1nc doubles

8/18/2019 1nc Doubles

1/18

The 1ac’s silence is a loaded presence- their forgetting of the

non-human world and the individualistic formation of agency

ensure the replication of prevailing anthropocentric speciesist

power relations

Bell and Russell 2K (Anne C. by graduate students in the Faculty ofEnvironmental Studies !or" #niversity and Constance $. a graduate student at the%ntario &nstitute for Studies in Education #niversity of 'oronto Beyond umanBeyond )ords* Anthro+ocentrism Critical ,edagogy and the ,oststructuralist 'urnhtt+*--.csse/scee.ca-C0E-Articles-Full'e1t-C0E2/3-C0E2/3/bell.+df4

For this reason the various movements against o++ression need to be aare of and su++ortive of each other. &n

critical +edagogy hoever the e1+loration of 5uestions of race gender class andse1uality has +roceeded so far ith little ac"noledgement of the systemic lin"s

beteen human o++ressions and the domination of nature . 'he more/than/humanorld and human relationshi+s to it have been ignored as if the su6ering ande1+loitation of other beings and the global ecological crisis ere somehoirrelevant. 7es+ite the call for attention to voices historically absent from traditional canons and narratives

(Sadovni" 899 +. 38:4 nonhuman beings are shrouded in silence. 'his silencecharacteri;es even the or" of riters ho call for a rethin"ing of all culturally +ositioned essentialisms. $i"e other

educators in


2/18

orld I as if someho acce+tance a++reciation onder and reverence erebeyond the +ale. 'his discursive frame of reference is characteristic of critical+edagogy. 'he human-animal o++osition u+on hich it rests is ta"en for granted itscultural and historical s+eciDcity not ac"noledged . And therein lies the +roblem.$i"e other social constructions this one derives its +ersuasiveness from its

@seeming facticity and from the dee+ investments individuals and communitieshave in setting themselves o6 from others (Brit;man et al. 8998 +. 984. 'his becomes thenormal ay of seeing the orld and li"e other discourses of normalcy it limits

+ossibilities of ta"ing u+ and confronting ine5uities (see Brit;man 8994. The primacy

of the human enterprise is simply not questioned. ,recisely ho ananthro+ocentric +edagogy might e1acerbate the environmental crisis has not received much consideration in theliterature of critical +edagogy es+ecially in Jorth America. Although there may be +assing reference to +lanetarydestruction there is seldom mention of the relationshi+ beteen education and the domination of nature let aloneany sustained e1+loration of the lin"s beteen the domination of nature and other social inHustices. Concerns aboutthe nonhuman are relegated to environmental education. And since environmental education in turn remains+eri+heral to the core curriculum (A. ough 899>L Russell Bell = Facett 24 anthro+ocentrism +assesunchallenged. 8

Modern wars exclude nature and the outside world from their

calculations. Their denition of conict reects an anti-nature

value system! which positions the human against the "arth.#erres $% (Gichel Serres French +hiloso+her and author @'he Jatural Contract Critical&n5uiry Mol. 89 Jo. 8. Autumn 89924

'he adversaries no longer e1change ords bu t rather ithout saying a thingblos. Someone Dghts someone else subHect face to/face ith subHect. Soonbecause Dsts are no longer enough for their rage the to adversaries gatherstones reDne them invent iron sords armor and shields discover gun+oder then +ut it to use Dnd thousands of allies assemble in giant armies multi+ly theirbattlefronts at sea on land and in the air sei;e the +oer of atoms and ta"e it tothe stars/is there anything sim+ler and more monotonous than this history )e needto ta"e stoc" of the situation again no that eNve reached the end +oint of groth. Jevermind the millions of deaths* as soon as ar as declared the belligerentsunderstood that blood and tears ould


3/18

tan"ers several gutted atomic submarines a fe e1+loded thermonuclear bombs* thesubHective victory in the subHective ar of so/and/so against so/and so suddenly counts verylittle in the face of the obHective results of the obHective violence unleashed against the orld

by the means at the belligerentsN dis+osal. Es+ecially no that the obHective arNsoutcome has global conse5uences. 7oes the contem+orary retreat before aorldide con


