Credit and Debt Critical Aff Case Neg
Notes
This is a file that is more policy oriented in dealing with this affirmative so I didn’t include the links to
more critical arguments. In the 1nc you should make a choice between running the econ DA and
framework but probably not both. The reason being if you run the counter advocacy as a counterplan
and then run framework you can have framework be the net benefit to the counterplan. Also, the
framework shell is pretty long and so is all the solvency so keep that in mind. I think the better strategy
though is to do case, the counter advocacy, and the DA because then you can make the argument that
the DA is a prior question (in the 2nc part of the file) because in order to reach the endpoint of their
solvency, we need to survive the economic collapse. That means that they don’t get to just weigh the DA
against the case but have to win that it won’t happen for them to reach case. Even if they do you have a
good chance of winning on the DA as net benefits to the counter advocacy because it probably solves.
Good luck!
1NC
Case
1. Neoliberalism solves global inequality
Obhof. 03. University of florida journal of law and public policy: Why globalization-A look at global
capitalism and its effects. 15, : 91
Many in the anti-globalization camp have focused their efforts on rising tensions within, rather than
between, countries. They argue that the rich and the poor are drifting farther apart, and that
violence between classes of people within the same country is increasing. Noting that economic
groups often tend to break down along ethnic lines, some have even postulated that the spread of
free-market democracy fosters "ethnoeconomic resentment" to the point of conflagration. n171
On their collective face, these arguments appear to have some merit. Intrastate war is now the
[*121] predominant form of armed conflict. n172 In the last decade, civil wars "have scarred the
world's poorest countries, leaving a legacy of more than five million dead, many more driven from
their homes, billions of dollars in resources destroyed, and wasted economic opportunity." n173 Is
the spread of global capitalism responsible for these atrocities? The answer is likely no. Such
analyses often overlook more obvious sources of backlash: elite behavior, corruption, and latent
ethnic, nationalist, and religious tensions. n174 They also ignore historical and economic realities.
As discussed above, there is no correlation between globalization and increased inequality within
countries - in fact, the opposite is true. Furthermore, the risk factors most closely correlated with
civil war include the share of GDP coming from the export of primary commodities, geography,
recent conflicts, economic opportunities, and ethnic and religious composition. n175 Since the end
of the Cold War, conflict has been concentrated in countries with little education and economic
decline. n176 Intrastate conflict is systematically related to low national income n177 and a lack of
economic opportunities, n178 but not inequality. n179 Unequal societies are simply not more
prone to conflict than more egalitarian ones. Given the importance of economic opportunity in
preventing conflict, and the unequivocally positive results of increased trade and foreign
investment, it seems that global capitalism is a potential cure, rather than a cause, of internal
conflict. In fact, internal pressures appear to be greater [*122] in countries that have not become
more globalized in recent years. Whatever the merits of this latter claim, though, the assertion that
globalization has increased internal conflict is simply not supported by the facts.
2. Their “student movement” card out of the 1AC proves that their plan is already
happening.
Cooper and Mitropolous 9 [Melinda Cooper, Assoc. Prof. Sociology and Public Policy @ Univ. of
Sydney, and Angela Mitropolous, writer and activist based in Australia and author of Contract &
Contagion: From Biopolitics to Oikonomia, 27 May 2009, “In Praise of Usura,” Mute,
http://www.metamute.org/editorial/articles/praise-usura]
We are not, therefore, suggesting that Obama's moral reinscriptions of the household be supplemented
with real economic supports of a neo-Keynesian kind in the manner, for example, of the family wage.
This, indeed, is one of the demands of Obama's progressive Christian supporters, E. J. Dionne, and is one
obvious direction in which demands for a living wage or basic income might unfold. Rather, we are
interested in pushing the exercise in excess even further, in praise of a usurious economy from below
that would begin with the most intimate of acts while breaking beyond their normative sexual and racial
boundaries. Briefly put, how is it possible to live on borrowed time, to extend credit to oneself and
others, while defaulting on the contractual arrangements one might have with the creditor? This is not
an instance of declaring what is to be done, but of noting what is already occurring.
A. Proves the movement is already happening and the plan is non-inherent
B. Proves no solvency because it hasn’t worked yet and debt is increasing for
these populations
3. The current economic system is experiencing trends towards gender economic
equality. Means we shouldn’t break down the system
Jenna Goudreau 10, 9-14-2010, "Gender Wage Gap Shrinks To Record Low," Forbes,
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagoudreau/2010/09/14/gender-wage-gap-shrinks-to-record-low/
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the wage gap between men and women has narrowed so
dramatically that it is now the smallest on record. In the second quarter of 2010, women’s median
weekly earnings were 82.8% of men’s, up from 76.1% in 2000. The change is likely due to the uneven
layoffs experienced by men in the recession, the growth of female-dominated industries like health care
and the increasing numbers of college-educated women, who now earn 60% of all Bachelors and
Masters degrees. Women have been increasing their participation in the labor force steadily since 1975
(men have been decreasing) and now make up half of the workforce. Young women seem to be reaping
the rewards. Single, childless women in their 20s now earn 8% more than their male peers, according to
market research firm Reach Advisors. Many have termed the downturn a “mancession” due to massive
cuts in the male-dominated construction, manufacturing and high finance fields. A narrowing wage gap
could renew fears about the so-called “decline of men” or an ongoing “gender war.” It should be
considered, however, that women continue to earn only 83 cents on men’s dollar. Unattached twentysomething women may out-earn male peers in the short-term, but add a family and it becomes a
slippery slope. Hopefully some of the Best 100 Companies named today–including IBM, Discovery and
Bank of America–will help working parents juggle their growing responsibilities.
4. Racism is a creation of policy and can only be destroyed by engaging with the
state
Ta-Nehisi Coates 13, 3-8-2013, "Good People, Racist People," Atlantic,
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/03/good-people-racist-people/273843/
The "I'm not racist even though I'm doing something actually racist right now" rationale is linked to the
notion of racism as something worthy of societal condemnation. That is a good thing. As Sugrue
identifies in his book, you see a post-World-War-II consensus forming in the 1950s that racial
discrimination actually is wrong. Along with that (perhaps in the 60s) comes the idea that racism is
something that "low-class" white people do. It's not a system of laws and policies, so much as the
ideology of Cletus the slack-jawed yokel. But Arnold Hirsch and Beryl Satter's work shows the University
of Chicago quietly and privately pursuing a racist strategy of "urban renewal" while publicly claiming
otherwise. None of this is new. It's akin to proto-Confederates loudly and lustily defending slavery,
daring the North to war before 1865, and then afterward claiming that the war really wasn't about
slavery. The point is to save face. Last night I had the luxury of sitting and talking with the brilliant
historian Barbara Fields. One point she makes that very few Americans understand is that racism is a
creation.You read Edmund Morgan's workand actually see racism being inscribed in the law and the
country changing as a result. If we accept that racism is a creation, then we must then accept that it can
be destroyed. And if we accept that it can be destroyed, we must then accept that it can be destroyed
by us and that it likely must be destroyed by methods kin to creation. Racism was created by policy. It
will likely only be ultimately destroyed by policy. That is hard to take. If Forrest Whitaker sticks out in
that deli for reasons of individual mortal sin, we can castigate the guy who frisked him and move on. But
if he -- and others like him -- stick out for reasons of policy, for decisions that we, as a state, have made,
then we have a problem. Then we have to do something beyond being nice to each other.
Counter advocacy
They advocate for a politics of brokenness which precludes the idea of a living wage or
free-market jobs.
Thus our Counter advocacy text: we advocate a government ensured living wage and
that the government should support three separate programs for increasing
employment: direct public sector employment, job training with job placement, and
wage subsidies for employers who hire unemployed workers.
The living wage succeeds in bringing disadvantaged populations – particularly people
of color – out of poverty. Creates structural trends away from cyclical poverty.
Bryce Covert 13, 6-21-2013, "How Raising The Minimum Wage Is A Racial Justice Issue," ThinkProgress,
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/06/21/2194701/race-minimum-wage/
Three and a half million people of color would be lifted out of poverty if Congress raised the minimum
wage to $10.10, according to a new report from the restaurant workers’ group ROC United. They would
be the majority of the six million people overall who would be lifted out of poverty. People of color are
far more likely to work minimum wage jobs, as they represent 42 percent of those earners even though
they make up just 32 percent of the workforce. That big number is in large part thanks to the
overrepresentation of people of color in low-wage restaurant industry jobs. Over 500,000 of those lifted
out of poverty by a raise in the minimum wage would be restaurant workers, 300,000 of whom would
be workers of color. Restaurants are the single largest employer of people of color, but they are
disproportionately concentrated in the lowest paying positions. As the report notes, “Two of the lowestpaying jobs, dishwashers and fast food preps and cooks, are 59% and 35% people of color, and earn a
median wage of $8.78 and $8.85, respectively.” Forty percent of tipped workers — who make an even
lower minimum wage of $2.13 — are people of color. The people of color who hold these jobs are also
more likely to live in poverty. They make up more than half of tipped workers and restaurant workers
with incomes below the poverty line. Women of color fare even worse. “Black female servers, for
example, are paid only 60 percent of what all male servers are paid,” the report notes. The minimum
wage has fallen far below its historical borrowing power. The current wage would be $10.40 if it had
been indexed to inflation at its peak in 1968. House Democrats introduced a bill in March that would
raise the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour and index it to inflation so that it would continue to rise.
The raising of the federal minimum wage to a living wage would be significant
progress towards eliminating the gender wage gap.
Alanna Vagianos 15, 10 Things We Need To Do To Close The Wage Gap, 4-30-2015, "10 Things We
Need To Do To Close The Wage Gap," The Huffington Post,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/14/things-we-need-to-do-to-close-wagegap_n_7056322.html
The gender pay gap impacts women across all socioeconomic and racial groups throughout a majority of
professional fields. It affects women of color at even greater rates, with Latina women earning just 56
percent of every dollar a white man makes, and black women earning 64 percent. To top it off, the
wage gap only grows larger as women age, with women earning 90 percent of what men make until 35,
after which they are paid 75–80 percent of what men are paid. Luckily there are concrete things that can
be done to close the wage gap and get us one step closer to achieving gender equality. Here are 10 of
them: 1. Raise the federal minimum wage. Immediately. Women working full time, year-round -- across
all industries and including all races and ethnicities -- earn an average of 78 percent as much as their
male counterparts. That leaves a wage gap of 22 cents on the dollar. One thing dragging the average
down? The high concentration of women in minimum-wage jobs. According to the National Women's
Law Center, two-thirds of minimum wage workers are women. Two-thirds of workers in low-wage,
tipped occupations are also women. "Raising the minimum wage and the tipped minimum wage are
important steps towards fair pay for women -- especially women of color," reads a 2014 NWLC report.
The primary reason that disadvantaged populations are shuttled off to prison is
because of low wages. This can only be solved by the counter-advocacy.
Nirali Beri, 14, 5-1-2014, "What Raising Minimum Wage Means for Racial Justice," American Civil
Liberties Union, https://www.aclu.org/blog/what-raising-minimum-wage-means-racial-justice
Yesterday the Fair Minimum Wage Act, legislation that would have raised federal minimum wage from
$7.25 to $10.10, was blocked by a Republican-led filibuster in the U.S. Senate. While many are focused
on the partisan politicking surrounding this bill, more attention must be given to the grave impact low
wages have on communities of color. First and foremost, it is important to juxtapose today's cost of
living with the salary of a full-time minimum wage earner. A person working full-time under the current
federal standard of minimum wage makes $15,080 a year, a number that is $4000 below the federal
poverty line for a family of three, and fails to meet the estimated cost of living for one individual in most
states. For example, a minimum wage earner in Indianapolis, Indiana, one of 21 states that maintain the
federal minimum wage, makes $3,119 short of sustaining oneself, and $20,148 short of sustaining a
family of three. (Take a look here and see if you could live on minimum wage in your state.) The current
minimum wage is inadequate, that much is clear. But, by looking beyond the impact of our federal
minimum wage on individuals and their families, we see that the wage standard also has systemic
consequences, most notably its disproportionate effect on people of color. For instance, AfricanAmericans, Asians and Hispanics constitute 42 percent of minimum wage workers, while representing
only 32 percent of the U.S. workforce. By earning dismal minimum wage salaries in higher numbers,
communities of color continue to be cut out of fundamental opportunities for equality. People of color
make up a majority of those living below the poverty level, while the median wealth of white
households remains twenty times that of Black homes and 18 times that of Hispanic homes. This severe
wealth inequality directly limits minority access to quality education, transportation and affordable
housing, while perpetuating the disproportionately high number of people of color involved in the
criminal justice system.
Our programs create lasting jobs that increase the quality of life.
Algernon Austin 11, 12-14-2011, "A jobs-centered approach to African American community
development: The crisis of African American unemployment requires federal intervention," Economic
Policy Institute, http://www.epi.org/publication/bp328-african-american-unemployment/
The federal government should support three separate programs for increasing employment in these
high-unemployment areas: direct public sector employment, job training with job placement, and wage
subsidies for employers who hire unemployed workers. Together these policies should significantly
increase employment rates in African American communities with persistently high unemployment.
Direct public sector employment. The federal government should provide funds to local governments
for job creation aimed at improving the quality of life in the community. Local governments, with
community input, should create projects to improve the human and physical infrastructure, safety,
health, and attractiveness of the community. Many African American communities experiencing
persistently high unemployment need workers to clean, rehabilitate, and beautify the housing stock and
green spaces; assist in the education of children; form auxiliaries to the police to help improve the safety
of the community; and participate in many other community projects. These jobs would improve the
quality of life of existing residents and make the community more desirable to middle-class
households.
The effects of this program would be long lasting and ultimately end the institutional
bias against workers of color, eliminating structural economic inequality.
Algernon Austin 11, 12-14-2011, "A jobs-centered approach to African American community
development: The crisis of African American unemployment requires federal intervention," Economic
Policy Institute, http://www.epi.org/publication/bp328-african-american-unemployment/
The effects of the proposed program are likely to be felt for several years after it is phased out.
Researchers find that positive economic effects last for many years after temporary jobs programs end
(Bartik 2001: 141–146). Positive experiences with African American workers may also reduce employer
biases, possibly leading them to institutionalize the outreach and hiring of African American workers
(Bartik 2001, 141–46). Studies of public sector employment programs find that employers are surprised
to find that workers from disadvantaged groups can perform as well as the workers they usually hire
(Bartik 2001, 179–80). This jobs proposal is designed to increase the overall economic resources in the
community. Increasing the number of working and taxpaying individuals would increase the tax base for
additional economic development activities while also decreasing local government social service and
social welfare costs. It would make the community more appealing for locating a business. The proposal
is also designed to increase the attractiveness of the community to middle-class households looking for
a new place to live as well as to both new and existing businesses. Significant growth in employment
rates could also lead to increases in the educational achievement of the children in the community and
reductions in crime. These improvements would attract more middle-class residents and further
increase the economic resources of the community.
Econ DA Net Benifit
The horizon of their politics is destroying the current economic system that we have.
This ensures economic destruction in order to reconstruct an entire new economy.
This is their 1AC Halberstam 13 evidence
It ends with love, exchange, fellowship. It ends as it begins, in motion,¶ in between various modes of
being and belonging, and on the way to¶ new economies of giving, taking, being with and for and it ends
with¶ a ride in a Buick Skylark on the way to another place altogether. Surprising,¶ perhaps, after we have engaged dispossession, debt,
the projects of “fugitive planning and black
study” are mostly about¶ reaching out to find connection; they are about making common¶ cause with the brokenness
of being, a brokenness, I would venture to¶ say, that is also blackness, that remains blackness, and will, despite
all,¶ remain broken because this book is not a prescription for repair. If we do not seek to fix what has
been broken, then what? How do we resolve¶ to live with brokenness, with being broke, which is also what
Moten¶ and Harney call “debt.” Well, given that debt is sometimes a history of¶ giving, at other times a history of taking, at all times a
dislocation¶ and violence. But not surprising when you have understood that¶
history of capitalism¶ and given that debt also signifies a promise of ownership but never delivers¶ on that promise, we have to understand
that debt is something that¶ cannot be paid off. Debt, as Harney puts it, presumes a kind of individualized¶ relation
to a naturalized economy that is predicated upon exploitation.¶ Can we have, he asks, another sense of
what is owed that does not¶ presume a nexus of activities like recognition and acknowledgement,¶
payment and gratitude. Can debt “become a principle¶ of elaboration”? Moten links economic debt to the
brokenness of being in the interview¶ with Stevphen Shukaitis; he acknowledges that some debts¶ should be paid, and that much
is owed especially to black people by¶ white people, and yet, he says: “I also know that what it is that is¶
supposed to be repaired is irreparable. It can’t be repaired. The only¶ thing we can do is tear this shit down
completely and build something¶ new.” The undercommons do not come to pay their debts, to¶ repair
what has been broken, to fix what has come undone.¶ If you want to know what the undercommons
wants, what Moten¶ and Harney want, what black people, indigenous peoples, queers and¶ poor people want,
what we (the “we” who cohabit in the space of the¶ undercommons) want, it is this – we cannot be satisfied
with the recognition¶ and acknowledgement generated by the very system that¶ denies a) that
anything was ever broken and b) that we deserved to¶ be the broken part; so we refuse to ask for recognition and
instead we¶ want to take apart, dismantle, tear down the structure
On to the internal link, this economic collapse is not benign and affects countries
around the world causing massive global economic collapse.
Clarfeld 12 [Rob, Forbes Contributor, Decouple This!, 1/25/12,
http://www.forbes.com/sites/robclarfeld/2012/01/25/decouple-this/]
During the first few weeks of 2012, the markets are following the prevailing narrative that the U.S.
economy has “decoupled” from the widely known troubles of Europe, and the somewhat less discussed
prevailing risks from China. In a “decoupling” scenario, a country or region is deemed to be able to
withstand the troubles going on outside of its own borders because of its own internal economic
strength. I see two major problems with this thesis. First, the U.S. economy is not growing at the
recently predicted robust rate of 4-5%; rather it is struggling to achieve a rate of 2-2.5%. This leaves little
cushion to withstand the “contagion” from a major economic fallout from either Europe or China, or for
that matter, economic shocks that have yet to surface. A significant European debt default, banking
failure, natural disasters or geopolitical events, would surely impact the U.S. economy and markets
beyond the current level of fragile growth – we simply don’t have the levels of productivity requisite to
absorb a major blow. Second, it was only a few years ago when the decoupling thesis was widely
espoused following the U.S. banking crisis and ensuing recession. At the time the thinking was that the
robust growth experienced in the emerging markets would be able to withstand the U.S. slowdown and
pick up some of the slack in the global economy. We now know how that worked out – it didn’t! When
the U.S. went into a major recession it dragged down the rest of the world with it. We need to deal
with it — the global economy remains highly interdependent. If a number of dominoes begin to fall, it is
highly unlikely that any individual country or region will be able to escape the carnage. Again, any
financial crisis would be occurring from levels of growth that have not yet fully recovered from their
recessionary lows. In relative terms, some countries and regions will do better than others, but the
“decoupling” thesis is highly flawed
Global economic collapse cause nuclear war. This turns case because we won’t be able
to experience the other side of their politics after everyone is dead.
Merlini 11 (Senior Fellow – Brookings)
(Cesare. A Post-Secular World? Survival, Volume 53, Issue 2 April 2011 , pages 117 – 130)
Two neatly opposed scenarios for the future of the world order illustrate the range of possibilities, albeit
at the risk of oversimplification. The first scenario entails the premature crumbling of the postWestphalian system. One or more of the acute tensions apparent today evolves into an open and
traditional conflict between states, perhaps even involving the use of nuclear weapons. The crisis might
be triggered by a collapse of the global economic and financial system, the vulnerability of which we
have just experienced, and the prospect of a second Great Depression, with consequences for peace and
democracy similar to those of the first. Whatever the trigger, the unlimited exercise of national
sovereignty, exclusive self-interest and rejection of outside interference would likely be amplified,
emptying, perhaps entirely, the half-full glass of multilateralism, including the UN and the European
Union. Many of the more likely conflicts, such as between Israel and Iran or India and Pakistan, have
potential religious dimensions. Short of war, tensions such as those related to immigration might
become unbearable. Familiar issues of creed and identity could be exacerbated. One way or another,
the secular rational approach would be sidestepped by a return to theocratic absolutes, competing or
converging with secular absolutes such as unbridled nationalism.
Fwk
Our interpretation is that an affirmative should defend curtailing federal government
surveillance as the endpoint of their advocacy. This does not mandate roleplaying,
immediate fiat or any particular means of impact calculus.
Surveillance can only be understood in relation to the agent doing the surveying –
understanding federal government surveillance as unique is key or the topic becomes
abstract and unlimited
Cetina 14
(DANIEL K. CETINA, BALANCING SECURITY AND PRIVACY IN 21ST CENTURYAMERICA: A FRAMEWORK FOR FISA
COURT REFORM, 47 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1453 2013-2014, Hein)
Any legitimate attempt to discuss and critique United States surveillance tactics
necessarily demands defining exactly what surveillance is and what it entails. Although
discourse surrounding governments' intelligence and law enforcement techniques transcends any
specific epoch or state,11 modern communication technologies "have revolutionized our daily lives
[and] have also created minutely detailed recordings of those lives," 12 thereby making governmental
surveillance simple, potentially ubiquitous, and susceptible to abuse.13 Of course, recent surveillance
programs were implemented for the noble purpose of conducting the War on Terrorism; 14 but the
danger is that pursuing this purpose unchecked can undermine the central principles that both provide
the Republic's foundation and differentiate it from the very enemies it combats. 15
While the prospect of governmental surveillance seems to implicitly suggest a quasi-Orwellian
dystopia,16 fantastical science fiction mythologies, 17 abstruse philosophical concepts, 18 or
documented repressive regimes,19 the reality is both less foreboding and more nuanced. Although
American society, ostensibly, is looking increasingly akin to such fiction, theory, and totalitarianism,
surveillance as applied is not so disturbing. Surveillance involves and encompasses many
topics and practices, both abstract and practical,20 but it primarily involves power
relationships. 2 1 Specifically, surveillance is "the focused, systematic and routine attention
to personal details for purposes of influence, management, protection or direction ."22
Surveillance can target a modern society's numerous communications networks, 28 which exist to send
and receive information. 24 The communications include both envelope information and content
information, distinct categories that draw varying degrees of interest from the surveillance authority. 25
But surveillance is not strictly the province of the federal government. 26 Indeed, state and local
governments have their own surveillance practices, as do private corporations, which
routinely use surveillance data to determine purchasing trends and calibrate advertising, especially
through such social media sites as Facebook.28 Surveillance, therefore, transcends the boundary
between the private sector and the public sector. 29
The focus here, however, is on federal governmental surveillance. It is therefore critical
to understand from where the federal government derives its authority to monitor and
analyze communications networks.
The Aff undermines the ability to have a limited and stable number of Affirmatives to
prepare against. The link magnitude is high. Their affirmative prevents arguments
about core topic areas like the NSA and the political ramifications of the plan.
This is a reason to vote negative.
Our first standard is competition – every affirmative argument needs to be filtered
through the question of “how does this function in a competitive venue of debate
where there must be a win or a loss assigned to each team. All their evidence will
assume non-competitive academic environment rather than one where a forced
choice will inevitably take place with every ballot.
Second is substantive side bias
Not defending the clear actor and mechanism of the resolution produces a substantive
side bias.
They have the ability to recontextualize link arguments, shift focus to different
proscriptive claims of the 1AC while using traditional competition standards like
perms to make non-absolutist disagreements irrelevant.
This undermines research. The Aff is incentivized to pick a body of literature with very little
negative literature and a prolif of aff advocacies based on single articles or created phrases.
There is no incentive to produce detailed strategies because academic disagreements in the
literature are minute and easily wished away by perms or Aff changes.
And we have an external impact – Sufficient research-based preparation and debates focused
on detailed points of disagreement are key to political effectiveness. This means they can
never effectively assemble a movement and decks their solvency
Gutting 13 (professor of philosophy at the University of Notre Dame)
(Gary, Feb 19, A Great Debate, http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/19/a-greatdebate/?emc=eta1)
This is the year of what should be a decisive debate on our country’s spending and debt. But our
political “debates” seldom deserve the name. For the most part representatives of the rival
parties exchange one-liners: “The rich can afford to pay more” is met by “Tax increases kill jobs.” Slightly
more sophisticated discussions may cite historical precedents: “There were higher tax rates during the
post-war boom” versus “Reagan’s tax cuts increased revenues.”
