is not interesting from the point of view of its own history. ... Man [in Africa] is in a state of barbarism and savagery which is preventing him from being an integral part of civilization. ... [Africa] is the country of gold which closed in on itself, the country of infancy, beyond the daylight of conscious history, wrapped in the blackness of night. Of course the blackness of night appears to be a crude reference to skin color, and blackness equating the undeveloped, the empty, and the savage. Colonizing the heart of darkness then is rationalized by erasing geography through the sea, making European development the end of history, and replacing other purposc(s) with a singular global purpose of free access to the rest of the worlds spaces and homes as naturalized right. Such erasure connects Grotius to Stephen Bikowhere Biko led Black South Africans to see blackness of their skin as the cause of their collective oppression and articulate a Black Consciousness to reinstate not just political power in the face of Apartheid (apartness), but to reinstate pre-colonial South African purposes and ontologies (sec Abdi 1999). Colonial and neo-colonial periods expunge the meanings of the local connection of inlet to stars of the South Pacific, or the organic functions of a living water. Perhaps this is the most powerful reducer of modernity where all life and home is made to serve one master, making the habitation of multiple overseas spaces (see Luke, this volume) less palpable because there is no perceptible loss of purpose or function to the then colonial and now globalized Northern minds. Enterprise, use, and free access to habitat and home underlies the structure of contemporary political order, which means that this very order must maintain a hegemonic hold on ontological notions of not just the ocean or of social relations, but of all-inclusive ecology (human and non-human) itself. Plumwood agrees that a main explanation for how the rationalist culture of the west has been able to expand and conquer other cultures as well as nature was that it has long lacked their respectbased constraints on the use of naturea thought that puts the success of the west in a rather different and more dangerous light. (Plumwood 2002: 117) The success is more dangerous because it leads in a boomerang effect back to the West where ecological collapse presses hard on the doors of the West threatening broad social collapse, and the West will not be immune regardless of how remote it tries to make itself. Nonetheless, without the Grotian or Scldenian ocean, the colonial nations could not have gone across the sea to siphon off resources, and ultimately create the structure of a world capitalist system we now live in. Imagine the power of the current core states, such as those in the G-8, without a colonial legacy to found their current power, and through this image we can imagine a counterfactual position for the modem power of the sea. Certainly, this power of the sea was not lost on Alfred Thayer Mahan, who knew that control of the ocean was a prerequisite for extending national and imperial power. Control the sea, control the world. was his modem contribution. In order to control the sea, it has to be something ontologically that can be controlled, such as the heap of matter that Nature could not bring to perfection.Contention 2: SolvencyThe problem is societal not biological; affs method is key to solve. Waxman et al 10 (Sandra Waxman, professor of psychology at Northwestern University, Douglas Medin, professor of psychology at Northwestern University, Patricia Herrmann, The University of Texas at Austin, Psychology, Post-Doc, Anthropocentrism is not the first step in childrens reasoning about the natural world, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles /PMC2890461/#!po=79.4118\\ME)The current results offer unambiguous evidence that the anthropocentric pattern of reasoning observed in urban 5-year-old children is not an obligatory initial step in reasoning about the biological world. Instead, the results show that anthropocentrism is an acquired perspective, one that emerges between 3 and 5 years of age in American children raised in urban environments. This interpretation is consistent with evidence from two independent sources. First, beginning in the first year of life, children distinguish animate objects (including human as well as nonhuman animals) from inanimate objects, and invoke this distinction when making predictions about the behavior of objects (2127). We suggest that the 3-year-olds in our experiments also invoked this concept of animacy in their reasoning about biological phenomena. Second, the current results, coupled with those from 5-year-old rural children (3), underscore the view that in every domain of human development, the path of acquisition is importantly shaped by the input that learners receive. Considered in this light, what is the most straightforward interpretation of our studies? We propose that anthropocentrism does not represent the young childs initial entry point for reasoning about the biological world, but that it is a learned perspective, and one that is likely supported more strongly in some cultures and some contexts than in others. As we have pointed out, there are differences among communities in the construals favored when considering the relation between human and nonhuman animals (28, 29). In addition, even within a given community, people are able to appreciate more than a single construal of this relation, and different perspectives will become highlighted in certain contexts (e.g., school vs. home) and even under certain priming conditions (10). This observation is directly relevant to the issue of conceptual development within the biological domain. We expect that adults, like children, retain an appreciation of an anthropocentric view (which means, of course, that this view is not cast aside during development). We also expect that in urban technologically saturated communities, where direct contact with nonhuman animals is relatively limited (30) and where images of nonhuman animals in childrens books, discourse, and media often take an anthropocentric cast (31), young children encounter considerable support (intended or not) for an anthropocentric perspective as they seek to understand the relation between human and nonhuman animals. Moreover, there is evidence that 5-year-old children are especially attuned to cultural discourse about essentially biological phenomena (32). We suggest that the anthropocentrism exhibited by urban 5-year-old children is not only a by-product of their more limited exposure to the natural world, but may also be passed on to them by adults in their community. A hydrological approach to ocean education is a key starting pointWatson-Wright 12 (Wendy, Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO, Ocean in Focus: Science and Education for Sustainable Development, in: Copejans, E.et al.(Ed.) (2012).First conference on ocean literacy in Europe: Book of abstracts. Bruges, Belgium, 12 October 2012. VLIZ Special Publication,60: pp. 14)

To address ocean and environmental challenges more progress is needed on many fronts: producing less greenhouse gases, inventing new green technologies, and changing our behaviour. Progress is also needed in providing education and public awareness to create informed citizens. The need for educating and learning about the ocean and global change is urgent and should be interdisciplinary and holistic, integrating scientific, social, gender, economic, cultural and ethical dimensions as well as incorporating local, traditional and indigenous knowledge perspectives and practices. Ocean and environmental education should be part of an education for sustainable development that helps people to develop the attitudes and knowledge to make informed decisions for the benefit of themselves and others, now and in the future. Nowadays scientists and students look at the world through many lenses, including human interactions with the planet, to better understand how we impact and are impacted by the world in which we live. UNESCO and its IOC strive to bring our picture of the Ocean, its beauty, diversity and fragility to educate scientists, policy makers and new generations about the broad vision needed to address todays global problems.