4/18

the natural orld +rovo"es hierarchical mindsets and institutions and is the root of the long/standing estern goal

to @dominate nature. &n the case of Gar1ists anarchists and so many others theorists ty+icallydont even mention human domination of animals let alone assign it causal +rimacy orsigniDcance. &n ,attersons model hoever the human subHugation of animals is the Drst form ofhierarchy and it +aves the ay for all other systems of domination such as include+atriarchy racism colonialism anti/Semitism and the olocaus t. As he +uts it @thee1+loitation of animals as the model and ins+iration for the atrocities +eo+le committed against each other

slavery and the olocaust being but to of the more dramatic e1am+les. ierarchy emerged ith therise of agricultural society some ten thousand years ago. &n the shift from nomadichunting and gathering bands to settled agricultural +ractices humans began toestablish their dominance over animals through @domestication . &n animal domestication(often a eu+hemism disguising coercion and cruelty4 humans began to e1+loit animals for +ur+osessuch as obtaining food mil" clothing +loing and trans+ortation. As they gained increasing controlover the lives and labor +oer of animals humans bred them for desired traits andcontrolled them in various ays such as castrating males to ma"e them more docile. 'o con5uerenslave and claim animals as their on +ro+erty humans develo+ed numeroustechnologies such as +ens cages collars ro+es chains and branding irons . 'he

domination of animals +aved the ay for the domination of humans. 'he se1ual subHugation of omen,atterson suggests as modeled after the domestication of animals such that men began tocontrol omens re+roductive ca+acity to enforce re+ressive se1ual norms and tora+e them as they forced breeding in their animals. Jot coincidentally ,atterson argues slaveryemerged in the same region of the Giddle East that s+aned agriculture and in factdevelo+ed as an e1tension of animal domestication +ractices. &n areas li"e Sumer slavesere managed li"e livestoc" and males ere castrated and forced to or" alongith females. &n the Dfteenth century hen Euro+eans began the coloni;ation of Africaand S+ain introduced the Drst international slave mar"ets the meta+hors modelsand technologies used to e1+loit animal slaves ere a++lied ith e5ual cruelty and force tohuman slaves. Stealing Africans from their native environment and homeland

brea"ing u+ families ho scream in anguish ra++ing chains around slavesbodies shi++ing them in cram+ed 5uarters across continents for ee"s or monthsith no regard for their needs or su6ering branding their s"in ith a hot iron tomar" them as +ro+erty auctioning them as servants breeding them for service andlabor e1+loiting them for +roDt beating them in rages of hatred and anger and"illing them in vast numbers I all these horrors and countless others in


5/18

beasts or sub/humans occu+ying a loer evolutionary rung than hite esterners subHugated +eo+les ere treated accordinglyL once characteri;ed as animals they could be hunteddon li"e animals. 'he Drst e1iles from the moral community animals +rovided a convenient discard bin foro++ressors to dis+ose the o++ressed. 'he connections are clear* @For a civili;ation built on the e1+loitation andslaughter of animals the Ploer and more degraded the human victims are the easier it is to "ill them. 'hus

colonialism as ,atterson describes as a @natural e1tension of human su+remacy over

the animal "ingdom . For Hust as humans had subdued animals ith their su+erior intelligence andtechnologies so many Euro+eans believed that the hite race had +roven its su+eriority by bringing the @loerraces under its command. 'here are im+ortant +arallels beteen s+eciesism and se1ism and racism in the

elevation of hite male rationality to the touchstone of moral orth. 'he arguments Euro+eancolonialists used to legitimate e1+loiting Africans I that they ere less than humanand inferior to hite Euro+eans in ability to reason I are the very same HustiDcationshumans use to tra+ hunt conDne and "ill animals. %nce estern norms of rationality eredeDned as the essence of humanity and social normality by Drst using non/human animals as themeasure of alterity it as a short ste+ to begin vieing odd di6erent e1otic and eccentric+eo+les and ty+es as non/ or sub/human. 'hus the same criterion created to e1clude animals fromhumans as also used to ostraci;e blac"s omen and numerous other grou+s from @humanity. 'he