Such volleys still don’t even amount to arguments: they don’t put forward generally accepted premises
that support a conclusion. Full-scale speeches by politicians are seldom much more than collections of
such slogans and factoids, hung on a string of platitudes. Despite the name, candidates’ pre-election
debates are exercises in looking authoritative, imposing their talking points on the questions, avoiding
gaffes, and embarrassing their opponents with “zingers” (the historic paradigm: “There you go again.”).
There is a high level of political discussion in the editorials and op-eds of national newspapers and
magazines as well as on a number of blogs, with positions often carefully formulated and supported
with argument and evidence. But even here we seldom see a direct and sustained
confrontation of rival positions through the dialectic of assertion, critique, response
and counter-critique.
Such exchanges occur frequently in our law courts (for example, oral arguments before the Supreme
Court) and in discussions of scientific papers. But they are not a significant part of our deliberations
about public policy. As a result, partisans typically remain safe in their ideological worlds,
convincing themselves that they hold to obvious truths, while their opponents must be
either knaves or fools — with no need to think through the strengths of their rivals’
positions or the weaknesses of their own.
Is there any way to make genuine debates — sustained back-and-forth exchanges,
meeting high intellectual standards but still widely accessible — part of our political culture? (I
leave to historians the question of whether there are historical precedents— like the Webster-Hayne or
Lincoln-Douglas debates.) Can we put our politicians in a situation where they cannot ignore challenges,
where they must genuinely engage with one another in responsible discussion and not just repeat
talking points?
A first condition is that the debates be focused on specific points of major
disagreement. Not, “How can we improve our economy?” but “Will tax cuts for the
wealthy or stimulus spending on infrastructure do more to improve our economy?”
This will prevent vague statements of principle that don’t address the real issues at
stake.
Another issue is the medium of the debate. Written discussions, in print or online could be easily
arranged, but personal encounters are more vivid and will better engage public attention. They should
not, however, be merely extemporaneous events, where too much will depend on quickthinking and an engaging manner. We want remarks to be carefully prepared and open
to considered responses.
This guts any educational potential of the aff – failure to engage with the legal detail
of surveillance policy prevents translating their argument into action. Means that they
cant access the endpoint of their imagination argument from the 1ac
Cohen 15 (professor of law at Georgetown University Law Center)
(Julie, 2015, Studying Law Studying Surveillance, Studying Law Studying Surveillance. Surveillance & Society 13(1):
91-101)
Relative to legal scholarship, work in Surveillance Studies is more likely to build from a solid
foundation in contemporary social theory. Even so, such work often reflects both an insufficient
grasp of the complexity of the legal system in action and lack of interest in the ways that legal
and regulatory actors understand, conduct, and contest surveillance. By this I don’t mean to suggest
that Surveillance Studies scholars need law degrees, but only to point out what ought to be obvious but
often isn’t: legal processes are social processes, too, and in overlooking these processes, Surveillance
Studies scholars also engage in a form of black-boxing that treats law as monolithic and
surveillance and government as interchangeable. Legal actors engage in a variety of
discursive and normative strategies by which institutions and resources are mobilized around
surveillance, and understanding those strategies is essential to the development of an
archaeology of surveillance practices. Work in Surveillance Studies also favors a type of theoretical
jargon that can seem impenetrable and, more importantly, unrewarding to those in law and policy
communities. As I’ve written elsewhere (Cohen 2012a: 29), “[t]oo many such works find power
everywhere and hope nowhere, and seem to offer well-meaning policy makers little
more than a prescription for despair.”
Returning to the topics already discussed, let us consider some ways in which Surveillance Studies might benefit from dialogue with law.
Let us return first to the problem of digitally-enhanced surveillance by law enforcement—the problem of the high-resolution mosaic. As discussed in the section above, works by Surveillance Studies scholars exploring issues of mobility and control offer profound insights into the ways in which continual observation shapes spaces and
subjectivities—the precise questions about which, as we have already seen, judges and legal scholars alike are skeptical. Such works reveal the extent to which pervasive surveillance of public spaces is emerging as a new and powerful mode of ordering the public and social life of civil society. They offer rich food for thought—but not for action.
Acknowledgment
of pervasive social shaping by networked surveillance need not preclude legal
protection for socially-shaped subjects, but that project requires attention to detail.
Networked surveillance is increasingly a fact of contemporary public life, and totalizing theories about its power don’t take us very far toward gaining regulatory traction on it. That enterprise is, moreover, essential even if it entails an inevitable quantum of self-delusion.
To put the
point a different way, the networked democratic society and the totalitarian state may be points on a continuum rather than binary opposites, but the fact that the continuum exists is still worth something. If so, one needs tools for assessment and differentiation that Surveillance Studies does not seem to provide.
As an example of this sort of approach within legal scholarship, consider a recent article by legal scholars Danielle Citron and David Gray (2013), which proposes that courts and legislators undertake what they term a technology-centered approach to regulating surveillance. They would have courts and legislators ask whether particular technologies
facilitate total surveillance and, if so, act to put in place comprehensive procedures for approving and overseeing their use. From a Surveillance Studies perspective, this approach lacks theoretical purity because its technology-specific focus appears to ignore the fact that total surveillance also can emerge via the fusion of data streams originating
from various sources. But the proposal is pragmatic; it does not so much ignore that risk as bracket it while pursuing the narrower goal of gaining a regulatory foothold within the data streams. And because it focuses on the data streams themselves, it is administrable in a way that schemes based on linear timelines and artificial distinctions
between different types of surveillance are not. One can envision both courts and legislatures implementing the Citron and Gray proposal in a way that enables far better oversight of what law enforcement is doing.
Turning next to the linked practices of commercial profiling and social media surveillance, we have already seen that work in Surveillance Studies again steps in where legal scholarship badly needs supplementation: on the question of how pervasive surveillance by private market actors shapes the production of culture and the patterns of
emergent subjectivity. Such work typically does not, however, consider or explore the ways that the legal construct of consent mobilizes legal and policy discourses to sanction ongoing expansions of private-sector surveillance and insulate them from regulatory oversight. Work in Surveillance Studies also has not seemed to pay particularly careful
attention to the roles that rhetorics of innovation and competition play in regulatory debates about information privacy. For a discipline that seeks to develop comprehensive and rigorous accounts of surveillance as social ordering and as cultural practice, these are large omissions. As we have seen, the notice-and-choice paradigm has deep roots
within liberal theory, and legal and policy discourses about notice and choice reflect legal culture in action. By the same token, understanding surveillance simply as a means to effective administration, or as a means for pursuing and performing security, misses the extent to which a narrative about the inevitable nature of innovation and
knowledge production positions surveillance as a modality of technical and social progress (Cohen 2015). The “surveillance-industrial complex” does not simply parallel the military-industrial complex; it is also deeply rooted in Silicon Valley’s technoculture and (albeit paradoxically) in the tropes of romantic individualism and cultural iconoclasm
with which its participants self-identify. These themes have been especially salient for privacy regulators.
Engagement with legal scholarship on information privacy would inform the project of
understanding surveillance as social ordering
and as culture in a number of complementary ways. First and most basically, many legal writings on information privacy are important as primary sources that reveal
the notice-and-choice paradigm and the narrative of inevitable innovation at work. But there is also a rich vein of legal scholarship interrogating the assumptions and the politics that underlie privacy and data protection regulation (e.g., Cohen 2012a, 2012c, 2013, 2015; Kerr 2013; Ohm 2010; Solove 2013). In addition, legal scholars have produced
richly detailed and revealing investigations of regulatory and compliance processes; for example, scholars concerned with the operation of “surveillant assemblages” and “digital enclosures” ought to read and consider the important work by Kenneth Bamberger and Deirdre Mulligan on corporate privacy compliance cultures (2011a, 2011b).
If Surveillance Studies is to inform the content of laws and the nature of regulatory practice in the domain of commercial profiling and social media, however,
surveillance theorists will need to do more
than simply read legal sources. Work in Surveillance Studies so far has not been particularly welladapted to helping policymakers figure out what, if anything, to do about evolving practices of
commercial surveillance. Once again, if it is to be useful to policymakers, the view from
Surveillance Studies requires translation into a form that might furnish a framework
for action.
Here I want to identify three important sets of questions on which Surveillance Studies scholars who want their work to make a difference might take their cues from legal scholarship.
An initial set of questions concerns how to redefine privacy and data protection in functional terms that do not presuppose the stable, liberal self, and that instead offer real benefit to the situated subjects who might claim their protection. David Lyon (2001) has argued that the organizing concepts of “privacy” and “data protection” are inadequate
to comprehend surveillance as a mode of social ordering. From a sociological perspective that is undoubtedly right, but privacy and data protection still might be made effective as legal constructs if articulated differently, in ways that correspond more closely to the ways that surveillance shapes experience. That project calls for the sort of
theoretical cannibalization that makes Ph.D. committees in Real Disciplines nervous, but at which legal scholars excel. With some trepidation, I offer my own work on privacy as boundary management for the postliberal self (Cohen 2012a, 2013), as well as Valerie Steeves’ (2009) work on relational subjectivity, as examples of the sort of exercise
that is necessary to reframe the effects of surveillance as social ordering in ways to which legal systems can respond. For law to develop a sustainable and effective approach to regulating data protection and protecting privacy, the ways of theorizing about the subject represented by these projects must become second nature, not only for scholars
but also and more importantly for legislatures, regulators, and courts. That in turn requires second process of translation, from the language of academia into a vernacular that can supply inputs into policy processes.
A second set of questions concerns how to understand what constitutes privacy harm in an era in which some surveillance is a constant. To the Surveillance Studies reader this may seem to be a variation on the first question, but it is different: in law, harm is what makes violation of an interest actionable, and the potential for harm is what creates
the predicate for comprehensive regulation of particular domains of activity. Harm need not be individualized or monetizable; environmental regulations and financial market regulations address systemic and often nonmonetizable risk. But it must be reasonably definite; talk of power, power everywhere is plainly insufficient and it should come as
no surprise that policymakers find it risible. Work on this problem is still preliminary, but here legal scholarship has a leg up because it deals in practicalities. Surveillance Studies scholars might profitably read works by Danielle Citron (2007) and Paul Ohm (2010) that identify and name the systemic risks associated with leaky and largely unregulated
data reservoirs, and that draw on resources ranging from the history of tort law to computational science to craft recommendations for more effective regulatory strategies.
A final set of questions concerns the design of governance mechanisms. As we have already seen, the flows of surveillance within social media create novel institutional design challenges. In the domain of commercial profiling, many activities on the business-facing side of personal information markets, removed from consumer-facing processes
that purport to ensure notice and choice, have eluded regulatory scrutiny entirely. Some of the classic works on privacy governance originate within the Surveillance Studies tradition; these include Priscilla Regan’s (1995) study of the way privacy legislation emerges within the U.S. political system and Colin Bennett and Charles Raab’s (2006) work
on privacy governance and the emergence of data protection as a regulatory paradigm. But the question of governance badly needs to be revisited; in particular, Surveillance Studies scholars have not yet engaged with the “new privacy governance” now emerging as official policy in the U.S. (and as de facto policy in the European Union) in a
sustained and meaningful way. Works by legal scholars on the political, epistemological, and normative dimensions of the new governance (e.g., Bamberger 2010; Cohen 2012b, 2013; Freeman 2000; Lobel 2004) offer starting points for an inquiry that moves beyond “doing Surveillance Studies” to consider the more pressing challenge of doing
surveillance regulation wisely and effectively.
Conclusion: Doing Law-and-Surveillance-Studies Differently
The prospects for fruitful interchange and collaboration between legal scholars and Surveillance Studies scholars are likely to remain complicated by pronounced differences in underlying theoretical orientation. But since Surveillance Studies is itself an interdiscipline (Garber 2001), and since legal scholarship has thrived on interdisciplinary
exploration, the prospects for effective communication also seem reasonably good.
Bridging the gaps requires, first and foremost, efforts by emissaries from
both traditions to foster a more tolerant and curious dialogue directed toward improved understanding
and, ultimately, toward methodological hybridization. Within one’s own academic
community, it can become too easy to mistake consensus on methodological conventions
for epistemological rigor, and to forget that methodological strength also derives from refusal to be
hemmed in by disciplinary boundaries.
From the standpoint of theory, a more sustained dialogue between law and Surveillance Studies
would count as a success if it produced a mode of inquiry about surveillance that melded the
theoretical sophistication of Surveillance Studies with lawyerly attention to the details,
mechanisms, and interests that constitute surveillance practices as legal practices, and
to the kinds of framing that mobilize legal and policy communities. To do Surveillance
Studies better, legal scholars need to challenge their own preference for putting problems in categories
that fit neatly within the liberal model of human nature and behavior, and Surveillance Studies scholars
can help by calling attention to the social and cultural processes within which surveillance practices are
embedded. Surveillance Studies scholars need to do more to resist their own penchant
for totalizing dystopian narratives, and should delve more deeply into the legal and
regulatory realpolitik that surrounds the administration of surveillance systems; legal
scholars can help by demystifying legal and regulatory processes.
From a legal scholar’s perspective, however, theory achieves its highest value when it becomes a tool
for forcing productive confrontations about how to respond to real problems. And so I think it would
count as an even bigger success if dialogue between law and Surveillance Studies generated not only a
hybridized theoretical discourse of law-and-Surveillance-Studies but also the beginnings of a more
accessible policy discourse about surveillance and privacy, along with reform
proposals designed to put the animating concepts behind such a discourse into
practice. Here the goal would be a hybridization between law’s ingrained pragmatism and Surveillance
Studies’ attentiveness to the social and cultural processes through which surveillance is experienced and
assimilated. Working together, legal scholars and Surveillance Studies scholars might
advance the project of formulating working definitions of privacy interests and harms, and might
develop more sophisticated projections of the likely effects of different policy levers that could be
brought to bear on systems of surveillance.
Next is Mechanism Education
The Aff’s failure to identify an agent and mechanism makes cost-benefits analysis impossible,
meaning debates take place in an academic vacuum where tradeoffs are irrelevant. It makes
link comparisons vacuous and means that detailed PICs about substance are all but
impossible.
And this turns the Aff – debates over mechanisms for change are crucial to solve material
violence on a large scale. This means they wont be able to create a government and their 1ac
will have no solvency because they will just break down the system and not be able to create
a new one. This turns case.
Capulong 9 (Assistant Professor of Law, University of Montana)
(Eduardo R.C., CLIENT ACTIVISM IN PROGRESSIVE LAWYERING THEORY, CLINICAL LAW REVIEW, 16 Clinical L. Rev.
109, Fall, 2009)
Motivating client activism under dynamic social conditions requires the development and
constant assessment and reassessment of a political perspective that measures that resistance
and its possibilities. That task in turn requires the development of specific activist goals within
the context of such analyses, and perhaps broader, national and international strategy--what some call
the political "next step." This is particularly true today, when the economic crisis plaguing capitalism, the
"war on terror" and climate change undeniably have world-wide dimensions. Instances of failure,
too, need to be part of that analysis, because they teach us much about why otherwise
promising activist efforts do not become sustained mass movements of the sort to which
we all aspire.
Thus, the theoretical need is two-fold: to construct a broader organizing perspective from a political
standpoint, and to consider activism writ large. Without reading the pulse of prevailing social conditions,
it is easy to miscalculate what that next step ought to be. We will not build a mass movement
though sheer perseverance--a linear, idealist conception of change at odds with dynamic social
conditions. By the same token, we may underestimate the potential of such mass activism if we focus
simply on the local dimensions of our work.
The dialectic between a dynamic social context and political consciousness and action requires
a constant organizational and political calibration and modulation often missing from
theoretical scholarship. Without such a working perspective, we are apt to be either ultra-left or overly conservative. As Jim Pope put it recently in the context of new forms of
labor organizing: "If we limit our vision of the future to include only approaches that work within the prevailing legal regime and balance of forces, then we are likely to be irrelevant when and if the
opportunity for a paradigm shift arises." n449 The cyclical nature of labor organizing, he argues, mirrors politics generally:
American political life as a whole has likewise alternated between periods characterized by public action, idealism, and reform on the [*189] one hand, and periods of private interest, materialism, and
retrenchment on the other. A prolonged private period spawns orgies of corruption and extremes of wealth and poverty that, sooner or later, ignite passionate movements for reform. n450
C. 'Activism': Towards a Broader, Deeper, Systematic Framework
In progressive lawyering theory, grassroots activism is frequently equated with "community organizing" and "movement" or "mobilization" politics. n451 Indeed, these methods have come to predominate
activist lawyering in much the same way as "public interest law" has come for many to encompass all forms of progressive practice. "Activism" is, of course, broader still. Even on its own terms, the history of
community organizing and social movements in the United States includes two vitally important traditions frequently given short shrift in this realm: industrial union organizing and alternative political partybuilding. n452 In this section, my aim is not to catalogue the myriad ways in which lawyers and clients can and do become active (methodically or institutionally)--which, given human creativity and progress, in
any event may be impossible to do--but rather to problematize three assumptions: first, the tendency to define grassroots activity narrowly; second, the notion that certain groups--for example "the poor" or
the "subordinated"--are the definitive agents of social change; and finally, the conviction that mass mobilization or movement-building, by itself, is key to social transformation.
1. Grassroots Activism
There are countless ways in which people become socially or politically active. Yet even the more expansive and sophisticated considerations of activism in progressive lawyering theory tend to unnecessarily
circumscribe activism. For example, Cummings and Eagly argue that we need to "unpack" the term "organizing." n453 Contrasting two strategies of the welfare rights movement in the 1960s, these authors
distinguish between "mobilization as short-term community action and organizing as an effort to build long-term institutional power." n454 In the same breath, however, they define organizing "as shorthand
for a range of community-based practices," n455 even though at least some activism, for example union organizing or, say, [*190] fasting, might not be best characterized as "community-based."
What is required is a larger framework that takes into account the sum total of activist initiatives. Lucie White argues that we need to "map out the internal microdynamics of progressive grassroots initiatives
... observe the multiple impacts of different kinds of initiatives on wide spheres of social and political life ... and devise typologies, or models, or theories that map out a range of opportunities for
collaboration." n456 This map would be inadequate--and therefore inaccurate--if we include certain activist initiatives and not others. But that is precisely what the progressive lawyering literature has done by
failing to regularly consider, for example, union organizing or alternative political party-building.
2. Agents of Social Change: Identity, Class and Political Ideology As with our definition of activism, here, too, the problem is a lack of clarity, breadth or scope, which leads to misorientation. Have we defined,
with theoretical precision, the social-change agents to whom we are orienting--e.g., the "people," the "poor," the "subordinated," "low-income communities" or "communities of color?" And if so, are these
groupings, so defined, the primary agents of social change? By attempting to harmonize three interrelated (yet divergent) approaches to client activism--organizing on the bases of geography and identity, class
and the workplace, and political ideology--modern community organizing simultaneously blurs and balkanizes the social-change agents to whom we need to orient. What, after all, is "community?" In
geographic terms, local efforts alone cannot address social problems with global dimensions. n457 As Pope observed of workers' centers: "the tension between the local and particularistic focus of community
unionism and the global scope of trendsetting corporations like Wal-Mart makes it highly unlikely that community unionism will displace industrial unionism as 'the' next paradigm of worker organization."
n458 On the other hand, members of cross-class, identity-based "communities" may not necessarily share the same interests. In the "Asian American community," Ancheta explains: using the word
"community" in its singular form is often a misnomer, because Asian Pacific Americans comprise many communities, each with its own history, culture and language: Filipino, Chinese, Japanese, Korean,
Vietnamese, Thai, Cambodian, Lao, Lao-Mien, [*191] Hmong, Indian, Indonesian, Malaysian, Samoan, Tongan, Guamanian, Native Hawaiian, and more. The legal problems facing individuals from different
communities defy simple categorization. The problems of a fourth-generation Japanese American victim of job discrimination, a monolingual refugee from Laos seeking shelter from domestic violence, an
elderly immigrant from the Philippines trying to keep a job, and a newcomer from Western Samoa trying to reunite with relatives living abroad all present unique challenges. Add in factors such as gender,
sexual orientation, age, and disability, and the problems become even more complex. n45 Angela Harris echoes this observation by pointing out how some feminist legal theory assumes "a unitary, 'essential'
women's experience [that] can be isolated and described independently of race, class, sexual orientation, and other realities of experience." n460 The same might be said of the "people," which, like the
"working class," may be too broad. Other categorizations--such as "low-income workers," "immigrants", and the "poor", for example--may be too narrow to have the social weight to fundamentally transform
society. In practice, progressive lawyers orient to the politically advanced among these various "communities." In so doing, then, we need to acknowledge that we are organizing on the basis of political
ideology, and not simply geography, identity or class. Building the strongest possible mass movement, therefore, requires an orientation not only towards certain "subordinated" communities, but to the
politically advanced generally. Otherwise, we may be undermining activism writ large. This is not to denigrate autonomous community efforts. As I have mentioned, subordinated communities of course have
the right to self-determination, i.e. to organize separately. But the point is not simply to organize groups of people who experience a particular oppression, but rather to identify those who have the social
power to transform society. Arguing that these agents are the collective, multi-racial working class, Smith explains: The Marxist definition of the working class has little in common with those of sociologists.
Neither income level nor self-definition are [sic] what determine social class. Although income levels obviously bear some relationship to class, some workers earn the same or higher salaries than some people
who fall into the category of middle class. And many people who consider themselves "middle [*192] class" are in fact workers. Nor is class defined by categories such as white and blue collar. For Marx the
working class is defined by its relationship to the means of production. Broadly speaking, those who do not control the means of production and are forced to sell their labor power to capitalists are workers.
n461 The practical consequence of this very well may be that we redefine who we represent as clients and consider activism or potential activism outside subordinated communities, for example union activity
and alternative political-party building, as part of our work.
3. From Movementism to Political Organization
Dogged as our work is in the activist realm, any effort at fundamental social transformation is
doomed without effective political leadership. Such leadership, in turn, requires work not often associated with "activism," such as, for
example, theoretical study. n462 "Movementism," n463 by which I mean the conviction that building a mass movement is the answer to oppression and exploitation, has its limitations. Even though activism
fundamental social
transformation will only come about if there are political organizations clear enough,
motivated enough, experienced enough, large enough, embedded enough and agile
enough to respond to the twists and turns endemic in any struggle for power . "The
problem," as Bellow astutely observed, "is not our analytic weaknesses, but the
opportunistic, strategic, and political character of our subject." n464 Such opportunities typically occur when there is a
itself is perhaps the best school for political education, we have an enormous amount to learn from our predecessors. In the final analysis,
confluence of three factors: a social crisis; a socio-economic elite that finds itself divided over how to overcome it; and a powerful mass movement from below. As I understand the nature of social change
,
successful social transformations occur when there is a fourth element: political
organization.
Conclusion
Client activism is not a monolithic, mechanical object. Most of the time, it is neither the gathering mass movement many of us wish for, nor the inert, atomized few in need of external, professional motivation.
Rather, activism is a phenomenon in constant ebb and flow, a [*193] mercurial, fluid complex shaped by an unremitting diversity of factors. The key through the maze of lawyering advice and precaution is
therefore to take a hard, sober look at the overarching state of activism. Are our clients in fact active or are they not? How many are and who are they? What is the nature of this period? Economically?
Politically? Culturally? What are the defining issues? What political and organizing trends can be discerned? With which organizations are our clients active, if any? What demands are they articulating, and how
are they articulating them?
This is a complex evaluation, one requiring the formulation, development and constant
assessment and reassessment of an overarching political perspective. My aim in this Article is to begin to
theorize the various approaches to this evaluation. In essence, I am arguing for the elaboration of a systematic macropolitical analysis in progressive lawyering theory. Here, my purpose is not to present a
comprehensive set of political considerations, but rather to develop a framework for, and to investigate the limitations of, present considerations in three areas: strategic aims; prevailing social conditions; and
methods of activism. Consciously or not, admittedly or not, informed and systematic or not, progressive lawyers undertake their work with certain assumptions, perspectives and biases. Progressive lawyering
theory would be a much more effective and concrete guide to action--to defining the lawyer's role in fostering activism--if it would elaborate on these considerations and transform implicit and perhaps
delimited assumptions and approaches into explicit and hopefully broader choices.