Education reform in the US empirically is centered on achievement gaps; security rhetoric upholds the failure of past reforms and only adopting a new model can overcome the colonial underpinnings of the current system the United States must changeYong Zhao 2009, Ph. D Presidential Chair, Director, Institute for Global and Online Education, Professor, Department of Educational Methodology, Policy, and Leadership at the University of Oregon Catching Up or Leading the Way Chapter 1 http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/109076/chapters/Recent-Education-Reform-in-the-United-States.aspx The massive reform efforts in the United States have been intended to close two types of so-called achievement gaps in order to deliver a better future for America and all Americans. The first is the gap inside the United States and among the different subgroups of the population; the second is the gap between the United States and other countries. In the NCLB proposal released by President Bush on July 3, 2001, the Executive Summary begins with mention of these two gaps: As America enters the 21st Century full of hope and promise, too many of our neediest students are being left behind. Today, nearly 70 percent of inner city fourth graders are unable to read at a basic level on national reading tests. Our high school seniors trail students in Cyprus and South Africa on international math tests. (Bush, 2001, p. 1) The phrase "achievement gap" is often used to refer to the performance gap between minority students, particularly African American and Hispanic students, and their white peers, and similar disparities between students from low-income and well-off families in a number of areas: standardized test scores, grades, dropout rates, and college completion rates. For example, results of the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) show that 39 percent of white students scored at the proficient level or higher in 4th grade reading, but only 12 percent of black students and 14 percent of Hispanic students did so (National Center for Education Statistics, 2003b). The gap in math was even larger, with 42 percent of white 4th graders scoring at the proficient level or above and just 10 percent of black students and 15 percent of Hispanic students achieving the same result. Thirty-eight percent of 4th graders who were eligible for free and reduced lunch scored below basic in math, whereas only 12 percent of those who were not eligible scored at the same level (National Center for Education Statistics, 2003c). Similar gaps exist in the dropout rate and the graduation rate. In 2006, the dropout rate for white, African American, and Hispanic youth was 5.8 percent, 10.7 percent, and 22.1 percent, respectively (National Center for Education Statistics, 2008). A study on high school graduation rates (Swanson, 2008) shows similar disparities: in 200304, high school graduation rates were 76.2 percent for whites, 57.8 percent for Hispanics, and 53.4 percent for blacks. The report found that in the nation's 50 largest urban areas, where most low-income and minority students reside, [o]nly about one-half (52 percent) of students in the principal school systems of the 50 largest cities complete high school with a diploma. That rate is well below the national graduation rate of 70 percent, and even falls short of the average for urban districts across the country (60 percent). Only six of these 50 principal districts reach or exceed the national average. In the most extreme cases (Baltimore, Cleveland, Detroit, and Indianapolis), fewer than 35 percent of students graduate with a diploma. (Swanson, 2008, p. 8) Although closing the achievement gap between subgroups of students within the United States has certainly been a strong motivator for the recent reforms, closing the gaps between the United States and other countries has perhaps been an even stronger force because it concerns the well-being and future of the U.S. economy and involves a majority of Americans, including more powerful Americansthe middle class and big businesses. The sense of an economic threat from other countries has long been associated with the sense that the American education system is much inferior to those of its foreign competitors. The achievement gap between U.S. students and foreign students is often illustrated by citing test scores on international comparative tests such as the Trends in Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), and the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS). In all these tests, the United States has not fared well. Results of the 1995 TIMSS show that U.S. students outperformed students in only 2 of 21 countries in math and finished significantly below students in 14 countries; U.S. students were significantly below students in 11 of 21 countries in science and were significantly ahead of students in only 2 countries. On the advanced math test, of the 15 countries participating, the United States was outscored by 11 countries. The PISA results were no better; American 15-year-olds ranked 24th among students in 40 countries that participated in the 2003 study (Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century [National Academies], 2006). In terms of reading and literacy, 4th graders' performance on PIRLS in 2006 gave the United States a midpoint rank18th out of 40 countries. The disappointing news is that between 2001 and 2006, U.S. students' reading ability as measured by PIRLS did not show any measurable improvement, despite all the efforts of NCLB to improve reading (Baer, Baldi, Ayotte, & Green, 2007). The gap is also identified in terms of the number of students pursuing degrees in math, science, engineering, and technology. In October 2005, the National Academies released a report titledRising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future, written by a panel of 20 prominent individuals with diverse backgrounds. This report was the result of a study requested by Congress to assess America's ability to compete and prosper in the 21st century. The panel presented the following information: In South Korea, 38% of all undergraduates receive their degrees in natural science or engineering. In France, the figure is 47%, in China, 50%, and in Singapore, 67%. