Atleast You Tried
Content
T
Interpretation 1
Domestic surveillance means the acquisition of nonpublic information regarding United
States persons
Small 8 – United States Air Force Academy
Matthew, His Eyes are Watching You: Domestic Surveillance, Civil Liberties and Executive Power
during Times of National Crisis, 2008,
http://cspc.nonprofitsoapbox.com/storage/documents/Fellows2008/Small.pdf
Before one can make any sort of assessment of domestic surveillance policies, it is first necessary to
narrow the scope of the term “domestic surveillance.” Domestic surveillance is a subset of
intelligence gathering. Intelligence, as it is to be understood in this context, is “information that
meets the stated or understood needs of policy makers and has been collected, processed and
narrowed to meet those needs” (Lowenthal 2006, 2). In essence, domestic surveillance is a means to
an end; the end being intelligence. The intelligence community best understands domestic
surveillance as the acquisition of nonpublic information concerning United States persons
(Executive Order 12333 (3.4) (i)). With this definition domestic surveillance remains an overly broad
concept.
Violation 1 SEVIS involves foreign students and has nothing to do with US persons
Violation 2 Curtailing SEVIS is not surveillance
Interpretation 2: “Should” means “must” and requires immediate legal effect
Summers 94
(Justice – Oklahoma Supreme Court, “Kelsey v. Dollarsaver Food Warehouse of Durant”, 1994 OK
123, 11‐8,
http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=20287#marker3fn13)
4 The legal question to be resolved by the court is whether the word "should"13 in the May 18 order
connotes futurity or may be deemed a ruling in praesenti.14 The answer to this query is not to be divined from rules of grammar;15 it must be
governed by the age‐old practice culture of legal professionals and its immemorial language usage. To determine if the omission (from the critical May 18 entry) of the turgid phrase, "and the
same hereby is", (1) makes it an in futuro ruling ‐ i.e., an expression of what the judge will or would do at a later stage ‐ or (2) constitutes an in in praesenti resolution of a disputed law issue,
the trial judge's intent must be garnered from the four corners of the entire record.16
[CONTINUES – TO FOOTNOTE]
13 "Should" not only is used as a "present indicative" synonymous with ought but also is the past tense of "shall" with various shades of meaning not always easy to analyze. See 57 C.J. Shall §
9, Judgments § 121 (1932). O. JESPERSEN, GROWTH AND STRUCTURE OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE (1984); St. Louis & S.F.R. Co. v. Brown, 45 Okl. 143, 144 P. 1075, 1080‐81 (1914). For a more
detailed explanation, see the Partridge quotation infra note 15. Certain contexts mandate a construction of the term "should" as more than merely indicating preference or desirability.
Brown, supra at 1080‐81 (jury instructions stating that jurors "should" reduce the amount of damages in proportion to the amount of contributory negligence of the plaintiff was held to imply
an obligation and to be more than advisory); Carrigan v. California Horse Racing Board, 60 Wash. App. 79, 802 P.2d 813 (1990) (one of the Rules of Appellate Procedure requiring that a party
"should devote a section of the brief to the request for the fee or expenses" was interpreted to mean that a party is under an obligation to include the requested segment); State v. Rack, 318
should" would mean the same as "shall" or "must" when used in an instruction to the jury
S.W.2d 211, 215 (Mo. 1958) ("
which tells the triers they "should disregard false testimony"). 14 In praesenti means literally "at the present
time." BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 792 (6th Ed. 1990). In legal parlance the phrase denotes that
which in law is presently or immediately effective, as opposed to something that will or would
become effective in the future [in futurol]. See Van Wyck v. Knevals, 106 U.S. 360, 365, 1 S.Ct. 336, 337, 27 L.Ed. 201
(1882).
Violation 3 Curtailing SEVIS has no immediate effect.
Standards
a. Fairness, by violating the resolution the aff effectivley unlimits aff ground, and therefore
makes the round unfair for the neg team, and ground dictates my ability to win. Debate
then becomes unfair, and no one wants to compete in an unfair activity. Thus effectivley
collapses participation in debate as an activity.
b. Education, by unlimitng aff ground the aff also reduces the learning that can happen in
the round. By focusing on a smaller topic, learning can be indepth. Education is
important because education has an impact beyond the round.
Voter Topicality is a voting issue for fairness and education, and should be judged as
prerequisite to substance, because toipicality determines what the round should look like now
and in the future. Their substance has no out of round real world impact.
GROUP STANDARDS AND VOTER FOR ALL VIOLATIONS AND INTERPRETATION
WILDERSON
State action and institutional ethics makes anti‐blackness worse ‐ erases the history of
exploitation of the black body
Wilderson, award‐winning author of Incognegro: A Memoir of Exile and Apartheid. He is one of two
Americans to hold elected office in the African National Congress and is a former insurgent in the
ANC’s armed wing, 2
003 (Frank B. III “Introduction: Unspeakable Ethics” Red, White, & Black: Cinema
and the Strucure of U.S. Antagonisms, Pg 15‐16) GG
Regarding the Black position, some might ask why, after claims successfully made on the state by
the Civil Rights Movement, do I insist on positing an operational analyticfor cinema, film studies,
and political theory that appears to be a dichotomous and essentialist pairing of Masters and
Slaves? In other words, why should we think of today’s Blacks in the US as Slaves and everyone else
(with the exception of Indians) as Masters? One could answer these questions bydemonstrating how
nothing remotely approaching claims successfully made on the State has come to pass. In other
words, the election of a Black President aside, police brutality, mass incarceration, segregated and
substandard schools and housing, astronomical rates of HIV infection, and the threat of being
turned away en masse at the polls still constitute the lived experience of Black life. But such
empirically based rejoinders would lead us in the wrong direction; we would find ourselves on
“solid” ground, which would only mystify, rather than clarify, the question. We would be forced to
appeal to “facts,” the “historical record,” and empirical markers of stasis and change, all of which
could be turned on their head with more of the same.Underlying such a downward spiral into
sociology, political science, history, and/or public policy debates would be the very rubric that I am
calling into question: the grammar of suffering known as exploitation and alienation, the
assumptive logic whereby subjective dispossession is arrived at in the calculations between those
who sell labor power and those who acquire it. The Black qua the worker. Orlando Patterson has
already dispelled this faulty ontological grammar in Slavery and Social Death, where he demonstrates
how and why work, or forced labor, is not a constituent element of slavery. Once the “solid” plank
of “work” is removed from slavery, then the conceptually coherent notion of “claims against the
state”—the proposition that the state and civil society are elastic enough to even contemplate the
possibility of an emancipatory project for the Black position—disintegrates into thin air. The
imaginary of the state and civil society is parasitic on the Middle Passage. Put another way: no slave,
no world. And, in addition, as Patterson argues, no slave is in the world. If, as an ontological position,
that is, as a grammar of suffering, the Slave is not a laborer but an anti‐Human, a positionality
against which Humanity establishes, maintains, and renews it coherence, its corporeal integrity; if
the Slave is, to borrow from Patterson, generally dishonored, perpetually open to gratuitous
violence, and void of kinship structure, that is, having no relations that need be recognized, a being
outside of relationality, then our analysis cannot be approached through the rubric of gains or
reversals in struggles with the state and civil society, not unless and until the interlocutor first
explains how the Slave is of the world. The onus is not on one who posits the Master/Slave
dichotomy, but on the one who argues there is a distinction between Slaveness and Blackness. How,
when, and where did such a split occur? The woman at the gates of Columbia University awaits an
answer.
The world writ large and civil society are preconditioned on the destruction of the black
positionality
Wilderson, Professor UCI, 2003 (Frank B., “The Prison Slave as Hegemony’s (Silent) Scandal”,
Soc Justice 30 no2 2003, Accessed 8‐4‐12, MR)
There is something organic to black positionality that makes it essential to the destruction of civil
society. There is nothing willful or speculative in this statement, for one could just as well state the
claim the other way around: There is something organic to civil society that makes it essential to the
destruction of the Black body. Blackness is a positionality of "absolute dereliction" (Fanon),
abandonment, in the face of civil society, and therefore cannot establish itself, or be established,
through hegemonic interventions. Blackness cannot become one of civil society's many junior
partners: Black citizenship, or Black civic obligation, are oxymorons.
Addressing Anti‐Blackness is a priority – scandalizes ethicality and sets the stage for all
violence
Wilderson, award‐winning author of Incognegro: A Memoir of Exile and Apartheid. He is one of two
Americans to hold elected office in the African National Congress and is a former insurgent in the
ANC’s armed wing, 2
003 (Frank B. III “Chapter One: The Ruse of Analogy” Red, White, & Black:
Cinema and the Structure of U.S. Antagonisms,) GG
Two tensions are at work here. One operates under the labor of ethical dilemmas‐‐ “simple enough
one has only not to be a nigger.”This, I submit, is the essence of being for the White and non‐Black
position: ontology scaled down to a global common denominator. The other tension is found in the
impossibility of ethical dilemmas for the Black: “I am,” Fanon writes, “a slave not of an idea others
have of me but of my own appearance.” Being can thus be thought of, in the first ontological
instance, asnon‐niggerness; and slavery then as niggerness. The visual field, “my own appearance,” is
the cut, the mechanism that elaborates the division between the non‐niggerness and slavery, the
difference between the living and the dead.Whereas Humans exist on some plane of being and thus
can become existentially present through some struggle for/of/through recognition, Blacks cannot
attain the plane of recognition(West 82). Spillers, Fanon, and Hartman maintain that the violence
that has positioned and repetitively re‐positions the Black as a void of historical movement is without
analog in the suffering dynamics of the ontologically alive. The violence that turns the African into a
thing is without analog because it does not simply oppress the Black through tactile and empirical
technologies of oppression, like the “little family quarrels” which for Fanon exemplify the Jewish
Holocaust. Rather, the gratuitous violence of the Black’s first ontological instance, the Middle Passage,
“wiped out [his/her] metaphysics…his [her] customs and sources on which they are based” (BSWM
110). Jews went into Auschwitz and came out as Jews. Africans went into the ships and came out as
Blacks. The former is a Human holocaust; the latter is a Human and a metaphysical holocaust. That
is why it makes little sense to attempt analogy: the Jews have the Dead (the Muselmenn) among
them; the Dead have the Blacks among them.¶ This violence which turns a body into flesh, ripped
apart literally and imaginatively, destroys the possibility of ontology because it positions the Black
within an infinite and indeterminately horrifying and open vulnerability, an object made available
(which is to say fungible) for any subject. As such, “the black has no ontological resistance in the
eyes of the white man” (110) or, more precisely, in the eyes of Humanity
The alternative is to reject the affirmative and reorient ourselves towards the world
through an unflinching para di g matic analysis
Wilderson 10 [Frank B. III, Ph.D., Associate Professor at UC Irvine, former ANC member, “on some
guerilla shit”, Red, White & Black: Cinema and the Structure of U.S. Antagonisms, pages ix‐x, OG]
STRANGE AS it might seem, this book project began in South Africa. During the last years of apartheid
I worked for revolutionary change in both an underground and above‐ground capacity, for the
Charterist Movement in general and the ANC in particular. During this period, I began to see how
essential an unflinching paradigmatic analysis is to a movement dedicated to the complete
overthrow of an existing order.The neoliberal compromises that the radical elements of the Chartist
Movement made with the moderate elements were due, in large part, to our inability or
unwillingness to hold the moderates' feet to the fire of a political agenda predicated on an
unflinching paradigmatic analysis. Instead, we allowed our energies and points of attention to be
displaced by and onto pragmatic considerations. Simply put, we abdicated the power to pose the
question—and the power to pose the question is the greatest power of all. Elsewhere, I have written
about this unfortunate turn of events (Incognegro: A Memoir of Exile and Apartheid), so I'll not
rehearse the details here. Suffice it to say, this book germinated in the many political and academic
discussions and debates that I was fortunate enough to be a part of at a historic moment and in a
place where the word revolution was spoken in earnest, free of qualifiers and irony. For their past and
ongoing ideas and interventions, I extend solidarity and appreciation to comrades Amanda Alexander,
Franco Barchiesi, Teresa Barnes, Patrick Bond, Ashwin Desai, Nigel Gibson, Steven Greenberg, Allan
Horowitz, Bushy Kelebonye (deceased), Tefu Kelebonye, Ulrike Kistner, Kamogelo Lekubu, Andile
Mngxitama, Prishani Naidoo, John Shai, and S'bu Zulu
RIMAL
The crunch is coming – our current pace of growth is unsustainable and will cause
extinction
Rose Buchanan, 6/20/2015, writer at The Independent. Cites study from scientists at Stanford,
Princeton and Berkeley
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/earth‐is‐entering‐sixth‐extinction‐phase‐with‐many‐spe
cies‐‐including‐our‐own‐‐labelled‐the‐walking‐dead‐10333608.html, mm
The planet is entering a new period of extinction with top scientists warning that species all over
the world are “essentially the walking dead” – including our own. The report, authored by scientists at
Stanford, Princeton and Berkeley universities, found that vertebrates were vanishing at a rate 114
times faster than normal. In the damning report, published in the Science Advances journal, researchers note that the last similar
event was 65 million years ago, when dinosaurs disappeared, most probably as a result of an asteroid. "We are now entering the
sixth great mass extinction event," one of the authors of the paper told the BBC. Gerardo Ceballos, lead author of the
research, added: "If it is allowed to continue, life would take many millions of years to recover and our
species itself would likely disappear early on". The research examined historic rates of extinction for vertebrates, finding
that since 1900 more than 400 vertebrates have disappeared – an extinction rate 100 times higher than
in other – non‐extinction – periods. "There are examples of species all over the world that are essentially the walking dead,”
said Stanford University professor Paul Ehrlich. He added: "We are sawing off the limb that we are
sitting on." The research, which cites climate change, pollution and deforestation as causes for the rapid change, notes that a knock‐on
effect of the loss of entire ecosystems could be dire. As our ecosystems unravel, the Centre for Biological Diversity has noted that we could
face a “snowball” effect whereby individual species extinction ultimately fuels more losses. The report, which builds on findings published
by Duke University last year, does note that averting this loss is “still possible through intensified conservation effects,” but that “window
of opportunity is rapid closing.”
