youth hegemony k (change heg for the better)

8/12/2019 Youth Hegemony K (Change Heg for the Better)

1/33

Youth Hegemony K


2/33

Strategy


3/33

Tips


4/33

Topshelf


5/33

1NC


6/33

Cards

( )Social change can only exist in the support of both hegemonic ideas and oppositional

ideas !ur embrace of hegemony as a site of change can inherently force us toredefine hegemony as youth acti"ists and lead to actual change

Negron#$on%ales &'[Genevieve, Graduate student at Berkeley, Hegemony, Ideology & OppositionalConsciousness:Undocumented out! and t!e "ersonal#"olitical $truggle%or ducational 'ustice(,

!ttp:))esc!olars!ip*org)uc)item)+-./0t12page#3,'Cook*4 5ccessed +).)6.*

Traditional social change mo"ement literature has under#theori%ed

consciousness7relegating it to little more than a *resource+ that can be *mobili%ed+ in the

ser"ice of a social7mo"ement 89cCart!y and ald 3;;6


7/33

5nderstanding thedialectic bet,een the hegemonic and the counterhegemonic7allo,s us to

mo"e a,ay from a totali%ing "ie, of liberatory consciousness and ma-e7space for a non#

linear more nuanced ,ay to understand the de"elopment of oppositional7consciousness

and political engagement* =!is invites us to rethin- notions of ,hat political7037engagement

*loo-s+ li-e, in a /ay t!at does not make it a non#%unctional concept >y arguing t!at7everyt!ing is resistance* at!er, this illuminates the

assertion that political engagement and7political consciousness is not a state of arri"al nora final point on a spectrum but a body of7thoughts experiences and actions that are

negotiated o"er and o"er again*7=!is %inding !olds implications %or !o/ ,e theori%e the role that ideas play

in building7social mo"ements* In %uture /ork, I /ill c!ange t!e scope o% my analysis and eplain !o/ /!at7!appens to oppositionalconsciousness on an individual level s!apes /!at !appens on an7organiational level, and ultimately on a movement >uilding level* @!at is clear is t!at7

undocumented young people in Cali%ornia are pro%oundly c!anging t!e political landscape7t!roug! t!eir struggle %or educational Dustice* This struggle is

deeply personal and7transformati"e on an indi"idual le"el and also has the potential to

change the course of history in7the state*These young people are demanding a resolution to

the contradiction that has shaped7their li"es the reliance of the 5nited States on their

presence and its simultaneous refusal to7recogni%e them as human beings deser"ing of

fundamental ci"il rights* Their insistence on being7heard despite profound institutional

exclusion demonstrates that their "oices ,ill not be silenced.

( )3cti"ism that separates itself from the system destroys our ability to use the system and

change it from the outside rationally and transformati"ely This oppositional

acti"ism often re#entrenches the system ,e fight to oppose. The plan entrenches

our curriculum into an epistemological structure ,hich destroys the potential for

our mo"ements !nly our alternati"e sol"es

5rrieta &'6[Euis, 'r*, 5ssistant "ro%essor in C!icana and C!icago studies at t!e University o% Cali%ornia at Favis, =!e $ocial $tudies o%Fomination: Cultural Hegemony and Ignorant 5ctivism(,

!ttp:))///*academia*edu)6--A6.)=!esocialstudieso%dominationCultural!egemonyandignorantactivism, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +).)6.*

!ften the ,ord acti"ism con7ures7up the image of /!at t!e media7 and ot!ers call radicals ( suc! as7in%lamed 9eican 5merican college7 students, %or eample, /!o are passionate7 and emotional, demanding an immediate7 end to racism on t!eir

college7 campus* 5not!er image may >e t!e7 t/enty#second ne/s sound >ite o% angry7 /omen in /!ite =#s!irts /!o travel7 %rom all over t!e

country to t!e U*$*7 Capitol to epress t!eir %rustration /it!7 t!e current policies on drunk driving*7 5not!er image is o% protesters at @orld7

=rade Organiation meetings epressing7 t!eir disapproval o% %urt!er epansion7 o% glo>al markets* Some castigate7acti"ist

participants as immature and7unsophisticated ,hereas others describe7their actions as

repugnant and7counterproducti"e to democracyand t!e7 5merican /ay o% li%e*( 9y point is t!at7acti"ism

has been stereotyped, and participants7 can >e portrayed as ignorant(7 >y /ay o% various code /ords*7 'ames $* Eeming 83;;.


8/33

c!anging multicultural7 society suc! as ours, such acti"ist7incursions must be criti8ued and 8uestioned7for

their legitimacy, >ecause,7although they appear to be neutral and7to some rational they may

lead to further7di"ision and ine8uality and ser"e to7reinforce cultural domination.