Over the past four decades, there has been remarkable continuity and consistency in progressive lawyers' use of litigation, legislation, direct services, education and organizing to stimulate and support client
activism. The theoretical "breaks" to which Buchanan has referred n465 have not been so much about the practice of lawyering itself, but rather about unarticulated shifts in ultimate goals, societal analyses,
and activist priorities, each necessitated by changes in the social, economic, and political context. That simply is another way of stating the obvious: that progressive lawyers change their practices to adapt to
changing circumstances. The recurrent problem in progressive lawyering theory is that many commentators have tended to generalize these practice changes to apply across social circumstances. In so doing,
they displace and often replace more fundamental differences over strategic goals, interpretation of social contexts, and organizing priorities with debates over the mechanics of lawyering practice.
The argument is turned on its head: we often assume or tend to [*194] assume agreement over the meanings and underlying conceptual frameworks relating to "fundamental social change," current political
analysis, and "community organizing," and debate lawyering strategy and tactics; but instead we should be elaborating and clarifying these threshold political considerations as a prerequisite to using what we
ultimately agree to be a broad and flexible set of lawyering tools. In effect, the various approaches to lawyering have become the currency by which scholars have debated politics and activism. The irony is that
our disagreements are less about lawyering approaches per se, I believe, than they are about our ultimate political objectives, our analyses of contemporary opportunities, and our views of the optimal paths
from the latter to the former. The myriad lawyering descriptions and prescriptions progressive lawyering theory offers are of limited use unless they are anchored in these primary considerations. How do we
decide if we should subscribe to "rebellious" and not traditional "public interest" lawyering, for example, or "collaborative" over "critical" lawyering, if we do not interrogate these questions and instead rush
too quickly into practical questions? The differences among these approaches matter precisely because they have different political goals, are based on different political analyses, and employ different political
activist strategies.
Activist lawyers already engage in these analyses--necessarily so. To foster client activism, they must read prevailing social conditions and strategize with their clients about the political next step, often with an
eye toward a long-term goal. But I don't think we necessarily engage in these analyses as consciously, or with as full a picture of the history and dynamics involved or options available, as we could. Often this is
because there simply isn't time to engage these questions. Or perhaps not wanting to dominate our clients, we squelch our own political analysis and agenda to allow for organic, indigenous leadership from
below. But if we are truly collaborative--and when we feel strongly enough about certain political issues--we engage on issues and argue them out. In either event, we undertake an unsystematic engagement
of these fundamental issues at our peril.
If we adhere to the belief that only organized, politicized masses of people can alter or replace
exploitative and oppressive institutions and bring about lasting fundamental social
change, then, as progressive lawyers, we need to be clear about which legal tactics can
bring about such a sustained effort in each historical moment. Without concrete and
comprehensive diagnoses of ultimate political goals, social and economic contexts, and
organizing priorities, progressive legal practice will fail to live up to its potential.
Now the State debate
We do not need to win that the state is good, rather just that the value of the state is
something that should be debated about. This is the screen you should adopt for the Aff’s
ev – it can’t just say that the state is bad or ineffective, their ev has to say that the state
should not even be discussed. General indictments of the state can be done on the neg, while
still preserving limited and effective debate and research.
First, engaging with the law is inevitable and can be effective. This is solvency for the counter
advocacy
Capulong 9 (Assistant Professor of Law, University of Montana)
(Eduardo R.C., CLIENT ACTIVISM IN PROGRESSIVE LAWYERING THEORY, CLINICAL LAW REVIEW, 16 Clinical L. Rev.
109, Fall, 2009)
Nevertheless, in contrast to what Steve Bachmann has called the [*116] "a-legal" or "crude
Marxist" approach, n19 progressive activists recognize that the legal arena remains a forum for social
struggle. n20 This is so for three reasons: First, activists often do not have a choice but to
work within the legal system, as when they are arrested or otherwise prevented from
engaging in activism by state authorities. Second, because law is relatively autonomous from
economic and political interests, n21 campaigns for legal reform can win substantial gains
and are frequently the only vehicles through which more far-reaching change takes
shape; struggles for reform, in other words, beget more radical possibilities and aspirations.
n22 And third, law is constitutive of the social order. Law--or, more accurately, the concept of
it--is not (again as some crude analysts would argue) simply a tool of one ruling class or other, but rather
an essential component of a just society. n23
Commentators observe that lawyers who base their practice on these three premises are "hungry for
theory," n24 for theory checks the "occupational hazards [of] reformism or cynicism." n25 The
theoretical project is thus a dialectic: while law reform alone cannot "disturb the basic political and
economic organization of modern American society," n26 [*117] law and lawyering are "a
complex, contradictory, and open-textured setting that provides opportunities to
challenge the status quo."
Second, education about legal details is crucial for movements that benefit oppressed
populations and is necessary for them to construct their new system after this one is
destroyed.
Arkles et al 10
(Gabriel Arkles, Pooja Gehi and Elana Redfield, The Role of Lawyers in Trans Liberation: Building a Transformative
Movement for Social Change, Seattle Journal for Social Justice, 8 Seattle J. Soc. Just. 579, Spring / Summer, 2010,
LN)
While agenda-setting by lawyers can lead to the replication of patterns of elitism and the reinforcement
of systems of oppression, we do believe that legal work is a necessary and critical way to
support movements for social justice. We must recognize the limitations of the legal
system and learn to use that to the advantage of the oppressed. If lawyers are going to support work that
dismantles oppressive structures, we must radically rethink the roles we can play in building and supporting these movements and acknowledge that our own individual
interests or even livelihood may conflict with doing radical and transformative work. n162 A. Community Organizing for Social Justice When we use the term community
organizing or organizing, we refer to the activities of organizations engaging in base-building and leadership development of communities directly impacted by one or more
social [*612] problems and conducting direct action issue campaigns intended to make positive change related to the problem(s). In this article, we discuss community
organizing in the context of progressive social change, but community-organizing strategies can also be used for conservative ends. Community organizing is a powerful
means to make social change. A basic premise of organizing is that inappropriate imbalances of power in society are a central component of social injustice. In order to have
social justice, power relationships must shift. In Organizing for Social Change: Midwest Academy Manual for Activists (hereinafter, "the Manual"), n163 the authors list three
principles of community organizing: n164 (1) winning real, immediate, concrete improvements in people's lives; (2) giving people a sense of their own power; and (3) altering
the relations of power. n165 Before any of these principles can be achieved it is necessary to have leadership by the people impacted by social problems. n166 As Rinku Sen
points out: [E]ven allies working in solidarity with affected groups cannot rival the clarity and power of the people who have the most to gain and the least to lose . . .
organizations composed of people whose lives will change when a new policy is instituted tend to set goals that are harder to reach, to compromise less, and to stick out a
fight longer. n167 She also notes that, "[I]f we are to make policy proposals that are grounded in reality and would make a difference either in peoples' lives or in the debate,
then we have to be in touch with the people who are at the center of such policies. n168 We believe community organizing has the potential to make fundamental social
change that law reform strategies or "movements" led by lawyers cannot achieve on their own. However, community organizing is not always just and effective. Communityorganizing groups are not immune to any number of problems that can impact other organizations, including internal oppressive dynamics. In fact, some strains of white,
male-dominated [*613] community organizing have been widely criticized as perpetuating racism and sexism. n169 Nonetheless, models of community organizing,
particularly as revised by women of color and other leaders from marginalized groups, have much greater potential to address fundamental imbalances of power than law
reform strategies. They also have a remarkable record of successes. Tools from community organizers can help show where other strategies can fit into a framework for social
change. The authors of the Manual, for example, describe various strategies for addressing social issues and illustrate how each of them may, at least to some extent, be
effective. n170 They then plot out various forms of making social change on a continuum in terms of their positioning with regard to existing social power relationships. n171
They place direct services at the end of the spectrum that is most accepting of existing power relationships and community organizing at the end of the spectrum that most
challenges existing power relationships. n172 Advocacy organizations are listed in the middle, closer to community organizing than direct services. n173 The Four Pillars of
Social Justice Infrastructure model, a tool of the Miami Workers Center, is somewhat more nuanced than the Manual. n174 According to this model, four "pillars" are the key
to transformative social justice. n175 They are (1) the pillar of service, which addresses community needs and stabilizes community members' lives; (2) the pillar of policy,
which changes policies and institutions and achieves concrete gains with benchmarks for progress; (3) the pillar of consciousness, which alters public opinion and shifts
political parameters through media advocacy and popular education; and (4) the pillar of power, which achieves autonomous community power through base-building and
leadership development. n176 According to the Miami Workers Center, all of these pillars are essential in making social change, but the pillar of power is most crucial in the
struggle to win true liberation for all oppressed communities. n177 [*614] In their estimation, our movements suffer when the pillar of power is forgotten and/or not
supported by the other pillars, or when the pillars are seen as separate and independent, rather than as interconnected, indispensable aspects of the whole infrastructure
that is necessary to build a just society. n178 Organizations with whom we work are generally dedicated solely to providing services, changing policies, or providing public
education. Unfortunately, each of these endeavors exists separate from one another and perhaps most notably, separate from community organizing. In SRLP's vision of
change, this separation is part of maintaining structural capitalism that seeks to maintain imbalances of power in our society. Without incorporating the pillar of power,
service provision, policy change, and public education can never move towards real social justice. n179 B. Lawyering for Empowerment In the past few decades, a number of
alternative theories have emerged that help lawyers find a place in social movements that do not replicate oppression. n180 Some of the most well-known iterations of this
theme are "empowerment lawyering," "rebellious lawyering," and "community lawyering." n181 These perspectives share skepticism of the efficacy of impact litigation and
traditional direct services for improving the conditions faced by poor clients and communities of color, because they do not and cannot effectively address the roots of these
forms of oppression. n182 Rather, these alternative visions of lawyering center on the empowerment of community members and organizations, the elimination of the
potential for dependency on lawyers and the legal system, and the collaboration between lawyers and directly impacted communities in priority setting. n183 Of the many
models of alternative lawyering with the goal of social justice, we will focus on the idea of "lawyering for empowerment," generally. The goal of empowerment lawyering is to
enable a group of people to gain control of the forces that affect their lives. n184 Therefore
, the goal of empowerment lawyering for
low-income transgender people of [*615] color is to support these communities in
confronting the economic and social policies that limit their life chances.
Rather than merely representing poor people in court and increasing access to services, the role of the community or
empowerment lawyer involves:
organizing, community education, media outreach, petition drives, public demonstrations, lobbying, and shaming campaigns . . .
[I]ndividuals and members of community-based organizations actively work alongside organizers and lawyers in the day-to-day
strategic planning of their case or campaign. Proposed solutions--litigation or non-litigation based--are informed by the clients'
knowledge and experience of the issue. n185
A classic example of the complex role of empowerment within the legal agenda setting is the question of whether to take cases
that have low chances of success. The traditional approach would suggest not taking the case, or settling for limited outcomes that
may not meet the client's expectations. However, when our goals shift to empowerment, our strategies change as well. If we
understand that the legal system is incapable of providing a truly favorable outcome for low-income transgender clients and
transgender clients of color, then winning and losing cases takes on different meanings.
For example, a transgender client may choose to bring a lawsuit against prison staff who sexually assaulted her, despite limited
chance of success because of the "blue wall of silence," her perceived limited credibility as a prisoner, barriers to recovery from
the Prison Litigation Reform Act, and restrictions on supervisory liability in § 1983 cases. Even realizing the litigation outcome will
probably be unfavorable to her, she may still develop leadership skills by rallying a broader community of people impacted by
similar issues. Additionally, she may use the knowledge and energy gained through the lawsuit to change policy. If our goal is to
familiarize our client with the law, to provide an opportunity for the client [*616] and/or community organizers to educate the
public about the issues, to help our client assess the limitations of the legal system on their own, or to play a role in a larger
organizing strategy, then taking cases with little chance of achieving a legal remedy can be a useful strategy.
Lawyering for empowerment means not relying solely on legal expertise for decisionmaking. It
means recognizing the limitations of the legal system, and using our knowledge and expertise to
help disenfranchised communities take leadership. If community organizing is the path to
social justice and "organizing is about people taking a role in determining their own future and
improving the quality of life not only for themselves but for everyone," then "the primary goal [of
empowerment lawyering] is building up the community." n186
C. Sharing Information and Building Leadership
A key to meaningful participation in social justice movements is access to information .
Lawyers are in an especially good position to help transfer knowledge, skills, and information to
disenfranchised communities--the legal system is maintained by and predicated on arcane
knowledge that lacks relevance in most contexts but takes on supreme significance in
courts, politics, and regulatory agencies. It is a system intentionally obscure to the
uninitiated; therefore the lawyer has the opportunity to expose the workings of the
system to those who seek to destroy it, dismantle it, reconfigure it, and re-envision it.
As Quigley points out, the ignorance of the client enriches the lawyer's power position, and thus the
transfer of the power from the lawyer to the client necessitates a sharing of information. n187 Rather
than simply performing the tasks that laws require, a lawyer has the option to teach and to
collaborate with clients so that they can bring power and voice back to their
communities and perhaps fight against the system, become politicized, and take
leadership. "This demands that the lawyer undo the secret wrappings of the legal
system and share the essence of legal advocacy--doing so lessens the mystical power of the lawyer,
and, in practice, enriches the advocate in the sharing and developing of rightful power."
n188
Lawyers have many opportunities to share knowledge and skills as a form of leadership development. This sharing can be accomplished, for example, through highly
collaborative legal representation, through community clinics, through skill-shares, or through policy or campaign meetings where the lawyer explains what they know about
the existing structures and fills in gaps and questions raised by activists about the workings of legal systems.
D. Helping to Meet Survival Needs
SRLP sees our work as building legal services and policy change that directly supports the pillar of power. n189 Maintaining an awareness of the limitations and pitfalls of
traditional legal services, we strive to provide services in a larger context and with an approach that can help support libratory work. n190 For this reason we provide direct
legal services but also work toward leadership development in our communities and a deep level of support for our community-organizing allies.
Our approach in this regard is to make sure our community members access and obtain all of the benefits to which they are entitled under the law, and to protect our
community members as much as possible from the criminalization, discrimination, and harassment they face when attempting to live their lives. While we do not believe that
the root causes keeping our clients in poverty and poor health can be addressed in this way, we also believe that our clients experience the most severe impact from state
Until our communities are truly empowered
and our systems are fundamentally changed to increase life chances and health for transgender
people who are low-income and people of color, our communities are going to continue to
have to navigate government agencies and organizations to survive.
policies and practices and need and that they deserve support to survive them. n191
2NC
Counter Advocacy
AT: Perm Do Both
1. Perm literally doesn’t function. They can’t break down the current economic
system and contemporaneously endorse a governmentally ensured wage and
these other private market job options. It is not logical
2. The disingenuous turn: at the point that they also advocate working through
the state they have proved that they are disingenuous about their aff. This
means even if you buy the aff you should vote them down to reject the
utilization of movements disingenuously
Solves debt
Solves debt - liquidity and economic freedom
Standing 13 – [Guy – professor of development studies @ School of Oriental and African Studies, in
London] [Unconditional Basic Income: Two pilots in Madhya Pradesh] (http://tinyurl.com/qayj2hm)
(accessed 7-27-15) //MC
Economic activity, work and production Contrary to a common criticism of cash transfers, cash grants
were associated with an increase in labour and work. Cash grant households were twice as likely to have
increased their production work as non-transfer households. Cash grants led to an increase in ownaccount work, and a relative switch from wage labour to own-account farming and small-scale business.
This was especially true for scheduled caste households and for women workers. The shift from labour
to own farm work was especially marked in the tribal villages. Many families used cash grants to buy
small items for production, such as sewing machines and seeds and fertiliser. Cash grants were
associated with the purchase of more livestock to increase production. Households in the cash-grant
tribal village increased their livestock by 70%. Cash grant households more likely to increase their
income from work, in spite of it being a difficult year due to weather conditions in the area. Cash grant
households were three times as likely to start a new business or production activity as others, with a
majority attributing that to the cash grants. In tribal village, farmers have increased their spending in
good quality seeds, fertilisers and pesticides. Debt and Savings Severe indebtedness was found in over
three-quarters of all households. Cash grants were associated with a significant reduction in
indebtedness, both because recipients used the money to reduce existing debt and because they used
the money to avoid going into further debt. Those receiving cash grants were more than twice as likely
to reduce debt. Cash grants led to a significant increase in savings, even in households with debt.
Households often used the money to give themselves vital liquidity.
Unemployment root cause of crime
Bad economies lead to increased crime which disproportionally affects people of color
Algernon Austin 11, 12-14-2011, "A jobs-centered approach to African American community
development: The crisis of African American unemployment requires federal intervention," Economic
Policy Institute, http://www.epi.org/publication/bp328-african-american-unemployment/
Millions of African Americans live in communities that lack access to good jobs and good schools and
suffer from high crime rates. African American adults are about twice as likely to be unemployed as
whites, black students lag their white peers in educational attainment and achievement, and African
American communities tend to have higher than average crime rates. These issues have been
persistent problems. Jobs are essential to improving African American communities. Increased
employment would help people in these communities lift themselves out of poverty. In addition,
because poor economic conditions are an important causal factor behind poor educational outcomes
and high crime rates are correlated with high unemployment rates, creating job opportunities would
help improve educational outcomes and reduce crime. This paper outlines a plan for significantly
increasing the number of jobs available to African Americans. The plan, which targets communities with
persistently high unemployment, includes three main components: creation of public sector jobs, job
training with job-placement programs, and wage subsidies for employers. Although the plan is
constructed with African Americans in mind, it would also provide benefits to Latino, American Indian,
and white communities in which unemployment has remained high.
Jobs Solvency
Jobs are a solid way to improve the economic conditions of some African American
communities. Bad economic conditions are the reason for high crime rates and bad
educational outcomes
Algernon Austin 11, 12-14-2011, "A jobs-centered approach to African American community
development: The crisis of African American unemployment requires federal intervention," Economic
Policy Institute, http://www.epi.org/publication/bp328-african-american-unemployment/
Millions of African Americans live in communities that lack access to good jobs and good schools and
suffer from high crime rates. African American adults are about twice as likely to be unemployed as
whites, black students lag their white peers in educational attainment and achievement, and African
American communities tend to have higher than average crime rates. These issues have been
persistent problems. Jobs are essential to improving African American communities. Increased
employment would help people in these communities lift themselves out of poverty. In addition,
because poor economic conditions are an important causal factor behind poor educational outcomes
and high crime rates are correlated with high unemployment rates, creating job opportunities would
help improve educational outcomes and reduce crime. This paper outlines a plan for significantly
increasing the number of jobs available to African Americans. The plan, which targets communities with
persistently high unemployment, includes three main components: creation of public sector jobs, job
training with job-placement programs, and wage subsidies for employers. Although the plan is
constructed with African Americans in mind, it would also provide benefits to Latino, American Indian,
and white communities in which unemployment has remained high.1
General Solvency
Our advocacy solves for unemployment in these communities
Algernon Austin 11, 12-14-2011, "A jobs-centered approach to African American community
development: The crisis of African American unemployment requires federal intervention," Economic
Policy Institute, http://www.epi.org/publication/bp328-african-american-unemployment/
Given the intractability of high joblessness for African Americans, the federal government should
support targeted job creation for communities experiencing persistently high unemployment. Job
creation should be targeted to communities of 25,000 people or more in counties and metropolitan
areas that have experienced unemployment of more than 6 percent every year in the previous 10 years.
Eligible individuals must have resided in an eligible community for a prolonged period and have been
unemployed or out of the labor market for at least six months. The program could be phased out in
communities over a five-year period after the annual unemployment rate fell below 6 percent. The
proposed program is at a scale large enough to produce a significant reduction in unemployment. It is
likely to improve communities plagued by persistent high unemployment in other ways, as well.
Living wage solves – lifts workers out of poverty, increases self-worth and dignity
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
Clearly the minimum wage offers little relief for the working poor. As Juana Zatarin and Martha
Jernegons illustrate, the most obvious benefits of the living wage remain the liberation of wageworkers
from official federal poverty levels and workers' improved ability to support their families with markedly
diminished or eliminated reliance on government aid. 72 Interviews with Baltimore wageworkers
earning the living wage demonstrated that miserably shortsighted welfare qualifications bar the
living wage from automatically translating into a living income.73 Nonetheless, most noted the obvious
and manifest role that increased
wages played in stabilizing their families and other circumstances. 74
A less tangible, but equally important, advantage that living wageworkers experience includes improved
attitudes toward work and renewed self-confidence.75 More than half of Baltimore workers earning the
living wage expressed a feeling of pride in their jobs after earning
increased wages.76 One worker shared, "I feel like I'm working for something now. I feel self-worth
more,"77 while others expressed hopefulness generated by the promise of future wage increases.78
Still others mentioned gratification with statements like, "Itake pride in what I do' 79 or "It gives me a
feeling of wanting to be there; it gives a sense of responsibility." 80 These sentiments exemplify the
correlation between living wages and a means of dignity.
Living wages help – laundry list of benefits, AND DOESN’T DECREASE JOBS
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
Notwithstanding these counterarguments, this broad-based, multi- racial movement is feeding off the
growing countrywide recognition that the living wage actually benefits rather than harms local
economies and the workers employed in them.94 Some local leaders support living wages to alleviate
the disparate wealth gap in their communities, save on public expenditures for government assistance,
provide low-wage workers with more disposable income, and collect increased tax revenue.95 The San
Francisco Department of Public Health reported that living wages may diminish mortality rates, decrease
unnecessary hospitalization of the poor, eliminate some costs associated with caring for the homeless,
and save up to 300 lives a year in the city.96 Employers already paying living wages hail the low turnover
and high quality work.97 They also stress that citywide living wage laws will promote a healthier
business climate by facilitating more responsible city contract competition-based on quality of service
rather than shoddy pay.98 Groundwork studies of living wage ordinances show that the pay increases
create "a motivated, more productive and stable work force, which enhances a company's ability to
compete."99 This increase in productivity and morale also reduces absenteeism and turnover. 0 0 In
addition, higher wages did not automatically translate into higher costs for city contracts following living
wage legislation in Baltimore.'' In fact, increased costs affected business by less than two percent and
have not eliminated jobs.12 The feared job relocation also has failed to materialize, as the nature of
many city service jobs makes them difficult to relocate. 01 3 Even David Neumark, a longtime critic of
the minimum wage, has recognized the overall positive impact of living wage laws.104 An ongoing study
of the Baltimore living wage reflects that it "has so far had a small but meaningful impact on the
incomes and lives of affected workers."'0 5 City costs stemming from increased wages have been
inconsequential, and "the fears related to fiscal drag and a hypothesized erosion of competitiveness are
evidently groundless ... [T]he living wage could be expanded into the private and nonprofit sectors
without severely deleterious effects."'10 6 Similarly, a study of living wages nationwide concluded
"there is no reason why a municipal living wage ordinance should be seen as seriously burdensome for
cities."'
Unemployment = no edu
Joblessness in communities of color has negative effects on children’s education.
Algernon Austin 11, 12-14-2011, "A jobs-centered approach to African American community
development: The crisis of African American unemployment requires federal intervention," Economic
Policy Institute, http://www.epi.org/publication/bp328-african-american-unemployment/
Parental unemployment, and not simply low income, has negative effects on children’s educational
outcomes. Blacks are twice as likely as whites to have had 10 or more spells of unemployment over their
prime working years. Joblessness, although by no means the only factor producing higher crime rates in
African American communities, appears to play a significant role. Neither educational advances nor
suburbanization by blacks has translated into reductions in the black–white unemployment rate ratio.
If a bold new approach is not developed to address the racial unemployment disparity, it is likely that
African Americans will be condemned to unemployment rates that are twice those of whites into the
foreseeable future. This paper begins with brief discussions of residential segregation and the persistent
job crisis facing African Americans. It then presents evidence that suggests why improving educational
attainment and access to suburban labor markets are not likely to be enough to raise employment rates
among African Americans. This discussion is followed by a proposal for reducing the high rate of
joblessness in and rejuvenating African American communities.
