Turn - Devaluation A) Their framework of harm calculation risks the devaluation of the Other, genocide, war and imperialism.

. Dillon Professor of Politics @ Lancaster - 99

(Micheal; Professor of politics @ Lancaster, Another Justice, Political Theory Apr 99, vol 27, Issue #2, p. 155, p. 21) Otherness is born(e) within the self as an integral part of itself and in such a way that it always remains an inherent stranger to itself. (n 33) It derives from the lack, absence, or ineradicable incompleteness which comes from having no security of tenure within or over that of which the self is a particular hermeneutical manifestation; namely, being itself. The point about the human, betrayed by this absence, is precisely that it is not sovereignty self-possessed and complete, enjoying undisputed tenure in and of itself. Modes of justice therefore reliant upon such a subject lack the very foundations in the self that they most violently insist upon seeing inscribed there. This does not, however, mean that the dissolution of the subject also entails the dissolution of Justice. Quite the reverse. The subject was never a firm foundation for justice much less a hospitable vehicle for the reception of the call of another Justice. It was never in possession of that self-possession which was supposed to secure the certainty of itself, of a self-possession that would enable it ultimately to adjudicated everything. The very indexicality required of sovereign subjectivity gave rise rather to a communsurability much more amenable to the expendability required of the political and material economies of mass societies than it did to the singular, invaluable, and uncanny uniqueness of the self. The value of the subject became the standard unit of currency for the political arithmetic of States and the political economies of capitalism. (n35) Thus no valuation without mensuration and no mensuration without indexation. Once rendered calculable, however, units of account are necessarily submissible not only to valuation but also, of course, to devaluation. Devaluation, locically can extend to the point of counting as nothing. Hence, no mensuration without demensuration either. Hence, no mensuration without demensuration either. There is nothing abstract about this: the declension of economies of value leads to the zero point of holocaust. However liberating and emancipating system of value rightsmay claim to be, for example, they run the risk of counting out the invaluable. Counted out, the invaluable may then lose its purchase on life. Herewith, then, the necessity of championing the invaluable itself For we must never forget that, we are dealing always with whatever exceeds measure. (n36) But how does that necessity present itself? Another Justice answers: as the surplus of the duty to answer to the claim of Justice over rights.

B) Only our alternative role of the ballot alone solves devaluation Eudaily, Doctoral Candidate Politics - University of Maryland - 2002
(The Good Society 11.1, (2002) 16-18, Haunting Hegemony: A Certain Spirit of Conservative-Liberal-Socialism) If hegemony enables its own haunting by the spirits of opposition, how is hegemony ever overcome? Were the dissidents of Eastern Europe only engaged in an imminent critique of state socialism? While this may be plausible for the socialist leg of the conservativeliberal-socialism triad, it is demonstrably false when applied to conservatives and liberals. In the end, every haunting is undertaken "in the name of something." 10 I think it is this "something" that Krygier hopes to find in the "reasons" conservatives, liberals, and socialists shared in opposing communism. [End Page 17] Yet, when approached in the manner of traditional political theory, we end up time and again left with Isaiah Berlin's "clash of incommensurate goods" between the three traditions. By engaging Derrida, an alternative approach is suggested. The conservative-liberal-socialism coalition under communism (just as the anti-WTO coalition under neoliberalism) acted in the name of justice. To expect this justice to have positive content in either the form of a future present utopia, or a past present arcadialeads us right back into the dead end of reconciling conservatism, liberalism, and socialism. This critique applies both to treating CLS as some kind of Hegelian synthesis (a "Third Way") or as a blueprint for a mixed or hybrid constitutional regime. However, if we take justice as the undeconstructable future (undeconstructable because it has no positive content), the practice of conservative-liberal-social-democracy is understood as taking place in the space opened between the content of an "actually existing hegemony" and such a notion of justice. 11 Such practice remains hauntological, as Derridian justice operates explicitly without ontology. The choice to step into that gap (like the choice in selecting an inheritance) is made in aporia and thus it constitutes a genuine decision, not merely a calculation. The result of this decision is responsibility, not to a philosophical system but to the decision to act itself. This is the ethical position of deconstruction and thus of Derrida's New International. 12 It is attuning ourselves to this responsibility to act in the name of justice that makes us heirs to a certain (albeit crucial) spirit of Kolakowski's conservative-liberal-socialist credo.