1ar Speech

K

Existence is a pre-requisite to ontological studies.
Paul Wapner is associate professor and director of the Global Environmental Policy Program at American University. "Leftist Criticism of."
Winter 2003. http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=539
THE THIRD response to eco-criticism would require critics to acknowledge the ways in which they themselves silence nature and then to respect
the sheer otherness of the nonhuman world. Postmodernism prides itself on criticizing the urge toward mastery that characterizes modernity.
But what post opdernisin is exertbui as it captures the nonhuman world within its ow Doesn't postmodern cultural criticism deepen the
modernist urge toward mastery by eliminating the ontological weight of the nonhuman world? What else could it mean to assert that there is
no such thing as nature? I have already suggested the postmodernist response: yes, recognizing the social construction of
"nature" does deny the self-expression of the nonhuman world, but how would we know what such self-
expression means? Indeed, nature doesn't speak; rather, some person always speaks on nature's behalf, and whatever that person says
is, as we all know, a social construction. All attempts to listen to nature are social constructions-except one. Even the most radical
postmodernist must acknowledge the distinction between physical existence and non-existence. As I have said,
postmodernists accept that there is a physical substratum to the phenomenal world even if they argue
about the different meanings we ascribe to it. This acknowledgment of physical existence is crucial. We
can't ascribe meaning to that which doesn't appear. What doesn't exist can manifest no character. Put differently , yes, the
postmodernists )including environmentalists who do that). But we need not doubt the simple idea that a prerequisite of expression is existence.
This in turn suggests that preserving the nonhuman world-in all its diverse embodiments-must be seen by eco-critics as a fundamental good.
Eco-critics must be supporters, in some fashion, of environmental preservation.

It is impossible to separate structural from direct violence, and nuclear war outweighs.
Hanna Newcombe, 2008, Founder of the Peace Research Institute Dundas, "On Violence," (first published online as of 2008, original
date not given) http://www.hannanewcombe.com/on-violence
Direct (intentional) violence and structural violence are convertible into each other, like kinetic and potential
energy during the swing of a pendulum. At the top of its swing, the pendulum has only potential and no
kinetic energy; at the bottom, when the rod is vertical, there is only kinetic and no potential energy; at
intermediate positions, there is some of each. Similarly, in periods of (negative) peace after a conquest,
there is only structural violence and no direct violence; in a period of active warfare (for example a liberation
struggle), there is mainly direct violence. Each side tries to achieve victory, i.e. end up as dominator instead of dominated, predator
rather than prey; i.e. to avoid structural violence to itself while able to inflict it on the other. Similarly, in establishing the pecking order
among barnyard chickens, direct violence (pecking) is practised until it becomes clear who is the dominator over whom and who is dominated
by whom. When the domination hierarchy has been established, there is no more need for direct violence, i.e. active pecking. There is
hierarchical order, there is negative peace. But the underdog (under-chicken?) gets less food and suffers from chronic anxiety; it is less healthy
and probably finds no mates to reproduce. The poor creature at the lowest rung of the social ladder suffers from potential violence,
expecting to be pecked at any time; and this potential violence is like the potential energy in the pendulum metaphor. Peace research, as part
of human betterment research (K. Bouldings term), is like medical science, which tries to cure or prevent diseases. The disease which
peace research tries to cure or prevent is violence at all levels, not only war between nations; though priority must
be given to the prevention of all-out nuclear war which might be totally destructive. Other parts of human
betterment research would be justice research, freedom research, etc.