UQ – Joblessness now
Huge problem of joblessness now. Statistics underestimate the problem because once
people stop looking for a job, they are no longer counted in the statistics.
Algernon Austin 11, 12-14-2011, "A jobs-centered approach to African American community
development: The crisis of African American unemployment requires federal intervention," Economic
Policy Institute, http://www.epi.org/publication/bp328-african-american-unemployment/
The problem of joblessness is a deep and persistent one for African Americans. Since as early as 1960,
the black unemployment rate has been twice the white rate (Fairlie and Sundstrom 1999).4 As wide as
this unemployment rate gap is, it actually underestimates the magnitude of the problem, because,
faced with persistent challenges finding employment, many would-be job seekers give up hope of
finding a job and drop out of the labor force. Once they do so, they are no longer counted as
unemployed, even though they are jobless. For this reason, only employment-rate gaps reveal the full
magnitude of the problem of joblessness for African Americans. In 2010, for example, had blacks had
the same unemployment rate as whites, an additional 1.3 million blacks would have been working. Had
blacks had the same employment rate as whites, however, an additional 2.0 million blacks would have
been working.5 The unemployment rate gap is large, but the employment rate gap is even larger.
Solvency for QOL
Deep reaching employment into communities comprised predominantly by people of
color would increase quality of life by decreasing crime, education, and increasing
disposable income.
Algernon Austin 11, 12-14-2011, "A jobs-centered approach to African American community
development: The crisis of African American unemployment requires federal intervention," Economic
Policy Institute, http://www.epi.org/publication/bp328-african-american-unemployment/
Employment that reaches deep into African American communities is key to community development,
for a variety of reasons. First, economic conditions are related to educational achievement. Low family
income has significant negative effects on children’s educational achievement (Duncan and Magnuson
2005; Kalil 2010; Lee and Burkam 2002; Stevens and Schaller 2009; Taylor, Dearing, and McCartney
2004). Unemployment in and of itself has negative effects on children’s educational outcomes (Stevens
and Schaller 2009; Kalil 2010). Blacks are twice as likely as whites to have had 10 or more spells of
unemployment over their prime working years (Bureau of Labor Statistics n.d.). Each spell of parental
unemployment reduces the likelihood of a child’s educational success. If it were possible to increase the
black employment rate to the level of whites and sustain it, we would expect substantial increases in the
performance of black students. Creating more jobs for African Americans would thus not only raise
incomes, it would also improve educational outcomes. Second, economic conditions seem to be related
to crime rates. Although there is much that criminologists still do not understand about the dynamics of
criminal offending, a growing body of research suggests that low wages, high unemployment, high
poverty, and high economic inequality lead to higher crime rates (Kelly 2000; Ludwig, Duncan, and
Hirschfield 2001; Gould, Weinberg, and Mustard 2002; Machin and Meghir 2004; Lin 2008). Strong job
creation that targets African-American communities would improve economic conditions in these
communities and likely reduce crime rates.
USFG Key
Federal government intervention is key.
Algernon Austin 11, 12-14-2011, "A jobs-centered approach to African American community
development: The crisis of African American unemployment requires federal intervention," Economic
Policy Institute, http://www.epi.org/publication/bp328-african-american-unemployment/
The depth and the persistence of the African American jobs crisis can probably be solved only with
intervention by the federal government. In the past 50 years, the normal working of the U.S. economy
and the modest amelioration efforts that have been tried have failed to provide sufficient jobs for
African Americans. Increases in educational achievement and suburbanization by blacks have also failed
to spur change. If a bold new approach to the problem is not taken, it is likely that blacks will be
condemned to unemployment rates that are twice those of whites into the foreseeable future.
SPEECH ACT SOLVENCY!!!
Grassroots movements can solve – activists spark real change
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
A local living wage ordinance passed in Baltimore in 1994 sparked the living wage movement demanding
economic justice that now boasts national force, 3 and which Harvard demonstrators have brought to
international attention.4 Grassroots living wage activists challenge local governments, school boards,
and universities to ensure that those who work full time for a company under government or university
contract or with the aid of a government subsidy should earn at least enough money to meet federal
poverty guidelines without reliance on public welfare.5 They refuse to allow solely traditional market
considerations to dictate workers' income and means.6 These community organizers charge that local
municipalities and endowed university employers should never facilitate substandard wages that
preclude full-time workers from moving out of a cramped one- bedroom living space for a family of
four.7 They demand that full-time wageworkers should earn enough to provide basic necessities,
including doctor's visits and household bills.8 Movements like the one in Baltimore have led to the
successful implementation of sixty ordinances in cities, counties, and school districts nationwide, and
more than seventy-five living wage campaigns are being fought presently across America in local
government forums and on college campuses.9
Human right
A living wage is a basic human right – upholds the guarantee of a dignified existence
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
Black, Edelman, and Michelman provide the foundation upon which to build a substantive vision of
justice. Though relying on different sources, each requires a minimum amount of money or fulfillment to
ensure a dignified existence. Black's constitutional justice of livelihood mandates a decent material basis
for life, one that considers all human needs-both physical and spiritual.3 °6 Edelman argues for a
subsistence income, providing all of the conditions necessary for human self-realization and assuring
more liberal provisions than eking out a miserable, meager existence. 30 7 Rather than suggesting a
certain amount of income, Michelman makes a case for minimum protection of each individual against
economic hazard, which requires satisfaction of just wants or basic needs. He contends that this
protection requires an income that will absolutely meet these needs without additional prerequisites.
308
Thus, these theorists help to uncover the first necessary component of a substantive vision of justice. All
human beings possess entitlement to enough income to meet their physical and spiritual needs-at a
minimum. These provisions must assure a self-respecting lifestyle-a guarantee of more than abject
poverty. This subsistence income must secure a lifestyle that facilitates human self-realization-conditions fostering intellectual and cultural development, building community, living with pride. Finally,
this income must provide enough to make certain that the basic needs of life- one's just wants-will be
satisfied without additional requirements and without state intervention or support. The income that a
substantive vision of justice requires ought to secure self-sufficiency.
Living wage is a constitutional and human right – grassroots movements help cement
this
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
Despite legal academics' attempts to find the right to a living wage or other subsistence guarantees in
the Constitution or to overcome the Supreme Court's failure to protect the poor, this "underclass"
remains unable to enjoy and realize other revered, non-economic rights, including life, liberty and
property, human dignity, or full civic and political participation in society-not to mention the pursuit of
happiness. This Note explores the living wage movement-and the possibility that the Constitution
requires living wage legislation-as one response to the distressing condition of the working poor.
Specifically, a substantive vision of justice derived from the United States Constitution and other
foundational American documents, scholars' response to Supreme Court jurisprudence addressing
poverty, and global struggles for economic justice, inform and enrich legislators' obligation to consider
the Constitution in enacting legislation. In short, lawmakers possess a duty to bear the Constitution in
mind. Giving voice to this substantive theory of justice through living wage legislation presents one
plausible, and arguably compulsory, method of adhering to this constitutional obligation. Even beyond
the scope of this Note, this argument structure lends itself well to other areas in need of legislative
action, including poverty problems other than the inadequate minimum wage and even broader
concerns about civil rights and liberties. Drawn from texts and principles constituting Americans as "a
people," this substantive vision of justice coalesces with the grassroots demands for economic justice
powering the living wage movement. Understanding how hunger for basic needs degrades human
dignity motivates Part II, which gives a face to the working poor, reviews poverty statistics and
thresholds as well as the current federal minimum wage, and highlights the need for a living wage to
guarantee subsistence and improve the self-perception of the working poor. This section also reviews
the most common characteristics of living wage legislation, advances many reasons why we must
mobilize for a living wage, and responds to counterarguments launched by living wage challengers who
fear economic disaster and failed businesses.
Morality
The living wage is more than just a wage increase – signifies a moral standpoint that
workers should be able to live a life of dignity
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
The living wage stems from the basic premise that anyone who works for a living should earn enough
money to raise a family outside of poverty.57 Such legislation symbolizes that the working poor should
be paid wages high enough to lift their families above official poverty levels,58 that limited public funds
should never subsidize poverty wages,59 and that wage labor entitles workers to earnings that facilitate
a life of dignity.60 The movement surrounding the living wage takes force from two sources: morality
and economic fairness.61 The moral argument seems intuitive: citizen tax dollars should never facilitate
the creation or continuance of poverty.62 Beyond principles ofjustice, however, the living wage demand
has pragmatic force as well. Mainly, when businesses pay workers substandard wages, taxpayers
encounter a forced subsidy to cover the needs that businesses fail to provide through wages, including
healthcare, food stamps, tax credits, housing assistance, and other social costs of the wage gap and
inequality.63 The living wage movement has strategically identified local governments as the best soil to
sow the seeds of economic justice, or at least the most appropriate place to lay the roots for future
change. 64 Recent attempts to raise the federal minimum wage by one dollar from $5.15 an hour to
$6.15 an hour have failed.65 Thus, anticipating any raise in the minimum wage at the national level-let
alone an increase to bring minimum wageworkers to the poverty level-remains unrealistic at this time,
so long as federal legislators' obligation to do so is ignored.66
Moral/societal obligation
Justice includes a societal obligation to assure a living wage – you have a moral
obligation to vote negative
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
Thus, for Edelman, justice in a contemporary society includes "a societal obligation to assure survival ...
at a more generous level than a bed in a homeless shelter and meals at a soup kitchen." 5 ' In short, his
substantive vision of justice requires subsistence.¶ Finally, Michelman advocates a constitutionally
required "minimum¶ protection against economic hazard" for those who suffer deprivation of¶ "basic
wants." 15 2 Using the Equal Protection Clause, he shifts his focus¶ from equality to minimum welfare or
deprivation in an "individualistic,¶ competitive, and market-oriented" society. 153 Michelman's vision of
social¶ justice relies upon a theory of "just wants."'15 4 More specifically, minimum¶ protection "would
mean that persons are entitled to have certain wants¶ satisfied-certain existing needs filled ... While
Michelman¶ promotes "a right to have a specific, existing want provided for" rather than¶ increased
income, his ideas inform a more expansive view of justice. He¶ posits that "justice requires more than a
fair opportunity to realize an¶ income which can cover [just wants] or insure against them-¶ requires ...
absolute assurance that they will be met.., free of any remote contingencies pertaining to effort, thrift
or foresight."' 5 6¶ Together, Black, Edelman, and Michelman contend that justice in a contemporary
constitutional democracy requires income sufficient to provide the common physical needs of
humanity, subsistence, or the provision of just wants.15 7 Each of these theorists presents a strong
case to argue against poverty in general, supporting a comprehensive vision of economic justice. Each of
their assertions has even more force, however, when applied to the working poor specifically.
Opponents to the above arguments might allege that the government owes no affirmative duty to
provide positive rights and challenge that doing so will undermine individual responsibility and
incentives to work. These objections lose force, however, in the debate surrounding substandard wages
that create conditions of persistent poverty for the working poor. Guaranteeing a subsistence income
for the working poor or actualizing a just wants theory would neither amount to government handouts,
nor create work disincentives. Instead, such arguments buttress living wage activists' claims that work
should never advance destitution in a just society.¶
Intl. Spillover
Movements work internationally – constitutions abroad help build public support for
a living wage
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
Looking internationally has pragmatic force as well. First, the living wage movement will continue to
take on an international force as the Internet and "exploitable" labor eliminate economic isolationism,
expand our market economy into an integrated network, and dictate a worldwide dignified wage. Thus,
an internationally informed vision of justice makes sense because legislation emanating from it will have
an impact beyond domestic wageworkers. Second, a successful grassroots effort to create widespread
public acceptance of the living wage will require education and a strong appeal to passionately held
values, such as human dignity and individual self worth. While one recent survey indicated that fortytwo percent of American adults cite "lack of living-wage jobs" as the "most serious problem facing
communities today,"'1 6 4 the general political consensus seems to belie such widespread concern.
Activists might find helpful language, theory, and doctrinal support in the constitutional language and
judicial reasoning of India and South Africa to build a public consensus in support of a living wage. Third,
a comparative approach might garner empirical data to help create workable legislation that can
negotiate efficiency, economic, and other practical objections.
Justice
Justice requires this economic reform – 7 key components
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
In sum, then, a substantive vision of justice comprises seven components. First, this vision requires
wages or income high enough to sustain a dignified lifestyle. Second, it necessitates an innovative
approach to the structuring of wage scales and an open view of economic efficiency and market
functioning. Third, justice requires a conceptualization of involuntary servitude as including situations
where abject poverty compels workers to engage in labor at subhuman wages. Fourth, a substantive
vision of justice does not view protecting the politically powerless as a waste of legislative resources or
an inappropriate use of government assets. Instead, it views empowering the vulnerable as a
reaffirmation of our commitment to the Constitution and integral to the security of all human rights.
Fifth, justice includes ambitious and currently unreachable goals, instilling in us an assiduous effort to
provide for the needs of all Americans. Sixth, a substantive vision of justice inevitably entails trying
choices between vulnerable groups or basic human needs. This conundrum forces a vision that
promotes a utilitarian ideal: fulfilling the basic needs of the greatest number of Americans. Finally, this
substantive vision of
justice contains two integral components: a faithfulness to principles of dignity and fairness coupled
with a pragmatic flexibility to confront the economic and social injustices of the day.
Living wage = happiness
Living wage key to justice, welfare, and happiness
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
Using the substantive vision of justice developed above and the experience of municipalities and locales
with living wage legislation, this Note engages in one side of a principled, political debate in support of
living wage legislation. The mobilization for a living wage outlined above suggests that living wage laws
establish justice, promote the general welfare, and facilitate the pursuit of happiness for the working
poor. Such laws are rooted in reason and justice, and facilitate the inalienable rights of humanity to a
dignified existence.
First, living wage legislation establishes justice, as exemplified by the
substantivevisionofjusticefleshedoutabove.327 Thewholeedictbehinda living wage suggests that fulltime wageworkers should earn enough to provide for their families without reliance on government
assistance. 32 8
Living wages demand that wage labor and destitution should never coexist. In a just society, full-time
workers should never find themselves unable to
make ends meet or falling below official federal poverty measures.
Living wages enable the pursuit of happiness – self-development, cultural enrichment,
hopes and dreams
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
Finally, living wages facilitate the pursuit of happiness for the working poor. As Black argues, 3 3 9
poverty may be the foremost obstruction to the pursuit of happiness for the working poor. For how can
the working poor pursue their dreams, their self-development, cultural enrichment, rest, or leisure if
poverty forces them to work two or three jobs or if the worry of providing for their families destroys any
chance of real relaxation? Poverty wages often prevent the working poor from supplying nutritious food
for their families without the help of food stamps. And how can those who work full time for a living
pursue true happiness if their insufficient wages leave them either dependent on government assistance
or foregoing basic needs? Disturbing as it may be, poverty wages devastate altogether the hopes, the
dreams, the pursuit of happiness for the working poor. Living wages would provide enough basic
comfort and security to ease the stress of daily provisions and to free some time and space for one's
wants rather than solely one's needs. Living wages would give the working poor a chance at the
pursuit of happiness.
Structural problems solvency
This vision of justice stops effectual slavery – living wage stops this unjust society, calls
into question other economic injustices and spills over to create further positive
changes
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
A living wage also requires an out-of-the-box approach to the economies of pay scales and wages. Strict
adherence to traditional components of economic efficiency and market elasticity discounts the reality
of poverty. Justice disqualifies substandard wages and impoverished full-time workers as legitimate
outcomes of the free market. Justice requires a new kind of economics that considers the actual
expenses needed to provide oneself and one's family with a dignified existence. It demands that
employers cannot pay wages less than this living wage.¶ The living wage movement recognizes that
employment of wageworkers on poverty wages sacrifices laborers' humanity and amounts to a version
of slave labor. A just society will never tolerate workers' acceptance of substandard wages because
destitution leaves them no other choice. A constitutional democracy with serious commitments to
justice will force those employers that only provide substandard wages out of¶ business because it will
never abide involuntary servitude.¶ Living wage legislation acknowledges the premier importance of
protecting the working poor from economic exploitation, degrading wages, and the allegedly objective
wage scale dictated by free-functioning economic markets when they reach efficiency. In fact, living
wage laws realize that failure to protect the vulnerable brands us an unjust society- questioning the
import of other human rights. By failing to ratify federal living wage legislation that safeguards the
dignity of the working poor, our society weakens its supposed commitment to the Constitution, to the
Declaration of Independence, to a coherent vision of justice in a constitutional democracy. If the
American economy or some employers could not sustain a living wage for all low-paid employees at this
time, justice would still require a commitment to a universal living wage for all wageworkers. Such a
lofty aspiration would continuously dangle the achievement of economic justice before us, encouraging
us to strive toward an ideal, similar to anti-discrimination legislation. In addition, the attainment of living
wages by some members of the workforce would remind lower-paid workers of their entitlements in a
just society to a dignified existence-to a living wage. The fight would continue.
General welfare
Living wage legislation promotes general welfare – huge exterior benefits
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
Second, living wage legislation promotes the general welfare. In¶ addition to justice-oriented arguments
in support of the living wage, a "rising tides lifts all boats" analogy also applies. First, workers earning a¶
living wage experienced great psychological gains, including improved self-confidence, self-esteem, and
pride.331 In addition to these gains, governments with living wage experience tout the economic
incentives of adopting such legislation. 332 Living wages have helped to narrow disproportionately wide
wealth gaps in many communities, lowered tax monies used for public welfare, allocated more
disposable income that wageworkers can use to oil the economy, and increased tax revenues. 333¶ The
ability to purchase health insurance and take advantage of preventative healthcare also decreased
unnecessary hospital care of the working poor on the government dole.334 Employers also applauded
the lower turnover and higher quality work among their employees once they¶ earned a living wage.335
Business owners also suggest that broad-based living wages promote a healthier business climate,
basing competition on the quality of service or product rather than deplorable wages
Constitutional obligation?
Legislators must uphold the constitution and thus set up living wage – protecting
justice, welfare, and the pursuit of happiness
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
Together, Brest and Tushnet illustrate that legislators have a clear duty to consider the Constitution in
creating legislation. Brest encourages legislators to consider whether proposed legislation will infringe
constitutional guarantees or fundamental rights. Tushnet promotes legislative involvement in populist
constitutional law or a principled political debate that takes the principles of the Declaration of
Independence seriously. These points help to uncover the project of this Note. Once we understand the
legislative responsibility to consider the Constitution in lawmaking, Tushnet allows us to set living wage
legislation in a political debate framed by the principles of the Declaration of Independence. Taking this
argument structure seriously, this Note uses constitutional and comparative arguments to develop a
substantive vision of justice to argue that living wage legislation is constitutional in the Tushnet sense. In
other words, such laws establish justice, promote the general welfare, and facilitate the pursuit of
happiness for the working poor. They reflect a commitment to the inalienable rights of humankind
justifiable by reason-a substantive vision of justice-in the service of self-government.
Econ DA/Net Benefit
Weigh this impact scenario first
You need to weigh the impact scenario of the Econ DA before the solvency of the aff.
This is because if we win that their advocacy leads to nuclear war, then their solvency
will never happen. This means if they lose this argument they don’t get to weigh the
aff against our impacts in a traditional sense because they wont happen.
New internal link and impact Scenario
The lack of US primacy and a weak economy leaves the world with a multitude of
scenarios for war and devastating conflict in the free for all for power
Richard Heinberg 12, 12-12-2012, "Conflict and Change in the Era of Economic Decline: Part 2: War
and peace in a shrinking economy," Resilience, http://www.resilience.org/stories/2012-12-12/conflictand-change-in-the-era-of-economic-decline-part-2-war-and-peace-in-a-shrinking-economy
The Long Peace we have known since World War II may well turn out to be shorter than hoped as world
economic growth stalls and as American hegemony falters—in John Michael Greer’s words, as “the costs
of maintaining a global imperial presence soar and the profits of the imperial wealth pump slump.”
Books and articles predicting the end of the American empire are legion; while some merely point to the
rise of China as a global rival, others describe the looming failure of the essential basis of the U.S.
imperial system—the global system of oil production and trade (with its petro-dollar recycling program)
centered in the Middle East. There are any number of scenarios describing how the end of empire might
come, but few credible narratives explaining why it won’t. When empires crumble, as they always do,
the result is often a free-for-all among previous subject nations and potential rivals as they sort out
power relations. The British Empire was a seeming exception to this rule: in that instance, the locus of
military, political, and economic power simply migrated to an ally across the Atlantic. A similar graceful
transfer seems unlikely in the case of the U.S., as economic decline during the 21st century will be global
in scope. A better analogy to the current case might be the fall of Rome, which led to centuries of
incursions by barbarians as well as uprisings in client states.
Global war would trigger events that culminate in the mass suffering of billions of
people. Recent studies give multiple scenarios on how it leads to famine, disease,
riots, and ethnic animosity. Outweighs case.
Andrea Germanos 15, staff writer, 7-24-2015, "Nuclear War Could Mean 'Extinction of the Human
Race'," Common Dreams, http://www.commondreams.org/news/2013/12/10/nuclear-war-could-meanextinction-human-race
A war using even a small percentage of the world's nuclear weapons threatens the lives of two billion
people, a new report warns. The findings in the report issued by International Physicians for Prevention
of Nuclear War (IPPNW) and Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) are based on studies by climate
scientists that show how nuclear war would alter the climate and agriculture, thereby threatening one
quarter of the world's population with famine. Nuclear Famine: Two Billion People at Risk? offers an
updated edition to the groups' April of 2012 report, which the groups say "may have seriously
underestimated the consequences of a limited nuclear war." "A nuclear war using only a fraction of
existing arsenals would produce massive casualties on a global scale—far more than we had previously
believed," Dr. Ira Helfand, the report’s author and IPPNW co-president, said in a statement. As their
previous report showed, years after even a limited nuclear war, production of corn in the U.S. and
China's middle season rice production would severely decline, and fears over dwindling food supplies
would lead to hoarding and increases in food prices, creating further food insecurity for those already
reliant on food imports. The updated report adds that Chinese winter wheat production would plummet
if such a war broke out. Based on information from new studies combining reductions in wheat, corn
and rice, this new edition doubles the number of people they expect to be threatened by nuclear-war
induced famine to over two billion. "The prospect of a decade of widespread hunger and intense social
and economic instability in the world’s largest country has immense implications for the entire global
community, as does the possibility that the huge declines in Chinese wheat production will be matched
by similar declines in other wheat producing countries," Helfand stated. The crops would be impacted,
the report explains, citing previous studies, because of the black carbon particles that would be
released, causing widespread changes like cooling temperatures, decreased precipitation and decline in
solar radiation. In this scenario of famine, epidemics of infectious diseases would be likely, the report
states, and could lead to armed conflict. From the report: Within nations where famine is widespread,
there would almost certainly be food riots, and competition for limited food resources might well
exacerbate ethnic and regional animosities. Among nations, armed conflict would be a very real
possibility as states dependent on imports attempted to maintain access to food supplies. While a
limited nuclear war would bring dire circumstances, the impacts if the world's biggest nuclear arms
holders were involved would be even worse. "With a large war between the United States and Russia,
we are talking about the possible —not certain, but possible—extinction of the human race.
AT: No Link because they create new economic system
1. Our evidence indicates a short term economic collapse on the part of the US
would trigger events that culminate in an extinction scenario as well as mass
suffering that precludes the possibility of the impact of the aff
2. It is an advocacy mandate that you engage in a politics of brokenness which
means you must necessarily link
AT: No war
Yes war
1. Dictators. WWII proves that when economic decline happens then there is an
increased chance of dictatorships which increase a countries nationalism and
propensity for war
2. Ethnic conflict. Economic decline makes life more hectic and increases the
chances that one group of people will be scapegoated as an explanation. This
increases ethnic conflict and gives another scenario for war
3. Resource wars. Absent the interdependence that occurs with a healthy
economy, countries no longer have restrictions on fighting over resources.
Paves the way for armed conflict
4. Free-for all for power. When we don’t have a clear economic and military
hegemon, war is almost guaranteed. WW1 and WWII prove and were the most
bloody wars in history.