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 15%. Some 34% of doctoral degrees in natural sciences (including the physical, biological, earth, ocean, and atmospheric sciences) and 56% of engineering PhDs in the United States are awarded to foreign-born students. In the U.S. science and technology workforce in 2000, 38% of PhDs were foreign-born. Estimates of the number of engineers, computer scientists, and information technology students who obtain 2-, 3-, or 4-year degrees vary. One estimate is that in 2004, China graduated about 350,000 engineers, computer scientists, and information technologists with 4-year degrees, while the United States graduated about 140,000. China also graduated about 290,000 with 3-year degrees in these same fields, while the United States graduated about 85,000 with 2- or 3-year degrees. Over the past 3 years alone, both China and India have doubled their production of 3- and 4-year degrees in these fields, while the U.S. production of engineers is stagnant and the rate of production of computer scientists and information technologists doubled (Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century [National Academies], 2006, p. 16). To some, these kinds of gaps spell clear danger to the future of the United States.New York Timescolumnist Thomas Friedman has been quoted as saying, "When I was growing up, my parents told me, 'Finish your dinner. People in China and India are starving. I tell my daughters, 'Finish your homework. People in India and China are starving for your job'" (Pink, 2005b). The world's best-known writer on globalization, Friedman has often used this vivid and simple image to warn Americans that the Chinese and the Indians may take away their children's jobs. Some have gone even further, likening the superior academic performance of other nations to the situation surrounding the launch ofSputnik, the first artificial satellite, which was once viewed as the symbol of the Soviet Union's superiority in military technology and a potent threat to the security of the United States. In 2007, Robert Compton, a venture capitalist, produced a documentary film to show how Indian and Chinese students are outdoing their American counterparts in education. The film,Two Million Minutes: A Global Examination, compares the lives of six students in China, India, and the United States through their final year of high school. The point of the comparison is clear, at least according to the filmmaker: American students are squandering their precious two million minutesthe estimated time that students spend in high schoolplaying video games and partying, while their peers in China and India spend more hours studying math and science, with a strong motivation to enter the best colleges because they all aspire to become top scientists and engineers. The filmmaker compares the situation to the context surroundingSputnik: Just as the Soviets' launch of a tiny satellite ignited a space race and impelled America to improve its science education, many experts feel the United States has reached its next "Sputnik moment." The goal of this film is to help answer the question: Are we doing enough with the time we have to ensure the best future for all? (Compton, 2008) Sputnikhas been used quite frequently to invoke a sense of urgency among Americans by many who share Thomas Friedman's "they are eating our lunch" belief. A report jointly issued by "fifteen of [the] country's most prominent business organizations" in 2005 usesSputnikas the primary rhetorical device to express their "deep concern about the United States' ability to sustain its scientific and technological superiority through this decade and beyond" (Business Roundtable, 2005, p. 1). The report,Tapping America's Potential: The Education for Innovation Initiative, begins as follows:A shift away from colonial education models towards hydrologics is the first step to solve environmental collapse our method uniquely solves for extinction Wright 14 Becoming-With 2014 in the Living Lexicon for the Environmental Humanities Kate Wright, Ph.D philosophy, University of New England, Armidale, Australia http://environmentalhumanities.org/arch/vol5/5.15.pdfThis multispecies becoming-with leaves us open to the responsive capacity of all earthly life, and this has important implications for ethics. If our knowledge of Earth's complex ecological systems relies on interspecies connectivities, issues like extinction, biodiversity and conservation become epistemicif we lose a species, we might irrevocably damage a multispecies way of knowing through becoming-with, diminishing what Mick Smith has termed the species of possibilities that define our sense of the world. This links the ethics of face-to-face encounter with developing an extended ecological imagination. Becoming-with nonhumans, and appreciating their capacity for meaning-making and worlding, may enhance our ability to respond to the disturbing and amorphous becoming-withs of the Anthropocenemore-than-(but including)-human assemblages like superstorms, acidifying oceans, and antibiotic resistant bacteria. Ultimately, this compelling photograph of two young men laughing in the face of powerful planetary forces is a reminder of how tragic and dangerous the cognitive illusion of human exceptionalism can be. We can never disconnect from Earth's ecological community, because we are always becoming-with, in a living multispecies world composed of phenomena and transitions. But we can terribly damage our ability to respond to that world. Failing to attend to ecological connectivities does not break them, but leaves them disfigured. These neglected connections hang in the air, like exposed faulty wiring, pulsing with a deadly charge.US k2 spillover Resources, presence, and innovationBOIESA 11/1/11 Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, Submission to the United Nations on November 1, 2011 Sustainable Development for the Next Twenty Years United States Views on Rio+20 http://www.state.gov/e/oes/sus/releases/176863.htmEfforts to help countries obtain and provide