Transition to eco‐authoritarianism coming now and solves extinction
Beeson 10 (Mark, Professor and Head of the Department of Political Science & International Studies,
University of Birmingham, 2010, “The coming of environmental authoritarianism,” Environmental
Politics, Vol. 19, No. 2)
The environment has become the defining public policy issue of the era. Not only will political responses to
environmental challenges determine the health of the planet, but continuing environmental
degradation may also affect political systems. This interaction is likely to be especially acute in parts of the world
where environmental problems are most pressing and the state's ability to respond to such challenges is weakest. One
possible consequence of environmental degradation is the development or consolidation of authoritarian rule
as political elites come to privilege regime maintenance and internal stability over political
liberalisation. Even efforts to mitigate the impact of, or respond to, environmental change may involve a
decrease in individual liberty as governments seek to transform environmentally destructive behaviour. As a
result, ‘environmental authoritarianism’ may become an increasingly common response to the
destructive impacts of climate change in an age of diminished expectations.
Advocating for STEM leadership in the US as a role model promotes democracy and
delays the transition and stops authoritarianism that is critical to avert extinction. This
turns their warming impact, only rimal can solve.
Humphrey 7 (Mathew, Reader in Political Philosophy at the University of Nottingham, UK, 2007,
Ecological Politics and Democratic Theory: The Challenge to the Deliberative Ideal, p. 20‐21)
If these changes are necessary ‐ the downgrading, curtailment and reconceptualisation of democracy,
liberties, and justice, as well as the raising to primacy of integrity and ecological virtue ‐ how are the
necessary changes to come about? Value change represents the best 'long‐term' hope but the
ecological crisis is not a 'long‐term' problem. These changes have to be introduced quickly and before
there has been time to inculcate value shifts in the population. The downgrading of rights and liberties
has to be achieved through policy and institutional change, even while the question of a long‐term change of values
is also addressed. For both these tasks what is required is political leadership and the institution of the state. The
immediate problem lies in the collective action problem that arises in respect of the looming ecological constraints on economic activity
and the potential collapse of the global commons. The end of the 'golden age' of material abundance, as we slide back down the other side
of 'Hubbert's pimple’ will bring about intense competition for scarce resources. To understand politics under these circumstances, we have
to turn back to Hobbes and Burke, the political philosophers who conceptualised life under conditions of scarcity, and also to Plato,
commended for his healthy mistrust of democracy. For Ophuls a crucial element of political philosophy is the definition of reality itself;
political philosophy carries within it an ontological component which sets out the foundations of
political possibility. The contemporary West he sees as defined by the 'philosophers of the great frontier'
Locke, Smith, and Marx. These are the political philosophers of abundance. For Locke the proviso of always
leaving 'as much and as good' for others in appropriation could always be met even when there was no unappropriated land left, as the
productivity of the land put to useful work would always create better opportunities for those coming later. Smith's 'invisible hand' thesis
was also dependent upon the assumption that the material goods would always be available for individual to accomplish their own
economic plans. For Marx the 'higher phase' of communist society arrives 'after the productive forces
have... increased with the all‐round development of the individual, and all the sprin4gs of
co‐operative wealth flow more abundantly' (Marx, 1970: 19). For Ophuls these are all the political philosophies
of abundance. Ecological crisis, however, returns us to the Hobbesian struggle of all against all (Heilbroner,
1974: 89). With ecological scarcity we return to the classical problems of political theory that 400 years of abnormal abundance has
shielded us from (Ophuls, 1977: 164). Both liberalism and socialism represent the politics of this 'abnormal
abundance' and with the demise of this period we return to the eternal problems of politics. Hobbes,
then, is seen as the political philosopher of ecological scarcity avant la lettre. 'Hardin's "logic of the commons" is simply a special version of
the general political dynamic of Hobbes' "state of nature"' (Ophuls, 1977; 148). Competition over scarce resources leads to
conflict, even when all those involved realise that they would be collectively better off if they could
co‐operate, 'to bring about the tragedy of the commons it is not necessary that men be bad, only that they not be actively good'
(Ophuls, 1977: 149). It is this Hobbesian struggle that may impose 'intolerable strains on the representative political apparatus that has
been historically associated with capitalist societies' (Heilbroner, 1974: 89). Coercion is seen as the solution (and it is hoped,
although as we have seen not for terribly good reasons, that this coercion can be agreed democratically), and the appropriate
agent of this solution is the state. The transition from abundance to scarcity will have to be
centralised and expert‐controlled, and it is unlikely that 'a steady state polity could be democratic'
(Ophuls, 1977: 162). As we shall see in the following paragraphs, this faith in the ability of the state to institute centralised controls that
would be obeyed by its citizens is one of the are1
CASE
STEM/innovation
1)
STEM crisis is exaggerated. there is actually an abundance of STEM workers
Charette 13 – IEEE Spectrum contributing editor (Robert N., 8/30/13, “The STEM Crisis Is a
Myth”, IEEE Spectrum,
http://spectrum.ieee.org/atwork/education/thestemcrisisisamyth)//SKY
So is there a shortfall of STEM workers or isn’t there?
The Georgetown study estimates that nearly twothirds of the STEM job openings in the United States, or about 180 000 jobs per year, will require bachelor’s degrees. Now, if
252 000
STEM graduates emerged in 2009. So even if all the STEM openings were entrylevel
positions and even if only new STEM bachelor’s holders could compete for them, that
still leaves 70 000 graduates unable to get a job in their chosen field.
Of course, the pool of U.S. STEM workers is much bigger than that: It includes new STEM master’s and Ph.D.
you apply the Commerce Department’s definition of STEM to the NSF’s annual count of science and engineering bachelor’s degrees, that means about
graduates (in 2009, around 80 000 and 25 000, respectively), STEM associate degree graduates (about 40 000), H1B visa holders (more than 50 000), other immigrants and
visa holders with STEM degrees, technical certificate holders, and nonSTEM degree recipients looking to find STEMrelated work. And then there’s the vast number of STEM
degree holders who graduated in previous years or decades.
Even in the computer and IT industry, the sector that employs the most STEM workers and is expected to grow the most over the next 5 to 10 years, not everyone who wants a
job can find one. A recent study by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a liberalleaning think tank in Washington, D.C., found that more than a third of recent computer science
graduates aren’t working in their chosen major; of that group, almost a third say the reason is that there are no jobs available.
Spot shortages for certain STEM specialists do crop up. For instance, the recent explosion in data analytics has sparked demand for data scientists in health care and retail. But
the H1B visa and similar immigrant hiring programs are meant to address such shortages. The problem is that students who are contemplating what field to specialize in can’t
assume such shortages will still exist by the time they emerge from the educational pipeline.
What’s perhaps most perplexing about the claim of a STEM worker shortage is that many studies have directly contradicted it, including reports from Duke University, the
Rochester Institute of Technology, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, and the Rand Corp. A 2004 Rand study, for example, stated that there was no evidence “that such shortages
have existed at least since 1990, nor that they are on the horizon.”
That report argued that the best indicator of a shortfall would be a widespread rise in salaries throughout the STEM community. But the price of labor has not risen, as you
would expect it to do if STEM workers were scarce. In computing and IT, wages have generally been stagnant for the past decade, according to the EPI and other analyses.
And over the past 30 years, according to the Georgetown report, engineers’ and engineering technicians’ wages have grown the least of all STEM wages and also more slowly
than those in nonSTEM fields; while STEM workers as a group have seen wages rise 33 percent and nonSTEM workers’ wages rose by 23 percent, engineering salaries grew
by just 18 percent. The situation is even more grim for those who get a Ph.D. in science, math, or engineering. The Georgetown study states it succinctly: “At the highest levels
of educational attainment, STEM wages are not competitive.”
it is difficult to make a case that there has been, is, or will soon be a STEM
labor shortage. “If there was really a STEM labor market crisis, you’d be seeing very different behaviors from companies,” notes Ron Hira, an associate
Given all of the above,
professor of public policy at the Rochester Institute of Technology, in New York state. “You wouldn’t see companies cutting their retirement contributions, or hiring new workers
and giving them worse benefits packages. Instead you would see signing bonuses, you’d see wage increases. You would see these companies really training their incumbent
workers.”
“None of those things are observable,” Hira says. “In fact, they’re operating in the opposite way.”
So why the persistent anxiety that a STEM crisis exists? Michael S. Teitelbaum, a Wertheim Fellow at Harvard Law School and a senior advisor to the Alfred P. Sloan
Foundation, has studied the phenomenon, and he says that in the United States the anxiety dates back to World War II. Ever since then it has tended to run in cycles that he
calls “alarm, boom, and bust.” He says the cycle usually starts when “someone or some group sounds the alarm that there is a critical crisis of insufficient numbers of scientists,
engineers, and mathematicians” and as a result the country “is in jeopardy of either a national security risk or of falling behind economically.” In the 1950s, he notes, Americans
worried that the Soviet Union was producing 95 000 scientists and engineers a year while the United States was producing only about 57 000. In the 1980s, it was the perceived
Japanese economic juggernaut that was the threat, and now it is China and India.
You’ll hear similar arguments made elsewhere. In India, the director general of the Defence Research and Development Organisation, Vijay Kumar Saraswat, recently noted
that in his country, “a meagre four persons out of every 1000 are choosing S&T or research, as compared to 110 in Japan, 76 in Germany and Israel, 55 in USA, 46 in Korea
and 8 in China.” Leaders in South Africa and Brazil cite similar statistics to show how they are likewise falling behind in the STEM race.
“The government responds either with money [for research] or, more recently, with visas to increase the number of STEM workers,” Teitelbaum says. “This continues for a
number of years until the claims of a shortage turn out not to be true and a bust ensues.” Students who graduate during the bust, he says, are shocked to discover that “they
can’t find jobs, or they find jobs but not stable ones.”
the U.S.
government spends more than US $3 billion each year on 209 STEMrelated initiatives
overseen by 13 federal agencies. That’s about $100 for every U.S. student beyond primary
At the moment, we’re in the alarmheadingtowardboom part of the cycle. According to a recent report from the Government Accountability Office,
school. In addition, major corporations are collectively spending millions to support STEM
educational programs.