9/33

9in-s


10/33

:edia

( )3cti"ism isn&t 7ust opposition in the media and the streets the protests. /t also exists in

e"ery policy change and thin- tan- The aff falls into the pit traps of the negati"e

media image of acti"ism gutting sol"ency and -illing other mo"ements



@!at is activismL Broadly de%ined,7acti"ism isthe acti"e participation, in7 various /ays, o% people advocating a7 particular

set o% issues* The image that7 activism con7ures up is not that of men7and ,omen in business attire

,or-ing7out of a thin- tan- in 5ustin, =eas, or7 C!icago, IllinoisMmost often the7image is of young

people shouting at7police officers in full riot gear. ;hat has7our media culture done to

mediate this7image of acti"istsL7The media are not neutral* Kor t!e last7 t/enty#%ive years, there has

been a7strong mo"ement among conser"ati"e7acti"ists to redress the gains of the ci"il7

rights mo"ements and other more progressi"e7accomplishments. That the7media portray

,hat some people refer to7as *lefto"er hippies+ in a negati"e ,ay7is not a coincidence.
http://www.academia.edu/1885913/The_social_studies_of_domination_Cultural_hegemony_and_ignorant_activismhttp://www.academia.edu/1885913/The_social_studies_of_domination_Cultural_hegemony_and_ignorant_activism


11/33

/mpacts


12/33

3Ty larger structures o%

capitalist social relations /it!in t!e glo>al division7o% la>or 8especially in t!e contet o% a restructured la>or demandy many post#9arists is o%ten recognied7as a type o% trompe dJoeil,hereby forces of

domination are ,illfully7underrecogni%ed as the structured e8uanimity of ine"itabilitychance or irre"ersible7fate.Historically, "ariable structural determinants of action are either7

detached from cultural formations and social practices or flatly ignored. >uilt7into a

number of theories of hegemony is the notion of the re"ersibility of cultural7formations

,ithin specified con7unctures as if such articulatory practices7,ere asocial or ahistorical

or other,ise se"ered from the chains of class determination *75ccording to at 86AA1e reminded t!at intellectuals

themsel"es are al,ays the products of ne,7forms of collecti"e labor po,er brought about

and consolidated by the forces of7production.
http://www.freireproject.org/articles/node%2066/Future%20of%20CP/mclarenfisch.pdfhttp://www.freireproject.org/articles/node%2066/Future%20of%20CP/mclarenfisch.pdf


13/33

3lternati"e


14/33

Sol"es 2mpirics

( ) Hegemonic structures ,ill al,ays exist in some ,ay or form The true 8uestion of

acti"ism is ho, ,e ,ill shape the current order to create a ne, shape a topological

loo- at acti"ism and transformation not a radical one li-e the 13C

=ischman and :c9aren &'6[Gustavo *, 5riona $tate University, "eter, University o% Cali%ornia, Eos 5ngeles, et!inkingCritical "edagogy and t!e Gramscian and Kreirean Eegacies: Krom Organic to Committed Intellectuals or Critical "edagogy, Commitment, and

"rais(,!ttp:))///*%reireproDect*org)articles)nodeN3;++)KutureN3;o%N3;C")mclaren%isc!*pd%, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +)0)6.*

5ccording to t!is %ormulation, groups and classes exist in a shifting and7mediated relationship in a

structured field of complex relations and ideological7forces stitched together out of social

fragments and pri"ileging hierarchies7in structured asymmetries of po,er in contending

"ectors of influence and in7emergent contingent alliances* @!en one eamines ideology, one must not7

loo- for smooth lines of articulation or a set of seamless canonical ideas but7rather a

regime of culture existing as a palimpsest of emergent and residual discourses *7HallJs 86AA+< elo?uent

position on t!is issue is /ort! ?uoting at7lengt!:7Gramsci al/ays insisted that hegemony is not exclusi"ely an ideological

phenomenon*7There can be no hegemony ,ithout *the decisi"e nucleus of the economic *(7On

t!e ot!er !and, do not fall into the trap of the old mechanical7economism and belie"e that if you

can only get hold of the economy you can7mo"e the rest of life.The nature of po,er in the

modern ,orld is that it is also7constructed in relation to political moral intellectual

cultural ideological and7sexual 8uestions* The 8uestion of hegemony is al,ays the 8uestion

of a ne, cultural7order* The 8uestion/!ic! %acedGramsci in relation to Italy %aces us no/ in7relation to Britain: ,hat is the

nature of this ne, ci"ili%ation?Hegemony is not a7state of grace ,hich is installed fore"er*