Case
Need Policy Option
Education is not enough, and we need concrete policy alternatives
Algernon Austin 11, 12-14-2011, "A jobs-centered approach to African American community
development: The crisis of African American unemployment requires federal intervention," Economic
Policy Institute, http://www.epi.org/publication/bp328-african-american-unemployment/
Parental unemployment, and not simply low income, has negative effects on children’s educational
outcomes. Blacks are twice as likely as whites to have had 10 or more spells of unemployment over their
prime working years. Joblessness, although by no means the only factor producing higher crime rates in
African American communities, appears to play a significant role. Neither educational advances nor
suburbanization by blacks has translated into reductions in the black–white unemployment rate ratio.
If a bold new approach is not developed to address the racial unemployment disparity, it is likely that
African Americans will be condemned to unemployment rates that are twice those of whites into the
foreseeable future. This paper begins with brief discussions of residential segregation and the persistent
job crisis facing African Americans. It then presents evidence that suggests why improving educational
attainment and access to suburban labor markets are not likely to be enough to raise employment rates
among African Americans. This discussion is followed by a proposal for reducing the high rate of
joblessness in and rejuvenating African American communities.
Political action is key – legislators must uphold the Consitution and thus enact a living
wage
(Lipp ’02, MaryBeth, Lipp, 75 S. Cal. L. Rev. 475 2001-2002, Legislators' Obligation to Support a Living
Wage: A Comparative Constitutional Vision of Justice, Acc. Sun Jul 26 19:30:08 2015)
Though much discussion about constitutionalism in American legal discourse centers on the judiciary,
legislators also take an oath to uphold the Constitution, which includes a duty to enact constitutional
law. The distressing situation of the working poor demonstrates one opportunity for lawmakers to
engage in such a project. Thus, Part III argues that legislators must confront their obligation to respect
the Constitution. While some instances of considering the Constitution might involve a negative
constitutional argument-or avoiding legislation that will likely infringe constitutional rights-considering
the Constitution might also mean affirmatively advocating and passing laws that carry out the
underlying and fundamental principles enshrined in our founding documents. This section argues that in
order to move toward enacting constitutional law in this sense, legislators should engage in political
debates on legislation, framed by the values and ideas to which our ancestors committed us. In order to
take part in this political dialogue, legislators must argue living wage legislation establishes justice or
promotes the general welfare. To participate in this endeavor, however, legislators need evidence that
such a result rings true. Thus, Part IV begins to develop a substantive vision of justice, drawn from the
arguments of American legal theorists. This vision borrows additional ideas from a comparative analysis
in Part V. This section examines the Constitutions and case law of India and South Africa to supplement
and advance this vision of justice. Ultimately, the vision drawn from these sources suggests that a truly
just society-one based on the principles of equality, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness-requires
dignified subsistence for all people at the very minimum. Part VI garners language, aspirational
narratives, philosophies, and other concrete building blocks for assembling this coherent vision of
substantive justice that guarantees human dignity for the working poor. Finally, this Note utilizes this
carefully constructed vision of justice, with the empirical data amassed in Part II, to put forth one side of
a principled, political debate that adheres to our founding values. This Note ultimately concludes that
living wage legislation meets legislators' obligation to consider the Constitution because it carries out
the project of the Declaration of Independence.
Education not enough
Don’t let them win on their education from this round being solvent. We need more
than just education and instead need strong policy options.
Algernon Austin 11, 12-14-2011, "A jobs-centered approach to African American community
development: The crisis of African American unemployment requires federal intervention," Economic
Policy Institute, http://www.epi.org/publication/bp328-african-american-unemployment/
Improving educational attainment is a worthy end in itself, but there is little reason to believe that it will
reduce the economic problems facing African Americans. The more educated a person is, the more likely
he or she will be employed and employed in a good job. However, the employment gap between
African Americans and whites will not be bridged by increasing education, as the evidence presented
below shows. The African American population is much better educated today than it was in the 1960s
by several measures (Austin 2006, 41–49), but the unemployment disparity between blacks and whites
remains essentially unchanged. Educational advances have not translated into improvements in the
employment situation for most African Americans (Bernstein 1995).
FWK
Mechanism Stuff
2NC Side Bias
Not defending the clear actor and mechanism of the resolution produces a substantive side
bias and produces worse debates
1. Minimize Lit Base – Their inter incentivizes picking the smallest lit base possible. Aff
advocacies based on mechanisms from single articles or created phrases produce less
nuanced debates and decrease both the ability and incentive to engage in research. There is
no incentive to produce detailed strategies because academic disagreements in the
literature are minute and easily wished away by the structure of debate like perms or Aff
changes.
2. Link Recontextualiztion and Multiple Normative Claims – prevent DA’s to focus, links
of omission, or other non-absolutist academic disagreements.
3. Number of non-topical advocacies prevents in depth research and the ability to break a
new affirmative with no connection to the previous mechanism negates incentives to
produce detailed case negs
The first impact to Aff sides bias is absolutism – anthro, Baudrillard and other structural
criticisms are the only recourse to ensure links and be able to keep up with Aff volume
especially for small schools. This forces us to the academic margins, makes us less effective
scholars and less literate in current events. Trains us only for leftist infighting, rather than
social change.
Dixon 14 (activist, writer, anarchist and educator who received a PhD from the History of Consciousness program
at the University of California, Santa Cruz. He has been involved in transformative social movements for more than
two decades.)
(Chris, Another Politics Talking across Today's Transformative Movements, pg. 111)
There is a certain prefigurative logic to this tendency-a sense that, if we announce our convictions
loudly enough and do everything in the way that we think is most righteously radical, our
activities will achieve what we want. But this is a prefigurative politics detached from
calculated consequential action. I As Lehman said, "If I can't articulate what that larger whole is
and where that larger whole is going or where it could potentially go, then I'm participating on blind
hope, and I think there are a lot of us doing that. And I don't think you can operate on principles alone.
We have to have a strategy, and it has to be a viable one-not just based on an idea of how it could
possibly work but we don't know how to ge' from here to there."
One result of this fixation on principles over plans is that activists often spend a lot of time and
energy debating whether particular individuals, activities, or organizations are sufficiently
"radical" without asking basic questions about how they seek to move us toward
actually winning. A focus on political ideas and rhetoric, in this way, eclipses strategic
thinking. It also creates a context in which some activists are quick to dismiss any effortoften sloppily using the terms "liberal" and "reformist"-that doesn't lead directly to
the complete destruction of the existing social order. San Francisco direct action organizer
David Salnit didn't mince words about this: " A lot of radicals talk shit about anything short
of smashing the state, but they don't have any idea of how to take necessary steps
in that direction."
Second, is research – an over focus on extemporaneous speaking in crushing time limits
isn’t radical, it’s more Fox News and the 24-hour news cycle. Our 1NC Gutting ev says that
politically effective debate needs careful preparation and research based responses.
2NC Competition
Frame the interp debate through the zero sum nature of debate competition – The yes/no
structure of debate radically redefines how educational choices should be made and has to
be the first issue you address when read their cards. This explicitly zero sum environment
short circuits their aspirational educational claims.
2NC Mechanism Debates
The Aff’s failure to identify an agent and mechanism is awful for debate
a. Cost-benefit analysis - debates take place in an academic vacuum where tradeoffs
are irrelevant and we can’t consider the way in which deeply important issues like
resource and time scarcity effect and limit politics. Only understanding these
material dynamics allow us to achieve political success – it’s the cause of current left
failure
Dixon 14 (activist, writer, anarchist and educator who received a PhD from the History of Consciousness program
at the University of California, Santa Cruz. He has been involved in transformative social movements for more than
two decades.)
(Chris, Another Politics Talking across Today's Transformative Movements, pg. 111)
Strategy is a consistent challenge in the anti-authoritarian current. As activists and organizers, we
often talk abstractly about how crucial strategy is, but much of the time we recognize its importance
mainJy through its absence in our activities. If we're serious about social transformation and honest with
ourselves, we eventually begin to realize that we can't simply do the same things week after week,
month after month, with no clear plans for how these activities will help us build
movements, achieve interim gains, pick up momentum, and move toward winning the world
we want. Revolutionary change needs more than good intentions, commitment, and effort; it also
requires conscious strategies and a movement culture that supports strategic discussion
and planning.
Many in the anti-authoritarian current yearn for this. As Toronto-based youth organ.izer Pauline Hwang
put it, "To have some level of dialogue at which these questions are being raised-the questions of longterm direc- tion, the questions of how does our work fit into building the society we want to have after the
so-called revolution-having that kind of dialogue is important to rne." This yearning is something I've
encountered again and again in conversations and workshops with activists across the continent. So why
do we have such tremendous difficulty sustaining this kind of dialogue and developing
strategy? In my view, there are three major obstacles that trip us up again and again.
The first of these obstacles is a tendency to focus on principles over plans. This focus, which comes
out of some sectors of North American anarchism in particular, is based on a legitimate concern that
radicals may sacrifice our core values and beliefs in order to win.' But focusing exclusively on principles slips into a kind of magical thinking: if we have the right ideas and values, so this goes,
everything else will more or less follow. Brooke Lehman, an experienced activist and educator who
was involved with Occupy Wall Street, characterized this tendency as "Well, I'm gonna do what I believe
in and what feels right to me and just be a piece of this larger whole."
b. Poor Engagement – their interp makes link comparisons vacuous and means that
detailed PICs about substance are all but impossible. There’s literature on the judge
voting yes or no, they prevent questions of materiality and scale which turns the Aff.
Our 1NC Capulong ev say that only constant organizational and political
calibration can produce mass movements. It is not our analytic weaknesses, but the
opportunistic, strategic, and political definiteness in our political debate that
prevent success now.
Mechanism Debates Good Ext.
Strategic discussion key
Schostak 11 (Professor of Education at Manchester Metropolitan University)
(John, Wikileaks, Tahrir Square – their significance for re-thinking democracy, Manchester social movements
conference, April, http://www.enquirylearning.net/ELU/politics/tahrirwikileaks.html)
In his study of the conditions of work imposed by neo-liberal practices in France, Christophe Dejours
(1998) has argued that political strategies, particularly those on the left, have not employed
appropriate strategies of analysis. Without a good analysis of contemporary circumstances, he
argues, political strategies aiming at social justice will be deficient or wrong. And a good
analysis for the production of appropriate strategies can only be accomplished through a
multiplicity of collective reflections, debates and decision making in public spaces for
public action(s). The protests that have spread since the food riots in Algeria on the 6th January, the
revolution in Tunisia and then the revolution in Egypt and then riots spreading to Bahrain, Yemen, Libya,
Jordan and others have drawn lessons from each other providing experience for the development of local
strategies. Any protest will give insights into the conditions underlying the protests and the community
and state structures, discourses, practices, and processes that tacitly if not explicitly underlie the social,
political and economic order at local, national, transnational and global levels. This is why, it seems to
me, that critically exploring from an educational and research perspective what has happened in response
to Wikileaks and has been happening in the Middle East is so important today.
Mechanism Debates Good Ext./Monolith Ext
We need to have a complex and comparative understanding of different tactics possibilities
Lobel 7 (Assistant Professor of Law, University of San Diego)
(Orly, THE PARADOX OF EXTRALEGAL ACTIVISM: CRITICAL LEGAL CONSCIOUSNESS AND
TRANSFORMATIVE POLITICS, 120 Harv. L. Rev. 937, February, 2007, LN)
B. Conceptual Boundaries: When the Dichotomies of Exit Are Unchecked
At first glance, the idea of opting out of the legal sphere and moving to an extralegal space using
alternative modes of social activism may seem attractive to new social movements. We are used
to thinking in binary categories, constantly carving out different aspects of life as belonging to different
spatial and temporal spheres. Moreover, we are attracted to declarations about newness - new paradigms,
new spheres of action, and new strategies that are seemingly untainted by prior failures. n186 However,
the critical insights about law's reach must not be abandoned in the process of critical
analysis. Just as advocates of a laissez-faire market are incorrect in imagining a purely
private space free of regulation, and just as the "state" is not a single organism but a
multiplicity of legislative, administrative, and judicial organs, "nonstate arenas" are
dispersed, multiple, and constructed.
The focus on action in a separate sphere broadly defined as civil society can be self-defeating
precisely because it conceals the many ways in which law continues to play a crucial
role in all spheres of life. Today, the lines between private and public functions are increasingly
blurred, forming what Professor Gunther Teubner terms "polycorporatist regimes," a symbiosis between
private and public sectors. n187 Similarly, new economic partnerships and structures blur the lines
between for-profit and nonprofit entities. n188 Yet much of the current literature on the limits of legal
reform and the crisis of government action is built upon a privatization/regulation binary, particularly
with regard [*979] to social commitments, paying little attention to how the background conditions of a
privatized market can sustain or curtail new conceptions of the public good. n189 In the same way, legal
scholars often emphasize sharp shifts between regulation and deregulation, overlooking the continuing
presence of legal norms that shape and inform these shifts. n190 These false dichotomies should resonate
well with classic cooptation analysis, which shows how social reformers overestimate the possibilities of
one channel for reform while crowding out other paths and more complex alternatives.
Indeed, in the contemporary extralegal climate, and contrary to the conservative portrayal of federal
social policies as harmful to the nonprofit sector, voluntary associations have flourished in mutually
beneficial relationships with federal regulations. n191 A dichotomized notion of a shift between
spheres - between law and informalization, and between regulatory and nonregulatory schemes -
therefore neglects the ongoing possibilities within the legal system to develop and
sustain desired outcomes and to eliminate others. The challenge for social reform
groups and for policymakers today is to identify the diverse ways in which some legal
regulations and formal structures contribute to socially responsible practices while
others produce new forms of exclusion and inequality. Community empowerment requires
ongoing government commitment. n192 In fact, the most successful community-based projects have been
those which were not only supported by public funds, but in which public administration also continued
to play some coordination role. n193
Agent Key
Failure to identify an agent for change dooms their politics
Capulong 9 (Assistant Professor of Law, University of Montana)
(Eduardo R.C., CLIENT ACTIVISM IN PROGRESSIVE LAWYERING THEORY, CLINICAL LAW REVIEW,
16 Clinical L. Rev. 109, Fall, 2009)
Agents of Social Change: Identity, Class and Political Ideology
As with our definition of activism, here, too, the problem is a lack of clarity, breadth or scope,
which leads to misorientation. Have we defined, with theoretical precision, the social-change
agents to whom we are orienting--e.g., the "people," the "poor," the "subordinated," "low-income
communities" or "communities of color?" And if so, are these groupings, so defined, the primary
agents of social change?
By attempting to harmonize three interrelated (yet divergent) approaches to client activism--organizing
on the bases of geography and identity, class and the workplace, and political ideology--modern
community organizing simultaneously blurs and balkanizes the social-change agents to
whom we need to orient. What, after all, is "community?" In geographic terms, local efforts
alone cannot address social problems with global dimensions. n457 As Pope observed of
workers' centers: "the tension between the local and particularistic focus of community unionism and the
global scope of trendsetting corporations like Wal-Mart makes it highly unlikely that community
unionism will displace industrial unionism as 'the' next paradigm of worker organization." n458
On the other hand, members of cross-class, identity-based "communities" may not
necessarily share the same interests. In the "Asian American community," Ancheta explains:
using the word "community" in its singular form is often a misnomer, because Asian Pacific Americans
comprise many communities, each with its own history, culture and language: Filipino, Chinese,
Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Thai, Cambodian, Lao, Lao-Mien, [*191] Hmong, Indian, Indonesian,
Malaysian, Samoan, Tongan, Guamanian, Native Hawaiian, and more. The legal problems facing
individuals from different communities defy simple categorization. The problems of a fourth-generation
Japanese American victim of job discrimination, a monolingual refugee from Laos seeking shelter from
domestic violence, an elderly immigrant from the Philippines trying to keep a job, and a newcomer from
Western Samoa trying to reunite with relatives living abroad all present unique challenges. Add in factors
such as gender, sexual orientation, age, and disability, and the problems become even more complex.
n459
Angela Harris echoes this observation by pointing out how some feminist legal theory assumes "a unitary,
'essential' women's experience [that] can be isolated and described independently of race, class, sexual
orientation, and other realities of experience." n460 The same might be said of the "people," which, like
the "working class," may be too broad. Other categorizations--such as "low-income workers,"
"immigrants", and the "poor", for example--may be too narrow to have the social weight to fundamentally
transform society.
A2: In Round Key / Survival Strat
Personal change only fails – must determine how to materially change macro-structures
like the law
Cummings & Eagly 6 (Acting Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law; Deputy Federal Public Defender, Los
Angeles, California)
(Scott L. and Ingrid V., Review Essay: AFTER PUBLIC INTEREST LAW: SUBURBAN SWEATSHOPS: THE
FIGHT FOR IMMIGRANT RIGHTS by Jennifer Gordon, Spring, 2006 100 Nw. U.L. Rev. 1251)
Yet Gordon does not assert the significance of participation as an end in itself. Rather, she emphasizes the
importance of translating internal power into external change: "If internal power is understood
merely as an emphasis on cooperation and personal growth, and cultivated in isolation from
the question of how the group can challenge the existing balance of power, it is unlikely
to result in structural change, because structural change requires engagement with structural power."
n180 However, the language that she uses to describe the results of the Workplace Project's experiment in
mobilizing internal power to produce structural reform is often couched in possibility and potential rather
than in concrete examples and evidence. She notes that participation has "the potential to have far more of
a collective impact that we can measure by looking at one slice of time" and suggests that "in the long
term" there is the possibility of building participation into a larger social movement. n181 In the
meantime, the structural impact of [*1281] empowerment may be visible in terms of the way immigrant
workers relate to community institutions - becoming more active in their children's schools, remaining
involved in home country politics, and starting up mutual help community organizations. n182
There is nothing wrong with planting the seeds of reform and placing one's hope for change in the
harvest to come. And, certainly, there are important reasons to want to promote legal consciousness
among the poor. But there are risks in this strategy, not the least of which is exaggerating the autonomy of
the poor in a way that obscures the structural nature of their condition and the need for some sort of
society-wide response. n183 The question is: How does changed consciousness become
imprinted on the world outside in the form of different laws, restructured economic
relationships, or concrete political power? The book does provide one powerful example of the
move to political participation in the example of member leadership in the passage of the UWPA. Others
stories like this would be useful.
Micro-politics focus obscures the lack of change being done
Lobel 7 (Assistant Professor of Law, University of San Diego)
(Orly, THE PARADOX OF EXTRALEGAL ACTIVISM: CRITICAL LEGAL CONSCIOUSNESS AND
TRANSFORMATIVE POLITICS, 120 Harv. L. Rev. 937, February, 2007, LN)
Once again, this conclusion reveals flaws parallel to the original disenchantment with legal reform.
Although the new extralegal frames present themselves as apt alternatives to legal reform
models and as capable of producing significant changes to the social map, in practice they generate
very limited improvement in existing social arrangements. Most strikingly, the cooptation
effect here can be explained in terms of the most profound risk of the typology - that of legitimation. The
common pattern of extralegal scholarship is to describe an inherent instability in dominant structures by
pointing, for example, to grassroots strategies, n223 and then to assume that specific instances of
counterhegemonic activities translate into a more complete transformation. This celebration of
multiple micro-resistances seems to rely on an aggregate approach - an idea that the
multiplication of practices will evolve into something substantial. In fact, the myth of engagement
obscures the actual lack of change being produced, while the broader pattern of equating
extralegal activism with social reform produces a false belief in the potential of change.
There are few instances of meaningful reordering of social and economic arrangements and macroredistribution. Scholars write about decoding what is really happening, as though the scholarly narrative has the power to unpack more than the actual conventional
experience will admit. n224 Unrelated efforts become related and part of a whole through mere reframing. At the same time, the elephant in the room - the rising level of
economic inequality - is left unaddressed and comes to be understood as natural and inevitable. n225 This is precisely the problematic process that critical theorists decry as
losers' self-mystification, through which marginalized groups come to see systemic losses as the [*986] product of their own actions and thereby begin to focus on minor
achievements as representing the boundaries of their willed reality.
The explorations of micro-instances of activism are often fundamentally performative, obscuring the distance between the descriptive and the prescriptive. The manifestations
of extralegal activism - the law and organizing model; the proliferation of informal, soft norms and norm-generating actors; and the celebrated, separate nongovernmental
sphere of action - all produce a fantasy that change can be brought about through small-scale, decentralized transformation. The emphasis is local, but the locality is described
as a microcosm of the whole and the audience is national and global. In the context of the humanities, Professor Carol Greenhouse poses a comparable challenge to
ethnographic studies from the 1990s, which utilized the genres of narrative and community studies, the latter including works on American cities and neighborhoods in trouble.
n226 The aspiration of these genres was that each individual story could translate into a "time of the nation" body of knowledge and motivation. n227 In contemporary legal
thought, a corresponding gap opens between the local scale and the larger, translocal one. In reality, although there has been a recent proliferation of associations and grassroots
groups, few new local-state-national federations have emerged in the United States since the 1960s and 1970s, and many of the existing voluntary federations that flourished in
the mid-twentieth century are in decline. n228 There is, therefore, an absence of links between the local and the national, an absent intermediate public sphere, which has been
termed "the missing middle" by Professor Theda Skocpol. n229 New social movements have for the most part failed in sustaining coalitions or producing significant
institutional change through grassroots activism. Professor Handler concludes that this failure is due in part to the ideas of contingency, pluralism, and localism that are so
embedded in current activism. n230 Is the focus on small-scale dynamics simply an evasion of the need to engage in broader substantive debate?
It is important for next-generation progressive legal scholars, while maintaining a critical legal
consciousness, to recognize that not all extralegal associational life is transformative. We must
differentiate, for example, between inward-looking groups, which tend to be self-regarding and
depoliticized, and social movements that participate in political activities, engage the public
debate, and aim to challenge and reform existing realities. n231 We must differentiate between
professional associations and more inclusive forms of institutions that act as trustees for larger
segments of the community. n232 As described above, extralegal activism tends to operate on a more
divided and hence a smaller scale than earlier social movements, which had national reform agendas.
Consequently, within critical discourse there is a need to recognize the limited capacity of small-scale
action. We should question the narrative that imagines consciousness-raising as directly
translating into action and action as directly translating into change . Certainly not every cultural
description is political. Indeed, it is questionable whether forms of activism that are opposed to
programmatic reconstruction of a social agenda should even be understood as social movements. In
fact, when groups are situated in opposition to any form of institutionalized power, they may be
simply mirroring what they are fighting against and merely producing moot activism that settles
for what seems possible within the narrow space that is left in a rising convergence of ideologies. The
original vision is consequently coopted, and contemporary discontent is legitimated through a process
of self-mystification
Law Debate Good Stuff
2NC Law Debate
First, we do not need to win that the state is good, rather just that the value of the state is
something that should be debated about. This massively raises the bar on their ev – it can’t
just say that the state is bad or ineffective, their ev has to say that the state should not even
be discussed. General indictments of the state can be done on the neg, while still preserving
limited and effective debate and research.