2) Science diplomacy fails
Dickson, 9 Director of ScieDev.net (David, “Science diplomacy: the case for caution”,
SciDev.net 2009,
http://scidevnet.wordpress.com/2009/06/02/sciencediplomacythecaseforcaution/)//gingE
Science diplomacy: the case for caution There has been much lively discussion on the value of international collaboration in achieving scientific goals, on the need for
researchers to work together on the scientific aspects of global challenges such as climate change and food security, and on the importance of science capacity building in
there remained little evidence at the end of the meeting on how
useful it was to lump all these activities together under the umbrella term of “science
diplomacy”. More significantly, although numerous claims were made during the conference about the broader social and political value of scientific collaboration –
developing countries in order to make this possible. But
for example, in establishing a framework for collaboration in other areas, and in particular reducing tensions between rival countries – little was produced to demonstrate
whether this hypothesis is true. If it is not, then some of the arguments made on behalf of “science diplomacy”, and in particular its value as a mechanism for exercising “soft
power” in foreign policy, do not stand up to close scrutiny. Indeed, a case can be made that where scientific projects have successfully involved substantial international
collaboration, such success is often heavily dependent on a prior political commitment to cooperation, rather than a mechanism for securing cooperation where the political will
is lacking. Three messages appeared to emerge from the two days of discussion. Firstly, where the political will to collaborate does exist, a joint scientific project can be
a useful expression of that will. Furthermore, it can be an enlightening experience for all those directly involved. But it is seldom a magic wand that can secure broader
science diplomacy” will only become recognised as a useful
activity if it is closely defined to cover specific situations (such as the negotiation of major international
scientific projects or collaborative research enterprises). As an umbrella term embracing the many ways in
which science interacts with foreign policy, it loses much of its impact, and thus its
value. F inally, when it comes to promoting the use of science in developing countries, a
terminology based historically on maximising selfinterest – the ultimate goal of the
diplomat – and on practices through which the rich have almost invariably ended up
exploiting the poor, is likely to be counterproductive. In other words, the discussion seemed to confirm that “science
cooperation where none existed before. Secondly, “
diplomacy” has a legitimate place in the formulation and implementation of policies for science (just as there is a time and place for exercising “soft power” in international
relations). But the dangers of going beyond this – including the danger of distorting the integrity of science itself, and even alienating potential partners in
collaborative projects, particularly in the developing world – were also clearly exposed.
3) Obsession with STEM, marine science, and science literacy is harmful to creative minds, for
innovation to truly work, we must be educated in multiple departments… English, and history
also matter.
Washington Post, 2015
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whystemwontmakeussuccessful/2015/03/26/5f
4604f2d2a511e4ab779646eea6a4c7_story.html Fareed Zakaria
If Americans are united in any conviction these days, it is that we urgently need to shift the country’s education toward the teaching of specific,
technical skills
This dismissal of broadbased learning, however, comes from a fundamental misreading of the facts — and puts America on a dangerously narrow path
for the future. The United States has led the world in economic dynamism, innovation and entrepreneurship thanks to exactly the kind of teaching we are now told to
A broad general education helps foster critical thinking and creativity.
Exposure to a variety of fields produces synergy and cross fertilization. Yes,
science and technology are crucial components of this education, but so are
English and philosophy. When unveiling a new edition of the iPad, Steve Jobs explained that “it’s in Apple’s DNA that technology alone is
defenestrate.
not enough — that it’s technology married with liberal arts, married with the humanities, that yields us the result that makes our hearts sing.”
ISIS
1) NO IMPACT: ISIS risks no real threat—history proves—in fact, there’s structural
problems with ISIS that makes its downfall inevitable
Brooks 15, Rosa Brooks is a senior fellow at New America and a law professor at Georgetown University. From 2009 to 2011, she
served as a senior adviser to the undersecretary of defense for policy., “It’s had some military success, but the Islamic State is no existential
threat,” Washingtonpost,
4/15/15,< http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its‐had‐some‐military‐success‐but‐the‐islamic‐state‐is‐no‐existential‐threat/2015/04
/16/5f6850de‐c69d‐11e4‐b2a1‐bed1aaea2816_story.html>
Berger and Stern paint a picture of the Islamic State as a sophisticated, adaptive organization with a clear blueprint for the future, an
elaborate internal administrative structure and strong millenarian appeal. Yes, it employs extreme violence and brutality — but it does so
with deliberation and purpose. However, Stern and Berger also remind us that while the group’s “military successes are
formidable,” it is not “an existential threat to any Western country.” Stern and Berger offer a nuanced and readable account of the
ideological and organizational origins of the group, emphasizing the early fault lines between Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al‐Zarqawi, the founder of the Islamic State’s precursor,
al‐Qaeda in Iraq. Even before 9/11, they note, bin Laden mistrusted Zarqawi’s embrace of extreme violence, particularly against Muslim civilians. But Zarqawi and his inner circle were heavily
influenced by a 2004 tract called “The Management of Savagery,” by Abu Bakr Naji. The book urged jihadists to draw “the United States into a continual series of conflicts in the Middle East to
destroy its image of invincibility,” Berger and Stern explain. It also advocated what became the Islamic State’s hallmark: the “embrace and wide broadcast of unvarnished violence as a tool to
motivate would‐be recruits and demoralize enemies.” After Zarqawi’s death, the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) was formed with support from al‐Qaeda leaders. In 2010, Abu Bakr al‐Baghdadi, a
veteran of the U.S. detention facility at Camp Bucca, became ISI’s leader. Baghdadi understood instinctively that ISI would eventually need shrewd managers and planners as much as
charismatic ideologues, and he recruited into its leadership a number of secular former Iraqi Baathists he had come to know at Camp Bucca. Their military, technical and administrative skills
proved invaluable. In 2011, Baghdadi sent a deputy to establish an offshoot in Syria. This group “came to be known as Jabhat al Nusra, which . . . positioned itself as an independent entity.”
Baghdadi sought to reestablish direct control by declaring in April 2013 that the Islamic State of Iraq and Jabhat al‐Nusra would merge to form a new Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. But
the Syrian group instead broke away from the Islamic State and swore allegiance to al‐Qaeda. Jabhat al‐Nusra and the Islamic State were soon fighting each other as well as the forces of Syrian
leader Bashar al‐Assad, and in February 2014, the Islamic State was formally disavowed by al‐Qaeda. This didn’t slow the group, which steadily gained in military strength and media
sophistication, producing an increasingly professional series of videos distributed via YouTube and a growing stream of pro‐Islamic State tweets. By mid‐2014, the militants had captured
enough money and equipment from conquered territories and the disintegrating Iraqi army to become “the richest terrorist organization in the world.” In June 2014, the Islamic State declared
itself a caliphate, with dominion over Muslims worldwide. The proclamation struck many as laughable, but the group was dead serious. Baghdadi was intent not simply on terrorizing Iraq and
Syria, but also on remaking civic order, Islamic State‐style. Even as the extremists posted graphic videos of beheaded Western hostages and massacres of hundreds of unarmed prisoners, they
also focused on the nitty‐gritty of municipal administration. The group actively recruited foreign technocrats, engineers and doctors, and soon it possessed all the trappings of governance,
from a detainee‐affairs office and a consumer protection bureau to nursing homes for the elderly. The Islamic State, Stern and Berger note, “was offering something novel” by “emphasizing
two seemingly disparate themes — ultraviolence and civil society. They were unexpectedly potent when combined.” I would quibble here with the authors, who view this combination of
Historically, societies a round the world have found spectacles of
extreme violence essential to the consolidation of power and the maintenance of civic order. Consider the
ultraviolence and civil order as “strange” and “unprecedented.” Hardly:
Roman games, the public burnings of heretics in England, the ritual violence of the Spanish Inquisition or the more than 15,000 enemies of the revolution sent to the guillotine during the reign
of terror following the French Revolution. In Europe, public executions attracted mobs of revelers. In the American South, lynchings of African Americans drew rowdy crowds well into the 20th
century. Gruesome public executions served to display and consolidate the power of those capable of inflicting such atrocities upon their opponents. Such spectacles were, as Michel Foucault
In the longer term, however, such public ultraviolence often
became self‐defeating: As Foucault also noted, the bloodthirsty crowds gathered to witness public
executions sometimes developed a dangerous tendency to turn upon the executioners. Awakened
bloodlust is difficult to control. Wise leaders eventually learn to dispense with spectacles of ultraviolence; unwise leaders may find themselves eventually dispensed
famously put it, the “ritual destruction of infamy by omnipotence.”
with in their turn.
2 ) Cyber terror is hyped up by the government agencies and reporters for
publicity and personal gain – don’t take their authors seriously.
Lee and Rid November 2014 (Robert M. Lee, active‐duty US Air Force cyber‐warfare operations
officer, and Thomas Rid, professor of security studies at King’s College London, November 2014,
“OMG CYBER! THIRTEEN REASONS WHY HYPE MAKES FOR BAD POLICY”,
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03071847.2014.969932)
Cyber is piping hot – and now¶ more so than ever, with several scary precedents being set over the course of the last year. In late 2013,¶ a massive security breach at Target, a¶ major
American retailer, compromised¶ the credit‐card data of as many as¶ 40 million customers. A few months¶ later, in May 2014, eBay suffered an¶ even bigger breach that affected 145¶
million accounts. In September, intruders¶ stole 56 million customer credit‐card¶ numbers from Home Depot,aUS home improvement chain. Also in 2014, in another first, the US Department
of Justice indicted five serving members of China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) for stealing industrial secrets from¶ several companies based in the Western¶ District of Pennsylvania.
Meanwhile,¶ Eastern European criminal syndicates¶ are busier than ever; ‘Cybercrime¶ is anonymous, sophisticated, and¶ international – and Russian’, says Lee¶ Miles, deputy head of the
UK’s National¶ Cyber Crime Unit.1¶ In 2014, the market¶ for information‐security spending topped¶ $70 billion.2¶ In September, NATO agreed¶ that a cyber‐attack could trigger a military¶
In the US, all of this nurtures hype; and the Washington Beltway forms the ideal Petri dish in which to cultivate the alarmism –
response.¶
several parties think that overstating ‘cyber’ is in their own best interest. Security firms like a clearly
stated threat in order to sell their security products. Contractors capitalise on fear¶ to get funding from the executive
branch.¶ The Pentagon finds a bit of hype useful to keep the money coming in. The armed¶ services each eye a
larger slice of the¶ budget pie. The White House loves some good cyber‐angst to nudge law‐makers into
action. Fear of Chinese cyber‐attack makes it easier for members of Congress to relate to voters. Reporting cyber‐war means that journalists sell more copy. Academics get quotations
and attention¶ from the buzz. Hype up cyber, and everybody wins. However, the real question is whether ramping up the threat of cyberattack is really in everybody’s interest.¶ There are
downsides to this dynamic.¶ This article argues that cyber is ‘hyped¶ out’. Overstating the threat does not just¶ have benefits (for some): it also comes with significant costs. The benefits are¶
short‐lived and easy to spot, whereas¶ the costs are long‐term and harder to¶ understand – and they are piling up fast¶ and high. Indeed, they are so high that¶ the debate inches towards a
turning point¶ for all parties involved. Here are thirteen¶ reasons why a more nuanced debate is¶ needed.
4) No risk of a blackout on grids because of a cyberattack
Perera14 (David Perera is a cybersecurity reporter for POLITICO Pro, 9/10/14, “U.S. grid safe from large‐scale attack, experts say”
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/power‐grid‐safety‐110815.html#ixzz3gTzSBgeP)
The specter of a large‐scale, destructive attack on the U.S. power grid is at the center of much strategic thinking about Cybersecurity. For years, Americans have been warned by a bevy of
the half‐dozen security experts
would‐be Cassandras in Congress, the administration and the press that hackers are poised to shut it down.¶ But in fact,
interviewed for this article agreed it’s virtually impossible for an online‐only attack to cause a
widespread or prolonged outage of the North American power grid. Even laying the groundwork for such a
cyber operation could qualify as an act of war against the U.S. — a
line that few nation‐state‐backed hacker crews would wish to cross. None denied that determined hackers could penetrate the networks of bulk power providers.