ItJs not a %ormation /!ic! incorporates7every>ody* =!e notion o% a !istorical >loc( is precisely di%%erent %rom t!at o% a7paci%ied, !omogeneous, ruling class* /t

entails a 8uite different conception of7ho, social forces and mo"ements in their di"ersity

can be articulated into strategic7alliances. To construct a ne, cultural order you need not

to reflect an7already#formed collecti"e ,ill but to fashion a ne, one to inaugurate a ne,7

historical pro7ect .8p* 61;


15/33


16/33

2xtension >ad Hegemony

Seeing oursel"es as a youth that is ,or-ing to change the futuredisrupts American

Exceptionalism and sho,s us that ,e&re 7ust another empire@this lets us loo- at

historical empires li-e the >ritish and the !ttoman and learn from their mista-es

a"oiding their pitfalls. Currentpolitical tunnel "ision says the only experience ,e

can dra, from is Dietnam or our current geopolitical affairs that *;2 C3N&T

CH3N$2 TH2 SYST2:+ li-e the 13C @this is what stopsnation building from

,or-ing and transformations from occuring. The more historical experience ,e

ha"e to dra, from the more successful and less damaging 5S nation#building ,ill

be.The more we as youth can understand the system and ,or- ,ithin it the better

we will be able to make it.@That&s =erguson &B.


17/33

=rame,or-


18/33

Key to Geforming edagogy

( )!nly the alternati"e&s method of including participation in the system as a space to

reshape 5S politics and hegemony allo,s us as youth acti"ists to truly approach

an acti"ism ,hich can truly create change



9earning ho, to li"e together is ,hat7democracy is about. /t is not about

systematically7excluding people or enforcing7a particular cultural perspecti"e as7the only

"alid truth. 9earning to deliberateI and especially to engage in dialogueI is at the core of

democratic practice andI principle, only t!at in a democracy like7our o/n, this seems not to be

culturally7"alued. Through dialogue people learn7to li"e together and to "alue differentI

perspecti"es rather than merely to tolerateI each other or pretend that ,e really7are not

that different ,hich is the7uncritical and naJ"e cultural pluralist7approach to di"ersity.
http://www.academia.edu/1885913/The_social_studies_of_domination_Cultural_hegemony_and_ignorant_activismhttp://www.academia.edu/1885913/The_social_studies_of_domination_Cultural_hegemony_and_ignorant_activism


19/33

:icropolitics Sol"es

( ):icropolitics is the root of all politics This means our youth methodology is uni8uely

-ey to reforming actual politics # ;e see oursel"es as a blueprint for change

olitics shouldn&t be left to the experts in the halls of Congress this dooms us to

captured forms of acti"ism li-e the 13C only that end in misery and death and

failure. Ceding the political ma-es a repeat of history ine"itable global ,ar and

depression on repeat. Dote aff to re#in"ent politics /ndependent reason to "ote

affirmati"e

atton A'8"aul, "olitical Pormativity and "ost#structuralism: t!e case o% Gilles Feleue(, SortraginsInstitutscollo?uium des"!ilosop!isc!enInstituts der KreienUniversitTt, Berlin, am Fonnerstag, den 6* Povem>er 3;;1, pgs* #63 [CE4lages >reak do/n or

>ecome trans%ormed* On t!e one !and, in so %ar as /e are interested in >ringing a>out c!ange /e cannot avoid eperimentation /it! suc! lines

>ecause it is al/ays on a l ine o% %lig!t t!at /e createJ 8Feleue and "arnet 6A-1: 6.e incapa>le

o% so connecting and turninstead into a line of destruction death and despair 8Feleue and Guattari 6A-1: 33Aed inA Thousand Plateausprovides grounds %or unam>iguous practical politicalorientation* In t!e evaluative sc!ema outlined, not!ing is good or >ad in itsel% : it all depends on a care%ul systematic use /eJre trying to say

you can never guarantee a good outcome 8its not enoug! Dust to !ave a smooth space, %or eample, to overcome striations and coercion, or a body

without organs to overcome organiationsetter %orms o% social and political li%e, t!ey did not engage

directly /it! t!e political norms em>edded in eisting political institutions and /ays o% li%e . /n the course of outlining the

inherently political "ocation of philosophy they suggest that philosophical concepts are

critical of the present to the extent that they Aconnect up ,ith ,hat is real here and no, in

the struggleagainst capitalismJ 8Feleue and Guattari 6AA0: 6;;e articulated /it! t!ose principles t!at are supposed to