Second, the affirmative’s ability to critique the law, indict it’s structure and advocate for
negative action all short circuit their claims about reformism and agency – these public
deliberations about the law and power positive forces for marginalized communities
Morales-Cruz 11 (J.D. Puerto Rico, LL.M. Harvard, M.Jur. Oxford)
(Myrta, COUNTER-HEGEMONIC WORK AS A LAWYER: THE ROLE OF THE LAWYER WORKING WITH
MARGINALIZED GROUPS IN THE AGE OF "GLOBAL GOVERNANCE", Revista Juridica Universidad
Interamericana De Puerto Rico Facultad De Derecho, 45 Rev. Jur. U.I.P.R. 399)
The discourse of the 'autonomy of law' has been used to confer legitimacy to globalization processes. n13
Counter-hegemonic work as a lawyer involves working in strategic and pragmatic ways
that can both question the 'autonomy of the law' discourse, when it is used to sustain neoliberal
claims, and use it to confer legitimacy to counter-hegemonic claims against neoliberal
globalization (e.g. the discourse of human rights). This is particularly difficult since using the discourse
of the 'autonomy of law' can legitimize neoliberal globalization. n14
Carroll, quoting Ford, states that from a neo-Gramscian perspective global civil society appears as a
"terrain for both legitimizing and challenging global governance." n15 Social movements must be aware
of the risk of reproducing, rather than challenging global hegemony in the global discursive space. n16
Since the publication of Lucie White's article To Learn and Teach: Lessons from Driefontein on
Lawyering and Power in 1988, and Gerald Lopez's book Rebellious Lawyering: One Chicano's Vision of
Progressive Law Practice in 1992, many progressive lawyers in the United States were challenged to
focus on empowering the communities with which they worked as opposed to focusing on result oriented
legal strategies. n17
[*402] White and López suggest that legal strategies should be used as part of a broader
strategy of organizing marginalized communities and helping to support an
empowerment process. n18 They embrace the 'critical legal studies' theory's vision in which law is
indeterminate, another arena where political battles are being fought. n19 A main challenge of
lawyers is not dominating the process in a way that can co-opt the possibilities of social mobilization. n20
It is important to be creative with the law since the grievances that marginalized communities
have are not easily translated into legal claims. n21 Litigation has its limitations and should be used as an
option of last resort; as part of a larger social mobilization campaign, as "public action with political
significance." n22 Focusing on pedagogy based on dialogue and strategic work to promote
client empowerment, and engaging in multidisciplinary work is of vital importance. n23
Strategies such as organizing, lobbying, holding press conferences, and protests are crucial. Finally, it is
helpful to link struggles with other local, national and international struggles. n24
This is an advocacy model that centers on process instead of results. n25 López has described this model
as one where the focus is on "process oriented client empowerment". n26 Traditionally lawyers that work
with marginalized groups have concentrated on developing legal strategies in order to obtain results,
"result oriented legal strategies". n27 López prefers a model more focused on the process, one that will
allow the low income 'client' to take control of his or her situation and that will promote empowerment
and self-help. n28
White has written extensively about this type of advocacy model, which has been called by some
commentators "law and organizing". n29 Pedagogical work, based on a dialogue with the community, is
of key importance. n30 The theory and methodology of popular education developed by the Brazilian
educator and lawyer, Paulo Freire, are particularly useful in this type of lawyering work. n31 Freire
critiques [*403] traditional education by labeling it "banking education" since it assumes that there is an
"empty brain" where the educator "deposits" information. n32 For education to be truly transformative it
should start from the experience of the participants and be based on dialogue and action; it must be a
participatory experience, aiming to generate a process of "consciousness raising". n33
As early as 1970, Steven Wexler, in an article published in the Yale Law School Law Review, had
remarked that since the problems of the poor were fundamentally problems of a social nature and not
individual problems, poor people had to organize and act for themselves. To support this process, poverty
lawyers had to radically depart from the traditional lawyering role and do work similar to that of a
teacher, turning each moment into an occasion for poor clients to practice skills and establish networks
that would allow them to make change. n34
Lobbying can be a good strategy for promoting empowerment among marginalized
groups. n35 In court, lawyers are in control of the process. Lobbying makes it easier for lawyers to work
side by side with marginalized groups. They gain power as they speak and argue about their
situation, about the law and about how the law should be. Their voice is independent
from the voice of the lawyers. Focusing on lobbying, as opposed to litigation also makes it
easier for marginalized groups to gain access to the press and to make alliances with
other marginalized groups, which helps to create more public discussion about their
issues. n36
Third, outside of the law being good or bad, legal education is crucial to empower even the
most revolutionary of movements. Debate about arcane legal details are crucial to the
short-term survival of oppressed populations – that’s our 1NC Arkles ev the legal system is
maintained by and predicated on arcane knowledge but legal education has the
opportunity to expose the workings of the system to those who seek to destroy it and
dismantle it. This is also crucial in the short term because being able to navigate is key to
communities that are going to continue to have to navigate government agencies and
organizations to survive.
Forth, no alternative solvency mechanism – they don’t magically create a space outside the
law much less the bounds of white supremacy and capitalism. Cooption is more likely in
non-state activism than in the law. Their ev romanticizes action outside the state and law
by failing to offer any clear mechanism for change or concrete alternative. 1NC Lobel says
opting out of traditional legal reform avenues only accentuates cooption and passive status
quo politics. It is the act of engagement, not law, that risks cooptation and compromise. It is
not the law that threatens movements, it is the essential difficulties of implementing theory
into practice.
Even if we lose all those arguments though engaging with state is good for social change –
a. It’s inevitable – 1NC Caplong activists often do not have a choice but to work within
the legal system especially under conditions of criminalization.
b. Momentum Building – Campaigning against particular laws can be effective and is
often necessary. Seemingly small reform efforts can be effective tools to mobilize
populations. This draw factor disproves their general claim about reformism
Cummings and Eagly 2k1 (Staff Attorney, Community Development Project, Public Counsel Law Center,
Los Angeles, California. J.D., Harvard Law School; Coordinating Attorney, Immigrant Domestic Violence Project,
Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), Los Angeles, California. J.D., Harvard Law
School)
(Scott L. and Ingrid V., A Critical Reflection on Law and Organizing, 48 UCLA L. Rev. 443, LN)
Gordon has offered a particularly comprehensive vision of law and organizing practice. She argues that
there are "three interesting and under-explored possibilities for how to use law" in grassroots organizing
work. n105 First, law can be used "as a draw" to bring new members into an organization that
has larger organizing and reformist goals. n106 The promise of legal assistance on a discrete case can
motivate a worker to come to a workers' meeting at which she will be exposed to the broader educational
and organizing activities of the group. Second, the law can be used as a "measure of injustice." n107 For
instance, as part of educational efforts, workers can be asked to analyze how their own experiences may
diverge from what the law defines as basic legal protections. In this way, a discussion of legal issues
can highlight discrepancies between the law as written and the law as lived by
marginalized workers. n108 The gap between the legal ideal and practical reality can
then be used to chart a course for political action and community mobilization. Finally,
the law can be used as "part of a larger organizing campaign" n109 in which the ultimate
goal is not to win a particular lawsuit, but rather to achieve specific organizing objectives and build
power among unrepresented groups. According to this conception, the law serves as a
strategic mechanism to support or advance organizing campaigns in practical ways - for example, by
filing a lawsuit to call attention to a broader structural issue or to put pressure on an employer or industry
to undertake systemic reforms. n110
[this is the one to skip if you’re short on time]
c. Short term survival – Rejecting engagement with the law directly trades off with
mechanisms that help ensure the daily survival of underserved populations – [poor people
flood legal services offices seeking assistance in accessing welfare benefits, contesting
discriminatory employment terminations, petitioning for political asylum, resisting
unlawful evictions, obtaining restraining orders from abusive spouses, and recovering
illegally withheld wages]
Cummings and Eagly 2k1 (Staff Attorney, Community Development Project, Public Counsel Law Center,
Los Angeles, California. J.D., Harvard Law School; Coordinating Attorney, Immigrant Domestic Violence Project,
Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), Los Angeles, California. J.D., Harvard Law
School)
(Scott L. and Ingrid V., A Critical Reflection on Law and Organizing, 48 UCLA L. Rev. 443, LN)
First, exaggerating the
ineffectiveness of traditional legal interventions minimizes the
significant institutional restructuring that legal advocacy has achieved. Indeed, creative
litigation and court-ordered remedies have changed many aspects of the social, political,
and economic landscape. n203 An analysis that obscures this fact truncates progressive legal practice
by closing off potential avenues for redress.
In addition, the suggestion by proponents of law and organizing that lawyers should act as organizers,
facilitators, and educators would require that less time be spent providing conventional representation to
low-income clients, n204 who are already drastically underserved. n205 As it stands, [*492] there are
only six thousand full-time legal services staff lawyers to meet the legal needs of the forty-five million
persons who are income-eligible for free legal services. n206 Each day, poor people flood legal
services offices seeking assistance in accessing welfare benefits, contesting
discriminatory employment terminations, petitioning for political asylum, resisting
unlawful evictions, obtaining restraining orders from abusive spouses, and recovering
illegally withheld wages. Given the scarcity of resources in legal aid programs, a shift toward an
organizing-centered approach would result in a reduction of basic services to these clients.
2NC Neolib Add On
Using the state is the only way to check neoliberal exploitation
Connolly 13 (Krieger-Eisenhower Professor of Political Science at Johns Hopkins University)
(William, The Fragility of Things: Self-Organizing Processes, Neoliberal Fantasies, and Democratic Activism, pg.
40-42)
6) The democratic state, while it certainly cannot alone tame capital or re- constitute the ethos and
infrastructure of consumption, must play a significant role in reconstituting our lived
relations to climate, weather, re- source use, ocean currents, bee survival, tectonic instability, glacier
flows, species diversity, work, local life, consumption, and investment, as it also responds favorably to
the public pressures we must generate to forge a new ethos. A new, new left will thus experimentally
enact new intersections be- tween role performance and political activity, outgrow its old disgust with the
very idea of the state, and remain alert to the dangers states can pose. It will do so because, as already
suggested, the fragile ecology of late capital requires state interventions of several sorts. A refusal to
participate in the state today cedes too much hegemony to neoliberal markets, either
explicitly or by implication. Drives to fascism, remember, rose the last time in capitalist states after a total
market meltdown. Most of those movements failed.
But a couple became consolidated through a series of resonances (vibrations) back and forth between
industrialists, the state, and vigilante groups in neighborhoods, clubs, churches, the police, the media, and
pubs. You do not fight the danger of a new kind of neofascism by withdrawing from
either micropolitics or state politics. You do so through a multisited politics designed to
infuse a new ethos into the fabric of everyday life. Changes in ethos can in turn open doors to
new possibilities of state and interstate action, so that an advance in one domain seeds that in the other.
And vice versa. A positive dynamic of mutual amplification might be generated here. Could a series of
significant shifts in the routines of state and global capital ism even press the fractured system to a point
where it hovers on the edge of capitalism itself? We don't know. That is one reason it is important
to focus on interim goals. Another is that in a world of becoming, replete with periodic and
surprising shifts in the course of events, you cannot project far beyond an interim period. Another yet is
that activism needs to project concrete, interim possibilities to gain support and propel
itself forward. That being said, it does seem unlikely to me, at least, that a positive interim future
includes either socialist productivism or the world projected by proponents of deep ecology.
7) To advance such an agenda it is also imperative to negotiate new connec- tions between nontheistic
constituencies who care about the future of the Earth and numerous devotees of diverse religious
traditions who fold posi- tive spiritualities into their creedal practices. The new, multifaceted movement needed today, if it emerges, will take the shape of a vibrant pluralist assemblage
acting at multiple sites within and across states, rather than either a centered movement with a
series of fellow travelers attached to it or a mere electoral constellation. Electoral victories are important,
but they work best when they touch priorities already embedded in churches, uni- versities, film, music,
consumption practices, media reporting, investment priorities, and the like. A related thing to keep in
mind is that the capitalist modes of acceleration, expansion, and intensification that heighten the fragility of things today also generate pressures to minoritize the world along multiple dimensions at a more
rapid pace than heretofore. A new pluralist constellation will build upon the latter developments as it
works to reduce the former effects.
I am sure that the forgoing comments will appear to some as "opti- mistic" or "utopian." But optimism
and pessimism are both primarily spec- tatorial views. Neither seems sufficient to the contemporary
condition. In- deed pessimism, if you dwell on it long, easily slides into cynicism, and cynicism often
plays into the hands of a right wing that applies it exclu- sively to any set of state activities not designed
to protect or coddle the corporate estate. That is one reason that "dysfunctional politics" redounds so
readily to the advantage of cynics on the right who work to promote it. They want to promote cynicism
with respect to the state and innocence with respect to the market. Pure critique, as already suggested,
does not suffice either. Pure critique too readily carries critics and their followers to the edge of cynicism.
It is also true that the above critique concentrates on neoliberal capital- ism, not capitalism writ large.
That is because it seems to me that we need to specify the terms of critique as closely as possible and
think first of all about interim responses. If we lived under, say, Keynesian capitalism, a somewhat
different set of issues would be defined and other strategies identified. Capitalism writ large—while it
sets a general context that neoliberalism inflects in specific ways—sets too large and generic a target. It
can assume multiple forms, as the differences between Swedish and American capitalism suggest; the
times demand a set of interim agendas targeting the hegemonic form of today, pursued with heightened
militancy at sev- eral sites. The point today is not to wait for a revolution that overthrows the whole
system. The "system," as we shall see further, is replete with too many loose ends, uneven edges, dicey
intersections with nonhuman forces, and uncertain trajectories to make such a wholesale project plausible.
Be- sides, things are too urgent and too many people on the ground are suffer- ing too much now.
The need now is to activate the most promising political strategies to the contemporary condition out of a
bad set. On top of assessing probabilities and predicting them with secret relish or despair—activities I
myself pur- sue during the election season—we must define the urgent needs of the day in
relation to a set of interim possibilities worthy of pursuit on several fronts, even if the
apparent political odds are stacked against them. We then test ourselves and those possibilities
by trying to enact this or that aspect of them at diverse sites, turning back to reconsider their efficacy and
side effects as circumstances shift and results accrue. In so doing we may ex- perience more vibrantly
how apparently closed and ossified structures are typically punctuated by jagged edges, seams, and
fractures best pried open with a mix of public contestation of established interpretations, experimen- tal
shifts in multiple role performances, micropolitics in churches, univer- sities, unions, the media, and
corporations, state actions, and large-scale, cross-state citizen actions.
Pragmatic use of the law can be successful at fighting back against neoliberalism
Ashar 8 (Associate Professor of Law and Director of the Immigrant and Refugee Rights Clinic, City University of
New York (CUNY) School of Law)
(Sameer M., LAW CLINICS AND COLLECTIVE MOBILIZATION, 14 Clinical L. Rev. 355, LN)
Public interest lawyers today represent clients in a period of rapid political and economic change. Poor
people are besieged by unprecedented market forces with less protection by the state than at
any other time in our recent history. Multinational corporate actors and their collaborators in
government have advanced an agenda in both developed and developing nations - described by some
as "neoliberal globalization"-with three major tenets: (1) weakening and impoverishment of the state
so that it is unable to provide basic social protections; (2) privatization of formerly public
functions; and (3) free and rapid movement of capital that facilitates lowered labor and
environmental standards. n9 In the United States, the advocates of neoliberalism successfully fought
to remove the federal social welfare entitlement in 1996 and to condition access to subsistence relief on
participation in enforced labor programs, thus expanding the class of [*361] low-wage workers in the
economy. n10 The reserve wage has fallen as our clients have become more vulnerable to their employers
and other market actors, including banks and landlords. Previously robust civil society organizations,
such as unions and identity-based associations, have weakened n13 and increasingly depend
upon corporate and governmental patrons.
In response to this environment, a growing number of small groups of poor and working-class people
have risen to challenge the reordering of our economy and politics. These resistance movements selfconsciously act locally and think globally, allying themselves (actually or symbolically) with grassroots
movements outside the United States. n14 This resistance simultaneously opposes neoliberalism and
constructs a decentralized "radical democratic" program. n15 In the area in which I work, immigrant
workers and organizers have banded together along ethnic, geographic, and
occupational lines in "worker centers" to improve their conditions of employment
through direct action, litigation, and legislation. n16 These worker centers have drawn [*362]
extensively in the course of their campaigns on legal resources provided by a small number of law school
clinics. n17 Similarly informed and designed law school clinics have also had highly productive
collaborations with environmental justice, n18 welfare rights, n19 and community
development organizations n20 that are either directly or indirectly related to global social
movements.
Law Good – Example Run
This is really more for your own edification but I suppose if you need to get crazy deep on this debate you might
read this.
We’ll provide a bunch of examples that the law can be used successfully for Black and
other oppressed populations:
First, community labor groups and the movement for undocumented immigrants
Cummings 7 (Acting Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law)
(Scott L., CRITICAL LEGAL CONSCIOUSNESS IN ACTION, 120 Harv. L. Rev. F. 62, Harvard Law Review
Forum, LN)
B. Revisiting the Role of Law Within the Paradigmatic Social Movements
Focusing on the world of practice allows us to discern multiple "critical legal
consciousnesses," including one that I would associate with the notion of "constrained legalism," by
which I mean an approach to legal activism informed by a critical appreciation of law's limits
that seeks to exploit law's opportunities to advance transformative goals. To illuminate this
approach, it is instructive to return briefly to current activity within the two fields that have symbolized
the perils of legal cooptation: labor and civil rights. Interestingly, both movements have embraced law
reform as an important goal, though the current wave of reform efforts looks quite different from its New
Deal and Civil Rights era precursors.
Within the labor movement, local legal reform to promote labor standards has been pursued
by a coalition of community-labor groups, supported by public interest lawyers. In Los Angeles,
for example, community-labor coalitions have pressed a reform agenda that includes card
check neutrality, living wage laws, the imposition of community benefits requirements
on publicly subsidized private developers, and limits on the negative economic impact
of big-box retail stores like Wal-Mart. n39 These efforts have enlisted lawyers to conduct research
on living wage impacts, draft legislation, negotiate community benefits agreements with developers, and
resist big-box developments through land use and environmental challenges.
Classical civil rights activism has been channeled into a diverse range of new movements, including
prominent efforts to promote the rights of immigrants and other noncitizens. The movement for
undocumented immigrant rights has deployed a traditional social movement strategy,
with the 2006 "Spring Marches" demonstrating power in numbers in order to influence the content of a
proposed guest worker statute. The movement has also relied on strategic litigation, as mentioned above
in the context of restaurant and garment advocacy, as well as organizing-based labor enforcement efforts
in the low-wage immigrant work sector, as the example of the Workplace Project illustrates. [*71] In the
wake of the Bush administration's counterterrorism policies after 9/11, we have also been reminded of the
continued importance of public interest law in protecting the rights of noncitizens against executive
power, with the Center for Constitutional Rights bringing two successful lawsuits that resulted in courts
upholding the right of detainees to challenge their detention through habeas corpus in Rasul v. Bush n40
and invalidating military commissions in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. n41 Though these cases have by no
means ended the battle over detainee rights, they have succeeded in mobilizing intense political pressure
on administration officials to change their practices. It is the self-conscious effort to combine the
legal and political -- to deploy them in mutually reinforcing ways that recognize the power and limits
of both -- that points beyond the boundaries of extralegalism.
Second, environmental justice work
Cummings and Eagly 2k1 (Staff Attorney, Community Development Project, Public Counsel Law Center,
Los Angeles, California. J.D., Harvard Law School; Coordinating Attorney, Immigrant Domestic Violence Project,
Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), Los Angeles, California. J.D., Harvard Law
School)
(Scott L. and Ingrid V., A Critical Reflection on Law and Organizing, 48 UCLA L. Rev. 443, LN)
For example, while an attorney at the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation, Luke Cole
engaged in a broad range of strategies, including community organizing, to remedy
environmental problems faced by the poor. In Kettleman City, California, Cole worked with
community leaders to organize meetings of neighborhood residents seeking to oppose the building of a
toxic waste incinerator. The residents initiated a letter-writing campaign n138 and established a core
leadership group that mobilized the community into action. n139 This strong organizing effort, in
conjunction with legal actions taken by Cole, played an important part in defeating the incinerator project.
n140
Other examples underscore how law and organizing strategies can be effectively deployed to combat
environmental racism. For instance, the Golden Gate Law and Justice Clinic worked with
community-based organizations to halt the development of a power plant in the largely
African American Bayview-Hunters Point section of San Francisco. n141 Against the [*475]
backdrop of threatened legal action, community groups organized strident opposition to the proposed
plant at numerous administrative hearings, coordinated studies demonstrating its potentially deleterious
health and economic consequences, and ultimately forced the city to adopt a resolution, crafted by
community groups and their lawyers, that prevented the placement of any power generation facilities in
the community. n142 In St. James Parish, Louisiana, local activists established a grassroots
organization that held educational forums for community residents, participated in local governmental
hearings, and collaborated with attorneys to defeat the siting of an environmentally
hazardous plant in a predominantly African American community. n143
Professor Shelia Foster has discussed how a coalition of lawyers and community-based
organizations in Chester, Pennsylvania worked to stop the clustering of commercial
waste facilities in a low-income, African American neighborhood. n144 The Chester case
study focused on the multifaceted strategy these organizations used to challenge the siting of a waste
sterilization plant and soil incineration facility in a community that was already home to various
environmental hazards. n145 In particular, the proposed sitings galvanized community residents to form
an organization, Chester Residents Concerned About Quality of Life, that convened meetings with
government and industry leaders, disrupted the operations of existing waste facilities, worked with public
interest attorneys to challenge the issuance of site permits, and lobbied city council to increase the burden
on companies seeking to locate hazardous facilities in Chester. n146 As a result of these efforts,
community residents and their legal representatives were able to block the location of the soil incinerator.
n147
Third is the Workplace Project
Cummings and Eagly 2k1 (Staff Attorney, Community Development Project, Public Counsel Law Center,
Los Angeles, California. J.D., Harvard Law School; Coordinating Attorney, Immigrant Domestic Violence Project,
Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), Los Angeles, California. J.D., Harvard Law
School)
(Scott L. and Ingrid V., A Critical Reflection on Law and Organizing, 48 UCLA L. Rev. 443, LN)
Another practice frequently associated with community organizing is legislative advocacy. Although
many efforts to influence legislation have an organizing component, it is important to disaggregate the
concepts in order to better understand the different levers for applying political pressure. An example
of effective legislative advocacy by the Workplace Project highlights this point. By
organizing aggrieved Latino workers and building political coalitions with sympathetic
constituencies, Workplace Project organizers were able to help win the passage of
stringent employer penalties for nonpayment of wages. n169 In this effort, the Workplace
Project relied on a variety of community-based techniques, including education, n170 media pressure,
n171 and signature gathering. n172 In addition, organizers and community members worked together to
draft legislation and conduct lobbying [*483] visits with key legislators. These varied practices suggest
different roles for lawyers engaged in legislative work. In particular, practitioners supporting the efforts
of a community-based organization to change the law might explain the technical aspects of the
existing legal regime, research how other jurisdictions have dealt with similar issues, assist in
drafting legislation, and help the organization understand and negotiate the legislative
process.
Not only does organizing practice comprise a range of different techniques, it also takes place within
disparate institutional contexts. In his recent work on organizing, Gary Delgado, one of the founders of
ACORN, highlights three principal community organizing structures: (1) the direct membership model,
(2) the coalition model, and (3) the institutionally based model. n173 These structures vary in terms of
their constituencies and methods, and often organizers working within these structures employ a
combination of tactical strategies. Groups using the direct membership model are generally small,
geographically based organizations of low-and moderate-income members that aim to increase their
political power through direct action, including organized protests, strategic pressure, and media
campaigns. n174 Coalitions, in contrast, are issue-based groupings of existing organizations that seek to
mobilize their members to change public policy through lobbying, public hearings, and electoral work.
n175 Institutionally based organizations, which tend to be affiliated with religious institutions, focus on
developing strong indigenous leaders who use public pressure and negotiation strategies to influence local
politics. n176
Law and organizing practice can vary depending on the type of institutional arrangements chosen by
community groups. In a direct membership organization the lawyer might be asked to provide limited
legal assistance to members. Frequently such services are promoted as a benefit of membership and used
as a method to draw new members. For instance, a group focused on welfare reform might offer a free
consultation with a lawyer on benefits issues in order to attract welfare recipients as members. Coalition
[*484] organizations, in contrast, might find it useful for lawyers to share their knowledge of a particular
specialized issue. For example, a coalition focused on immigrant rights would need a lawyer to explain
existing immigration laws and interpret new legislative proposals. Finally, lawyers working with an
institutionally based organization might be asked to analyze local redevelopment laws or the rules
governing municipal decision making in order to strengthen the organization's ability to influence
political decisions affecting the allocation of local resources.
