Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
289051876
Page 1 of 9
N. Ryan
1
Liberty Debate
Liberty Debate
289051876
Page 2 of 9
N. Ryan
Important Note
You should read some of these cards in the 1NC, but which ones you choose should depend on the aff.
Theyre pretty specific to actual governmental action, but the permutation cards are good about
reform.
2
Liberty Debate
Liberty Debate
289051876
Page 3 of 9
N. Ryan
3
Liberty Debate
Liberty Debate
289051876
Page 4 of 9
N. Ryan
have been replaced with moving dots over a computer screen - just like one does in amusement arcade games or on the screen of
portable Nintendo - the killer does not need to be pitiless; he does not have the occasion to feel pity. This is, however, the most obvious
and trivial, even if the most dramatic, aspect of'action at a distance'. The less dramatic and spectacular manifestations of our new, modern, skills of distant
action are more consequential yet - all the more so for not being so evident. They consist in creating what may be called a social and psychological, rather than a
merely physical and optical, distance between actors and the targets of their actions. Such social/psychological distance is produced and reproduced daily, and
ubiquitously, and on a massive scale, by the modern management of action, with its three different, yet complementary aspects. First, in a modern
organization every personally performed action is a mediated action, and every actor is cast in what Stanley Milgram called the
'agentic state': almost no actor ever has a chance to develop the 'authorship' attitude towards the final outcome of the operation,
since each actor is but an executor of a command and giver of another; not a writer, but a translator of someone else's intentions.
Between the idea which triggers the operation and its ultimate effect there is a long chain of performers, none of whom may be
unambiguously pinpointed as a sufficient, decisive link between the design and its product. Second, there is the horizontal,
functional division of the overall task: each actor has but a specific, self-contained job to perform and produces an object with no
written-in destination, no information on its future uses; no contribution seems to 'determine' the final outcome of the operation,
and most retain but a tenuous logical link with the ultimate effect - a link which the participants may in good con science claim to
be visible only in retrospect. Third, the 'targets' of the operation, the people who by design or by default are affected by it,
hardly ever appear to the actors as 'total human beings', objects of moral responsibility and ethical subjects themselve s. As
Michael Schluter and David Lee wittily yet aptly observed, 'in order to be seen at the higher levels you have to be broken up
into bits and most of you thrown away'. And again, about the Gleichschaltung tendency that inevitably follows such fragmentation: 'the institutions of the mega community deal more readily with the capacities in which people are all the same than
those marking each of them out as individual and unique.'1 As a result, most actors in organizations deal not with human
beings, but with facets, features, statistically represented traits; while only total human persons can be bearers of moral
significance. The global impact of all these aspects of modern organization is what I have called (borrowing the term from the vocabulary of the medieval
Church) - the moral adiaphorization of action: for all practical purposes, the moral significance of the ultimate and combined effect of individual actions is
excluded from the criteria by which individual actions are measured, and so the latter are perceived and experienced as morally neutral (more exactly, but with the
same effect, moral significance is shifted from the impact of action on its appointed targets, to motives such as loyalty to the organization, collegial
solidarity, the well-being of subordinates, or procedural discipline). The fragmentation of the objects of action is replicated by the fragmentation
of actors. The vertical and horizontal division of the global operation into partial jobs makes every actor into a role-performer. Unlike 'the person', the roleperformer is an eminently replaceable and exchangeable incumbent of a site in the complex network of tasks - there is always a certain impersonality, a distance, a
less-than-authorship relationship between the role-performer and the role performed . In none of the roles is the role-performer a whole person, as
each role's performance engages but a selection of the actor's skills and personality features, and in principle should neither engage
the remaining parts nor spill over and affect the rest of the actor's personality. This again makes the role-performance ethically
adiaphoric: only total persons, only unique persons ('unique' in the sense of being irreplaceable in the sense that the deed would
remain undone without them) can be moral subjects, bearers of moral responsibility - but modern organization derives its strength
from its uncanny capacity for splitting and fragmentation, while on the other hand providing occasions for the fragments to come
together again has never been modern organization's forte. Modern organization is the rule of nobody. It is, we may say, a contraption to float
responsibility - most conspicuously, moral responsibility. Thanks to all these inventions, often discussed under the name of 'scientific management', modern
action has been liberated from the limitations imposed by ethical sentiments. The modern way of doing things does not call for the mobilization of sentiments and
beliefs. On the contrary, the silencing and cooling off of the sentiments is its prerequisite and the paramount condition of its astounding effectiveness. Moral
impulses and constraints have not been so much extinguished, as neutralized and made irrelevant. Men and women have been
given the opportunity to commit inhuman deeds without feeling in the least inhuman themselves . It is only when (to quote Hannah
Arendt again) 'the old spontaneous bestiality gave way to an absolutely cold and systematic destruction of human bodies' , that 'the
average German whom the Nazis notwithstanding years of the most furious propaganda could not induce to kill a Jew on his own
account (not even when they made it quite clear that such a murder would go unpunished)' served 'the machine of destruction
without opposition'.2 Modernity did not make people more cruel; it only invented a way in which cruel things could be done by
non-cruel people. Under the sign of modernity, evil does not need any more evil people. Rational people, men and women well
riveted into the impersonal, adiaphorized network of modern organization, will do perfectly.