govern political li%e in late capitalist societies* $o, %or eample, /!ile t!ey insist on t!e importance o% political struggles in relation to /el%are and

unemployment >ene%its, t!ey o%%er no normative t!eory in support o% t!e redistri>ution o% /ealt! or any principles o% a Dust distri>ution* @!ile

t!ey point to t!e importance o% struggles %or regional and national autonomy, t!ey o%%er no normative grounds %or t!e esta>lis!ment o% di%%erential

rig!ts %or cultural or national minorities 8Feleue and Guattari 6A-1: 016asic institutions o% modern li>eral democracies, suc! as t!e e?ual

moral /ort! o% individuals, %reedom o% conscience, t!e rule o% la/, %airness in t!e distri>ution o% material goods produced >y social cooperation

and so on* =!e principled di%%erences >et/een li>eral democratic, totalitarian and %ascist $tates are mentioned only in passing in t!e course o%

t!eir analysis o% capitalism and present day politics as a process o% aiomatisation o% t!e social and economic %ield 8Feleue and Guattari 6A-1:

00 V 0++ W 6AA0 : 6;+


20/33

occasional /riting during t!e 6A-;s and then ;hat is hilosophy? amount toa significant step to,ards

positi"e engagement ,ith the institutions and implicit political "alues of modern liberal

democracy* =/o issues in particular signal t!is turn to/ards political normativity in !is later /ritings: %irst, !is comments a>out rig!ts andDurisprudence, and second, in t!e contet o% !is de%inition o% p!ilosop!y, !is remarks a>out democracy and >ecoming#democratic*J Given t!at

t!e term >ecoming#democraticJ occurs only once in What is Philosophy? it /ould >e an eaggeration to include it among t!e list o% concepts

created >y Feleue and Guattari* Pevert!eless, I /ill try to s!o/ t!at some o% t!e elements o% t!eir earlier political p!ilosop!yJ provide t!e

resources needed to develop suc! a concept* 86< In a series o% intervie/s during t!e 6A-;s, Feleue responds to t!e rene/ed interest in !uman

rig!ts during t!is period >y criticising t!e manner in /!ic! t!ese are represented as eternal valuesJ and ne/ %orms o% transcendence*J. 5t t!esame time, !e makes it clear t!at !e is not opposed to rig!ts as suc! >ut only to t!e idea t!at t!ere is a de%initive and a#!istorical list o% supposed

universal rig!ts* He argues t!at rights are not the creation of codes or declarations but of

7urisprudence ,here this implies ,or-ing ,ith the Asingularities& of a particular situation8Feleue 6AA: 6.y >ecoming#democraticJ /e need to approac! t!is concept >y /ay o% t!e overtly

political conception o% p!ilosop!y outlined in What is Philosophy? hilosophy is defined as the creation of

concepts ,here the creation of concepts Ain itself calls for a future form, %or a ne/ eart! and peoplet!at do not yet eistJ 8Feleue and Guattari 6AA0: 6;-ut not all !istorical and

eisting %orms o% p!ilosop!y* On t!is account, philosophy is a specific -ind of thought defined in terms of its

affinity ,ith absolute as opposed to relati"e deterritoriali%ation. 5s /e sa/ earlier, relativedeterritorialiation concerns t!e !istorical relations!ip o% t!ings to t!e territories into /!ic! t!ey are organised, including t!e manner in /!ic!

t!ese territories >reak do/n and are trans%ormed or reconstituted into ne/ %orms* 5>solute deterritorialiation concerns t!e a#!istorical

relations!ip o% t!ings and states o% a%%airs to t!e virtual realm o% >ecoming or pure events t!at is imper%ectly or partially epressed in /!at

!appens* It is >ecause it creates concepts that express such pure e"ents # to become to capture to

deterritorialise but also to go"ern democratically to re"oltetc* # t!at p!ilosop!y is in!erently critical o% t!epresent in /!ic! it takes place* =o c!aracterise eisting >odies and states o% a%%airs in terms o% suc! p!ilosop!ical concepts is to re#present t!em

in t!oug!t as t!e epression o% pure eventsJ or >ecomings*J This is ,hat 4eleu%e calls the Acounteractuali%ation&

of phenomena such philosophical redescription enables us to see things differently or to see

them as they might become rather than as they currently are. In t!is manner, t!e invention o% ne/ conceptscan assist t!e deterritorialiation o% eisting structures and t!e emergence o% ne/ ones /it!out, !o/ever, >eing tied to any positive political

program* In t!is respect, FeleueJs conception o% t!e political task o% p!ilosop!y is close to t!at o% Koucault, /!o descri>es t!e aim o% !is

genealogical criticism as t!e identi%ication o% limits to present /ays o% t!inking, acting and speaking in order to %ind points o% di%%erence or eit