But there’s a huge gap between that and causing a civilization‐ending sustained outage of the grid.¶ Electrical‐grid hacking scenarios mostly overlook the engineering expertise necessary to
intentionally cause harm to the grid, say experts knowledgeable about the power generators and high voltage transmission entities that constitute the backbone of the grid — what’s called the
bulk power system.¶ There’s also the enormity of the grid and diversity of its equipment to consider. “The grid is designed to lose utilities all the time,” said Patrick Miller, founder and director
of the Energy Sector Security Consortium. “I’m not trying to trivialize the situation, but you’re not really able to cause this nationwide cascading failure for any extended duration of time,” he
added.¶ “It’s just not possible.”¶ ICS security in a nutshell¶ Controlling the boilers, fans, valves and switches and other mechanical devices that turn raw inputs and high‐voltage transmission
into flip‐of‐a‐switch electricity is a class of computers known as industrial control systems. Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems, or SCADA, is a type of ICS.¶ ICSs aren’t general
purpose computers like desktops. At the level of direct control over electromechanical processes — via a device often classified as a Programmable Logic Controller — programming is mainly
done in specialized languages on obscure operating systems. Even just accessing a PLC requires particular software. Hiding malware in field devices is difficult to impossible. Many of the
And
devices “aren’t running multi‐thread, multi‐tasking operations like our laptops,” noted Chris Blask, chair of the Industrial Control System Information Sharing and Analysis Center.¶
penetration is just a starting point. “Just hacking into the system, and even taking complete control of a computer
or crashing a bunch of computers, won’t necessarily bring down the bulk electric system,” said Dale Peterson, founder
of Digital Bond, an industrial control system cybersecurity consultancy.¶ For example, hackers could cause a SCADA system to crash,
causing grid operators to lose system visibility — decidedly not a good thing. But the grid doesn’t need the SCADA system to continue
operating. “There has to be an understanding that simply taking out the cyber assets doesn’t cause a
blackout,” Peterson said.
AND NO NUC WAR IMPACT
Mutual assured destruction checks escalation
Chari 03– P.R. Chari is a Research Professor. "IPCS Nuclear Crisis, Escalation Control, and Deterrence in South Asia” P.R.
Chari Working Paper Version 1.0 August 2003 http://www.stimson.org/images/uploads/researchpdfs/escalation_chari_1.pdf
The belief however that lowyield tactical nuclear weapons could be used in the battlefield during
an IndoPak nuclear crisis, 28 or to launch counterforce attacks on military and economic targets,
while expecting that the conflict will not escalate to general war, is feckless. There are several reasons for this assertion.
Firstly, the “firebreak” distinguishing nuclear and conventional conflict must be maintained since
the entry of nuclear weapons into the battlefield introduces an entirely new, qualitative dimension. Undoubtedly, some conventional
weapons can resemble “mininukes” in their destructive capabilities, but the latter are unique in that they can cause instant
annihilation and longterm radiation effects on present and even unborn generations. Above all, the use of any kind of
nuclear weapons presages escalation leading on to the use of more powerful weapons that could
annihilate cities and major economic targets. Secondly, there is no guarantee that the adversary will
not escalate nuclear conflict straightaway by launching massive counterattacks on population
centers. As graphically argued in a Pugwash Symposium some twentyfive years ago, “I do not believe that any
scenario exists which suggests that nuclear weapons could be used in field warfare between two
nuclear states without escalation resulting… [T]here is no Marquess of Queensberry who would
be holding the ring in a nuclear conflict… [N]o one has yet suggested a mutually agreed
mechanism for controlling escalation on a battlefield. Until we are assured that there could be
one, we have to see any degree of nuclear destruction as part of a continuous spectrum of
devastation.” 29 The problem that rules cannot govern the fighting of a war, anticipated by Clausewitz two centuries ago,
remains unresolved. Moreover, for a nuclear conflict to proceed under established rules assumes that an understanding on its
contours exists between the adversaries. Should this exist, the natural question would arise: why should they
enter a conflict at all? Thirdly, it has been further urged that, “A war of attrition, even if it were technically
feasible, cannot be in the interest of the weaker side. Against a numerically superior opponent, the sensible
strategy would be attacking cities, perhaps ‘controlling’ the response by destroying some smaller towns first…whatever the
significance of the notion of superiority in a war confined to military targets, there can be little doubt that a saturation point is soon
reached when civilian populations become the objective.” 30 Mutual assured destruction ultimately upholds the
edifice of nuclear deterrence; warfighting scenarios configuring nuclear weapons lack credibility
in the real world
AND No war – too worried about the economy
Malik 10 Ashok Malik, Senior editor, 20 years in journalism, Times of India Interviewed by Charles Davis, a professor at the
Missouri School of Journalism, GLOBAL JOURNALIST: Coverage of Pakistan floods lacks urgency Saturday, August 21, 2010 | 2:16
p.m. CDT BY CHARLES DAVIS
Malik: People do realize that this well could have been a battle scene. But there are continuing questions about the capacity of
Pakistanis to address internal challenges. India and Pakistan have had a rough relationship, but things are
much better today than had been historically. For one, there is no real prospect of a war.
Pakistan has numerous challenges far beyond India, and it is not interested in a war, which
would mean its economic ruin. This is quite an achievement for two countries that saw a war a
few years ago.
AND Antiterrorism rhetoric is islamophobic, racist and ultimately justifies oppressing
people perceived as “Muslim” in the status quo‐ gives us access to race impacts
http://www.newamerica.org/internationalsecurity/islamophobiaextremismandthedomesticwaronterror/
Bergen 14
In The Muslims Are Coming!: Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic War on Terror, Arun
new front in the War on Terror is the homegrown enemy, domestic terrorists who
Kundnani notes that the
have become the focus of sprawling counterterrorism structures in the United States and across
Europe. Domestic surveillance by police forces and government agencies has mushroomed— at
least 100,000 Muslims in America have been secretly under scrutiny. In Britain, police officers
compiled a secret suspect list of more than 8,000 alQaeda "sympathizers," and almost 300
children aged fifteen and younger were among the potential extremists investigated. While the revelations
by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden have caused some to question the rise, even the legality, of these national surveillance states, Western
governments continue to focus on the threats posed by homegrown extremists, particularly as the Islamic State attracts foreign fighters from around the world Based on several
years of research and reportage, in locations as disparate as Texas, New York, and Yorkshire, and written in engrossing, precise prose, Kundnani’s The Muslims Are Coming! is
the first comprehensive critique of Western counterradicalization strategies. He notes that the new policies and policing campaigns have been backed by
an industry of freshlyminted experts and liberal commentators, and looks at the way these debates have been transformed by the
embrace of a narrowlyconfigured and illconceived antiextremism stance.
AND That’s a d rule
Memmi 2K (Albert, Professor Emeritus of Sociology @ U of Paris, Naiteire, Racism, Translated by Steve Martinot, p. 163165)
The struggle against racism will be long, difficult, without intermission, without remission,
probably never achieved. Yet, for this very reason, it is a struggle to be undertaken without
surcease and without concessions. One cannot be indulgent toward racism; one must not even
let the monster in the house, especially not in a mask. To give it merely a foothold means to
augment the bestial part in us and in other people, which is to diminish what is human. To
accept the racist universe to the slightest degree is to endorse fear, injustice, and violence. It is to
accept the persistence of the dark history in which we still largely live. it is to agree that the outsider will always be a possible victim (and which man is not himself an
outsider relative to someone else?. Racism illustrates, in sum, the inevitable negativity of the condition of the dominated that is, it illuminates in a certain sense the entire
human condition. The antiracist struggle, difficult though it is, and always in question, is nevertheless one of the prologues to the ultimate passage from animosity to
humanity. In that sense, we cannot fail to rise to the racist challenge. However, it remains true that one’s moral conduit only emerges from a choice: one has to want it. It is
a choice among other choices, and always debatable in its foundations and its consequences. Let us say, broadly speaking, that the choice to conduct oneself morally is the
One cannot found a moral
condition for the establishment of a human order, for which racism is the very negation. This is almost a redundancy.
order, let alone a legislative order, on racism, because racism signifies the exclusion of the
other, and his or her subjection to violence and domination. From an ethical point of view, if one can deploy a little religious language, racism is ‘the truly capital sin.
It is not an accident that almost all of humanity’s spiritual traditions counsels respect for the weak, for orphans, widows, or strangers. It is not just a question of theoretical
morality and disinterested commandments. Such unanimity in the safeguarding of the other suggests the real utility of such sentiments. All things considered, we have an
interest in banishing injustice, because injustice engenders violence and death. Of course, this is debatable. There are those who think that if one is strong enough, the
assault on and oppression of others is permissible. Bur no one is ever sure of remaining the strongest. One day, perhaps, the roles will be reversed. All unjust society
contains within itself the seeds of its own death. It is probably smarter to treat others with respect so that they treat you with respect. “Recall.” says the Bible, “that you
were once a stranger in Egypt,” which means both that you ought to respect the stranger because you were a stranger yourself and that you risk becoming one again
someday. It is an ethical and a practical appeal—indeed, it is a contract, however implicit it might be. In short, the refusal of racism is the condition for all theoretical and
the ethical choice commands the political choice, a just society must be
practical morality because, in the end,
a society accepted by all. If this contractual principle is not accepted, then only conflict,
violence, and destruction will be our lot. If it is accepted, we can hope someday to live in
peace. True, it is a wager, but the stakes are irresistible.
SOLVENCY
Plan doesn’t solve—H‐1B visa policies make it difficult for foreign students to stay in the
US
Han 15 (Xueying Han, Postdoctoral Scholar at University of California, Santa Barbara, “STEMming
reverse brain drain: what would make foreign students stay in the US?”, March 31st , 2015, the
conversation,
http://theconversation.com/stemming‐reverse‐brain‐drain‐what‐would‐make‐foreign‐students‐stay‐i
n‐the‐us‐39148, JAS)
Science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) disciplines in the US have come to heavily rely on international
students, who constitute about a third of all STEM graduate students in the US. So what makes these
individuals stay in the US upon graduation? This has come to be an important question considering
that for science and engineering, 40% of US doctorates awarded today are to people from abroad.
Understanding why international students may or may not want to leave the US and where they choose to work after they graduate is
crucial for future immigration policies. As a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for Nanotechnology in Society at the University of California,
Santa Barbara, I am part of an interdisciplinary research group headed by Richard Appelbaum that investigated international students'
career choices and found that those interested in becoming entrepreneurs were most inclined to stay after
graduation. US still a magnet for the entrepreneurial Among multiple factors, the choice of career plays a key role in
students deciding to stay or leave the US upon graduation. Our study found those who wanted to work with business groups, or start their
own business, or work for a non‐governmental organization had a 90% likelihood of wanting to stay in the US. This suggests to us that the
US continues to be viewed as a hub for innovation and research. However, for those wanting a career
in academia or a governmental agency, the choice is more complicated and depends on a
combination of social, professional and personal reasons. They come but they are going back in higher
numbers P erceived as a global leader in STEM innovation, the US remains the most popular destination in the world
for international students. International students are also more likely to earn a doctorate in a STEM
related field than their American counterparts. From 2001 to 2011, 84% of doctorate degrees earned by international
students were in STEM compared to only 63% by US citizens and permanent residents. STEM areas are offering exciting possibilities of
research. Scientist image via www.shutterstock.com However, given the importance of STEM research, increasingly
many countries have come up with policies and programs to encourage individuals who studied
abroad to return to their home countries. From technological advancements in fully autonomous vehicles to medical
breakthroughs in targeted drug delivery, STEM disciplines offer exciting possibilities of research with significant economic and global
impact. A 2011 study focusing only on foreign STEM doctoral recipients in the US has found that the percentage of individuals who stay
long‐term after graduation has steadily decreased. At the same time, studies by Brookings, Harvard, NAFSA: Association of International
Educators, and the Institute of International Education have highlighted that international students are important
contributors to the US economy and are integral to the future economic success of the country.
Immigration policies deter many from staying on Our study also looked at current immigration policies
and whether they acted as a possible barrier in retaining the best talent. An Optional Practical Training (OPT)
period allows individuals to stay and work in the US in a job related to their field of study for 12 months following graduation. Qualified
STEM degree holders are then eligible to apply for an additional 17‐month OPT extension. But to stay past their OPT period,
international students must find a business willing to sponsor them for an H‐1B visa. Respondents in
our study were forthright on how frustrating they found the H‐1B visa process. Students say visa
issues are a major deterrent For instance, a graduate student in electrical and computer engineering
said: “The H‐1B visa makes you get a sponsor for five years or so and you are bound to that employer
and that is not very attractive. If the US wants to retain talent, people need freedom to pursue what
they want to research. ” Another graduate student in mechanical engineering voiced a similar sentiment: “The fact that you
don’t have a green card at the end of your PhD – it’s a nightmare. For international students, not
having a green card ‐ it impacts the job search…everything. ” For policymakers in the US, such a large
pool of STEM students raises crucial questions about the direction of future policies. Do we want to
retain international STEM graduates? And if so, how do we go about easing immigration policies
restrictions so as to encourage those most likely to contribute to the American economy?