o++ression of blac"s omen and animals ali"e as

grounded in an argument that biological inferiority +redestined them for servitude. &n the maHor strainof estern thought alleged rational beings (i.e. elite hite estern males4 +ronounce that the %ther (i.e. omen +eo+le of color animals4 is deDcient in rationality in ays crucial to their nature and statusand therefore are deemed and treated as inferior subhuman or nonhuman. )hereas the racist mindsetcreates a hierarchy of su+erior-inferior on the basis of s"in color and the se1ist mentality s+lits men and omeninto greater and loer classes of beings the s+eciesist outloo" demeans and obHectiDes animals by dichotomi;ingthe biological continuum into the anti+odes of humans and animals. As racism stems from a hateful hitesu+remacism and se1ism is the +roduct of a bigoted male su+remacism so s+eciesism stems from and informs aviolent human su+remacism // namely the arrogant belief that humans have a natural or od/given right to useanimals for any +ur+ose they devise or more generously ithin the moral boundaries of elfarism andsteardshi+ hich hoever as 0udaic moral baggage ocial Christianity left behind.

0ur alternative is to ta(e the standpoint of the non-human

animal! and approach history! culture! action and humanity’from the perspective of the nonhuman animals who have been

the driving force behind all we have done.

Best 9 (7r. Steven Best ,rofessor of ,hiloso+hy at the #niversity of 'e1as El,aso. @'he Rise of Critical Animal Studies* ,utting 'heory into Action and Animal$iberation into igher Education 0ournal of Critical Animal Studies Mol M&& &ssue 8htt+*--.stateofnature.org-theRise%fCriticalAnimal.html4 -- R0/C$

,ostmodern criti5ues have been hugely in


6/18

opposition underpins oppositions between reason2emotions!

thought2body! men2women! white2blac(! and 3estern2non-3estern . !et asnoted by theorists (e.g. Keith 'homas 0im Gason and Charles ,atterson >4 ithbroader o+tics and more inclusive theories humanism! speciesism and animaldomestication provide the conceptual template and social practice

whereby humans begin to clearly distinguish between 4human rationality4and 4animal irrationality.4 567 &nimals - dened as 4brute beasts4 lac(ing

4rationality4 - thereby provided the moral basement into which one could

e8ect women! people of color! and other humans deemed to be subhuman

or decient in 93estern male: 4humanity.O)hereas nearly all histories ! evenso-called 4radical4 narratives! have been written from the human

standpoint! a growing number of theorists have bro(en free of the

speciesist straight8ac(et to examine history and society from the

standpoint of 9nonhuman: animals . This approach! as ; dene it! considers

the interaction between human and nonhuman animals - past! present!

and future - and the need for profound changes in the way humans dene

themselves and relate to other sentient species and to the natural world

as a whole. 3hat ; call the 4animal standpoint4 examines the origins anddevelopment of societies through the dynamic! symbiotic interrelationship

between human and nonhuman animals . ;t therefore interprets history not

from an evolutionary position that reies human agency as the

autonomous actions of a


7/18

fundamental ways! the oppression of human over human is rooted in the

oppression of human over nonhuman animal. &nimal standpoint theory

thus leads us ineluctably to understanding the commonalities of

oppression! and hence to alliance politics and the systemic revolutionary

viewpoint of total liberation. 8 ;t demonstrates - would that dogmatic

=eft! eco-humanists! and so-called 4environmentalists4 ta(e note> - theprofound importance of veganism and the animal rights2liberation

movement for human liberation! peace and 8ustice! and ecological healing

and balance.

& ,eg ballot brea(s down the community’s wall of ignorance!

and sends a signal that forces the positions and problems

facing animals into the community.