environmental information to their citizens and global experts are important contributions to Rio+20. For sustainable development to take hold, policies must be based on sound science and reliable data. With advances in technology, it is now quicker and less costly to collect, monitor, assess, and disseminate data. Countries need to have the capacity to monitor the environment and to integrate that data with economic and social development plans. The United States is cooperating internationally through other fora to share environmental information and promote the use of compatible data systems so that we can better identify where we are achieving sustainable outcomes and where work still remains to be done. In this vein, Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), if structured correctly, could be a useful means to assess progress, catalyze action, and enhance integration among all three pillars of sustainable development. Any goals that we might set should go beyond measuring traditional assistance and towards data-driven and evidence-based tracking of intermediate and end outcomes that are realized through all sources of investment in the green economy. We believe the concept of sustainable development goals is worthy of consideration at Rio+20, and that the discussions at Rio+20 can inform ongoing and future deliberations about the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) as we approach 2015. Inspiring Future Generations: The 1992 Conference on Environment and Development was a landmark event. Rio+20 marks a new foundation for engaging the global community and building the greener and more inclusive economies, smarter cities, and advanced institutions and networks that will define the future. Achieving these goals will require new ways of working with diverse stakeholders and communities at all stages of development. The United States stands ready to collaborate, innovate, and realize the promise of sustainable development for the next 20 years and beyond.The natural progression of our relationship with the ocean is one that is defined by hydrologics; new concepts of sustainability are inseparable from the education inherent to ocean exploration our radical pedagogy is key Bowers 08 Professor of Environmental Studies @ University of Oregon[C. A. Bowers (Ph. D. from the University of California in educational studies with an emphasis on education and social thought,) Transitions: Educational Reforms that Promote Ecological Intelligence or the Assumptions Underlying Modernity?]Leadership is needed in preparing classroom teachers with the necessary knowledge and pedagogical skills that will enable students to live a less consumer and thus less individualistic and change-oriented lifestyle. One of the paradoxes that few faculty recognize is that the ideal of the autonomous individual who has not learned the value of the intergenerational knowledge, skills, and mutually supportive relationships that are the basis of greater community self-reliance, is the kind of individual required by the industrial system of production and consumption. Overcoming faculty resistance to recognizing how many of the ideas and values that have guided their own approaches to education contribute to the consumer dependent lifestyle that is one of the major contributors to degrading the ability of natural systems to renew themselves will be a difficult challengeespecially since many will claim that academic freedom protects their right to promote educational reforms even though the reforms contribute to overshooting the sustaining capacity of natural systems. The dawning of a new consciousness, which the civil rights and feminist movements are still struggling to achieve, requires both conceptual and moral leadership. The same conceptual and moral leadership will be required in transforming the long-held traditions of thinking in colleges of education. Before spelling out the broader implications of basing educational reforms in teacher education and other areas of study on ecologically sustainable ideas and values, it is necessary to summarize the nature of the changes that the Earths natural systems are undergoing. It is important to keep in mind that this summary must take account of the realities of the world in which we now live. Changes in natural systems: The industrial system of production and consumption, along with the decline in the ability of species and habitats to regenerate themselves, are increasing the rate of global warming as well as changing the chemistry of the worlds oceans. Degraded habitats in oceans and in different regions of the world are leading to the disappearance of species (including a rapid decline in the viability of the worlds fisheries). Other environmental changes include the spread of deserts, the melting of glaciers that are the source of water for hundreds of millions of people. The loss of topsoil, depletion of major aquifers, and the destruction of forests, are also major sources of change already influencing the prospects of the current and future generations. Increase in world population and the spread of poverty: Over the last hundred years the world population has increased by five and a half billion people at the same time the natural resources have been exploited in ways that have led to the impoverishment of more people. The current estimate is that over 2 billion people live on less than two dollars a day. For the different groups in American society, the era of cheap food is overwhich, along with the rising cost of fuel and other basic services will force many people further into poverty. Changes in Lifetime Employment: Economic globalization, along with the spread of the morally unrestrained culture of corporations, will cause more people to outlive their savings in the increasingly privatized retirement programs. The lack of health insurance now experienced by nearly forty-seven million Americans is the leading cause of bankruptcy and homelessness. Youth entering the job market will find that the outsourcing of work to low wage regions of the world, even in highly skilled occupations, will limit their possibilitiesand thus their ability to educate