Interpretation 1
Domestic surveillance means the acquisition of nonpublic information regarding United
States persons
Small 8 – United States Air Force Academy
Matthew, His Eyes are Watching You: Domestic Surveillance, Civil Liberties and Executive Power
during Times of National Crisis, 2008,
http://cspc.nonprofitsoapbox.com/storage/documents/Fellows2008/Small.pdf
Before one can make any sort of assessment of domestic surveillance policies, it is first necessary to
narrow the scope of the term “domestic surveillance.” Domestic surveillance is a subset of
intelligence gathering. Intelligence, as it is to be understood in this context, is “information that
meets the stated or understood needs of policy makers and has been collected, processed and
narrowed to meet those needs” (Lowenthal 2006, 2). In essence, domestic surveillance is a means to
an end; the end being intelligence. The intelligence community best understands domestic
surveillance as the acquisition of nonpublic information concerning United States persons
(Executive Order 12333 (3.4) (i)). With this definition domestic surveillance remains an overly broad
concept.
Violation 1 SEVIS involves foreign students and has nothing to do with US persons
Violation 2 Curtailing SEVIS is not surveillance
Interpretation 2: “Should” means “must” and requires immediate legal effect
Summers 94
(Justice – Oklahoma Supreme Court, “Kelsey v. Dollarsaver Food Warehouse of Durant”, 1994 OK
123, 11‐8,
http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=20287#marker3fn13)
4 The legal question to be resolved by the court is whether the word "should"13 in the May 18 order
connotes futurity or may be deemed a ruling in praesenti.14 The answer to this query is not to be divined from rules of grammar;15 it must be
governed by the age‐old practice culture of legal professionals and its immemorial language usage. To determine if the omission (from the critical May 18 entry) of the turgid phrase, "and the
same hereby is", (1) makes it an in futuro ruling ‐ i.e., an expression of what the judge will or would do at a later stage ‐ or (2) constitutes an in in praesenti resolution of a disputed law issue,
the trial judge's intent must be garnered from the four corners of the entire record.16
[CONTINUES – TO FOOTNOTE]
13 "Should" not only is used as a "present indicative" synonymous with ought but also is the past tense of "shall" with various shades of meaning not always easy to analyze. See 57 C.J. Shall §
9, Judgments § 121 (1932). O. JESPERSEN, GROWTH AND STRUCTURE OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE (1984); St. Louis & S.F.R. Co. v. Brown, 45 Okl. 143, 144 P. 1075, 1080‐81 (1914). For a more
detailed explanation, see the Partridge quotation infra note 15. Certain contexts mandate a construction of the term "should" as more than merely indicating preference or desirability.
Brown, supra at 1080‐81 (jury instructions stating that jurors "should" reduce the amount of damages in proportion to the amount of contributory negligence of the plaintiff was held to imply
an obligation and to be more than advisory); Carrigan v. California Horse Racing Board, 60 Wash. App. 79, 802 P.2d 813 (1990) (one of the Rules of Appellate Procedure requiring that a party
"should devote a section of the brief to the request for the fee or expenses" was interpreted to mean that a party is under an obligation to include the requested segment); State v. Rack, 318
should" would mean the same as "shall" or "must" when used in an instruction to the jury
S.W.2d 211, 215 (Mo. 1958) ("
which tells the triers they "should disregard false testimony"). 14 In praesenti means literally "at the present
time." BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 792 (6th Ed. 1990). In legal parlance the phrase denotes that
which in law is presently or immediately effective, as opposed to something that will or would
become effective in the future [in futurol]. See Van Wyck v. Knevals, 106 U.S. 360, 365, 1 S.Ct. 336, 337, 27 L.Ed. 201
(1882).
Violation 3 Curtailing SEVIS has no immediate effect.
Standards
a. Fairness, by violating the resolution the aff effectivley unlimits aff ground, and therefore
makes the round unfair for the neg team, and ground dictates my ability to win. Debate
then becomes unfair, and no one wants to compete in an unfair activity. Thus effectivley
collapses participation in debate as an activity.
b. Education, by unlimitng aff ground the aff also reduces the learning that can happen in
the round. By focusing on a smaller topic, learning can be indepth. Education is
important because education has an impact beyond the round.
Voter Topicality is a voting issue for fairness and education, and should be judged as
prerequisite to substance, because toipicality determines what the round should look like now
and in the future. Their substance has no out of round real world impact.
GROUP STANDARDS AND VOTER FOR ALL VIOLATIONS AND INTERPRETATION
WILDERSON
State action and institutional ethics makes anti‐blackness worse ‐ erases the history of
exploitation of the black body
Wilderson, award‐winning author of Incognegro: A Memoir of Exile and Apartheid. He is one of two
Americans to hold elected office in the African National Congress and is a former insurgent in the
ANC’s armed wing, 2
003 (Frank B. III “Introduction: Unspeakable Ethics” Red, White, & Black: Cinema
and the Strucure of U.S. Antagonisms, Pg 15‐16) GG
Regarding the Black position, some might ask why, after claims successfully made on the state by
the Civil Rights Movement, do I insist on positing an operational analyticfor cinema, film studies,
and political theory that appears to be a dichotomous and essentialist pairing of Masters and
Slaves? In other words, why should we think of today’s Blacks in the US as Slaves and everyone else
(with the exception of Indians) as Masters? One could answer these questions bydemonstrating how
nothing remotely approaching claims successfully made on the State has come to pass. In other
words, the election of a Black President aside, police brutality, mass incarceration, segregated and
substandard schools and housing, astronomical rates of HIV infection, and the threat of being
turned away en masse at the polls still constitute the lived experience of Black life. But such
empirically based rejoinders would lead us in the wrong direction; we would find ourselves on
“solid” ground, which would only mystify, rather than clarify, the question. We would be forced to
appeal to “facts,” the “historical record,” and empirical markers of stasis and change, all of which
could be turned on their head with more of the same.Underlying such a downward spiral into
sociology, political science, history, and/or public policy debates would be the very rubric that I am
calling into question: the grammar of suffering known as exploitation and alienation, the
assumptive logic whereby subjective dispossession is arrived at in the calculations between those
who sell labor power and those who acquire it. The Black qua the worker. Orlando Patterson has
already dispelled this faulty ontological grammar in Slavery and Social Death, where he demonstrates
how and why work, or forced labor, is not a constituent element of slavery. Once the “solid” plank
of “work” is removed from slavery, then the conceptually coherent notion of “claims against the
state”—the proposition that the state and civil society are elastic enough to even contemplate the
possibility of an emancipatory project for the Black position—disintegrates into thin air. The
imaginary of the state and civil society is parasitic on the Middle Passage. Put another way: no slave,
no world. And, in addition, as Patterson argues, no slave is in the world. If, as an ontological position,
that is, as a grammar of suffering, the Slave is not a laborer but an anti‐Human, a positionality
against which Humanity establishes, maintains, and renews it coherence, its corporeal integrity; if
the Slave is, to borrow from Patterson, generally dishonored, perpetually open to gratuitous
violence, and void of kinship structure, that is, having no relations that need be recognized, a being
outside of relationality, then our analysis cannot be approached through the rubric of gains or
reversals in struggles with the state and civil society, not unless and until the interlocutor first
explains how the Slave is of the world. The onus is not on one who posits the Master/Slave
dichotomy, but on the one who argues there is a distinction between Slaveness and Blackness. How,
when, and where did such a split occur? The woman at the gates of Columbia University awaits an
answer.
The world writ large and civil society are preconditioned on the destruction of the black
positionality
Wilderson, Professor UCI, 2003 (Frank B., “The Prison Slave as Hegemony’s (Silent) Scandal”,
Soc Justice 30 no2 2003, Accessed 8‐4‐12, MR)
There is something organic to black positionality that makes it essential to the destruction of civil
society. There is nothing willful or speculative in this statement, for one could just as well state the
claim the other way around: There is something organic to civil society that makes it essential to the
destruction of the Black body. Blackness is a positionality of "absolute dereliction" (Fanon),
abandonment, in the face of civil society, and therefore cannot establish itself, or be established,
through hegemonic interventions. Blackness cannot become one of civil society's many junior
partners: Black citizenship, or Black civic obligation, are oxymorons.
Addressing Anti‐Blackness is a priority – scandalizes ethicality and sets the stage for all
violence
Wilderson, award‐winning author of Incognegro: A Memoir of Exile and Apartheid. He is one of two
Americans to hold elected office in the African National Congress and is a former insurgent in the
ANC’s armed wing, 2
003 (Frank B. III “Chapter One: The Ruse of Analogy” Red, White, & Black:
Cinema and the Structure of U.S. Antagonisms,) GG
Two tensions are at work here. One operates under the labor of ethical dilemmas‐‐ “simple enough
one has only not to be a nigger.”This, I submit, is the essence of being for the White and non‐Black
position: ontology scaled down to a global common denominator. The other tension is found in the
impossibility of ethical dilemmas for the Black: “I am,” Fanon writes, “a slave not of an idea others
have of me but of my own appearance.” Being can thus be thought of, in the first ontological
instance, asnon‐niggerness; and slavery then as niggerness. The visual field, “my own appearance,” is
the cut, the mechanism that elaborates the division between the non‐niggerness and slavery, the
difference between the living and the dead.Whereas Humans exist on some plane of being and thus
can become existentially present through some struggle for/of/through recognition, Blacks cannot
attain the plane of recognition(West 82). Spillers, Fanon, and Hartman maintain that the violence
that has positioned and repetitively re‐positions the Black as a void of historical movement is without
analog in the suffering dynamics of the ontologically alive. The violence that turns the African into a
thing is without analog because it does not simply oppress the Black through tactile and empirical
technologies of oppression, like the “little family quarrels” which for Fanon exemplify the Jewish
Holocaust. Rather, the gratuitous violence of the Black’s first ontological instance, the Middle Passage,
“wiped out [his/her] metaphysics…his [her] customs and sources on which they are based” (BSWM
110). Jews went into Auschwitz and came out as Jews. Africans went into the ships and came out as
Blacks. The former is a Human holocaust; the latter is a Human and a metaphysical holocaust. That
is why it makes little sense to attempt analogy: the Jews have the Dead (the Muselmenn) among
them; the Dead have the Blacks among them.¶ This violence which turns a body into flesh, ripped
apart literally and imaginatively, destroys the possibility of ontology because it positions the Black
within an infinite and indeterminately horrifying and open vulnerability, an object made available
(which is to say fungible) for any subject. As such, “the black has no ontological resistance in the
eyes of the white man” (110) or, more precisely, in the eyes of Humanity
The alternative is to reject the affirmative and reorient ourselves towards the world
through an unflinching para di g matic analysis
Wilderson 10 [Frank B. III, Ph.D., Associate Professor at UC Irvine, former ANC member, “on some
guerilla shit”, Red, White & Black: Cinema and the Structure of U.S. Antagonisms, pages ix‐x, OG]
STRANGE AS it might seem, this book project began in South Africa. During the last years of apartheid
I worked for revolutionary change in both an underground and above‐ground capacity, for the
Charterist Movement in general and the ANC in particular. During this period, I began to see how
essential an unflinching paradigmatic analysis is to a movement dedicated to the complete
overthrow of an existing order.The neoliberal compromises that the radical elements of the Chartist
Movement made with the moderate elements were due, in large part, to our inability or
unwillingness to hold the moderates' feet to the fire of a political agenda predicated on an
unflinching paradigmatic analysis. Instead, we allowed our energies and points of attention to be
displaced by and onto pragmatic considerations. Simply put, we abdicated the power to pose the
question—and the power to pose the question is the greatest power of all. Elsewhere, I have written
about this unfortunate turn of events (Incognegro: A Memoir of Exile and Apartheid), so I'll not
rehearse the details here. Suffice it to say, this book germinated in the many political and academic
discussions and debates that I was fortunate enough to be a part of at a historic moment and in a
place where the word revolution was spoken in earnest, free of qualifiers and irony. For their past and
ongoing ideas and interventions, I extend solidarity and appreciation to comrades Amanda Alexander,
Franco Barchiesi, Teresa Barnes, Patrick Bond, Ashwin Desai, Nigel Gibson, Steven Greenberg, Allan
Horowitz, Bushy Kelebonye (deceased), Tefu Kelebonye, Ulrike Kistner, Kamogelo Lekubu, Andile
Mngxitama, Prishani Naidoo, John Shai, and S'bu Zulu
RIMAL
The crunch is coming – our current pace of growth is unsustainable and will cause
extinction
Rose Buchanan, 6/20/2015, writer at The Independent. Cites study from scientists at Stanford,
Princeton and Berkeley
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/earth‐is‐entering‐sixth‐extinction‐phase‐with‐many‐spe
cies‐‐including‐our‐own‐‐labelled‐the‐walking‐dead‐10333608.html, mm
The planet is entering a new period of extinction with top scientists warning that species all over
the world are “essentially the walking dead” – including our own. The report, authored by scientists at
Stanford, Princeton and Berkeley universities, found that vertebrates were vanishing at a rate 114
times faster than normal. In the damning report, published in the Science Advances journal, researchers note that the last similar
event was 65 million years ago, when dinosaurs disappeared, most probably as a result of an asteroid. "We are now entering the
sixth great mass extinction event," one of the authors of the paper told the BBC. Gerardo Ceballos, lead author of the
research, added: "If it is allowed to continue, life would take many millions of years to recover and our
species itself would likely disappear early on". The research examined historic rates of extinction for vertebrates, finding
that since 1900 more than 400 vertebrates have disappeared – an extinction rate 100 times higher than
in other – non‐extinction – periods. "There are examples of species all over the world that are essentially the walking dead,”
said Stanford University professor Paul Ehrlich. He added: "We are sawing off the limb that we are
sitting on." The research, which cites climate change, pollution and deforestation as causes for the rapid change, notes that a knock‐on
effect of the loss of entire ecosystems could be dire. As our ecosystems unravel, the Centre for Biological Diversity has noted that we could
face a “snowball” effect whereby individual species extinction ultimately fuels more losses. The report, which builds on findings published
by Duke University last year, does note that averting this loss is “still possible through intensified conservation effects,” but that “window
of opportunity is rapid closing.”