8/18

get caught. & told them lying somehat triviali;ed our argument and that insteadthey should e1+lain that they "no its hard to change but having a Drm advocacythat calls for the end of anthro+ocentric thin"ing is still needed. & +ointed out thatthey could no all say that because of their argument theyve all had one less mealcontaining animal


9/18

0ur role of the ballot is a necessary precursor to anything else

in the round.


10/18

e6ects it generates. &n fact social science helps to format a world resolvedinto this binary order! and thus to constitute and solidify the experience of

agency and expertise. ;n much of social science this is quite deliberate. ;ttries to acquire the (ind of intellectual mastery of social processes that

dams seem to oHer over rivers artiDcial nitrates over sugarcane +roduction or

77' over arthro+ods. ;t is less important whether one understands howthings wor(! more important how eHective are the immediate results. Butmore careful forms of historical or cultural analysis can do the same thing inless obvious ways! by leaving technics unexamined! or tal(ing about the

)social construction* of things that are clearly more than social.

To put in question these distinctions! and the assumptions about agency

and history that they ma(e possible! does not mean introducing a limitless

number of actors and networ(s all of hich are someho of e5ual signiDcanceand +oer. ?ather! it means ma(ing this issue of power and agency aquestion! instead of an answer (nown in advance. ;t means ac(nowledgingsomething of the unresolvable tension the inse+arable mi1ture the im+ossible

multi+licity out of which intention and expertise must emerge requiresac(nowledging that human agency ! li(e capital is a technical body issomething made. ;nstead of invo(ing the force and logic of reason! self-interest! science! or capital and attributing what happens in the world to

the wor(ing of these enchanted powers and processes! we can open up

the question as & have attem+ted here of what (inds of hybrid agencies!connections! interactions! and forms of violence are able to portray their

actions as history! as human expertise overcoming nature! as the progress

of reason and modernity or as the e1+ansion and develo+ment of ca+italism.

& ,eg ballot is a symbol that brings the &nimal into the debate

space! and brea(s down the moral regulation that demandsthat we not consider their lives in our decision-ma(ing and our

social sphere. B Iross &pply this to &lt solvency

Smith 2 (Gic" Smith ,rofessor in the 7ivision of Sociology in the #niversity ofAbertay in 7undee Scotland. @'he Ethical S+ace of the Abbatoir* %n the(&n4human(e4 slaughter of %ther Animals uman Ecology Revie Mol. 9 Jo. 222. htt+*--.humanecologyrevie.org-+astissues-her92-92smith.+df 4 --R0

3hat does it mean for the dying animal to nd a voice egels claim raisesmany 5uestions* 5uestions about animality and its relation to humanity in an age ofevolution about violence in an age of mass/e1terminations about the voice as ane1+ression of self/identity in these most self/centred of times. These are ethicalquestions! and their concerns + animality! violence! self-identity + all as(

)how can we fail to hear and respond to the 0ther’s voice in a time of

need

http://www.humanecologyreview.org/pastissues/her92/92smith.pdfhttp://www.humanecologyreview.org/pastissues/her92/92smith.pdf


11/18

'hese 5uestions are gathered together in the violent death of animals because theanimal traces both the limit of modern humanitys Tbeing (Dasein4 and the limit ofhuman concerns. The animal brings into question 9human: consciousnessand conscience! existence and ethics . ;t does this because modernity

denes the animal as humanity’s 0ther! as the not-human ! the inhuman the

less than human the bestial (Ba"er 8993L Ser+ell 89?:L She+ard 899:4. &nimalityis that state of being which! it is claimed! humanity has transcended!evolved beyond esca+ed through becoming conscious of ourselves as selvesthrough having tamed and transformed our animal desires through the ac5uisitionof the voice U the gift of language ithin hich e e1+ress our/selves and ourdi6erence to animal %thers.