4
Liberty Debate
Liberty Debate
289051876
Page 5 of 9
N. Ryan
the root of all such evils, from his view, was a mistaken view about the nature of reality. He
remained un confused concerning his central insight, that these social issues cannot be changed without a concerted focus of
understanding of this root, the interdependent insubstantial nature of reality. In other words, the Buddhist teachings on compassion
begin with personal clear seeing, but they do not end there. The reason the compassion teachings go further, must go further, is
that in Buddhism one cannot have genuine compassion without a direct experience of the lack of inherent existence of all
phenomena, including all beings. The enormity of serious issues like globalization could be overwhelming, moving one to a sense
of urgency. If the urgency, however, is an impulsive response to the unbearable qualities of suffering, the aversion that arises
toward suffering could lead one to unskillful acts based on what could be called "idiot compassion." (36) It is called idiot
compassion for two reasons: First, it is an impulsive response based on insufficient understanding of the true nature of reality.
Second, this impulsive compassion quickly becomes ineffective, exacerbating suffering and confusion in others, and precipitating
discouragement and depression in oneself. Good intention is never enough; it risks the dangers of impulsiveness, unskillful
actions, and romanticism. Effective actions must be based upon wisdom, the clear seeing of the nature of reality. Seeing the
true nature suggests a different, more subtle, sustained, and strategic response. If one understands the lack of inherent existence of
all phenomena, all social and economic problems are fragile and subject to change. If one understands interdependence, one sees
that every personal act of dropping habitual patterns necessarily lessens the suffering of every other being, directly,
inexorably. And so waking up, even seemingly individually, is a social and political act that affects the happiness of everyone. From
abuse of power, and unethical activity. But
this perspective, the contemplative who sees clearly and acts strategically is a social activist, even if she or he never leaves the monastery. But action that is truly compassionate, based on
clear seeing, cannot take sides. Spiritually based social action must embrace both sides of an issue and refrain from identifying external enemies. Thich Nhat Hanh wrote, "Where is our
enemy? I ask myself this all the time." (37) Sometimes the journey seems ambiguous, for it is not nourished by a clear definition of justice. Justice is always a difficult word for the
Buddhist. What is justice, and how does it relate to the experience of suffering? How does a notion of justice actually contribute to the happiness of beings? (38) Often these mysterious,
frustrating discussions with Buddhists end here, with the view suggesting that the nature of the problem about which we are most concerned is not a problem at all. In order to get a
balanced perspective, however, it is important to deal with the other important aspect of the Mahayana path. This is the treatment of the relative practice aspect, the way in which we
express our skillful means in the world through compassion. If Christians are exposed to the insight (prajna, sherap) teachings of Mahayana Buddhism alone, without the compassion or
skillful means (upaya-kaushalya, thapla khepa) teachings, an eerie impression is left. Buddhism is a very practical tradition, and insight is always tied with practical action in the world. In
fact, in my lineage it is often said that if the practitioner does not manifest a natural leaning toward compassion, it is quite possible that the insight into the true nature may be only
theoretical; it is with the dawn of true compassion that the emptiness realization is completed. (39) There are two specific areas for compassionate action in American Buddhism. The first
Choices
about what one can contribute are very individual, but donate to the perfect balance. Perhaps the greatest contribution is a commitment to
area is in the realm of spiritual activism. Having identified as directly as possible the multiple causes of the global economy, one must strategically undo those causes.
meditation practice, as Eido Shimano Roshi expressed. Perhaps it is to choose some specific area of activism or education in order to undo the result of transnational corporations that hold
power over even governments of the world. Perhaps it relates to hands-on relief from suffering, or in community building on a small scale within one's own region or environment.
Whatever the choice, these efforts must be developed patiently, with a clear sense of the magnitude of the project, even while recognizing that every single act of clear seeing or
Activism
based on impatience with results, excess urgency, or romantic clinging to alternative outcomes will always be doomed to
eventual failure.
compassionate action reverses in some small way the ignorance concerning the basic nature of reality and changes in some small way the entire international phenomenon.
5
Liberty Debate
Liberty Debate
289051876
Page 6 of 9
N. Ryan
the self-perception of
people in the life-state of anger expands and swells until the ocean deeps would only lap their knees. The inner distortions twisting
the heart of someone in this state prevent them from seeing things in their true aspect or making correct judgments. Everything
appears as a means or a tool to the fulfillment of egotistical desires and impulses. In inverse proportion to the scale of this inflated
arrogance, the existence of otherspeople, cultures, natureappears infinitely small and insignificant. It becomes a matter of no
concern to harm or even kill others trivialized in this way. It is this state of mind that would countenance the use of nuclear
weapons; it can equally be seen in the psychology of those who would advocate the use of such hideously cruel weapons as napalm, or, more recently, depleted uranium and cluster
bombs. People in such a state of life are blinded, not only to the horrific suffering their actions wreak but also to the value of human life itself . For the sake of human dignity,
we must never succumb to the numbing dehumanization of the rampant world of anger. When the atomic bomb was dropped on
the city of Hiroshima, not only military personnel but also many scientists were thrilled by the success of this new weapon.