%rom t!e past 8Koucault 6AA1: .6solute deterritorialiation >ut al/ays at t!e critical point at /!ic! it is connected

/it! t!e present relative milieuJ 8Feleue and Guattari 6AA0: 6;;


21/33

modern societies include t!e ideals or opinions t!at motivate or in%orm particular %orms o% resistance, it %ollo/s t!at this -ind of

immanent utopianism ,ill dra, upon elements of existing political normati"ity to suggest

,ays in ,hich the in7ustice or intolerability of present institutional forms of social life

might be remo"ed. >ecoming#democratic& therefore points to ,ays of criticising the

,or-ings of actually existing democracies in t!e name o% t!e egalitarian principles t!at are supposed to in%orm t!eir

institutions and political practices* In Feleuean terms the philosophical concept of democracy is a means tocounter#actuali%e ,hat passes for democratic society in the present/!ile >ecoming#democratic allo/s usto counter#actualie movements or processes o% democratiation* "!ilosop!y pursues or supports suc! processes o% >ecoming#democratic, %or

eample, ,hen it challenges existing opinions about ,hat is acceptable,right or 7ust ,ith the

aim of extending the actuali%ation of democracy ,ithin contemporary societies. =!e compleconcept o% democracy ties toget!er a num>er o% t!e political norms at t!e !eart o% modern political t!oug!t* In principle, t!ere /ill >e as many

/ays o% >ecoming#democratic as t!ere are elements o% t!e concept o% democracy* In practice, p!ilosop!y can only e%%ectively advance t!e

>ecoming#democratic o% a given political society /!en i t engages /it! deterritorialiing movements t!at rely upon actualied or actualia>le

elements o% democratic political normativity* Feleue o%%ers no detailed account o% Dust /!at !e understands >y >ecoming#democraticJ and it is

not di%%icult to imagine %orms o% populism t!at go against t!e grain o% !is political sensi>ility* 9i-e all forms of

deterritoriali%ation this one is not ,ithout its dangers* =!e comments on Heidegger in What is Philosophy?

remind us t!at it is not enoug! to put oneJs %ait! in t!e people it depends on ,hat people and ho, they are

constituted as a political community8Feleue and Guattari 6AA0: 6;-#6;Ale us to %ill out t!e concept o% >ecoming#democratic* Kor eample: 86< One o% t!e sources o% con%lictt!at !as >een present ever since t!e introduction o% modern democratic government !as >een t!e coeistence o% %ormally e?ual rig!ts alongside

enormous disparities o% material condition* =!e !istory o% modern democracies !as >een in part a !istory o% struggle to reduce material ine?uality

and to ensure t!at t!e >asic rig!ts o% citiens !ave at least approimately e?ual value %or all* Feleue alludes to t!is ongoing pro>lem /!en !e

contrasts t!e universality o% t!e market /it! t!e manner in /!ic! it une?ually distri>utes poverty as /ell as enormous /ealt!* He is critical o% t!e

/ay in /!ic! modern democratic states %ail to live up to t!eir egalitarian promise: AThere is no democratic state that is not

compromised to the "ery core by its part in generating human misery& 8Feleue 6AA: 61.ene%its o% market economies are not universally s!ared and ine?ualities o% condition are !anded do/n %rom generation to generation in direct

contravention o% t!e principle t!at all are >orn e?ual, t!en /e can say t!at ac!ieving a more Dust distri>ution o% material social goods is one vectoro% >ecoming#democratic*J 83< 5not!er constant source o% con%lict in democratic nation states ever since t!eir inception !as >een t!e struggle to

>roaden t!e >ase o% t!ose /!o count as citiens and t!us enDoy %ull access to t!e entire range o% >asic legal and political rig!ts* 4emocracy

has al,ays relied upon the principle of ma7ority rule butthe prior 8uestion Ama7ority of

,hom& has al,ays been settled in ad"ance and usually not by democratic means.=!is eposes a%ault in one o% t!e key components o% t!e concept o% democracy, namely t!e concept o% maDority* =!is can mean eit!er t!e ?uantitative maDority

o% t!ose counted or t!e ?ualitative maDority o% t!ose among t!e population at large /!o are considered %it to >e counted* Feleue and Guattari

rely upon t!e latter, ?ualitative sense o% maDority in A Thousand Plateaus /!en t!ey point to t!e eistence o% a maDoritarian %actJ in

contemporary uropean derived societies, namely t!e priority o% t!e average adult#/!ite#!eteroseual# uropean#male#speaking a standard