Organizing must therefore be understood as encompassing a diverse range of methods
and institutional forms. Although the analytic distinctions outlined in this part are schematic and do
not fully capture the fluid nature of organizing work, they are nevertheless important for beginning to
sharpen discussions of law and organizing practice. To move forward, these distinctions must be
elaborated, challenged, and brought to life with practice-based examples. Sophisticated
practitioners have already begun this process by providing models of coordinated law and organizing
advocacy that deftly integrate different community-based techniques to achieve clearly defined strategic
goals. For instance, the Workplace Project and Make the Road by Walking, a community-
based organization in Bushwick, Brooklyn, both use organizing, education, media
pressure, and legislative advocacy to advance their workers' rights agendas. n177
Similarly, the Metropolitan Alliance in Los Angeles has recently launched a Jobs and Health
Care Campaign that thoughtfully combines an array of techniques - demonstrations, an
electoral campaign, organization-building, and education - to increase quality jobs and expand
job training programs in low-income communities. Yet, despite these examples of model practices, many
community activists continue to adopt the rhetoric of organizing without having developed an
understanding of the complexity of community-based practices. In order for lawyers to target their legal
resources in a way that advances community projects, a more intricate typology of organizing methods is
needed. At the moment, the picture of what organizing is - as well as what it is not - is still incomplete.
Law Good – Neolib
Abandoning legal structures for the sake of revolutionary purity would leave millions of
trans, poor and Black people who are everyday attacked by those same structures without
defense or recourse.
Robertson 97 (Osgoode Hall Law School, York University)
(Cherie. "The Demystification of Legal Discourse: Reconceiving the Role of the Poverty Lawyer as Agent of the
Poor." Osgoode Hall Law Journal 35.3/4 (1997))
Empowerment of the poor will not come from a withdrawal of legal services. If we, as
advocates of the poor, simultaneously withdrew the provision of our services, the current system
would not bow down in penitent acquiescence under the weight of our moral
uprightness, but rather, the system would greedily digest its unprotected prey and the fit
that continued to survive would simply become relatively more fit. In the meantime, we need to work in
collaboration with not for the poor. Poverty will only be eradicated through the coordinated efforts and
actions of various different sectors of society committed to ending the oppression of the poor. We must
work to create alliances aimed at taking the poor out of isolation. As L6pez writes:
Lawyers must know how to work with (not just on behalf of) women, low-income people,
people of color, gays and lesbians, the disabled, and the elderly. They must know how to
collaborate with other professional and lay allies rather than ignoring the help that these other problemsolvers may provide in a given situation. They must understand how to educate those with
whom they work, particularly about law and professional lawyering, and, at the same time, they
must open themselves up to being educated by all those with whom they come in contact, particularly
about the traditions and experiences of life on the bottom and at the margins.
Law Good – Social Movements
Marginalized groups use the law precisely because they lack power
Lobel 7 (Assistant Professor of Law, University of San Diego)
(Orly, THE PARADOX OF EXTRALEGAL ACTIVISM: CRITICAL LEGAL CONSCIOUSNESS AND
TRANSFORMATIVE POLITICS, 120 Harv. L. Rev. 937, February, 2007, LN)
In the triangular conundrum of "law and social change," law is regularly the first to be questioned,
deconstructed, and then critically dismissed. The other two components of the equation - social and
change - are often presumed to be immutable and unambiguous. Understanding the limits of legal change
reveals the dangers of absolute reliance on one system and the need, in any effort for social reform, to
contextualize the discourse, to avoid evasive, open-ended slogans, and to develop greater sensitivity to
indirect effects and multiple courses of action. Despite its weaknesses, however, law is an
optimistic discipline. It operates both in the present and in the future. Order without law is often the
privilege of the strong. Marginalized groups have used legal reform precisely because they
lacked power. Despite limitations, these groups have often successfully secured their
interests through legislative and judicial victories. Rather than experiencing a disabling
disenchantment with the legal system, we can learn from both the successes and failures
of past models, with the aim of constantly redefining the boundaries of legal reform and making
visible law's broad reach.
A2: Law Bad – Cap
Law not inherently classist or bad
Robertson 97 (Osgoode Hall Law School, York University)
(Cherie. "The Demystification of Legal Discourse: Reconceiving the Role of the Poverty Lawyer as Agent of the
Poor." Osgoode Hall Law Journal 35.3/4 (1997))
The observation has been made that lawyers, as espousers of and adherents to law, are participants in its
oppressive nature, in its discriminatory regulation, and in its inequities; lawyers in effect are "greasing the
wheels" for the law as a tool of social oppression, and are perpetuating the legitimacy and facilitating the
operation of an unjust system. Marxist analyses have attempted to explain how law operates as an
instrument of repression promoting the interests of certain classes at the expense of those of others in
contemporary Western societies while, at the same time, contributing to shape a climate of thought in
these societies that makes possible a reduction of direct repression through law to a minimum.
Yet, if all poverty lawyers in Toronto simultaneously withdrew their services, the result would most
certainly be increased suffering for the poor. While a reconceptualization of the work that poverty
lawyers do is essential, I would argue that it must take place while we continue to represent
the poor. We cannot put our work on hold until we devise the perfect way to help poor
people. Besides, there will never be unanimous agreement amongst leftist activist lawyers on what the
best strategies for self-reform are. Furthermore, I am not of the mind that there is nothing redemptive
about law as a mechanism for bringing about positive social change. Of dominant ideologies in society,
law is a discourse which at least pays lip-service to the ideals of justice. As such, it continues to be a
site where power relations can be debated, challenged and reconstituted. E.P. Thompson's
words are inspiring in this regard:
It is true that in history the law can be seen to mediate and to legitimize existent class relations. Its forms
and procedures may crystallize those relations and mask ulterior injustice. But this mediation, through the
forms of law, is something quite distinct from the exercise of unmediated force. The forms and rhetoric of
law acquire a distinct identity which may, on occasion, inhibit power and afford some protection to the
powerless. 22
Besides, poor people do not have the luxury of choosing whether or not they will engage
with law. As Wexler writes, "poor people must go to government officials for many of the things which
not-poor people get privately ... . Poverty creates an abrasive interface with society; poor people are
always bumping into sharp legal things."23 Consequently, as lawyers, we have to continue to
try to renegotiate with legal discourse while simultaneously challenging its
inadequacies.
Education about the state is crucial to anti-capitalism
a. The state is not an end, but it is a crucial facet to make massive change possible
Abramsky 10 (visiting fellow at the Institute of Advanced Studies in Science, Technology and Society; fmr.
coordinator of the Danish-based World Wind Energy Institute)
(Koyla, SPARKING AN ENERGY REVOLUTION Building New Relations of Production, Exchange, and
Livelihood in Sparking A Worldwide Energy Revolution, ed. Koyla Abramsky, pg. 646)
As this book has sought to show, leadership in an emancipatory transition process is unlikely
to come predominantly from structures from above, like governments, multilateral institutions
and agreements, or corporations. It is more likely that autonomous movements, self-organizing from
below in order to gain greater control and autonomy over their own lives, will lead the way..-This is not
to say that state regulation is unimportant; it is completely essential in order to secure a
legal and institutional framework (as well as financial support) conducive to a grassroots
process led from below. However, the regulatory process is very unlikely to be the driving
force of the changes, but rather a necessary process that enables wider changes.
Furthermore, it is highly unlikely that emancipatory regulation that is strong enough to be effective could
even come about without major pressure from below.
b. Even if revolutionary change is necessary, Understanding its inner workings is crucial
AK Press 12 (February 17, http://www.revolutionbythebook.akpress.org/accumulation-of-freedom-video-promo2/)
Anti-capitalism is too often little more than a sentiment, easily captured as a slogan on a wall
or banner. Much of the discussion stays close to the surface. It’s as if we, as anarchists,
don’t feel a responsibility to intellectually challenge capitalist dogma on its own terms
(because we can’t? because it requires an incredible amount of work?). We rail against capitalist
institutions and forms but spend too little time working to understand them and to
effectively translate that understanding to others. So it’s with pleasure that we welcome works
likeAccumulation, David Graeber’s Debt, and forthcoming titles like Wayne Price’s revamped book on
Marx’s economics for anarchists (2012), and Geoff Mann’s Dissassembly Required: A Field Guide to
Actually Existing Capitalism (2013). Those smug anarchists quick to dismiss the study of economic
A2: Law Bad – Alternatives Key
Can only assess the viability of the law in relation to alternatives
Cummings 9 (Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law)
(Scott L., A PRAGMATIC APPROACH TO LAW AND ORGANIZING: A COMMENT ON "THE STORY OF
SOUTH ARDMORE", 42 J. Marshall L. Rev. 631, LN)
The classic justification for public interest law, particularly the lawsuits attacking Jim Crow during the
Civil Rights Movement, was the entrenched and immobile political opposition to the cause of racial
equality. Law may be a second-best option, but sometimes it is the most powerful weapon
available. When organizing groups are contemplating different courses of action, the use of
law must be compared to alternative non-legal strategies and their likely outcomes. It
may be that in a particular organizing context, law poses significant risks. But what are the risks of other
strategies? How might the risks be weighted and usefully compared? Realizing Shdaimah's
call for a "fluid" approach to law and organizing requires a genuine analysis of the trade-
offs of legal action and non-legal alternatives and a strategic plan of action that
combines the best of both.
A2: Law Bad – Agency/“We can’t access”
Discussing legal changes is possible and can help fuel a collective sense fo agency for
oppressed groups
Morales-Cruz 5 (teaches at Inter American University of Puerto Rico School of Law)
(Myrta, "Do not hand me fish, teach me how to fish", SELA 2005 Panel 4: The Lawyer’s Role,
http://www.law.yale.edu/documents/pdf/Do_not_hand_me_Fish.pdf)
We have found lobbying to be a good strategy for promoting empowerment among our
clients. In the court, we, the lawyers, are in control of the process. Lobbying makes it easier for us to
work side by side with our clients. They gain
power as they speak and argue about their
situation, about the law, about how the law should be. Their voice is independent from our
voice as lawyers. Focusing on the legislative branch also makes it easier for our clients to
gain access to the press and to make alliances with other community groups, which
helps to create more public discussion about the issues. The public hearings have been
crucial in the empowerment process. Finally, the fact that a statute, once approved, has a direct
impact on more people that an average court decision, helps to bring more people into the process and
furthers collective empowerment.53
More evidence
Guinier and Torres 14 (Prof of Law @ Harvard; Professor of Law @ Cornell)
(Lani and Gerald, THE MEANING OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS REVOLUTION: Changing the Wind: Notes Toward a
Demosprudence of Law and Social Movements, June, 2014, Yale Law Journal, 123 Yale L.J. 2740, LN)
In many ways, our project is not new. Like Professor Ackerman, we are challenging the privileging of formal sources of authority
that discount or minimize the role of social movement activists and other contentious forms of organized power to name their own
reality and give that reality a heart, a soul, and a story. The political transformation of the United States comes not just from what
the Court is doing or what arguments the lawyers for the social movements are making. The movement activists themselves are part
of the law creation process. They make some arguments more resonant and even more plausible. This is what Adam Liptak, in
describing the dueling roles played by iconic Supreme Court cases like Brown v. Board of Education, calls the "music" as opposed
to the "logic" of law. n237 Lawyers are usually understood to control the logic of law through their analysis of precedent and
commitment to principle. Meanwhile, the activists reveal the music of law by combining legal rights talk with home-grown stories
of justice that define normative or narrative frames through which to understand what the courts thought they [*2800] were doing.
when the Southern civil rights movement organizers "transposed"
conceptual frameworks from one institutional domain to another, they provided new
energy for resistance. n238 The music these activists composed is the work of "transposition," which
combines, for example, legal rights formulations with "locally resonant justificatory
rhetorics." n239 Such work, through decentralized structures at some distance from national or state
civil rights organizations, encouraged tactical and ideological experimentation and
innovation, built organizational solidarity, and enabled movement activists to broaden their appeal
According to Francesca Polletta,
in some cases and in other cases to engage, at minimum, in critical reflection. n240 When a "dynamic"
constituency names its own reality by, for example, singing spirituals in the church choir, composing its
own anthems in the call and response of the amen corner, or summoning in plain English, before a
television audience, the brutal hardship of trying to register to vote in Mississippi, movement activists
supply additional sources of authority for the lawyer and a new source of accountability for both the
lawyer and "the law." By expressing what the law means to those subject to it, activists
create new grounds on which to interpret the law and make it harder for elites to say it means something other than what those
on the street thought it should mean if it were talking to their experience. Any substantial disjunction is felt as injustice. It is through this potential feedback effect that those
who sing the music of law can have a role in composing its logic.
By defining winning in its narrowest possible terms, as Joe Rauh did with the MFDP, lawyers may prompt litigants to celebrate important tactical victories. At the same time,
the strategic vision essential to sustainable long-term change can be lost. n241 Nonetheless, whatever their historically contingent [*2801] role, Fred Gray's relationship with
the MIA shows that law and lawyers ultimately do much of the heavy lifting in shaping a social movement's trajectory in fashioning both its short term objectives and long term
consequences. n242 Because lawyers occupy both an elite and expert position and often do not reflect on the impact of their expertise on their imagination, their role in social
movements deserves more attention.
Cause lawyers and legal scholars have begun to take notice of the multiple ways practicing lawyers, organizers, and policy makers can and do represent marginalized
communities to tell different stories and make new law. n243 There is renewed interest in researching the relationship between social movements and lawmaking among legal
scholars and practitioners on the left n244 as well as the right. n245
[*2802] Even so, much of the focus is still on discovering new avenues for elite driven social change. Some cause lawyers search for ways to do "public education" or develop
"communications strategies" to win support for their cases, but they rarely pause to wonder whether the cases they litigate resonate with the lived experience of their clients, not
just their putative supporters and funders. n246 Sociologists, political scientists, and historians have long studied social movements, yet their theories of social change also
separate out the role of law and lawyers, as if lawyers and social movement actors function on parallel but distinctive tracks. Similarly, many lawyers and law professors still
focus on legal cases and judicial opinions without necessarily considering the social, political, and historical forces that influence the development of legal doctrine. Unlike
Professor Ackerman, they concern themselves primarily with formal lawmaking by the judiciary, the legislature, or the executive. Lawyers, in particular, too often assume that
their maximum opportunity to influence the [*2803] law is through formal argument in judicial settings. Their argument, however, is not necessarily situated in a larger story
that has normative force of its own and may be distinguishable from what the courts say is important. Even when moments of popular constitutionalism are considered, the
actions of "the people" count only when they can be canonized through the published opinions of courts or the statutory language of legislators. n247 In either case, it is the
judiciary that serves as law's authoritative editor.
By contrast, we contend that democratic societies are organized to produce a variety of authoritative interpretive communities. n248 The MFDP, Montgomery Bus Boycott, and
UFW stories exemplify the ways a social movement functioning as an authoritative interpretative community can play a critical role in redefining the meaning of accountability,
democratic action, and American democracy.
Hamer and the other MFDP delegates were exemplary "wind changers." Their goal was to widen the scope of meaningful participation in decision-making. They questioned the
limited definition of what is legitimate representation; they redefined meaningful participation; and they insisted on a wider scope for who should be included in decisionmaking. By contrast, the politicians and the national leaders, as members of the state apparatus, stood with their wet fingers in the wind without noticing that the weather was
changing.
The roles played by Fred Gray and other lawyers in the Montgomery Bus Boycott, the story that law ultimately tells, the driving ideal of equality, the assumption about the
source of power to make change, and the definition of success all reflect the distinctive interpretive communities to which the lawyers felt they were accountable. In the case of
law is practiced tactically. It retains its link to a mobilized community that is
seeking change to produce justice. A narrative whose higher authority comes from the idea that
the bus boycott,
[*2804] national citizenship applies to black people in Alabama motivates this community. These people
are inspired to take risks in support of this ideal because of their belief in a just God and the support they
gain from religious cultural rituals, as manifest in the religious tenor, the spirituality, and the singing at
mass meetings. Through their collective struggle and communal resourcefulness they gain a
sense of agency and create a constituency of resistance that builds a new organization and
inspires a series of national movements.
A2: Law Bad – Structuralism
Structuralism about the law is wrong
Connolly 13 (Krieger-Eisenhower Professor of Political Science at Johns Hopkins University)
(William, The Fragility of Things: Self-Organizing Processes, Neoliberal Fantasies, and Democratic Activism, pg.
36-38)
A philosophy attending to the acceleration, expansion, irrationalities, interdependencies, and fragilities of
late capitalism suggests that we do not know with confidence, in advance of experimental action, just
how far or fast changes in the systemic character of neoliberal capitalism can be made. The structures
often seem solid and intractable, and indeed such a sem- blance may turn out to be true. Some may
seem solid, infinitely absorptive, and intractable when they are in fact punctuated by hidden
vulnerabilities, soft spots, uncertainties, and potential lines of flight that become appar- ent
when they are subjected to experimental action, upheaval, testing, and strain. Indeed no
ecology of late capitalism, given the variety of forces to which it is connected by a thousand pulleys,
vibrations, impingements, dependencies, shocks, and threads, can specify with supreme confidence the
solidity or potential flexibility of the structures it seeks to change.
The strength of structural theory, at its best, was in identifying insti- tutional intersections that hold a
system together; its conceit, at its worst, was the claim to know in advance how resistant such
intersections are to potential change. Without adopting the opposite conceit, it seems important
to pursue possible sites of strategic action that might open up room for productive
change. Today it seems important to attend to the relation be- tween the need for
structural change and identification of multiple sites of potential action. You do not know
precisely what you are doing when you participate in such a venture. You combine an experimental
temper with the appreciation that living and acting into the future inevitably contain a shifting quotient of
uncertainty. The following tentative judgments and sites of action may be pertinent.
1) Neither neoliberal theory, nor socialist productivism, nor deep ecology, nor social democracy in its
classic form seems sufficient to the contemporary condition. This is so in part because the powers of
market self- regulation are both real and limited in relation to a larger multitude of heterogeneous force
fields beyond the human estate with differential powers of self-regulation and metamorphosis. A first task
is to challenge neoliberal ideology through critique and by elaborating and publicizing positive
alternatives that acknowledge the disparate relations between mar- ket processes, other cultural systems,
and nonhuman systems. Doing so to render the fragility of things more visible and palpable. Doing so,
too, to set the stage for a series of intercoded shifts in citizen role performances, social movements, and
state action.
2) Those who seek to reshape the ecology of late capitalism might set an interim agenda of radical reform
and then recoil back on the initiatives adopted to see how they work. An interim agenda is the best thing
to focus on because in a world of becoming the more distant future is too cloudy to engage. We must,
for instance, become involved in experimental micro- politics on a variety of fronts, as we
participate in role experimentations, social movements, artistic displays, erotic-political shows,
electoral campaigns, and creative interventions on the new media to help recode the
ethos that now occupies investment practices, consumption desires, family savings, state priorities,
church assemblies, university curricula, and media reporting. It is important to bear in mind how extant
ideologies, estab- lished role performances, social movements, and commitments to state action intersect.
To shift some of our own role performances in the zones of travel, church participation, home energy use,
investment, and consump- tion, for instance, that now implicate us deeply in foreign oil dependence and
the huge military expenditures that secure it, could make a minor dif- ference on its own and also lift
some of the burdens of institutional implica- tion from us to support participation in more adventurous
interpretations, political strategies, demands upon the state, and cross-state citizen actions.
A2: Sovereignty Always Bad
Each use of the state has to judged on its own terms. Universal opposition to the state
creates multiple other forms of oppression
Derrida 3
(Jacques, THE "WORLD" OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT TO COME (EXCEPTION, CALCULATION,
SOVEREIGNTY), Research in Phenomenology. Pittsburgh: 2003. Vol. 33 pg. 9, 44 pgs)
And yet, in the second place, it would be imprudent and hasty, in truth hardly reasonable, to oppose
unconditionally, that is, head on, a sovereignty that is itself unconditional and indivisible.
One cannot combat, head on, all sovereignty, sovereignty in general, without
threatening at the same time, beyond the nation-state figure of sovereignty, the classical
principles of freedom and self-determination. Like the classical tradition of law (and the force
that it presupposes), these classical principles remain inseparable from a sovereignty at once indivisible
and yet able to be shared. Nation-state sovereignty can even itself, in certain conditions, become
an indispensable bulwark against certain international powers, certain ideological,
religious, or capitalist, indeed linguistic, hegemonies, which, under the cover of
liberalism or universalism, would still represent, in a world that would be little more
than a market, a rationalization in the service of particular interests. Yet again, in a
context that is each time singular, where the respectful attention paid to singularity is not relativist but
universalizable and rational, responsibility would consist in orienting ourselves without any
determinative knowledge of the rule. To be responsible, to keep within reason [garder raison],
would be to invent maxims of transaction for deciding between two just as rational and
universal but contradictory exigencies of reason as well as its enlightenment.
A2: Legal Details Bad
Link goes the opposite way – it is white elites who benefit from a lack of formal details
McCann 4 (Professor of Law at University of New Hampshire)
(Michael, Law and Social Movements in The Blackwell Companion to Law and Society Pg. 510)
Law is often especially important to one specific aim of many "outsider" groups _ that of "formalizing"
policy formulation and implementation processes. Formality, as understood here, refers to the degree to
which relations are conducted according to procedures and standards that are public, general, explicit, and
uniform (Lowi, 1979). The basic supposition here is that dominant groups tend to prefer relatively
insular (autonomous or hidden) modes of highly discretionary policy implementa- tion
unhampered by standardized procedures, substantive guidelines, high visibility, and outside
supervision. In such informal settings, established prerogatives of prevailing elites can more
easily prevail to minimize costs, maintain control, and protect their own privileges while
granting empty symbolic gestures to challengers. By contrast, marginalized groups usually
benefit from more formalized processes where specified procedural rights and
substantive standards can be employed to render accountable dominant interests who
control the bulk of material and organizational resources (Delgado et al., 1985).
A2: Liberalism Bad
Rejecting liberalism and while continuing to fight for justice within the law are necessary
and compatible
Sharpless 12 (Associate Clinical Professor, University of Miami School of Law)
(Rebecca, MORE THAN ONE LANE WIDE: AGAINST HIERARCHIES OF HELPING IN PROGRESSIVE
LEGAL ADVOCACY, 19 Clinical L. Rev. 347, Fall, LN)
Matsuda offers insights based in the "double consciousness" experience of people of color in which
"deep criticism" is combined with "an aspirational vision of law." n203 From this point of
view, we can believe in both the necessity and the inadequacy of rights. n204 We can
believe in both the necessity and the inadequacy of direct service lawyering. Theoretical critiques of
liberalism may require the critique of individual client services as, at best, a panacea and, at worst, a
practice that perpetuates client domination and the status quo. Yet social reality requires that
progressive lawyers work with individual people and within the current legal system.
Social justice lawyers can believe in the inadequacy of the liberal rights framework and
the adversarial system but still make rights claims in court; reject formalism but still
engage in rule-bound lawyering; believe that helping individuals alone will never bring
about social justice, but keep helping individuals; understand the indeterminacy of any road
towards social justice but still meaningfully debate the best goals and methods; and believe
that there is inherent domination whenever lawyers engage with their clients but still offer their
professional skills in the service of others and the movement. Progressive legal advocates--attorneys and
academics alike--should value the work of those who have the patience and commitment to offer lifesustaining help day in and day out.
A2: Roleplaying Bad
First, there’s obviously no link
Second, taking on different roles is a powerful tool of amplifiying collective action. Purely
negative critique is dangerous
Connolly 11
(William E., A World of Becoming, Duke University Press)
What are possible modes of positive intervention in this amplification machine?
Certainly state and interstate actions could make a major difference, even though they
cannot dismantle the machine done. Concerted state and interstate pressure to regulate derivative markets,
to roll back Israeli settlements, to promote a new state of Palestine (or even a larger, pluralistic Israel)
would help immeasurably. So would the end of preemptive wars and the bellicose image the United
States has presented to much of the world during large stretches of time. But these and other actions are
also insufficient to the times. Equally important, they require significant constituency changes
on the ground to make them feasible. A combination of luck, exhaustion of the most
militant constituencies on each side, cultural shaming, and creative action by nonstate
actors within and across states is also needed to turn the machine in a new direction. The
hawkish minorities on each side must be matched and surpassed by counter-constituencies anchored in
multiple sites.