Transition to eco‐authoritarianism coming now and solves extinction
Beeson 10 (Mark, Professor and Head of the Department of Political Science & International Studies,
University of Birmingham, 2010, “The coming of environmental authoritarianism,” Environmental
Politics, Vol. 19, No. 2)
The environment has become the defining public policy issue of the era. Not only will political responses to
environmental challenges determine the health of the planet, but continuing environmental
degradation may also affect political systems. This interaction is likely to be especially acute in parts of the world
where environmental problems are most pressing and the state's ability to respond to such challenges is weakest. One
possible consequence of environmental degradation is the development or consolidation of authoritarian rule
as political elites come to privilege regime maintenance and internal stability over political
liberalisation. Even efforts to mitigate the impact of, or respond to, environmental change may involve a
decrease in individual liberty as governments seek to transform environmentally destructive behaviour. As a
result, ‘environmental authoritarianism’ may become an increasingly common response to the
destructive impacts of climate change in an age of diminished expectations.
Advocating for STEM leadership in the US as a role model promotes democracy and
delays the transition and stops authoritarianism that is critical to avert extinction. This
turns their warming impact, only rimal can solve.
Humphrey 7 (Mathew, Reader in Political Philosophy at the University of Nottingham, UK, 2007,
Ecological Politics and Democratic Theory: The Challenge to the Deliberative Ideal, p. 20‐21)
If these changes are necessary ‐ the downgrading, curtailment and reconceptualisation of democracy,
liberties, and justice, as well as the raising to primacy of integrity and ecological virtue ‐ how are the
necessary changes to come about? Value change represents the best 'long‐term' hope but the
ecological crisis is not a 'long‐term' problem. These changes have to be introduced quickly and before
there has been time to inculcate value shifts in the population. The downgrading of rights and liberties
has to be achieved through policy and institutional change, even while the question of a long‐term change of values
is also addressed. For both these tasks what is required is political leadership and the institution of the state. The
immediate problem lies in the collective action problem that arises in respect of the looming ecological constraints on economic activity
and the potential collapse of the global commons. The end of the 'golden age' of material abundance, as we slide back down the other side
of 'Hubbert's pimple’ will bring about intense competition for scarce resources. To understand politics under these circumstances, we have
to turn back to Hobbes and Burke, the political philosophers who conceptualised life under conditions of scarcity, and also to Plato,
commended for his healthy mistrust of democracy. For Ophuls a crucial element of political philosophy is the definition of reality itself;
political philosophy carries within it an ontological component which sets out the foundations of
political possibility. The contemporary West he sees as defined by the 'philosophers of the great frontier'
Locke, Smith, and Marx. These are the political philosophers of abundance. For Locke the proviso of always
leaving 'as much and as good' for others in appropriation could always be met even when there was no unappropriated land left, as the
productivity of the land put to useful work would always create better opportunities for those coming later. Smith's 'invisible hand' thesis
was also dependent upon the assumption that the material goods would always be available for individual to accomplish their own
economic plans. For Marx the 'higher phase' of communist society arrives 'after the productive forces
have... increased with the all‐round development of the individual, and all the sprin4gs of
co‐operative wealth flow more abundantly' (Marx, 1970: 19). For Ophuls these are all the political philosophies
of abundance. Ecological crisis, however, returns us to the Hobbesian struggle of all against all (Heilbroner,
1974: 89). With ecological scarcity we return to the classical problems of political theory that 400 years of abnormal abundance has
shielded us from (Ophuls, 1977: 164). Both liberalism and socialism represent the politics of this 'abnormal
abundance' and with the demise of this period we return to the eternal problems of politics. Hobbes,
then, is seen as the political philosopher of ecological scarcity avant la lettre. 'Hardin's "logic of the commons" is simply a special version of
the general political dynamic of Hobbes' "state of nature"' (Ophuls, 1977; 148). Competition over scarce resources leads to
conflict, even when all those involved realise that they would be collectively better off if they could
co‐operate, 'to bring about the tragedy of the commons it is not necessary that men be bad, only that they not be actively good'
(Ophuls, 1977: 149). It is this Hobbesian struggle that may impose 'intolerable strains on the representative political apparatus that has
been historically associated with capitalist societies' (Heilbroner, 1974: 89). Coercion is seen as the solution (and it is hoped,
although as we have seen not for terribly good reasons, that this coercion can be agreed democratically), and the appropriate
agent of this solution is the state. The transition from abundance to scarcity will have to be
centralised and expert‐controlled, and it is unlikely that 'a steady state polity could be democratic'
(Ophuls, 1977: 162). As we shall see in the following paragraphs, this faith in the ability of the state to institute centralised controls that
would be obeyed by its citizens is one of the are1
CASE
STEM/innovation
1)
STEM crisis is exaggerated. there is actually an abundance of STEM workers
Charette 13 – IEEE Spectrum contributing editor (Robert N., 8/30/13, “The STEM Crisis Is a
Myth”, IEEE Spectrum,
http://spectrum.ieee.org/atwork/education/thestemcrisisisamyth)//SKY
So is there a shortfall of STEM workers or isn’t there?
The Georgetown study estimates that nearly twothirds of the STEM job openings in the United States, or about 180 000 jobs per year, will require bachelor’s degrees. Now, if
252 000
STEM graduates emerged in 2009. So even if all the STEM openings were entrylevel
positions and even if only new STEM bachelor’s holders could compete for them, that
still leaves 70 000 graduates unable to get a job in their chosen field.
Of course, the pool of U.S. STEM workers is much bigger than that: It includes new STEM master’s and Ph.D.
you apply the Commerce Department’s definition of STEM to the NSF’s annual count of science and engineering bachelor’s degrees, that means about
graduates (in 2009, around 80 000 and 25 000, respectively), STEM associate degree graduates (about 40 000), H1B visa holders (more than 50 000), other immigrants and
visa holders with STEM degrees, technical certificate holders, and nonSTEM degree recipients looking to find STEMrelated work. And then there’s the vast number of STEM
degree holders who graduated in previous years or decades.
Even in the computer and IT industry, the sector that employs the most STEM workers and is expected to grow the most over the next 5 to 10 years, not everyone who wants a
job can find one. A recent study by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a liberalleaning think tank in Washington, D.C., found that more than a third of recent computer science
graduates aren’t working in their chosen major; of that group, almost a third say the reason is that there are no jobs available.
Spot shortages for certain STEM specialists do crop up. For instance, the recent explosion in data analytics has sparked demand for data scientists in health care and retail. But
the H1B visa and similar immigrant hiring programs are meant to address such shortages. The problem is that students who are contemplating what field to specialize in can’t
assume such shortages will still exist by the time they emerge from the educational pipeline.
What’s perhaps most perplexing about the claim of a STEM worker shortage is that many studies have directly contradicted it, including reports from Duke University, the
Rochester Institute of Technology, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, and the Rand Corp. A 2004 Rand study, for example, stated that there was no evidence “that such shortages
have existed at least since 1990, nor that they are on the horizon.”
That report argued that the best indicator of a shortfall would be a widespread rise in salaries throughout the STEM community. But the price of labor has not risen, as you
would expect it to do if STEM workers were scarce. In computing and IT, wages have generally been stagnant for the past decade, according to the EPI and other analyses.
And over the past 30 years, according to the Georgetown report, engineers’ and engineering technicians’ wages have grown the least of all STEM wages and also more slowly
than those in nonSTEM fields; while STEM workers as a group have seen wages rise 33 percent and nonSTEM workers’ wages rose by 23 percent, engineering salaries grew
by just 18 percent. The situation is even more grim for those who get a Ph.D. in science, math, or engineering. The Georgetown study states it succinctly: “At the highest levels
of educational attainment, STEM wages are not competitive.”
it is difficult to make a case that there has been, is, or will soon be a STEM
labor shortage. “If there was really a STEM labor market crisis, you’d be seeing very different behaviors from companies,” notes Ron Hira, an associate
Given all of the above,
professor of public policy at the Rochester Institute of Technology, in New York state. “You wouldn’t see companies cutting their retirement contributions, or hiring new workers
and giving them worse benefits packages. Instead you would see signing bonuses, you’d see wage increases. You would see these companies really training their incumbent
workers.”
“None of those things are observable,” Hira says. “In fact, they’re operating in the opposite way.”
So why the persistent anxiety that a STEM crisis exists? Michael S. Teitelbaum, a Wertheim Fellow at Harvard Law School and a senior advisor to the Alfred P. Sloan
Foundation, has studied the phenomenon, and he says that in the United States the anxiety dates back to World War II. Ever since then it has tended to run in cycles that he
calls “alarm, boom, and bust.” He says the cycle usually starts when “someone or some group sounds the alarm that there is a critical crisis of insufficient numbers of scientists,
engineers, and mathematicians” and as a result the country “is in jeopardy of either a national security risk or of falling behind economically.” In the 1950s, he notes, Americans
worried that the Soviet Union was producing 95 000 scientists and engineers a year while the United States was producing only about 57 000. In the 1980s, it was the perceived
Japanese economic juggernaut that was the threat, and now it is China and India.
You’ll hear similar arguments made elsewhere. In India, the director general of the Defence Research and Development Organisation, Vijay Kumar Saraswat, recently noted
that in his country, “a meagre four persons out of every 1000 are choosing S&T or research, as compared to 110 in Japan, 76 in Germany and Israel, 55 in USA, 46 in Korea
and 8 in China.” Leaders in South Africa and Brazil cite similar statistics to show how they are likewise falling behind in the STEM race.
“The government responds either with money [for research] or, more recently, with visas to increase the number of STEM workers,” Teitelbaum says. “This continues for a
number of years until the claims of a shortage turn out not to be true and a bust ensues.” Students who graduate during the bust, he says, are shocked to discover that “they
can’t find jobs, or they find jobs but not stable ones.”
the U.S.
government spends more than US $3 billion each year on 209 STEMrelated initiatives
overseen by 13 federal agencies. That’s about $100 for every U.S. student beyond primary
At the moment, we’re in the alarmheadingtowardboom part of the cycle. According to a recent report from the Government Accountability Office,
school. In addition, major corporations are collectively spending millions to support STEM
educational programs.