their children, to own a decent house, and to save for retirement. The present plight of older workers will also be the plight of younger workers as the government safety nets become further overwhelmed by the current shift in the distribution of wealth in society. The future is made even more uncertain by the current globalization of an industrial/consumer oriented lifestyle. While economic globalization is being viewed as the expression of progress, it is increasing the rate of global warming and the depletion of the Earths natural resources. Unfortunately, scientists and other experts have no way of knowing the regenerative capacity of the natural systems that are being exploited at an accelerating rate. How long with it take for various fish stocks, such as the codfish once so abundant and the blue fin tuna now on the verge of extinction, to recover? Can the aquifers that are being mined as though they are an infinite resource regenerate themselves within our lifetimesor even the seventh generation from now? Can the worlds oceans reverse the acidic levels and warmer temperatures that are now contributing to the death of coral reefs that nearly 25 percent of fish species depend upon? What is the time frame for regenerating the glaciers that are the source of fresh water for hundreds of millions of people? Even though we do not have the answers to these questions, more of the worlds governments have made the adoption of the American consumer lifestyle their goal. Many regions of the world are already experiencing the degradation ofnatural systems that were assumed to be inexhaustiblesuch as potable water, forest cover, topsoil, fisheries, petroleum, and other natural minerals.Pg. 182-184Hydro-relationality is crucial to reversing unsustainable nature/culture distinction; fundamentally alters model of spatial-temporalityStrang 13 Conceptual Relations: Water, Ideologies, and Theoretical Subversions in Edited by Cecilia Chen, Janine MacLeod and Astrida Neimanis IAS Fellow at St John's College, Durham University (October - December 2009)Professor Veronica Strang is an environmental anthropologist at the University of Auckland, whose work focuses on the social and cultural aspects of human-environmental interactions. Her doctoral research at Oxford University was concerned with conflicts between land and water users along the Mitchell River in northern Queensland. The ensuing ethnographic text, Uncommon Ground: cultural landscapes and environmental values (Berg1997), is now well known as a leading comparative study, described by American Anthropologist as contributing absorbing, original theory' and by the Australian Review of Books as pioneering this field'.Disconnecting Water: One of the most striking effects of modernity has been the emergence in Western thought of an extraordinary hubris: a conceptual bifurcation between culture and nature, and the idea that civilization has separated humankind from inclusion in and interdependence with ecological processes. This conceptual relation is often gendered, positioning culture with (active) masculinity and nature with (passive) femininity. At times it has also been heavily racialized, aligning notions of culture with primarily Western, more cosmopolitan ways of life, and conflating notions of (unspoiled/unformed) nature and (innocent/primitive) indigeneity.* The sources of this dualism are multiple, entangled in a distant past when shifts into agriculture and irrigation allowed some societies to expand, to override ecological limitations, subdue nature, and embark upon escalating programs of environmental engineering.3 Today, human supremacy is widely taken for granted: contemporary industrialized societies have normalized increasingly intensive self-generative and managerial activities, gardening the world3 in highly directive ways, and believing that when nature revolts this is a mere slippage in patriarchal control. However, under intensifying pressure, nature is revolting more extremely, forcing us all to pay attention both to the lack of reciprocal care in human-environmental relationships and to the reality that global ecosystems cannot absorb misuse indefinitely. The dualistic thinking that separates culture from nature has been much critiqued in anthropology.^ Benefiting from multiple exchanges of knowledge with non-Westem, small-scale societies, the discipline has articulated alternate, more integrated conceptual models of humanenvironmental engagement in which humankind is situated within rather than as a superior ruler of the material environment.5 Recent decades have brought a shift away from the theoretical fixities of structuralism, via feminist critiques and postmodernism, to more dynamic ways of understanding human being and human relations with other species and things. The notion of ecocultural dialectics coheres with this thinking, as do earlier philosophical notions of dialectical relations.- Further appreciation of the relational nature of human-environmental engagement has come from progress in understanding the intimacies of cognitive, phenomenological, and sensory* engagement with the world.2 Thinking with water - making imaginative use of its material characteristics to formulate ideas about flow, permeation, movement, and change - has encouraged this greater theoretical fluidity', highlighting the reality that human-environmental engagements are composed of shifting and mutually constitutive processes, rather than the more static and fixed relations suggested by notions of culture or civilization, wiiich depend heavily on images of structure, artefacts, and built urbanity.A more connective view, building on Vladimir Vernadskys ideas about the flows between all biota, situates humankind within an all-encompassing hypersea of spatio-temporal relations.3 This view draws attention to the reality that human agency intersects with that of many other actors and actants. There is an ongoing negotiation with the activities and behaviours of non-human species and things; with the circulations of hydrological and ecological processes; with the currents of histories and changing imagery; and above all, with the inexorable flow of time.