Here I focus primarily on one dimension of such activity, a "triggering" force that carries Hegel's
expressive dimension of sovereignty into contemporary role definitions. It is misleading to divide the
political world into individuals, constituency organizations, and states. Each individual, for instance, is
ensconced in a variety of roles. And each role both informs the individual and is linked to larger
assemblages. The connections are relatively conscious when consumption patterns of dress, hairstyle,
housing, entertainment, and car choke forge identity niches. Role specific habits of eye contact are less
conscious, as in the street rules of middle class eye contact between the sexes in the United States of the
1950s. Yet those habits helped to constitute a pattern of gender relations that found expression in family
life, education, dating, sports, work life, voting habits, and church practices. A role is neither reducible
entirely to the individuals who inhabit it nor thoroughly assimilable to the larger assemblages that help to
shape and manage it. It is the site of strategic ambiguity, periodically susceptible for that reason to
creative political deployment.
To consider multiple roles in relation to this global resonance machine suggests how
accumulated changes in these practices might make a contribution to turning the
machine in a different direction. Certainly, a large number of preachers, imams, rabbis, writers,
military leaders, talking heads, and unemployed workers introduced changes into role conduct that helped
to organize the current machine. Osama bin Laden's roles as a wealthy man, investor, devotee of Islam,
Saudi, and charismatic leader all underwent change when he founded Al Qaeda.
We are, variously, teachers, blue collar workers, writers, film directors, consumers, investors, faith
devotees, parents, lovers, voters, Internet users, Tv viewers, military veterans, charity donors, members of
an age cohort, contributors to retirement funds, homeowners or renters, neighbors, models, athletes,
students, advertising executives, geologists, oil drifters, and so on, endlessly. The trick today is to
infuse a bit of the warrior ethic into the performance of several of these roles, not in the
spirit of Napoleon, Putin, and Bush, of Gandhi, Thoreau, Nietzsche, and Martin Luther King Jr., with
the inspiration and strategic sense of each adjusted to the new circumstances of being.
The task is to inhabit several roles in more militant, visible, creative, and inspirational
ways, as we come to terms with their cumulative effects on the world.
The accumulation of rapid shifts in role performance might introduce new pressures
into the world. The goals in ascending order are: first, to induce cumulative changes in individual and
group conducts that shift the center of gravity in this or that way and encourage others to do so; second,
to push collective role assemblages in new directions; and third, to inspire initiatives that
draw energy from activity on these first two fronts to escalate both internal and external
pressures upon corporations, states, universities, churches and temples, investment
firms, the media, the Internet, and international organizations.
The initial potentialities are numerous. Consumers can, as the need and opportunity arises, alter patterns
of consumption with respect to food acquisition, vehicle use, housing, cuisine, clothing, and
entertainment, seeking to gear each mode more closely to a near future that reduces oil dependence,
improves food production, and curtails emissions, and also to inspire more active and intense support for
collective modes of consumption that reduce inequality within and between regions. Investors and
participants in retirement investment funds can readjust the priorities of those investments, as they also
organize to demand closer state regulation of volatile markets. Congregants within churches, temples,
synagogues, mosques, and madrassas can repudiate publicaliy the most ugly pronouncements and actions
taken by others in the name of theft faith, to shame those who have hijacked their creed for retrograde
means, and to press their own congregations to change their energy use, relations with other faiths, and
relations to corporations and the state. By doing so they also help to recompose the connection between
existential faith and drives to implacable revenge so prominent today. Experts in oil exploration,
sustainable energy production, electrical engineering, and automobile production can experiment with
new modes of transportation and energy use. Writers, Tv producers, actors, bloggers, and film directors
can infuse a gratitude for being more actively into their writing, films, and characters, seeking to
challenge cynical existential dispositions on the Left that come perilously close to the forces they would
resist. Veterans, who have experienced the horror of war up close, can relate that sense of horror to
others, while publicizing nonmilitary ways to engage contemporary issues. Reporters and dissident
economists can publicize microeconomic experiments in various corners of the world that could be
extended, exposing investors, consumers, and producers to a larger range of possibilities than generally
recognized. Teachers in schools and universities can teach students how the media work upon them daily
at multiple levels of the sensorium, and how they too can acquire sophisticated media skills.
The possibilities are endless. The point of individual and group experimentation with
role assignments is simultaneously to make a direct difference through our conduct, to
open us to new experiences that might alter our relational sensibilities even further, to
unscramble role assumptions assumed by others, to form operational connections with
others from which larger political movements might be generated, and to make
connections with noble role warriors in other regions and walks of life to enlarge the
space and visibility of positive action. A stated change in personal or constituency belief is not
enough since the layered embodiment of belief and the actual performance of roles are so closely bound
together. A belief is an embodied tendency to performance; concerted practices of performance
help to alter or intent efy belief; and new intensities of belief fold back into future desires, performative
priorities, and potentialities of political action. Such a spiral can produce positive as well as negative
effects. For example, an accumulation of resentments against states, corporations, and
consumers for their refusal to address global warming could eventually inspire a
cross-regional movement to launch simultaneous general strikes in several states.
Such dramatic actions are not apt to take place unless and until the spiritual ground has
been prepared and the unity of obstinate elites has been weakened. Effective role
adventurism helps. It builds a reservoir of public readiness for more militant action upon
and by civil society, state, and interstate institutions. As some churches modify their behavior
toward mosques, and vice versa, the door is open to form a cross-state citizen movement to modify the
practices of states and international organizations. As those movements coalesce, support for the
most bellicose forces on each side wanes. When those effects are consolidated, corporations,
churches, states, and international organizations are placed under yet more positive pressure, or
alternatively find it possible to take more risks, if and when such a machine becomes organized, each
pressure point begins to resonate with the others, creating a resonance machine larger than its parts.
At the early stages of such a movement, it
is important to think tactically about how to
proceed, so as to put effective pressure on others through example, inspiration, and
shaming. The goal is to build a resonant assemblage by deploying mobile intersections between belief,
role performance, desire, and action to prepare the way for more militant sit-ins, highway blockages,
selective refusals of participation, and so on, as events unfold. One key to formation of vibrant
cross-state citizen movements is to respond creatively to new and surprising events as
they arise, drawing upon the fund of readiness built up by role adventurism to engender
larger, more militant actions. Such a combination takes a leaf out of the "shock doctrine" of the
neoliberal right while diverging from it in every other respect. As Naomi Klein shows, the neoliberal
right has been primed for decades to use surprising events as a pretext to install a neoliberal agenda
through top-down action. 17 The shock side of its economic doctrine shows how political neoliberalism is
in its essence. It pursues a neoliberal politics of elite control in the service of military
bellicosity and regional inequality in the name of freeing a self-regulating economy that
it pretends is waiting to emerge. Its politics is top down, war-like, and inegalitarian while
its doctrine celebrates the ever receding promise of world markets that thrive most when they are least
regulated. We, by contrast, must start in the middle of things and constituencies, pushing
out in several directions, responding creatively to new events in a world in which no
self-organizing economic system can fulfill the promises of neoliberalism, because the
world is composed of multiple, interacting temporal systems, with many containing
capacities of selforganization and metamorphosis. Micropolitics
on several fronts can render
creative mass responses to new events promising because of the dose interinvolvements
between role performance, intensities of belief, and political action.
Is it not obligatory to expose and resist the system as such rather than taking cumulative
actions to move it? Don't such actions necessarily fold back in on themselves, feeding
the dosed system they seek to move? Some theorists on the Left say such things, but
they themselves have too dosed a view of the systems they criticize. No system in a
world of becoming composed of multiple, interacting systems of different types, with
different capacities of self-organization, is entirely dosed. It is both more vulnerable to the outside
than the carriers of hubris imagine and periodically susceptible to creative movement from within and
without simultaneously. Moreover, pure negativity on the Left does not sustain either critique
or militancy for long, but rather, it tends eventually to lapse into resignation or to slide
toward the authoritarian practices of the Right that already express with glee the moods
of negativity, hubris, or existential revenge. We have witnessed numerous examples of such
disappointing transitions in the last several decades, when a negative or authoritarian mood is retained
while the creed in which it was set is changed dramatically. We must therefore work on mood,
belief; desire, and action together. As we do so we also amplify positive attachment to
existence itself amidst the specific political resentments that help to spur us on. To
ignore the existential dimension of politics is to increase the risks of converting a noble
movement into an authoritarian one and to amplify the power of bellicose movements
that mobilize destructive potential. To focus on the negative dimension alone is to abjure the
responsibilities of political action during a dangerous time.
To review, none of the role interventions listed above nor all in concert could suffice to break such a
global resonance machine. Luck and pregnant points of contact with salutary changes in state actions,
other cross-state citizen movements, the policies of international organizations, creative
market innovations, and religious organization are needed. But those larger constellations
may not themselves move far in a positive direction unless they meet multiple constituencies primed to
join them and geared to press them whenever they lapse into inertia, if a world resonance machine of
revenge and counter-revenge stretches, twists, and constrains the classical image of sovereign units,
regionally anchored creeds, uneven capitalist exchange, and international organizations, while drawing
selective sustenance from all of them, a new counter-machine must do so too.
Legal Ed Good – A2: Makes you a drone etc
Legal education empowers a critique of the law, not liberal passivity
Harris and Maeda 4 (Prof @ UC Davis School of Law; Professor of Critical Theory and Social Justice @
Occidental)
(Angela Harris and Donna Maeda, Power and Resistance in Contemporary Legal Education, in Legal Education and
the Reproduction of Hierarchy, Project MUSE)
Efforts by progressive students to transform hierarchies indicate the importance of
constant resistance, and also the usefulness of a midlevel political analysis: not focusing on the law
school (the local) as a fulcrum for changing the world (the global) but understanding legal
education as one aspect of very particular social struggles for justice. The Coalition for Diversity
in some ways is the embodiment of the kind of resistance Kennedy advocates. Its diffuse structure and
efforts have enabled members to figure out how to connect issues, to constantly look for complex relationships of the operations of power, and to set in motion dynamics of change even beyond specific,
planned actions. The organization’s success may at times appear small, but the complexity of power
relationships indi- cates the necessity of such small, constant resistances. Such organizing work, which
contributes to the development of complex critical perspectives and coalition-building skills, as well as
lessons learned by efforts to change the most elite, hierarchical structures (such as law review), may help
prepare such students for struggles in the hierarchically ordered lib- eral legal-political world we inhabit.
At the same time, progressive students in the Coalition and elsewhere add to Kennedy’s two left stances
an ability to treat law as only one thread in a web of relations of power and to bring their prior
experiences of sub- ordination, resistance, and critical thinking directly to bear on their law school
organizing. Both the liberal and radical stances Kennedy describes understand the law as the law
understands itself: as, for good or ill, the foundation of the house of power. This view, however, sustains
power relations by appealing only to the realm of law itself for resistance. The belief that law school, the
legal profession, and the law more generally are the sole, or even key, places for reproducing or undoing
hierarchy sets up this realm as the most significant place for work in confronting power, so that people
with legal skills continue to be held up as the most important ac- tors for social change.
As an alternative, progressive law students may use their involvement with the law to
participate in broader resistance practices. We have focused on connecting resistance
against legal hierarchy with the fight for racial justice, but of course there are many other kinds
of anti-subordina- tion struggles that can serve as the basis for a valuable praxis. Kennedy’s assessment of
the circuits of institutional self-replication remains a valu- able one; but left students who come to law
school need not choose between liberal naïveté and radical alienation. Instead, law students
may draw on their experiences of hierarchy outside legal education to transform their
conditions of life, grounded in the knowledge of the necessity of constant struggle and
resistance.
Legal Ed Good – A2: But We Know the Law’s Bad
Legal education needs to be tailored to specific acts of resistance
Morales-Cruz 12 (teaches at Inter American University of Puerto Rico School of Law)
(Myrta, Oñati Socio-Legal Series, v. 2, n. 1, ¡Los Filtros Luchan!1 A Case Study of Lawyering and Participatory
Democracy: Participatory Lobbying as a Strategy for Working with Marginalized Communities)
Finally, the third image of lawyering presented by White is "lawyering together toward change"
(White 1988). This image of lawyering combines pedagogy and strategic action. White (1988
cited Freire 1970 and De Lauretis 1984) is inspired by Paulo Freire's popular education theory and the
feminist methodology of consciousness raising. Both show how a critical consciousness can emerge
among oppressed groups as they reflect together about their situation (White 1988). This is a learning
practice that is non-hierarchical "in which small groups reflect together upon the immediate conditions of
their lives" (White 1988, p. 761). It is a "dialogic process of reflection and action" (White 1988, p. 761).
In this model, nobody monopolizes the teacher role (White 1988). However, an "outsider" with
professional skills can have an important role to play (White 1988, p.762). The lawyer who
assumes this role must, according to White, above all else, have humility. The strategic work entailed
by this image of lawyering must help the group "devise concrete actions that challenge the
patterns of domination that they identify" (White 1988, p. 763). This work is a process where "the
group learns to interpret their relationship with those in power as an ongoing drama" instead of a static
condition (White 1988, p. 763). They must learn how to design specific acts of resistance,
which reveal the wrongness of the positions of the oppressor to itself and to the public
(White 1988).
White (1988, p. 765) posits that " fluency in the law" which she describes as a "deep practical
understanding of law as a discourse for articulating norms of justice and an array of rituals for resolving
social conflict" is beneficial for the type of work that she describes: "An understanding of law as
discourse on norms will help [the "outsider"] work with the clients to deepen their own
consciousness of their injuries and their needs. Knowledge of the law's procedural
rituals will give the group access to a central arena for public resistance and challenge."
Monolith/Closure DA Ext.
Specific to lawyering
Grinthal 11 (J.D. 2006, Harvard Law School; M.P.A. 2006, Harvard John F. Kennedy School of Government.
Senior Staff Attorney, South Brooklyn Legal Services.)
(Michael, POWER WITH: PRACTICE MODELS FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE LAWYERING, University of
Pennsylvania Journal of Law and Social Change, 15 U. Pa. J.L. & Soc. Change 25, LN)
There is truth to these criticisms. As Bill Quigley quoted one veteran organizer, "In my 25 years of
experience, I find that lawyers create dependency. The lawyers want to advocate for others and do not
understand the goal of giving a people a sense of their own power." n51 But there is also overreaction.
The radical critique of lawyering at times approaches superstition, as if lawyers were
black holes, inexorably warping any organizational space into which they enter. In fact,
some alarmist narratives so perpetuate the mystification of lawyers as to contribute to the
effects they decry; when lawyers do arrive on the scene - perhaps representing opponents, perhaps
opportunity - organizers and leaders are conditioned to overreact, automatically mistrust, and shun
relationship where a relationship might be politically appropriate.
Surrender to the destructive dynamics of lawyering is not inevitable. Neither is
transformation of the lawyer's role and impact a simple matter of renunciation, no matter how emphatic.
It is, like all transformations, a long and daily struggle. And, like all powerful struggles, it must be
relational. It will take lawyers and non-lawyers working together to re-imagine and remold the lawyer-client relationship. To assume that lawyers can do so unilaterally is to begin with
the very assumption sought to be transcended - that all power flows from and all responsibility accrues to
the lawyer.
Why, with all of the narrative danger swirling around them, should we even bother with lawyers? If it is
true that "poverty will not be stopped by people who are not poor," n52 why not concentrate on
organizing the poor and leave lawyers out of it? The answer, of course, is that once we clear
away the mystification, lawyers, like any other participant in organization, have both value and
values that can be amplified when they come into relationship with other people. As
discussed below, lawyers bring specific knowledge and skills, relationships with powerful
institutions, access to legal forums, and traditions of individual worth and equality. This
list is by no means an exhaustive picture of what lawyering may be or has been. My purpose in offering it
here is to prepare a framework for evaluation of the lawyer-constituency relational models in the
following section, so that it will be possible to ask of each model: "what aspects of lawyering are engaged
in this relationship? To what extent is the lawyer entering into the relationship as a lawyer?"
Knowledge & Skills
Lawyers famously possess unique knowledge and skills uniquely adapted to the public arena. Just as Mr.
Domingo's storytelling abilities took on new value when he used them in relation with the other leaders
with whom he shared the stage, so the value of lawyers' special knowledge and skills
multiplies in the context of group action. Sometimes the lawyer may simply do what she knows
best how to do. At other times, the lawyer may replicate her knowledge and skills by teaching others.
These knowledge and skills can be important tools, as long as the lawyer and the constituents do not
confuse them for strategies in and of themselves, or allow group goals to be shaped by their easy
availability.
Relationships
As discussed above, organizing, at its core, consists of the building and mobilization of deliberate
relationships. Lawyers, like pastors, shop stewards, teachers, block captains, grandparents, etc., tend to
have relationships with many people. In a poor community, the local legal services lawyer may be the
only relationship that numerous tenants, benefit recipients, or laid-off workers have in common. The
lawyer is the first to see changes in the local community or economy in the pattern of clients coming
through the door. In addition, because lawyers so often mediate between their clients and powerful
institutions, they know the local decision-makers and resource controllers. n53 Experienced lawyers walk
around with robust power maps in their heads, [*42] developed through repeated interactions with
institutions; they know the real procedures by which agencies make decisions - who is influential, what
their values and interests are, who is coming up, and who is on their way out - in addition to the official
written procedures that community leaders can discover through diligent research.
Once it may have been the parish priest who played these roles. And it may bode poorly for our society if
they have shifted to the lawyer. But the answer, rather than delivering eulogies for civil society, must be
to draw lawyers out into networks of relationship and interdependency, to enable them to share their
hoard of social capital - a hoard many do not want to keep to themselves, but simply do not know how to
redistribute. The lawyer, like the priest, is often the loneliest person that knows everybody, and this ought
to have any decent organizer salivating.
Access to Legal Forums
The lawyer's privileged access to courtrooms and other institutional forums is a scarce
resource that they alone can make available to organizing efforts. Most people do not have to be told
how valuable this resource can be; even organizers who scorn litigation cannot entirely avoid
criminal charges, collateral civil attacks, and the transactional requirements of group
development. More fundamentally, all organizing efforts at some point seek recognition, n54 and
recognition is often formal, whether legal (as when a union is recognized by the National Labor Relations
Board) or private but rule-bound (as when a corporation allows a proxy organization onto the agenda of
its shareholders' meeting). Formal recognition is often an important step in exercising power (though it is
unfortunately almost as often confused with power itself), and lawyers are given privileged access to its
processes. Under current law, at least, lawyers cannot simply give this access away to nonmembers of the
bar. The only way they can redistribute their privilege is to enter into relationships through which their
access is mobilized and held accountable by a group decision-making process.
Lobel 7 (Assistant Professor of Law, University of San Diego)
(Orly, THE PARADOX OF EXTRALEGAL ACTIVISM: CRITICAL LEGAL CONSCIOUSNESS AND
TRANSFORMATIVE POLITICS, 120 Harv. L. Rev. 937, February, 2007, LN)
When examining closely the dominant set of assumptions underlying recent critical scholarship, one must face the question: what is uniquely legal about cooptation? This
Article considers the claims of legal cooptation as they have been developed vis-a-vis former periods of social activism - primarily the New Deal labor movement and the 1960s
civil rights movement - in relation to recent scholarship that purports to provide alternatives to cooptive legal processes. It traces the impact of critical understandings of the law
the limits of social
change are not confined to legal reform, but in fact are as likely (if not more so) to occur
in the realm of extralegal activism. Moreover, the very idea of opting out of the legal arena
creates a false binary between social spheres that in reality permeate one another. Under the contemporary axiomatic skepticism
to three strands of contemporary "extralegal" schools of thought that operate under a critical legal consciousness. The Article argues that
about the law, analysts often bundle and collapse legal cooptation claims rather than differentiate among myriad, distinct sets of concerns. When claims about the failures of
legal reform are unbundled, they provide a window into our assumptions about the possibilities and rhythms of change in general, not merely change via the path of the law.
Accordingly, this Article asserts that contemporary critical legal consciousness has eclipsed the origins of critical theory, which situated various forms of social action - all of
which potentially have cooptive as well as transformative effects - on more equal grounds.
The inquiry begins by delineating three periods of social reform activism, their relationship to legal reform, and their successes and failures as perceived by legal scholars. Part
II describes the first two periods, which have served contemporary thinkers as paradigmatic moments for analyzing the failures of legal reform and the negative consequences
that followed the decline of social activism. The first period is the New Deal labor movement, which achieved statutory reordering of labor relations yet was ultimately
criticized for creating a hostile environment for collective bargaining and for leading to the sharp decline of unionism. The second period is the civil rights movement of the
1950s and 1960s, which achieved widespread recognition for its legislative and judicial victories yet has been widely critiqued for its limited success in eliminating racial
injustice. In both cases, cooptation analysis focuses not simply on the limits of the legal victories but also, and often primarily, on the pacification of the social movement and
the decline of a reform vision, which resulted from the perceived successes of legislative and judicial victories. Pointing to these two "failed successes," contemporary legal
scholars express a now-axiomatic skepticism about law's ability to produce social transformation. Drawing on the critical scholarship that has developed in relation to these two
periods, Part II unpacks the arguments about legal cooptation, demonstrating that they are not monolithic but rather constitute distinct sets of claims, including concerns about
resources and energy, framing and fragmentation, lawyering and professionalism, [*941] crowding-out effects, institutional limitations, and the unsubstantiated legitimation of
existing social arrangements.
As a result of an emerging truism about the limitations of legal reform - captured by the reference to legalism as the "hollow hope" n2 - contemporary critics warn against a
reliance on law, courts, legal language, and lawyers in the struggles of social movements. Part III describes a third period, this one involving extralegal activism, as it is
represented and celebrated in legal scholarship. In mapping the landscape of this "alternative scholarship," three distinct types of extralegal strategies emerge: first, the
redefinition of the purpose of the legal system as promoting secondary goals rather than primary ones; second, the move away from the legal arena to an extralegal sphere of
action, often evoking the notion of civil society; and third, the expansion of the meanings of law and legality, building on earlier understandings of the legal pluralism school of
thought.
After exploring the underlying assumptions of each of these proposals with regard to the limits of law and the limits of change, this Article revisits the concept of cooptation
within the broader range of possibilities for social struggle. Rather than dismissing concerns about legal cooptation, Part IV asserts that the emerging umbrella school of thought
draws erroneous conclusions from critical understandings and presents false alternatives in the gamut of law and social change. A more accurate inquiry into the limits of
extralegal
activism proponents misrepresent alternative avenues of activism as solutions to
cooptation concerns by overlooking the risks of cooptation present in extralegal
activism. Consequently, a counter "myth of engagement" is reified by the rejection of the
"myth of law." Not only is the idea of avoiding legal strategies as a means of social change
misdirected, but such a construction also conceals the ways in which the law continues to exist
in the background of the envisioned alternatives. Thus, earlier critical insights about the ongoing
importance of law in seemingly unregulated spheres are lost in the contemporary message. Further, the
idea of opting out of the legal arena fails to recognize a reality of growing
interpenetration and blurring of boundaries between private and public spheres, for-profit
and nonprofit actors, and formal and informal institutions. Most importantly, a theory of avoidance
contributes to a conservative rhetoric about the decline of the state, the necessities of
deregulation, and the inevitability of mounting inequalities. The Article reveals a
change should cast doubt on the privileged role of extralegal activism that is trumpeted in contemporary writings. This Article demonstrates how
contemporary false equation of formal legal reform avenues with a conservative status quo and of
informal - that is, extralegal - avenues with transformative progress. The movement to extralegal
activism has unwittingly aligned itself with concepts such as civil society revivalism,
informality, and nongovernmental norm generation. All of these concepts are associated with
decreasing commitments of the state, privatization, deregulation, and devolution of
governmental authority in the social arena. All three brands of extralegal strategies reflect not
only disillusionment with and disappointment in the legal system as a potential engine for social reform,
but also imply path dependency with current economic realities and shifting commitments of the state in
an era of globalization.
Since the critique of legal cooptation asserts that legal reform, even when viewed as successful,
is never radically transformative, it is equally crucial to ask what criteria are available for
assessing the success of the suggested alternatives. As this Article argues, the risks of extralegal
cooptation are similar to the risks of legal cooptation. However, the allure of an alternative model
of progressive politics that would avoid the critical risks of cooptation has prevented its advocates
from scrutinizing it in the same way that legal strategies are routinely questioned.
Therefore, the new wave of extralegal politics risks entailing no more than a loser's ex post selfmystification. Posing these challenges, Part V concludes that much of the contemporary alternative
scholarship obscures the lines between description and prescription in the exploration and formulation of
transformative politics.