2) Science diplomacy fails
Dickson, 9 Director of ScieDev.net (David, “Science diplomacy: the case for caution”,
SciDev.net 2009,
http://scidevnet.wordpress.com/2009/06/02/sciencediplomacythecaseforcaution/)//gingE
Science diplomacy: the case for caution There has been much lively discussion on the value of international collaboration in achieving scientific goals, on the need for
researchers to work together on the scientific aspects of global challenges such as climate change and food security, and on the importance of science capacity building in
there remained little evidence at the end of the meeting on how
useful it was to lump all these activities together under the umbrella term of “science
diplomacy”. More significantly, although numerous claims were made during the conference about the broader social and political value of scientific collaboration –
developing countries in order to make this possible. But
for example, in establishing a framework for collaboration in other areas, and in particular reducing tensions between rival countries – little was produced to demonstrate
whether this hypothesis is true. If it is not, then some of the arguments made on behalf of “science diplomacy”, and in particular its value as a mechanism for exercising “soft
power” in foreign policy, do not stand up to close scrutiny. Indeed, a case can be made that where scientific projects have successfully involved substantial international
collaboration, such success is often heavily dependent on a prior political commitment to cooperation, rather than a mechanism for securing cooperation where the political will
is lacking. Three messages appeared to emerge from the two days of discussion. Firstly, where the political will to collaborate does exist, a joint scientific project can be
a useful expression of that will. Furthermore, it can be an enlightening experience for all those directly involved. But it is seldom a magic wand that can secure broader
science diplomacy” will only become recognised as a useful
activity if it is closely defined to cover specific situations (such as the negotiation of major international
scientific projects or collaborative research enterprises). As an umbrella term embracing the many ways in
which science interacts with foreign policy, it loses much of its impact, and thus its
value. F inally, when it comes to promoting the use of science in developing countries, a
terminology based historically on maximising selfinterest – the ultimate goal of the
diplomat – and on practices through which the rich have almost invariably ended up
exploiting the poor, is likely to be counterproductive. In other words, the discussion seemed to confirm that “science
cooperation where none existed before. Secondly, “
diplomacy” has a legitimate place in the formulation and implementation of policies for science (just as there is a time and place for exercising “soft power” in international
relations). But the dangers of going beyond this – including the danger of distorting the integrity of science itself, and even alienating potential partners in
collaborative projects, particularly in the developing world – were also clearly exposed.
3) Obsession with STEM, marine science, and science literacy is harmful to creative minds, for
innovation to truly work, we must be educated in multiple departments… English, and history
also matter.
Washington Post, 2015
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whystemwontmakeussuccessful/2015/03/26/5f
4604f2d2a511e4ab779646eea6a4c7_story.html Fareed Zakaria
If Americans are united in any conviction these days, it is that we urgently need to shift the country’s education toward the teaching of specific,
technical skills
This dismissal of broadbased learning, however, comes from a fundamental misreading of the facts — and puts America on a dangerously narrow path
for the future. The United States has led the world in economic dynamism, innovation and entrepreneurship thanks to exactly the kind of teaching we are now told to
A broad general education helps foster critical thinking and creativity.
Exposure to a variety of fields produces synergy and cross fertilization. Yes,
science and technology are crucial components of this education, but so are
English and philosophy. When unveiling a new edition of the iPad, Steve Jobs explained that “it’s in Apple’s DNA that technology alone is
defenestrate.
not enough — that it’s technology married with liberal arts, married with the humanities, that yields us the result that makes our hearts sing.”
ISIS
1) NO IMPACT: ISIS risks no real threat—history proves—in fact, there’s structural
problems with ISIS that makes its downfall inevitable
Brooks 15, Rosa Brooks is a senior fellow at New America and a law professor at Georgetown University. From 2009 to 2011, she
served as a senior adviser to the undersecretary of defense for policy., “It’s had some military success, but the Islamic State is no existential
threat,” Washingtonpost,
4/15/15,< http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its‐had‐some‐military‐success‐but‐the‐islamic‐state‐is‐no‐existential‐threat/2015/04
/16/5f6850de‐c69d‐11e4‐b2a1‐bed1aaea2816_story.html>
Berger and Stern paint a picture of the Islamic State as a sophisticated, adaptive organization with a clear blueprint for the future, an
elaborate internal administrative structure and strong millenarian appeal. Yes, it employs extreme violence and brutality — but it does so
with deliberation and purpose. However, Stern and Berger also remind us that while the group’s “military successes are
formidable,” it is not “an existential threat to any Western country.” Stern and Berger offer a nuanced and readable account of the
ideological and organizational origins of the group, emphasizing the early fault lines between Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al‐Zarqawi, the founder of the Islamic State’s precursor,
al‐Qaeda in Iraq. Even before 9/11, they note, bin Laden mistrusted Zarqawi’s embrace of extreme violence, particularly against Muslim civilians. But Zarqawi and his inner circle were heavily
influenced by a 2004 tract called “The Management of Savagery,” by Abu Bakr Naji. The book urged jihadists to draw “the United States into a continual series of conflicts in the Middle East to
destroy its image of invincibility,” Berger and Stern explain. It also advocated what became the Islamic State’s hallmark: the “embrace and wide broadcast of unvarnished violence as a tool to
motivate would‐be recruits and demoralize enemies.” After Zarqawi’s death, the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) was formed with support from al‐Qaeda leaders. In 2010, Abu Bakr al‐Baghdadi, a
veteran of the U.S. detention facility at Camp Bucca, became ISI’s leader. Baghdadi understood instinctively that ISI would eventually need shrewd managers and planners as much as
charismatic ideologues, and he recruited into its leadership a number of secular former Iraqi Baathists he had come to know at Camp Bucca. Their military, technical and administrative skills
proved invaluable. In 2011, Baghdadi sent a deputy to establish an offshoot in Syria. This group “came to be known as Jabhat al Nusra, which . . . positioned itself as an independent entity.”
Baghdadi sought to reestablish direct control by declaring in April 2013 that the Islamic State of Iraq and Jabhat al‐Nusra would merge to form a new Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. But
the Syrian group instead broke away from the Islamic State and swore allegiance to al‐Qaeda. Jabhat al‐Nusra and the Islamic State were soon fighting each other as well as the forces of Syrian
leader Bashar al‐Assad, and in February 2014, the Islamic State was formally disavowed by al‐Qaeda. This didn’t slow the group, which steadily gained in military strength and media
sophistication, producing an increasingly professional series of videos distributed via YouTube and a growing stream of pro‐Islamic State tweets. By mid‐2014, the militants had captured
enough money and equipment from conquered territories and the disintegrating Iraqi army to become “the richest terrorist organization in the world.” In June 2014, the Islamic State declared
itself a caliphate, with dominion over Muslims worldwide. The proclamation struck many as laughable, but the group was dead serious. Baghdadi was intent not simply on terrorizing Iraq and
Syria, but also on remaking civic order, Islamic State‐style. Even as the extremists posted graphic videos of beheaded Western hostages and massacres of hundreds of unarmed prisoners, they
also focused on the nitty‐gritty of municipal administration. The group actively recruited foreign technocrats, engineers and doctors, and soon it possessed all the trappings of governance,
from a detainee‐affairs office and a consumer protection bureau to nursing homes for the elderly. The Islamic State, Stern and Berger note, “was offering something novel” by “emphasizing
two seemingly disparate themes — ultraviolence and civil society. They were unexpectedly potent when combined.” I would quibble here with the authors, who view this combination of
Historically, societies a round the world have found spectacles of
extreme violence essential to the consolidation of power and the maintenance of civic order. Consider the
ultraviolence and civil order as “strange” and “unprecedented.” Hardly:
Roman games, the public burnings of heretics in England, the ritual violence of the Spanish Inquisition or the more than 15,000 enemies of the revolution sent to the guillotine during the reign
of terror following the French Revolution. In Europe, public executions attracted mobs of revelers. In the American South, lynchings of African Americans drew rowdy crowds well into the 20th
century. Gruesome public executions served to display and consolidate the power of those capable of inflicting such atrocities upon their opponents. Such spectacles were, as Michel Foucault
In the longer term, however, such public ultraviolence often
became self‐defeating: As Foucault also noted, the bloodthirsty crowds gathered to witness public
executions sometimes developed a dangerous tendency to turn upon the executioners. Awakened
bloodlust is difficult to control. Wise leaders eventually learn to dispense with spectacles of ultraviolence; unwise leaders may find themselves eventually dispensed
famously put it, the “ritual destruction of infamy by omnipotence.”
with in their turn.
2 ) Cyber terror is hyped up by the government agencies and reporters for
publicity and personal gain – don’t take their authors seriously.
Lee and Rid November 2014 (Robert M. Lee, active‐duty US Air Force cyber‐warfare operations
officer, and Thomas Rid, professor of security studies at King’s College London, November 2014,
“OMG CYBER! THIRTEEN REASONS WHY HYPE MAKES FOR BAD POLICY”,
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03071847.2014.969932)
Cyber is piping hot – and now¶ more so than ever, with several scary precedents being set over the course of the last year. In late 2013,¶ a massive security breach at Target, a¶ major
American retailer, compromised¶ the credit‐card data of as many as¶ 40 million customers. A few months¶ later, in May 2014, eBay suffered an¶ even bigger breach that affected 145¶
million accounts. In September, intruders¶ stole 56 million customer credit‐card¶ numbers from Home Depot,aUS home improvement chain. Also in 2014, in another first, the US Department
of Justice indicted five serving members of China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) for stealing industrial secrets from¶ several companies based in the Western¶ District of Pennsylvania.
Meanwhile,¶ Eastern European criminal syndicates¶ are busier than ever; ‘Cybercrime¶ is anonymous, sophisticated, and¶ international – and Russian’, says Lee¶ Miles, deputy head of the
UK’s National¶ Cyber Crime Unit.1¶ In 2014, the market¶ for information‐security spending topped¶ $70 billion.2¶ In September, NATO agreed¶ that a cyber‐attack could trigger a military¶
In the US, all of this nurtures hype; and the Washington Beltway forms the ideal Petri dish in which to cultivate the alarmism –
response.¶
several parties think that overstating ‘cyber’ is in their own best interest. Security firms like a clearly
stated threat in order to sell their security products. Contractors capitalise on fear¶ to get funding from the executive
branch.¶ The Pentagon finds a bit of hype useful to keep the money coming in. The armed¶ services each eye a
larger slice of the¶ budget pie. The White House loves some good cyber‐angst to nudge law‐makers into
action. Fear of Chinese cyber‐attack makes it easier for members of Congress to relate to voters. Reporting cyber‐war means that journalists sell more copy. Academics get quotations
and attention¶ from the buzz. Hype up cyber, and everybody wins. However, the real question is whether ramping up the threat of cyberattack is really in everybody’s interest.¶ There are
downsides to this dynamic.¶ This article argues that cyber is ‘hyped¶ out’. Overstating the threat does not just¶ have benefits (for some): it also comes with significant costs. The benefits are¶
short‐lived and easy to spot, whereas¶ the costs are long‐term and harder to¶ understand – and they are piling up fast¶ and high. Indeed, they are so high that¶ the debate inches towards a
turning point¶ for all parties involved. Here are thirteen¶ reasons why a more nuanced debate is¶ needed.
4) No risk of a blackout on grids because of a cyberattack
Perera14 (David Perera is a cybersecurity reporter for POLITICO Pro, 9/10/14, “U.S. grid safe from large‐scale attack, experts say”
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/power‐grid‐safety‐110815.html#ixzz3gTzSBgeP)
The specter of a large‐scale, destructive attack on the U.S. power grid is at the center of much strategic thinking about Cybersecurity. For years, Americans have been warned by a bevy of
the half‐dozen security experts
would‐be Cassandras in Congress, the administration and the press that hackers are poised to shut it down.¶ But in fact,
interviewed for this article agreed it’s virtually impossible for an online‐only attack to cause a
widespread or prolonged outage of the North American power grid. Even laying the groundwork for such a
cyber operation could qualify as an act of war against the U.S. — a
line that few nation‐state‐backed hacker crews would wish to cross. None denied that determined hackers could penetrate the networks of bulk power providers.