12/18

Maintaining a clear conscience thus necessitates that those animals we

intend to harm are (ept out of sight and out of mind or at least that their+resence is managed so as to limit their sco+e for self/e1+ression.2 Thus! ratherthan facilitating a genuinely ethical relation to animals! one that

recognises and respects them for what they are! modernity engages in a

complex form of moral regulation that separates and constrains animalexpression in order to minimise the potential danger to its cultural logic.This moral management regulates both the social space in which

animal2human interactions ta(e place and the hearts and minds of those

involved. ;t wor(s at diHerent levels not Hust consciously through the+roduction of e1+licit codes of conduct but im+licitly through the unconsciousadoption of specic social norms and practically through the employment

of various techniques and procedures.

?etaining a )distinction* between man and beast is not then simply a

philosophical pro8ect but requires hat Bourdieu (899?4 refers to as@transformations of social space transformations that foster and are fostered

by +articular social +ractices and the ado+tion of +articular (discriminatory4dis+ositions toards ones surrounding environment. Bourdieu refers to this systemof embodied dis+ositions to act in certain ays as the habitus. 'he habitus is a formof +ractical sense o+erating ithout the necessary mediation of conscious thought.;t is that unconscious )feel for the game* that enables individuals to

respond to particular situations in a manner that meets with the

expectations and norms associated with their inhabiting particular

positions in social space e.g. as a member of the or"ing class a +rofessionaletc. @&nculcated in the earliest years of life and constantly reinforced by calls toorder from the grou+ (Bourdieu 8998 84 the habitus becomes @second nature. ;tis a 9necessary: coping-mechanism that enables us to respond

immediately and )appropriately* to the circumstances of everyday life. ;talso absolves us from the requirement and responsibility of constantly

having to thin( things through or to experience things for ourselves.

3hat follows then aims to illustrate the production and transformation of

certain modern social spaces which predispose people to turn deaf ears to

non-human existence +articularly at that most ethically +roblematic of momentsthat of the animals death. &ts subHect is the ethical (or rather unethical4 s+aceassociated ith the abattoir a s+ace that e1em+liDes modern humanitys attem+tto distance itself from its on animality and from its ethical res+onsibilities toanimal %thers. ,ut sim+ly & argue that the modern abattoir is a factory that

facilitates a @social and ethical distancing from the messy realities of animalslaughter. &t achieves this through a series of +ractices and discourses includingmoralistic discourses of @hygiene and @humane slaughter that enable thoseoutside its alls to maintain their carnivorous habits hilst +leading if challenged a"ind of @diminished res+onsibility U as +eo+le ho cant (a6ord to4 recognise hatthey are actually res+onsible for. This requires the suppression and silencingof the expressions of animals themselves and the removal2regulation of

personal lin(s between the animal corpse and human consumer . 'his is not


13/18

then an argument against modernitys +redominantly carnivorous habit(u4s sim+lyon the grounds of the cruelty and "illing involved. Rather it focuses on theevolution of deliberate managerial and spatial techniques that see( to

suppress the animals’ room for self-expression 9especially vocally:. This in

turn re-enforces the boundary between human and nonhuman and assists

us in absolving ourselves of responsibility for the existence 9and (illing: of animal 0thers.

This debate is going to come down to which team better

utiliJes the ballot to combat anthro and creates the most

ethical form of pedagogyB Kote aH@Sub+oint A is visibility I

1. "lim rounds aHect more individuals within the community and have a

greater potential to catalye a broader discussion of death and our

orientation towards it

%. #uccessful criticisms gain attention B "mporia 33’s competitive

success literally brought their arguments to center stage B aLrmation of

our political strategy catalyJes spillover

Sub+oint B is credibility I

1. Iritiques that never win gain the reputation of being )bad

arguments* B this disincentiviJes others from aLrming a similar

strategy

%.