languageJ 8Feleue and Guattari 6A-1: 6;ecomings as t!e variety o% /ays in /!ic! individuals and

groups %ail to con%orm to t!is standard* The social mo"ements corresponding to these becomings ha"e

gi"en rise to a succession of measures to extend the scope of the standard and thereby

broaden the sub7ect of democracy %irst, >y etending t!e vote to /omen and ot!er minoritiesW second, >y c!anging t!enature o% political institutions and procedures to ena>le t!ese ne/ly en%ranc!ised mem>ers to participate on e?ual terms* %%orts to c!ange t!enature o% pu>lic institutions in /ays t!at >ot! ackno/ledge and accommodate many kinds o% di%%erence are ongoing in democratic societies, %or

eample in relation to seual di%%erence, seual pre%erence, di%%erent p!ysical and mental a>ilities, cultural and religious a%%iliations* Feleue and

Guattari a%%irm t!e importance o% e%%orts to enlarge t!e c!aracter o% t!e maDority, even as t!ey insist t!at t!e po/er o% minorities is not measured

>y t!eir capacity to enter into and make t!emselves %elt /it!in t!e maDority systemJ 8Feleue and Guattari 6A-1: 016ecoming /ill al/ays eceed or escape %rom t!e con%ines o% any given maDority* =!ey carry t!e potential to trans%orm t!e a%%ects,>elie%s and political sensi>ilities o% a population in /ays t!at amount to t!e advent o% a ne/ people* In turn, to t!e etent t!at a people is

constituted as a political community, t!e trans%ormations it undergoes /ill a%%ect its conceptions o% /!at is %air and Dust and t!ere%ore t!e nature

o% t!e rig!ts and duties attri>uted to t!e ne/ maDority*6; 9inoritarian>ecomings t!ere%ore provide anot!er vector o% >ecoming#democratic*J 8.ut rat!er user groupsJ 8Feleue 6AA: 6+A#61;e taken in consultation /it! t!ose most a%%ected >y t!em* =!is is one o% t!e %ounding principles o% modern


22/33

democratic governance and many t!eorists recommend its etension and application to ne/ contets suc! as t!e /orkplace 8"e%%er 6AA;: 06A#

03;y t!e outcome and upon t!e nature

o% t!ose interests: the more fundamental the interest the greater their entitlement to a "oice in the

decision#ma-ing process 8$!apiro 3;;.: 3iotec!nologies givesreason to t!ink t!at t!e opening#up o% decision making procedures t!roug!out society constitutes a %urt!er vector o% >ecoming#democratic*J

( ) The only reason the system exists as it does is because people before us accepted it and

created it ,e ha"e the potential to truly change the ,orld

4eleu%e and $uattariLM'85=" 360#36ureaucratic segmentation, a suppleness o% and

communication >et/een o%%ices, a >ureaucratic perversion, a permanent inventiveness or creativity practiced even

against administrative regulations* I% a%ka is t!e greatest t!eorist o% >ureaucracy, it is >ecause !e s!o/s !o/, at a

certain level 8>ut /!ic! oneL it is not localia>leeen esta>lis!ed, micro%ascisms persisted t!at gave it une?ualed a>ility to act upon t!e

Xmasses*X Faniel Guerin is correct to say t!at if Hitler too- po,er rather then ta-ing o"er the

$erman State administration it ,as because from the beginning he had at his

disposal microorgani%ations gi"ing him Fan une8ualed irreplaceable ability to

penetrate e"ery cell of societyF in other ,ords a molecular and supple

segmentarity flo,s capable of suffusing e"ery -ind of cell. Con"ersely if capitalism

came to consider the fascist experience as catastrophic if it preferred to ally itself

,ith Stalinist totalitarianism ,hich from its point of "ie, ,as much more sensible

and manageable it ,as because the segmentarity and centrali%ation of the latter

,as more classical and less fluid.;hat ma-es fascism dangerous is its molecular or

micropolitical po,er for it is a mass mo"ement a cancerous body rather than a

totalitarian organism.5merican %ilm !as o%ten depicted t!ese molecular %ocal pointsW >and, gang, sect,

%amily, to/n, neig!>or!ood, ve!icle %ascisms spare no one* !nly microfascism pro"ides an ans,er


23/33

to the global 8uestion7;hy does desire desire its o,n repression ho, can it desire

its o,n repression? The masses certainly do not passi"ely submit to po,er nor do

they F,antF to be repressed in a -ind of masochistic hysteria nor are they tric-ed

by an ideological lure. 4esire is ne"er separable from complex assemblages that

necessarily tie into molecular le"els from microformations already shaping

postures, attitudes, perceptions, expectations semiotic systems etc* 4esire is ne"er anundifferentiated instinctual energy but itself results from a highly de"eloped

engineered setup rich in interactions: a /!ole supple segmentarity t!at processes molecular energies and potentially

gives desire a %ascist determination* Ee%tist organiations /ill not >e t!e last to secrete micro%ascisms* /tLs too easy to be

antifascist on the molar le"el and not e"en see the fascist inside you the fascist you

yourself sustain and nourish and cherish ,ith molecules both personal and

collecti"e.