The mission statement and objective of NOAA ocean exploration is centered around the hydrological cycle and the advancement of its knowledgeNOAA 11 NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research: strategic plan FY 2011-FY 2015 May 2011 http://explore.noaa.gov/sites/OER/Documents/about-oer/program-review/oer-str-plan.pdfOER Vision: A society that understands the importance of a healthy ocean to all life on Earth and is informed and inspired by discoveries that reveal the wonders, mysteries, and workings of the ocean. OER Mission: Support National and NOAA objectives by exploring the Earths largely unknown ocean in all its dimensions for the purpose of discovery and the advancement of knowledge, using state-of-the-art technologies in evolutionary and revolutionary ways.GOAL 1: Conduct scientific baseline characterizations of unknown or poorly-known ocean* basin boundaries, processes, and resourcesGOAL 2: Transition ocean exploration discoveries to new research areas (E2R) and research results to new applications (R2A) to benefit societyGOAL 3: Increase the pace, scope, and efficiency of exploration and research through advancement of underwater technologiesGOAL 4: Engage audiences through innovative means by integrating science, education, and outreach.Analysis of HYDRO-RELATIONALITY comes first water materially underlays all other forms of representation and political actionChen MacLeod Neimanis 13 Thinking with Water edited by Cecilia Chen, Janine MacLeod, Astrida NeimanisAstrida Neimanis (BA McGill, MSc London School of Economics, PhD York) Chair of the Editorial Board of PhaenEx: Journal of Existential and Phenomenological Theory and Culture, Affiliated Researcher, Posthumanities Hub (TEMA Gender), Linkoping University, SE. Cecilia Chen is an architect and a doctoral candidate in communications at Concordia University Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, Facult des tudes environnementales Co-organiser, Thinking With Water Project (with Chen and Neimanis) / Coorganisatrice, Projet penser avec leau (avec Chen et Neimanis) Janine MacLeod is a PhD student in the Faculty of Environmental Studies at York University.We certainly take Slack's point. At the same time, perhaps we should hold onto the eco just a little bit longer. With its etymological root in the Greek oikos, meaning home or dwelling, the prefix eco- indicates where we live. In this sense, ecocultural studies implies a recontextualizing of critical cultural thinking, a way of bringing it home - we might even be tempted to say, to where it belongs. In other words, we suggest that this prefix be read not as a specializing manoeuvre, but rather as a way of remembering that eco is far more inclusive, expansive, and quotidian than conventional views of the natural or the biological suggest. Eco is also culture, technology, representation, identity, poetry. Yet, at the same time, homes can be radically uncanny,31 and coming home can be fraught with risk, uncertainty, and ghosts. In this specific case, there is the risk that assuming the eco within the cultural will result in the further forgetting of this oikos that makes the cultural possible in the first place. For these reasons, we also hold onto the eco as a means of making our position visible: ecological and environmental perspectives are crucial to a full understanding of what cultural studies entail - even if such markers should be unnecessary. Thinking with Water emphasizes that this home (this place, this body, this time, this planet) is composed largely of water. Our use of the word with in the title of this collection thus signifies a dual recognition. First, we bring waters into the foreground, noticing how they already animate key ways of knowing - including practices of politics and language, metaphor, corporeal relation, and theory. Second, we invite waters to further inform our concepts, consciously and strategically engaging their potential to transform ecocultural theory. Thus, not only do we acknowledge waters' ubiquity and potency within the more-than-human production of knowledge; we also assert that waters themselves have their own intelligences3- - that they can and should be approached as collaborators in our theoretical endeavours.

Our use of fiat advocacy and educational reform couples to provide the most powerful vehicle for changeDilla 97 [Alfonso Haroldo, and Michael Kaufman.Alfonso Haroldo Dilla is a Cuban sociologist, former director of the Latin American Studies center from 1980-1996. Community Power and Grassroots Democracy: The Transformation of Social Life. London [u.a.: Zed [u.a., 1997. Print.]With such a diversity of organizational types and social situations exam- ined in this book, it is difficult to reach simple and uniform conclusions. In a sense, the theoretical assumptions enunciated at the beginning of this chapter form some of the conclusions of the book as a whole. Community-based forms of popular participation cannot represent the sole locus of social organization for change; they are constrained by limited availability of resources, by the impact of outside political and economic forces, and by the very cultural, economic, social, and political factors that have required community action in the first place. On the other hand, while not being a panacea, they represent an important locus of organization and mobilization: one that is capable of being a vehicle of empowerment, education, and outreach; one that can (but does not necessarily) challenge hierarchy and oppression among the oppressed. In short, they can be a successful vehicle for change and part of the goal of a qualitatively more democratic society. Research on such organizations is still in its infancy. One or two of the studies presented in this book represent the beginning of this process, as they attempt, for the first time, to record a range of organizations and activities. Others were able to take the second step, to look at the internal dynamics of these organizations and to study in greater detail the role of community members and their relation to the larger political realm. Differ- ential participation, the role of leaders, relations between community organ- izations and the state, changes measured over time in self-consciousness and self-esteem of participants, and implicit or explicit organizational norms are topics that would benefit from future in-depth studies. Together, these chapters affirm the need to develop broader, more inclusive theoretical paradigms for understanding and advancing community- based forms of popular power. At the same time, the analysis presented here recognizes the specificity of any project of democracy-building and local empowerment: such processes are subject to cultural and historical conditions, and are part of the changing internal life of a community and of national political-economic life. There is no single democratic experi- ence or form which is a blueprint for future action at the community level; indeed, grassroots democracy itself isn't one thing. While these democratic experiments share a desire for enhanced participation and social justice, the means to obtain these goals will flourish or wither in ever-novel forms. Our hope is that this book will contribute to both understanding and encouraging such a process. Scholarship must engage the existing institution wishing away policy discussion fails because oppression is institutionally entrenched makes patriarchy and colonialism inevitable Jones & Spicer 9 (Campbell, Senior Lecturer in the School of Management at U of Leicester, Andre, Associate Professor in the Dept of Industrial Relations @ Warwick Business School U of Warwick, Unmasking the Entrepreneur, pgs. 22-23)The third strand in our proposed critical theory of entrepreneurship involves questions of the 'extra-discursive' factors that structure the context in which these discourses appear. The result of privileging language often results in losing sight of political and economic relations, and for this reason, a turn to language and a concomitant disavowal of things extra-discursive have been roundly criticised (Ackroyd and Fleetwood, 2000; Armstrong, 2001; Reed, 1998,2000,2009). An analysis of discourse cannot alone account for the enduring social structures such as the state or capitalism. Mike Reed has argued that a discursive approach to power relations effectively blinds critical theorists to issues of social structures: Foucauldian discourse analysis is largely restricted to a tactical and localised view of power, as constituted and expressed through situational-specific 'negotiated orders', which seriously underestimates the structural reality of more permanent and hierarchal power relations. It finds it difficult, if not impossible, to deal with institutionalised stabilities and continuities in power relations because it cannot get at the higher levels of social organisation in which micro-level processes and practices are embedded. (Reed, 2000: 526-7) These institutional stabilities may include market relations, the power of the state, relations like colonialism, kinship and patriarchy. These are the 'generative properties' that Reed (1998: 210) understands as 'mak(ing) social practices and forms - such as discursive formations - what they are and equip(ing) them with what they do'. Equally Thompson and Ackroyd also argue that in discourse analysis 'workers are not disciplined by the market, or sanctions actually or potentially invoked by capital, but their own subjectivities' (1995: 627). The inability to examine structures such as capitalism means that some basic forms of power are thus uninvestigated. Focusing solely on entrepreneurship discourse within organisations and the workplace would lead to a situation where pertinent relations that do not enter into discourse are taken to not exist. Such oversights in discursive analyses are that often structural relations such as class and the state have become so reified in social and mental worlds that they disappear. An ironic outcome indeed. Even when this structural context is considered, it is often examined in broad, oversimplified, and underspecified manners. This attention to social structure can be an important part of developing a critical theory of entrepreneurship, as we remember that the existing structural arrangements at any point are not inevitable, but can be subjected to criticism and change. In order to deal with these problems, we need to revive the concept of social structure. Thus we are arguing that 'there exist in the social world itself and not only within symbolic systems (language, myths, etc.) objective structures independent of the consciousness and will of agents, which are capable of guiding and constraining their practices or their representations' (Bourdieu, 1990: 122). Objective still means socially constructed, but social constructions that have become solidified as structures external to individual subjects. Examples of these structures may include basic 'organising principals' which are relatively stable and spatially and historically situated such as capitalism, kinship, patriarchy and the state. Some entrepreneurship researchers, particularly those drawing on sociology and political science, have shown the importance of social structure for understanding entrepreneurship (see for example Swedberg, 2000).Policy precedes value shift especially in the context of the environment checks back authoritarianismAnthony A. Leiserowitz, director of Strategic Initiatives and the Yale Project on Climate Change, and a research scientist at the School of Forestry & Environmental Studies at Yale University and Lisa O. Fernandez, the program coordinator for Strategic Initiatives and the Yale Project on Climate Change, October 2007, Toward a New Consciousness: Values to Sustain Human and Natural Communities, Environment, http://www.environmentmagazine.org/Archives/Back%20Issues/September-October%202008/Leiserowitz-Fernandez-full.htmlPolicy analysts cannot create a movement by themselves. But they can help prepare the ground so that when a movement coalesces, policy tools and leaders are ready with a clear sense of which goals to pursue and paths to take. Likewise, it is imperative that environmentalism become more than another special interest. What is required is a systems shift, a new holistic view of the world we live in. A powerful, inspiring vision of a better world, not just a critique of the status quo is needed. If widely accepted, the policy changes will follow. Policymakers and analysts can help to develop the social and political capital and policy tools for the movement that is emerging in response to the ecological, social, and economic challenges of the present and future. Use policy to encourage behavior change along with a change in values. The late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) argued that, The central conservative truth is that culture, not politics, determines the success of a society. The central liberal truth is that politics can change a culture and save it from itself. Sociologists have found that the engrained routinization of behavior, over time, can lead to sea changes in values. Focusing solely on changing values first may miss the opportunity to engrain new behaviors, which may themselves lead to new values. Part of the importance of policy is that laws and regulations can require changes in