But there’s a huge gap between that and causing a civilization‐ending sustained outage of the grid.¶ Electrical‐grid hacking scenarios mostly overlook the engineering expertise necessary to
intentionally cause harm to the grid, say experts knowledgeable about the power generators and high voltage transmission entities that constitute the backbone of the grid — what’s called the
bulk power system.¶ There’s also the enormity of the grid and diversity of its equipment to consider. “The grid is designed to lose utilities all the time,” said Patrick Miller, founder and director
of the Energy Sector Security Consortium. “I’m not trying to trivialize the situation, but you’re not really able to cause this nationwide cascading failure for any extended duration of time,” he
added.¶ “It’s just not possible.”¶ ICS security in a nutshell¶ Controlling the boilers, fans, valves and switches and other mechanical devices that turn raw inputs and high‐voltage transmission
into flip‐of‐a‐switch electricity is a class of computers known as industrial control systems. Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems, or SCADA, is a type of ICS.¶ ICSs aren’t general
purpose computers like desktops. At the level of direct control over electromechanical processes — via a device often classified as a Programmable Logic Controller — programming is mainly
done in specialized languages on obscure operating systems. Even just accessing a PLC requires particular software. Hiding malware in field devices is difficult to impossible. Many of the
And
devices “aren’t running multi‐thread, multi‐tasking operations like our laptops,” noted Chris Blask, chair of the Industrial Control System Information Sharing and Analysis Center.¶
penetration is just a starting point. “Just hacking into the system, and even taking complete control of a computer
or crashing a bunch of computers, won’t necessarily bring down the bulk electric system,” said Dale Peterson, founder
of Digital Bond, an industrial control system cybersecurity consultancy.¶ For example, hackers could cause a SCADA system to crash,
causing grid operators to lose system visibility — decidedly not a good thing. But the grid doesn’t need the SCADA system to continue
operating. “There has to be an understanding that simply taking out the cyber assets doesn’t cause a
blackout,” Peterson said.
AND NO NUC WAR IMPACT
Mutual assured destruction checks escalation
Chari 03– P.R. Chari is a Research Professor. "IPCS Nuclear Crisis, Escalation Control, and Deterrence in South Asia” P.R.
Chari Working Paper Version 1.0 August 2003 http://www.stimson.org/images/uploads/researchpdfs/escalation_chari_1.pdf
The belief however that lowyield tactical nuclear weapons could be used in the battlefield during
an IndoPak nuclear crisis, 28 or to launch counterforce attacks on military and economic targets,
while expecting that the conflict will not escalate to general war, is feckless. There are several reasons for this assertion.
Firstly, the “firebreak” distinguishing nuclear and conventional conflict must be maintained since
the entry of nuclear weapons into the battlefield introduces an entirely new, qualitative dimension. Undoubtedly, some conventional
weapons can resemble “mininukes” in their destructive capabilities, but the latter are unique in that they can cause instant
annihilation and longterm radiation effects on present and even unborn generations. Above all, the use of any kind of
nuclear weapons presages escalation leading on to the use of more powerful weapons that could
annihilate cities and major economic targets. Secondly, there is no guarantee that the adversary will
not escalate nuclear conflict straightaway by launching massive counterattacks on population
centers. As graphically argued in a Pugwash Symposium some twentyfive years ago, “I do not believe that any
scenario exists which suggests that nuclear weapons could be used in field warfare between two
nuclear states without escalation resulting… [T]here is no Marquess of Queensberry who would
be holding the ring in a nuclear conflict… [N]o one has yet suggested a mutually agreed
mechanism for controlling escalation on a battlefield. Until we are assured that there could be
one, we have to see any degree of nuclear destruction as part of a continuous spectrum of
devastation.” 29 The problem that rules cannot govern the fighting of a war, anticipated by Clausewitz two centuries ago,
remains unresolved. Moreover, for a nuclear conflict to proceed under established rules assumes that an understanding on its
contours exists between the adversaries. Should this exist, the natural question would arise: why should they
enter a conflict at all? Thirdly, it has been further urged that, “A war of attrition, even if it were technically
feasible, cannot be in the interest of the weaker side. Against a numerically superior opponent, the sensible
strategy would be attacking cities, perhaps ‘controlling’ the response by destroying some smaller towns first…whatever the
significance of the notion of superiority in a war confined to military targets, there can be little doubt that a saturation point is soon
reached when civilian populations become the objective.” 30 Mutual assured destruction ultimately upholds the
edifice of nuclear deterrence; warfighting scenarios configuring nuclear weapons lack credibility
in the real world
AND No war – too worried about the economy
Malik 10 Ashok Malik, Senior editor, 20 years in journalism, Times of India Interviewed by Charles Davis, a professor at the
Missouri School of Journalism, GLOBAL JOURNALIST: Coverage of Pakistan floods lacks urgency Saturday, August 21, 2010 | 2:16
p.m. CDT BY CHARLES DAVIS
Malik: People do realize that this well could have been a battle scene. But there are continuing questions about the capacity of
Pakistanis to address internal challenges. India and Pakistan have had a rough relationship, but things are
much better today than had been historically. For one, there is no real prospect of a war.
Pakistan has numerous challenges far beyond India, and it is not interested in a war, which
would mean its economic ruin. This is quite an achievement for two countries that saw a war a
few years ago.
AND Antiterrorism rhetoric is islamophobic, racist and ultimately justifies oppressing
people perceived as “Muslim” in the status quo‐ gives us access to race impacts
http://www.newamerica.org/internationalsecurity/islamophobiaextremismandthedomesticwaronterror/
Bergen 14
In The Muslims Are Coming!: Islamophobia, Extremism, and the Domestic War on Terror, Arun
new front in the War on Terror is the homegrown enemy, domestic terrorists who
Kundnani notes that the
have become the focus of sprawling counterterrorism structures in the United States and across
Europe. Domestic surveillance by police forces and government agencies has mushroomed— at
least 100,000 Muslims in America have been secretly under scrutiny. In Britain, police officers
compiled a secret suspect list of more than 8,000 alQaeda "sympathizers," and almost 300
children aged fifteen and younger were among the potential extremists investigated. While the revelations
by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden have caused some to question the rise, even the legality, of these national surveillance states, Western
governments continue to focus on the threats posed by homegrown extremists, particularly as the Islamic State attracts foreign fighters from around the world Based on several
years of research and reportage, in locations as disparate as Texas, New York, and Yorkshire, and written in engrossing, precise prose, Kundnani’s The Muslims Are Coming! is
the first comprehensive critique of Western counterradicalization strategies. He notes that the new policies and policing campaigns have been backed by
an industry of freshlyminted experts and liberal commentators, and looks at the way these debates have been transformed by the
embrace of a narrowlyconfigured and illconceived antiextremism stance.
AND That’s a d rule
Memmi 2K (Albert, Professor Emeritus of Sociology @ U of Paris, Naiteire, Racism, Translated by Steve Martinot, p. 163165)
The struggle against racism will be long, difficult, without intermission, without remission,
probably never achieved. Yet, for this very reason, it is a struggle to be undertaken without
surcease and without concessions. One cannot be indulgent toward racism; one must not even
let the monster in the house, especially not in a mask. To give it merely a foothold means to
augment the bestial part in us and in other people, which is to diminish what is human. To
accept the racist universe to the slightest degree is to endorse fear, injustice, and violence. It is to
accept the persistence of the dark history in which we still largely live. it is to agree that the outsider will always be a possible victim (and which man is not himself an
outsider relative to someone else?. Racism illustrates, in sum, the inevitable negativity of the condition of the dominated that is, it illuminates in a certain sense the entire
human condition. The antiracist struggle, difficult though it is, and always in question, is nevertheless one of the prologues to the ultimate passage from animosity to
humanity. In that sense, we cannot fail to rise to the racist challenge. However, it remains true that one’s moral conduit only emerges from a choice: one has to want it. It is
a choice among other choices, and always debatable in its foundations and its consequences. Let us say, broadly speaking, that the choice to conduct oneself morally is the
One cannot found a moral
condition for the establishment of a human order, for which racism is the very negation. This is almost a redundancy.
order, let alone a legislative order, on racism, because racism signifies the exclusion of the
other, and his or her subjection to violence and domination. From an ethical point of view, if one can deploy a little religious language, racism is ‘the truly capital sin.
It is not an accident that almost all of humanity’s spiritual traditions counsels respect for the weak, for orphans, widows, or strangers. It is not just a question of theoretical
morality and disinterested commandments. Such unanimity in the safeguarding of the other suggests the real utility of such sentiments. All things considered, we have an
interest in banishing injustice, because injustice engenders violence and death. Of course, this is debatable. There are those who think that if one is strong enough, the
assault on and oppression of others is permissible. Bur no one is ever sure of remaining the strongest. One day, perhaps, the roles will be reversed. All unjust society
contains within itself the seeds of its own death. It is probably smarter to treat others with respect so that they treat you with respect. “Recall.” says the Bible, “that you
were once a stranger in Egypt,” which means both that you ought to respect the stranger because you were a stranger yourself and that you risk becoming one again
someday. It is an ethical and a practical appeal—indeed, it is a contract, however implicit it might be. In short, the refusal of racism is the condition for all theoretical and
the ethical choice commands the political choice, a just society must be
practical morality because, in the end,
a society accepted by all. If this contractual principle is not accepted, then only conflict,
violence, and destruction will be our lot. If it is accepted, we can hope someday to live in
peace. True, it is a wager, but the stakes are irresistible.
SOLVENCY
Plan doesn’t solve—H‐1B visa policies make it difficult for foreign students to stay in the
US
Han 15 (Xueying Han, Postdoctoral Scholar at University of California, Santa Barbara, “STEMming
reverse brain drain: what would make foreign students stay in the US?”, March 31st , 2015, the
conversation,
http://theconversation.com/stemming‐reverse‐brain‐drain‐what‐would‐make‐foreign‐students‐stay‐i
n‐the‐us‐39148, JAS)
Science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) disciplines in the US have come to heavily rely on international
students, who constitute about a third of all STEM graduate students in the US. So what makes these
individuals stay in the US upon graduation? This has come to be an important question considering
that for science and engineering, 40% of US doctorates awarded today are to people from abroad.
Understanding why international students may or may not want to leave the US and where they choose to work after they graduate is
crucial for future immigration policies. As a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for Nanotechnology in Society at the University of California,
Santa Barbara, I am part of an interdisciplinary research group headed by Richard Appelbaum that investigated international students'
career choices and found that those interested in becoming entrepreneurs were most inclined to stay after
graduation. US still a magnet for the entrepreneurial Among multiple factors, the choice of career plays a key role in
students deciding to stay or leave the US upon graduation. Our study found those who wanted to work with business groups, or start their
own business, or work for a non‐governmental organization had a 90% likelihood of wanting to stay in the US. This suggests to us that the
US continues to be viewed as a hub for innovation and research. However, for those wanting a career
in academia or a governmental agency, the choice is more complicated and depends on a
combination of social, professional and personal reasons. They come but they are going back in higher
numbers P erceived as a global leader in STEM innovation, the US remains the most popular destination in the world
for international students. International students are also more likely to earn a doctorate in a STEM
related field than their American counterparts. From 2001 to 2011, 84% of doctorate degrees earned by international
students were in STEM compared to only 63% by US citizens and permanent residents. STEM areas are offering exciting possibilities of
research. Scientist image via www.shutterstock.com However, given the importance of STEM research, increasingly
many countries have come up with policies and programs to encourage individuals who studied
abroad to return to their home countries. From technological advancements in fully autonomous vehicles to medical
breakthroughs in targeted drug delivery, STEM disciplines offer exciting possibilities of research with significant economic and global
impact. A 2011 study focusing only on foreign STEM doctoral recipients in the US has found that the percentage of individuals who stay
long‐term after graduation has steadily decreased. At the same time, studies by Brookings, Harvard, NAFSA: Association of International
Educators, and the Institute of International Education have highlighted that international students are important
contributors to the US economy and are integral to the future economic success of the country.
Immigration policies deter many from staying on Our study also looked at current immigration policies
and whether they acted as a possible barrier in retaining the best talent. An Optional Practical Training (OPT)
period allows individuals to stay and work in the US in a job related to their field of study for 12 months following graduation. Qualified
STEM degree holders are then eligible to apply for an additional 17‐month OPT extension. But to stay past their OPT period,
international students must find a business willing to sponsor them for an H‐1B visa. Respondents in
our study were forthright on how frustrating they found the H‐1B visa process. Students say visa
issues are a major deterrent For instance, a graduate student in electrical and computer engineering
said: “The H‐1B visa makes you get a sponsor for five years or so and you are bound to that employer
and that is not very attractive. If the US wants to retain talent, people need freedom to pursue what
they want to research. ” Another graduate student in mechanical engineering voiced a similar sentiment: “The fact that you
don’t have a green card at the end of your PhD – it’s a nightmare. For international students, not
having a green card ‐ it impacts the job search…everything. ” For policymakers in the US, such a large
pool of STEM students raises crucial questions about the direction of future policies. Do we want to
retain international STEM graduates? And if so, how do we go about easing immigration policies
restrictions so as to encourage those most likely to contribute to the American economy?
