Millard+South+LH+Neg

Millard South LH – Negative – At-Large Team

Nietzsche is their core Neg position

V. POLICY CASES

FIRST, BY UNEQUIVOCALLY MANDATING THAT PLAN SHOULD PASS OR LIFE WILL BE TERRIBLE OR NONEXISTENT THE AFFIRMATIVE DENIES REALITY AND DISPARAGES THE INTEGRITY OF THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH THEIR MORALITY. THEY ATTEMPT TO CONSTRUCT THE WORLD IN THEIR OWN LIKENESS.

Nietzsche 1889 (Friedrich, German Philosopher, 1889 “Twilight of the Idols”)

SECOND, THE AFFIRMATIVE’S PUSH FOR THE “BETTER LIFE” “ANOTHER, BETTER WORLD” – THAT OF PLAN – MAKES THIS LIFE MEANINGLESS. THE SHAMELESS UTOPIA FREE OF CASE HARMS PRESENTED IN THE 1AC IS A DENIAL OF THE WORLD AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS.

Nietzsche 1877 (Friedrich, German Philosopher, 1877, “Twilight of the Idols”)

AND, THE AFFIRMATIVE’S PITY AND ATTEMPT TO ALLEVIATE THIS SUFFERING VALORIZES HUMANITY’S WORST IMPULSES LEADING US INTO AN ETERNAL RETURN OF MALICE INSTEAD OF ONE OF JOY AND HAPPINESS.

Nietzsche 1895 (Friedrich, Philosopher, “Twilight of the Idols”)

AND, OUR ALTERNATIVE IS NOT MERELY AN ACTION THAT CAN BE PERMUTED, BUT A RADICALLY DIFFERENT ORIENTATION TOWARDS THE WORLD. A VOTE FOR THE NEGATIVE IS A VOTE TO REFUSE TO ENGAGE IN THE MOURNFUL POLITICS OF THE 1AC, AND INSTEAD EMBRACE BOTH THE SUFFERING AND JOYS OF LIFE. TO VOTE NEG IS AMOR FATI, TO LOVE FATE.

AND, THE ALTERNATIVE SOLVES – NIETZSCHEAN ETHICS PURSUE AND CELEBRATE TRUTH, PRODUCING JOY – WE MUST NOT ONLY ACCEPT FATE BUT LOVE IT IN ORDER TO BE HAPPY AND FREE

Groff 04 – Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Bucknell University – 2004 (Peter S, Journal of Nietzsche Studies, “Al-Kindi and Nietzsche on the Stoic Art of Banishing Sorrow,” Issue 28, Autumn 2004, pg. 139-173)

AND, MUCH LIKE THE EMPTY DESIRE FOR A BETTER WORLD WHERE ONE DOES NOT EXIST, THE AFFIRMATIVE’S FRAMEWORK ARGUMENTS ARE FICTITIOUS RULES THAT SUPPRESS DEBATE IN THE NAME OF PLAYING THE “CORRECT” WAY. RULES ARE SOCIALLY CONSTRUCTED BY PEOPLE WHO HAVE PSYCHOLOGICAL POINTS TO PROVE.

Johnston 90 ( Ian, Professor @ Malaspina College, “There's Nothing Nietzsche Couldn't Teach Ya About the Raising of the Wrist,” May 1990, http://www.mala.bc.ca/~johnstoi/introser/nietzs.htm)

AND, THEIR CLAIMS THAT THE ALTERNATIVE MANDATES HOLOCAUST ARE FALSE. WE DON’T CONDEMN ETHICS, JUST ABSOLUTE MORALITY – ACKNOWLEDGING THAT EVERYTHING IS PERMITTED AND POSSIBLE ONLY MAKES MORE IMPORTANT THE ETHICAL QUESTION OF WHAT WE SHOULD DO.

White 90 (Alan, Professor of Philosophy @ Williams College,“Within Nietzsche’s Labyrinth: Completing Frames,” 1990, http://www.williams.edu/philosophy/faculty/awhite/WNL%20web/Completing%20frames.htm)

V. CRITICAL CASES

FIRST, THE AFFIRMATIVE’S CONSTANT SEARCHING FOR A “BETTER LIFE” OF “ANOTHER BETTER WORLD” MAKES THIS LIFE MEANINGLESS. CONSTANT QUESTING FOR UTOPIA IS A REJECTION OF THE WORLD AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS.

Nietzsche 1877 (Friedrich, Philosopher, 1877, “Twilight of the Idols”)

SECOND, BY UNEQUIVOCALLY ADVOCATING THAT THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT IS WRONG, AND THAT THEIR FANTASY OF POST-PLAN/ROUND CHANGE WILL CREATE WORLD PEACE AND SOLVE ALL SUFFERING, THEY INDUGLE IN THE FANTASY OF AN ABSOLUTIST MORALITY. THIS MORALITY IS BY NATURE DESIGNED TO DISPARAGE THE INTEGRITY OF ANY WHO WOULD DISAGREE.

Nietzsche 1889 (Friedrich, Philosopher, 1889 “Twighlight of the Idols”)

AND, THE AFFIRMATIVE’S PITY AND ATTEMPT TO ALLEVIATE THIS SUFFERING VALORIZES HUMANITY’S WORST IMPULSES LEADING US INTO AN ETERNAL RETURN OF MALICE INSTEAD OF ONE OF JOY AND HAPPINESS.

Nietzsche 1895 (Friedrich, Philosopher, “Twilight of the Idols”)

AND, OUR ALTERNATIVE IS NOT MERELY AN ACTION THAT CAN BE PERMUTED, BUT A RADICALLY DIFFERENT ORIENTATION TOWARDS THE WORLD. A VOTE FOR THE NEGATIVE IS A VOTE TO REFUSE TO ENGAGE IN THE WORLD-DENYING POLITICS OF THE 1AC, AND INSTEAD EMBRACE BOTH THE SUFFERING AND JOYS OF LIFE. TO VOTE NEG IS AMOR FATI, TO LOVE FATE.

AND, THE ALTERNATIVE SOLVES – NIETZSCHEAN ETHICS PURSUE AND CELEBRATE TRUTH, PRODUCING JOY – WE MUST NOT ONLY ACCEPT FATE BUT LOVE IT IN ORDER TO BE HAPPY AND FREE.

Groff 04 – Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Bucknell University – 2004 (Peter S, Journal of Nietzsche Studies, “Al-Kindi and Nietzsche on the Stoic Art of Banishing Sorrow,” Issue 28, Autumn 2004, pg. 139-173)

AND, THEY FAIL TO CONFRONT THE MEANING OF PAIN BECAUSE THE ENTIRE 1AC ACTS AS AN AVERSIVE AVOIDANCE OF THE PAIN OF LIVING. SUFFERING IS AN INHERENT CONDITION OF LIFE, NOT AN ARGUMENT AGAINST THE ALTERNATIVE’S AFFIRMATION OF IT.

Deleuze 83[Gilles, professor of philosophy, “Nietzsche and Philosophy”, ‘The Dicethrow’, Pg 129-130]

AND, THEIR AVERSION TO SUFFERING DENIES THE GREATNESS OF THE SOUL AND SEES ONLY MISERY WHERE THERE COULD EXIST GREAT STRENGTH. THIS PRECLUDES THE ALTERNATIVE’S AFFIRMATION.

Nietzsche 1886 (fredrich, “beyond good and evil”, aph # 225, pg. 342