CO_CapAnswers_Aff

CO_CapAnswers_Aff -...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
820d967a67080bea9a2b92f9afc422a26c88aa37.doc Dartmouth 2K9 1 A2: Cap K 1. framework: weigh aff solvency claims against implementation of the alt - solves all of their kritiks good offense while preventing unfair mooting of the 1AC and forces the negative to defend a stable alternative, which is key to the aff’s ability to generate offense – if we win framework, evaluate the debate by weighing aff ability to solve for harms against the alt’s ability to solve the harms if it were actually to be implemented 2. perm: do the plan and all of the alt which doesn’t include voting negative- the only way to bring down capital is a combination of a socialist worldview and governmental reforms. 3. Perm do both: Total rejection of capitalism fragments resistance – the perm solves best. J.K. Gibson-Graham , Professor of Human Geography at the Australian National University and Professor of Geosciences at the University of Massachusates, Amherst, 19 96 (The End of Capitalism (As We Know It)) One of our goals as Marxists has been to produce a knowledge of capitalism. Yet as “that which is known,” Capitalism has become the intimate enemy. We have uncloaked the ideologically-clothed, obscure monster, but we have installed a naked and visible monster in its place. In return for our labors of creation, the monster has robbed us of all force . We hear – and find it easy to believe – that the left is in disarray. Part of what produces the disarray of the left is the vision of what the left is arrayed against. When capitalism is represented as a unified system coextensive with the nation or even the world, when it is portrayed as crowding out all other economic forms, when it is allowed to define entire societies, it becomes something that can only be defeated and replaced by a mass collective movement (or by a process of systemic dissolution that such a movement might assist). The revolutionary task of replacing capitalism now seems outmoded and unrealistic, yet we do not seem to have an alternative conception of class transformation to take its place . The old political economic “systems” and “structures” that call forth a vision of revolution as systemic replacement still seem to be dominant in the Marxist political imagination. The New World Order is often represented as political fragmentation founded upon economic unification. In this vision the economy appears as the last stronghold of unity and singularity in a world of diversity and plurality. But why can’t the economy be fragmented too? If we theorized it as fragmented in the United States, we could being to see a huge state sector (incorporating a variety of forms of appropriation of surplus labor), a very large sector of self-employed and family-based producers (most noncapitalist), a huge household sector (again, quite various in terms of forms of exploitation, with some households moving towards communal or collective appropriation and others operating in a traditional mode in which one adult appropriates surplus labor from another). None of these things is easy to see.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 4

CO_CapAnswers_Aff -...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online