However, the consciences of genuinely great scientists were filled with anguish. Einstein greeted this news with an agonized cry of woe, while Rotblat
are various explanations as to what the specific distance may be, but 84,000 yojanas represents an immeasurable enormity. This metaphor indicates how
told me he was completely overcome with hopelessness. Their feelings were no doubt intensely resonant with the sentiments that motivated Josei Toda to denounce nuclear weapons.
When Toda spoke of declawing the demonic nature of nuclear weapons, he had in mind the struggle to prevent the inner forces of anger from disrupting the ten worlds and going on an
unrestrained rampage. He was calling for the steady and painstaking work of correctly repositioning and reconfiguring the function of anger in an inner world where wisdom and harmony
it is thus vital we remember that not only our specific activities for
peace and culture but the movement for human revolution based on the daily endeavor to transform our lives from
within is a consistent and essential aspect of the historic challenge of nuclear disarmament and abolition. Unless we focus
on this inner, personal dimension, we will find ourselves overwhelmed by the structural momentum of a technological
civilization, which in a certain sense makes inevitable the birth of such demonic progeny as nuclear weapons.
prevail. This is the true meaning of declawing. For SGI members in particular
The struggle against oppression has to be rooted in our own contradictions- its key to spilling over into
the greater consciousness
Daisaku Ikeda president of Soka Gokkai International and Buddhist philosopher, 2007
(Restoring the Human Connection: The First Step to Global Peace
http://www.sgi-uk.org/resources/PeaceProposal2007.pdf, accessed 2/11/10) RKB
In my proposal of two years ago, I offered what I consider guidelines for humanism in action: Recognizing that all is change
within a framework of interdependence, we of course see harmony and oneness as expressions of our interconnectedness. But we
can even appreciate contradiction and conflict in the same way. Thus the struggle against evila struggle that issues from the
inner effort to master our own contradictions and conflictsshould be seen as a difficult yet unavoidable trial that we must
undergo in the effort to create a greater and deeper sense of connection.7 Underlying this statement and expressed in the repeated
reference to connection is the belief that we must never lose sight of the bonds we share as members of the same human family, a
connection that transcends cultural, ethnic and national borders. This is not to deny the reality of clashing interests and outlooks;
these need to be faced head-on if we are to avoid encouraging evil, thus inviting catastrophe. The challenge of preventing any
further proliferation of nuclear weapons is just such a trial in the quest for world peace, one that cannot be achieved if we
are defeated by a sense of helplessness. The crucial element is to ensure that any struggle against evil is rooted firmly in a
consciousness of the unity of the human family, something only gained through the mastery of our own inner
contradictions. It is this kind of reconfiguration of our thinking that will make possible a skilled and restrained approach to
the options of dialogue and pressure. The stronger our sense of connection as members of the human family, the more effectively
we can reduce to an absolute minimum any application of the hard power of pressure, while making the greatest possible use of the
soft power of dialogue. Tragically, the weighting in the case of Iraq has been exactly the reverse.
6
Liberty Debate
Liberty Debate
289051876
Page 7 of 9
N. Ryan
7
Liberty Debate
Liberty Debate
289051876
Page 8 of 9
N. Ryan
The state can only attempt to manifest its actions in bigger units of power that create illusions of
resisting while asserting more control- only individual response solves
Anthony Carty, Professor of Law University of Westminster, 2003
(Nietzsche and Legal Theory (Part I): Nietzsche and Socrates / Or The Spirit Of The Devil And The Law,
24 Cardozo L. Rev. 621, January) RKB
States of legality can never be anything but exceptional states, since they are partial restrictions of the true will of life, which is
bent upon power, and are subordinate to its ultimate goal as a single means: namely, as a means of creating bigger units of power. A
system of law conceived as sovereign and general, not as a means for use in the fight between units of power but as a means against fighting in general, rather like Dumuhring's
communistic slogan that every will should regard every other will as its equal, this would be a principle hostile to life, an attempt to assassinate the future of man, a sign of fatigue and a
target here:
Whereas in the case of all productive people instinct is precisely the creative-affirmative force and consciousness makes critical and warning gestures, in the case of
resistance to contractarian
liberalism can be understood as a pessimistic metaphysics. What are missing from the liberal contract are the facts of birth and death, not simply as single
Socrates, by contrast, instinct becomes the critic and consciousness the creator - a true monstrosity per defectum... . n25 So, Nietzsche's
events in each individual's life, but as permanent forces or drives, the unconscious pressure of which determine everyone's actions. This perspective correctly predicts that Nietzsche will
employ a genealogical method to allow him to de-mythologize every effort made to assure autonomy in the contractarian foundation of law. Both
constitutional and
international legal order are illusory. They reflect a temporary, perhaps only apparent halt in the dynamic of the material forces,
whether psychological or physical, which underlie personal or group-acquired status. States receive legal recognition only as long
as those same material forces do not once again regain momentum. n26
8
Liberty Debate
Liberty Debate
289051876
Page 9 of 9
N. Ryan
9
Liberty Debate