24/33

Gole of the 3cti"ist


25/33

3T


26/33

3ns,ers


27/33

3Tloc< elicit consent from the popular sectors. 3nd yet

hegemony is7inseparable from conflicts and struggles o"er it. In t!is process, the struggle for7

control o"er the symbolic and economic domains of any gi"en society and the7role the state

plays in such struggles cannot be diminished * =!e pro>lem /it!7t!e vie/ o% !egemony articulated >y Eaclau, 9ou%%e,and Hall is t!at in t!eir7emp!asis, to distance t!emselves %rom /!at t!ey consider to >e a crude7economism, t!ey o%ten seriously neglected t!e

%undamental social contradiction7>et/een capital and la>or and resecured t!e pro!i>itions on c!allenging7t!e contradictions o% capitalism /!ile

at t!e same time positing cultural struggles7associated /it! c!anges in t!e mode o% accumulation, ec!ange, and circulation7o% capital assuperordinate over material relations o% eploitation linked7to production 8i*e*, to t!e etraction o% surplus la>or %rom /orkers /!o !ave7not!ing

else to sell >ut t!eir capacity to la>or, t!eir la>or po/er


28/33

3Taum, 5* Herter "ro%essor o% 5merican Koreign "olicy, t!e "aul H* Pite $c!ool o% 5dvancedInternational $tudies, 'o!ns Hopkins University, @as!ington FCW and Firector, "roDect on ast#@est elations, Council on Koreign elations,

CK A;t! 5nniversary $eries on ene/ing 5merica: 5merican "o/er and "ro%ligacy,( 'an 3;66ack t/o decades*I t!ink t!e /ars or the inter"entions

in Somalia, in >osnia, in Koso"o, in Haiti>elong /it! t!e interventions in 3fghanistan and /ra8, alt!oug! t!ey

,ere underta-en by different administrations for different reasons and had different

costs.>ut all of them ended up in the protracted unexpected un,anted and expensi"e tas-

of nation building .INation building has ne"er been popular.The country has ne"er li-ed

it./t li-es it e"en less no,.3nd / thin- ,eLre not going to do it again .@eRre not going to do it >ecause t!ere

/onRt >e enoug! money*;eLre not going to do it because there ,ill be other demands on the public

purse .;e ,onLt do it because ,eLll be busy enough doing the things that / thin- ought to be

done in foreign policy.3nd ,e ,onLt do it because it ,ill be clear to politicians that the

range of legitimate choices that they ha"e in foreign policy ,ill ha"e narro,ed and ,ill

exclude inter"entions of that -ind*$o I >elieve and I say in t!e >ook t!at t!e last ## the first t,o post#Cold

;ar decades can be seen as a single unit.3nd that unit has come to an end*

>) /nter"entionism ,on&t sno,ball No moti"e

:athieson and Youngs AQ8Favid 9at!ieson and, 5ssociate Kello/ at KIF* He !olds a doctorate %rom t!e University o%Eondon, ic!ard oungs +, Co#ordinator o% t!e Femocratisationprogramme at KIF, and lecturer at t!e University o% @ar/ick, Femocracy"romotion and t!e uropean Ee%t: 5m>ivalence Con%usedL(, Fecem>er, /orking paper 3A at KIFia and C!ina* =!e >ush

administration !as launched t,o military in"asionsandneither of these had democracy promotion

as their main ob7ecti"e butrat!er as side effect* Beyond 5%g!anistan and Ira?, Kreedom House lists 0A countries in t!e/orld t!at still lack >asic democratic rig!tsW countries /!ere there is8as o% t!is /riting< little e"idence that the 5S has

planned to in"ade in democracy&s name* ?ually important, leftist analystsand politicians on t!e ot!er 8pro#Ira?

invasion< side o% t!e de>ate mustalso de#lin- their "ie,s on /ra8 from the broader democracy agenda .

