2AC Coercion (1/4)
1. Case outweighs – we access the only solvable internal link to extinction.
[Explain advantage impact/internal link]
Even if coercion in the abstract is bad, it shouldn’t be the first priority in politics – the plan results in
something positive for the world.
2. The role of a policy maker is to evaluate consequences first – obsessions with moral purity plunge the
neg into an infinite regression
, PhD.Yale, Prof. PoliSci Indiana-Bloomington, dir. Center for the Study of Democracy and Public Life,
(Jeffrey C. Isaac, PhD.Yale, Prof. PoliSci Indiana-Bloomington, dir. Center for the Study of Democracy and Public Life, Spring 2002,
“End, Means, and Politics,”
vol. 49, no. 2)
As writers such as Niccolo Machiavelli, Max Weber, Reinhold Niebuhr, and Hannah Arendt have taught, an unyielding
concern with moral goodness undercuts political responsibility. The concern may be morally laudable,
reflecting a kind of personal integrity, but it suffers from three fatal flaws: (1) It fails to see that
the purity of
one’s intention does not ensure
the achievement of what one intends
. Abjuring violence or refusing to make
common cause with morally compromised parties may seem like the right thing; but if
such tactics entail impotence,
then it is hard to view them as serving any moral good beyond the clean conscience of their supporters;
it fails to see that in a world of real violence
and injustice, moral purity is
not simply a form of powerlessness;
it is often a form of complicity in injustice.
This is why, from the standpoint of politics--as opposed to religion--
pacifism is always a potentially immoral stand. In categorically repudiating violence
, it refuses
in principle to
certain violent injustices with any effect; and (3)
it fails to see that politics is as much about
unintended consequences as
it is about intentions; it is the effects of action, rather than the motives of
action, that is most significant. Just as
the alignment with “good” may engender impotence, it is often
the pursuit of “good”
that generates evil. This is the lesson of communism
in the twentieth century: it is not
enough that one’s goals be sincere
or idealistic; it is equally important
, always, to ask about
the effects of
these goals and to judge
these effects in pragmatic
and historically contextualized ways. Moral
absolutism inhibits this judgment. It alienates those who are not true believers.
It promotes arrogance. And
it undermines political effectiveness.
3. Perm – do the plan and reject coercive politics.
The alt is only possible in a world of policy action.