14/18

entire con4 +rovide the contrast beteen the bullet and thetan" as an e1am+le of the ays in hich material obHects achieve this* &t canha++en that s+eed is abstracted as the +ro+erty of a +roHectile a bullet or artilleryshell hich condemns the ea+on itself and the soldier to immobility (fore1am+le immobility in the First )orld )ar4. But an e5uilibrium of forces is a+henomenon of resistance hereas the counterattac" im+lies a rush or change ofs+eed that brea"s the e5uilibrium* it as the tan" that regrou+ed all of theo+erations in the s+eed vector and recreated the smooth s+ace for movement byu+rooting men and arms.

'hus the very dynamics of ar and the ays in hich con


15/18

determination. )hat +lays a signiDcant role in a +articular con


16/18

dicult even to imagine a ne viable teleology that could singlehandedly e1+lain the evolutionary dynamics of the orld yet too often this

diculty has been ta"en as license to ignore the real systemic dynamics thatnevertheless occur . 'he alternative e have +osed here is a non/teleological movement based on the contingent and un+redictableinteractions involved in assemblages.2:2 %n the other hand academics in +olitical science have often remainedithin the conDnes of a +roHect see"ing to derive generali;able correlations beteen large/scaleevents and thereby missing minute yet signiDcant details . &n many other instances they see" to do casestudies hile escheing the embedded global conte1t of the cases and thereby missing the systemic nature of +olitical reality. &n +art this avoidance

of systemic theori;ing is a methodological problem concerning ho to analy;e large/scale

+henomena ithout doing violence to their inherent com+le1ity. Gore +rofoundly though it is thecontention of this thesis that the +roblems stem in large +art from the traditional ontologies that su++ort much of +olitical science and +olitical theory. &four ontologies are themselves limited to characteri;ing the general @furniture of the orld that are considered relevant to a +articular Deld (as so much of

international relations is ont to do4 e remain unable to move beyond a ty+e of theori;ing that beginsby establishing immutable building bloc"s and then Dts them together in various

ays in a futile attem+t to ca+ture real dynamics. As 7eleu;e says @0ne begins with

concepts that! li(e baggy clothes! are much too big. &n such cases the real is recom+osed ith

abstracts. But the concrete ill never be attained by combining the inade5uacy of oneconce+t ith the inade5uacy of another. 'he singular ill never be attained bycorrecting a generality ith another generality.2:3 7eleu;es +oint is that our very conce+ts of hat constitutesan ontology are at +resent oefully inade5uate to even ma+ out the com+le1 situations that arise in the modern orld let alone begin to manage them

in an intelligent ay. 'he +ur+ose of this thesis therefore has been to contribute toards a re/thin"ing of the ontological basis of contem+orary+olitical science in the belief that such self/re


17/18

%.: 'old the 1&I to a standard of &ctor-,etwor( Tracing B Kote negative as

an educator to refuse their oversimplied ris( assessment of macro-

phenomenon and force them to map out the micro-conduits

Jic" Srnice" 7octoral Candidate in &R W the $ondon School of Economics 28@Con


18/18

e1+lains nothing. %ne Dnal note on agency* if the em+irical orld is com+osed ofhuman and nonhuman actors interacting ith each other and inducing actions ineach other any +articular human individual ill be the manifestation of a (variably/si;ed428 local netor".22 &n this ay actor/netor" theory gives an em+iricaland scientiDc basis to the oft/cited claim that actors are socially and culturally

embedded. Rather than citing an em+ty notion of Tconte1t (e.g. @it de+ends on theconte1t4 actor/netor" theory forces the researcher to discern describe and

reveal the +oer of the surrounding netor". Jote though that by saying thateverything emerges from a concatenation of local netor"s e are not e1cludingthe global I our reformulation of the global means that it must be channeledthrough a series of local i;ed netor"s hich means that macro /level actors can anddo act to +roduce +henomena. But they act only through a +articular series ofconduits and not through some abstract Tsocial structure or Tsocial force.

D.: This is a gateway argument about how we should be allowed to debate.

;f they win their model of ris( calculus is good! then the rest of the 1,Iapplies.

Assumes that all stem maHors ill ..

1nc doubles

Documents