3 fixation ,ith 7ustifying the /ra8 in"asion %rom a progressive point o% vie/ isalso in danger of obscuring

a clearer "ision on more proacti"e democracy promotion*3A This Ademocracy by force&

debate is a di"ersion* One analyst points out t!at this debate has dragged the 2uropean left into

rallying forcefully behindt!e imperialism&Dudged to lie >e!ind a small num>er o% interventions, but to ignore


29/33

the far larger number of casesaround t!e /orld ,here the ;est has by its inaction and silence

been complicit ,ith autocracy*.; There is no prospect of a far#reaching Adoctrine of democratic

inter"entionJ*4ebate at the multilateral le"el has long settled on the "ie, that an absence of

democracy cannot in itself 7ustify military inter"ention in a particular country . 3t least for

the present no state appears li-ely to challenge this* =!e morality o% military intervention is o% course a crucial

issue %or international et!icsW >ut,the core business of democracy promotion isessentially about ci"ilianstrategies . /t is here ,here the left must engage and ha"e something more creati"e and

producti"e to say* 9ore t!an any ot!er %oreign policy issue o% modern times, /ra8 has split the 2uropean left* $omeimportant points !ave >een made, not least t!ose around t!e validity o% international la/ and t!e e%%icacy o% using armies %or regime c!ange* But

the debate hasalsobeen damaging and confused* @!en not actively disagreeing /it! eac! ot!er some on t!e le%t !aveappeared simply to >e talking at cross#purposes* =ony BlairJs speec!es a>ound /it! re%erences linking democracy /it! %irmness /!ilst apatero

constantly stresses t!e need %or democracy t!roug! non#prescriptive dialogue* The 2uropean left ris-s regressing to an

unsatisfactory binary distinction bet,een Ainter"ention& and Adoing nothing& in non#

democratic countries* Ironically, ,hile it lambasts 5S military po,er the leftitsel% appears to

ha"e slid bac- to,ards a ;estphalian "ie, of international relations , reversing t!e evolution in its o/ninternal de>ates during t!e 6AA;s*

C) refer our impacts their long#term ine"itability claim is nonfalsifiable our short

term scenarios are more "alid

=ett,eis AB8C!ristop!er '* Kett/eis, assistant pro%essor o% national security a%%airs at t!e U*$* Paval @ar College, 9ay 3;;0 valuatingIRs Crystal Balls: Ho/ "redictions o% t!e Kuture Have @it!stood Kourteen ears o% Unipolarity( International $tudies evie/ Solume +, Issue6, "ages 1A#6;0ark on t!is venture is >ot! overly literal and restrictiveW a%ter

all, it is possible to pro7ect a fe, years beyond the immediate time hori%on ,ith a good

degree of accuracy.easona>le proDections o% economic potential and military spending are availa>le %or t!e net %e/ years %or t!egreat po/ers* One o% t!e more ro>ust, i% unsurprising, %indings o% ?uantitative international relations sc!olars!ip is t!at t!e >est predictor o%

events in year Y is t!e situation in year 8YZ6it longer* The ob"ious reaction by any s-eptic to this "entureMsome

form of F7ust you ,aitXM

is too open#ended to be useful and renders the predictionsunfalsifiable. Scholars ,ho defend their probabilistic and e"en ine"itable predictions about

the e"olution of the international system by as-ing for more time can ne"er be pro"en

,rong . 4espite ob7ections to the contrary nothing in the logic of these pro7ections suggests

a reason to expect a delay in the beginning of their de"elopment. >y no, fourteen years

after the fall of the >erlin ;all the trends that these "isions predicted ought to ha"e at

least begun to ma-e themsel"es apparent in measurable ,ays. 5 little later t!is


30/33

Youth Hegemony =rame,or-


31/33

Topshelf


32/33

=rame,or- 1NC

( ) ;e&re going to control the uniqueness8uestion on the frame,or- flo, Current

pedagogical methods cannot teach us critical thin-ing s-ills or acti"ism in

oppressed groups refer our e"idence citing specific studies about these groups

and modern teaching methods



$peci%ically, 9eming83;;.< postulates7from a deficiency position, using7a traditional cognitive developmental7perspective

based on one study8itc!ner7and ing 6A-< that school#aged7students cannot produce the form of7

reasoning that the Contro"ersial ublic7/ssues8C"I< approach to learning7demands* Eeming %urt!er

states t!at7school#aged students are not capable ofI performing the cogniti"e tas-s re8uired7by

the C/ curricula to de"elop higherorderI thin-ing. Not only are 9eming&s7arguments

from a deficit perspecti"eI and insulting to youth but his insistence7on teaching to pro"ide

students7,ith only a *store of information+ also7is based on perceptions of students as7

empty slates ,ith little ability for complex7reasoning or ,hat =reire86A1;


33/33

3;;;

youth hegemony k (change heg for the better)

Documents