behavior, whether or not citizens and companies currently hold the values that would lead to those behaviors without regulation. Democratic governments, however, cannot govern without the consent of the governed and often cannot adequately enforce changes in individual behavior. Thus, policy instruments and value changes need to support each other, creating synergies and positive feedbacks that lead to large-scale changes in human behavior. Changes in smoking, seat-belt use, and drunk driving are all recent examples of the mutually reinforcing impacts of shifts in public values and attitudes on the one hand and changes in government policies on the other. Prepare for the opportunities inherent in future crises. There is often opportunity in crisis, and the policy domain needs to be prepared to act when it occurs. Crises like Pearl Harbor, Three Mile Island, and 9/11 resulted in rapid and fundamental shifts in public priorities and institutions. As global environmental conditions continue to deteriorate, there will be inevitable surprises, shocks, and disasters. How can leaders be prepared not only to better respond to the damage and destruction of these events, but also to take advantage of these teachable moments? We need to prepare for future ecological crises by creating institutions, systems, and roadmaps for change so that negative responses, such as authoritarianism, do not seize the day.Fear of co-optation leads to passive acceptance of oppression the better alternative is to engage in politics while acknowledging their incompletion that very failure spurs more radical transformation of the systems unconscious coordinates Zizek 2004 [Slavoj, Ocean Rain, Liberation Hurts: An Interview with Slavoj Zizek, The Electronic Book Review, July 1, 2004, www.electronicbookreview.com/v3/servlet/ebr?comman=view_essay&essay_id=rasmussen, Acc. 10-23-04l]Zizek: Im trying to avoid two extremes. One extreme is the traditional pseudo-radical position which says, If you engage in politics - helping trade unions or combating sexual harassment, whatever - youve been co-opted and so on. Then you have the other extreme which says, Ok, you have to do something. I think both are wrong. I hate those pseudo-radicals who dismiss every concrete action by saying that This will all be co-opted. Of course, everything can be co-opted [chuckles] but this is just a nice excuse to do absolutely nothing. Of course, there is a danger that - to use the old Maoist term, popular in European student movements thirty some years ago, the long march through institutions will last so long that youll end up part of the institution. We need more than ever, a parallax view - a double perspective. You engage in acts, being aware of their limitations. This does not mean that you act with your fingers crossed. No, you fully engage, but with the awareness that - the ultimate wager in the almost Pascalian sense - is not simply that this act will succeed, but that the very failure of this act will trigger a much more radical process.Fed funding key State level education funding has steadily declined since 2000 by an average of 10% a year, leading to cutbacks, increased taxes, and decreased education. Federal education funding has steadily increased over that span by billions of dollars. Michael Leachman and Chris Mai 14 5/30/14Policy and Communications Manager at The After-School Corporation (TASC), Director of State Fiscal Research with the State Fiscal Policy division of the Center, Leachman holds a Ph.D. in sociology from Loyola University Chicago. Most States Funding Schools Less Than Before the Recession http://www.cbpp.org/files/9-12-13sfp.pdfStates new budgets are providing less per-pupil funding for kindergarten through 12th grade than they did six years ago often far less. The reduced levels reflect not only the lingering effects of the 2007-09 recession but also continued austerity in many states; indeed, despite some improvements in overall state revenues, schools in around a third of states are entering the new school year with less state funding than they had last year. At a time when states and the nation are trying to produce workers with the skills to master new technologies and adapt to the complexities of a global economy, this decline in state educational investment is cause for concern. Our review of state budget documents finds -that: At least 35 states are providing less funding per student for the 2013-14 school year than they did before the recession hit. Fourteen of these states have cut per-student funding by more than 10 percent. (These figures, like all the comparisons in this paper, are in inflation-adjusted dollars and focus on the primary form of state aid to local schools.) At least 15 states are providing less funding per student to local school districts in the new school year than they provided a year ago. This is despite the fact that most states are experiencing modest increases in tax revenues. Where funding has increased, it has generally not increased enough to make up for cuts in past years. For example, New Mexico is increasing school funding by $72 per pupil this year. But that is too small to offset the states $946 per-pupil cut over the previous five years. Restoring school funding should be an urgent priority. The steep state-level K-12 spending cuts of the last several years have serious consequences for the nation. State-level K-12 cuts have large consequences for local school districts. Some 44 percent of total education spending in the United States comes from state funds (the share varies by state). Cuts at the state level mean that local school districts have to either scale back the educational services they provide, raise more local tax revenue to cover the gap, or both. Local school districts typically have little ability to replace lost state aid on their own. Given the still-weak state of many of the nations real estate markets, many school districts struggle to raise more money from the property tax without raising rates, and rate increases are often politically very difficult. Localities collected 2.1 percent less in property tax revenue in the 12-month period ending in March 2013 than in the previous year, after adjusting for inflation. The cuts deepened the recession and have slowed the economys recovery. Federal employment data show that school districts began reducing the overall number of teachers and other employees in July 2008, when the first round of budget cuts began taking effect. As of August 2013, local school districts had cut a total of 324,000 jobs since 2008. These job losses have reduced the purchasing power of workers families, in turn reducing overall economic consumption, and thus deepen