Tournament: College Prep | Round: 1 | Opponent: harvard westlake | Judge:
I begin with the story of the Lorax (you have 2:03 to read this, if you don’t finish mark the card)
Dr.Suess ( “ The Lorax”, New York random house, Dr.Suess hidden gem that brainwashed little kids on philosophical ideas, pages 1-28”) 

At the far end of townwhere the Grickle-grass growsand the wind smells slow
AND
that hack.Then the Lorax and all of his friendsmay come back."

First, the status quo changes the image of nature to a dead ting, removing all limitations for exploitation. The reductionist worldview that sees money as alive and nature as dead controls our lives and legitimizes the exploitation of people. The digging up of natural resources is rooted in capitalistic ideologies. Only breaking away from the consumption/production logic can we avoid extinction.
Trainer 7 (Senior Lecturer, School of Social Work, University of New South Wales (Ted, Renewable Energy Cannot Sustain A Consumer Society, pg. 125-126)
The core “limits to growth” claim is that the huge global problems we
AND
ways. Few people seem to grasp the magnitude of the required reductions.

The call for resource management merely re-positions humans as superior to the natural world—this eliminates the true need to care for and guard the environment
Housman and Flynn 11 Benjamin H. Housman and Thomas R. Flynn “Cooling Down Global Warming: Revisiting Sartre and Heidegger on this Modern Day Challenge” The ‘Step Back’ as a ‘Step Towards’ Confronting Global April 14, 2011 MV

So why does it matter that we now live in a positioned world exemplified by
AND
, and Heidegger proceeds in his lecture by stressing the danger of positionality.

Trees are the lungs of the Earth. The Once-ler asks us to plant the seeds of Truffula Trees to make up for our damage done to the planet and to provide a place to live for the animals we have chased away. Deforestation and overconsumption lead to endless consumption. Thus the AFF is an eco-sophical stance that rethinks the relationship between the self and nature and between nature and culture. The Affirmative stance is LITERALLY a pre-requisite to any critical or political questions about the potential implications of the effects of the AFF. An Affirmative ballot represents embracing ecosophy as a means to fundamentally change the way humans interact with the environment or in the words of the resolution developing countries should prioritize environmental protection over resource collection when the two are in conflict because of our reorientation of our ethical stance with the environment.
Tinnell 11 – Department of English, University of Florida (John, The Fibreculture Journal, issue 18 2011, FCJ-121 Transversalising the Ecological Turn: Four Components of Felix Guattari’s Ecosophical Perspective, http://eighteen.fibreculturejournal.org/2011/10/09/fcj-121-transversalising-the-ecological-turn-four-components-of-felix-guattariE28099s-ecosophical-perspective/)

Transversality, as can be surmised Watson’s insightful work on Guattari, moves hand
AND
come, or at least, the eco-humanities yet to come.

And, how we as subjects are positioned in debate is a prerequisite to interpreting and understanding the resolution or its implications – how we know and view the world is influenced by construction of social reality through discourses of knowledge. The affirmative burden is to prove that the discursive alternative is preferable to the status quo or the negative’s competitive option. The reciprocal negative burden is to prove that the status quo or negating the resolution is preferable to enactment of the alternative. Burdens must be reciprocal for fairness by definition. Promoting understanding of the issue in the debate space is a way of educating others for the public good
Maniates ‘01 (Indivdualization: Plant a Tree, Buy a Bike, Save the World? 2001 Michael      Maniates, Professor of Environmental Science and Political Science?at Allegheny College http://merlin.allegheny.edu/employee/m/mmaniate/savetheworld.pdf)
There's another reason, though, why the book is so loved. By ending
AND
) the need to speak politely and individually; amled only with facts. 

Focusing on resources and fossil fuels causes the exploitation of the people and the environment. Economic contradiction force short-term thinking that results in environmental catastrophe – this causes extinction  
Foster, 11 (John B, “Capitalism and Degrowth-An Impossibility Theorem”, Monthly Review Vol. 62, Iss. 8; pg. 26, 8 pgs , January 2011, proquest)
In the opening paragraph to his 2009 book, Storms of My Grandchildren, James
AND
markets, even wages) but reframes them according to different principles.9 

The existential risk of environmental destruction from the capitalist drive to infinitely exploit resources is an independent reason to vote affirmative, as extinction from environmental destruction is the end of all human aspiration; existence is a prerequisite to making ethical calculations or evaluating deontological standards.
Questioning of technological thought is a prerequisite to ethical determinations; it negates one’s value to life. Calculative thought makes all life expendable and open to extermination
Dillon 99 (Michael, Prof of Politics + Int'l Relations @ Lancaster Univ., Political Theory, p. 164-165)

Quite the reverse.  The subject was never a firm foundation for justice, much
AND
global effect.  The technologisation of the political has become manifest and global.
Economies of evaluation necessarily require calculability.  Thus no valuation without mensuration and no mensuration
AND
, is integral to the lack constitutive of the human way of being.

The validity of one’s method of knowledge is the entire starting point for political query—if you have a false understanding of the problem, your solution will fail. Therefore debate is an essential activity because it shapes our knowledge about the world and how to interact with it. Power shapes everything we do, and criticism is necessary to create spaces for agency, and new forms of knowledge production.

Only by ceasing to believe in technological managerialism can we establish a new relationship to the environment and the world
Smith 91 (Gregory, Department of Poly Sci @ Univ. of Michigan, "Heidegger, Technology, and Postmodernity," Social Science Journal, Vol 28, Issue 3, p. ebscohost)
NARRATIVES GOOD for debate space and break down hegemonic structures. Independent reason to vote aff. 

Representations and discourse come first - discourse shapes how we perceive the world and how we create effective policies. Discourse analysis is important in context of the environment
Backstrand and Lovbrand 6 { FIND IN ANY LOCATION.

Global environmental change in general....articulate and set the term for discourse.

Tournament: College Prep | Round: 3 | Opponent: Loyola CP | Judge: Monica Amestoy
Contention 1: Capitalism
First, the digging up of natural resources is rooted in capitalistic ideologies. Only breaking away from the consumption/production logic can we avoid extinction. (45 sec)
Trainer 7 (Senior Lecturer, School of Social Work, University of New South Wales (Ted, Renewable Energy Cannot Sustain A Consumer Society, pg. 125-126)
The core “limits to growth” claim is that the huge global problems we
AND
ways. Few people seem to grasp the magnitude of the required reductions.

Thus, affirmation of the resolution is a rejection of capitalism, as in a
AND
this is key to develop a real political strategy. (43 seconds)
Herod 4 (James, renowned philosopher, author, and social activist, “Getting Free”, http://site.www.umb.edu/faculty/salzman_g/Strate/GetFre/06.htm)
It is time to try to describe, at first abstractly and later concretely,
AND
another, and not merely reforming one way of life into something else.

And, how we as subjects are positioned in debate is a prerequisite to interpreting and understanding the resolution or its implications – how we know and view the world is influenced by construction of social reality through discourses of knowledge. The affirmative burden is to prove that the discursive alternative is preferable to the status quo or the negative’s competitive option. 

The reciprocal negative burden is to prove that the status quo or negating the resolution is preferable to enactment of the alternative. Burdens must be reciprocal for fairness by definition. 

read only if neg reads skept
Skepticism does not meet the neg’s burden because if I have to prove a moral obligation for this specific act, the neg’s reciprocal burden is to prove no moral obligation for this specific act. If skep negates the aff reciprocal burden would be “moral obligations are possible.” And, skep doesn’t work with this affirmative; the reason ethical determinations are foggy are because people and values become commodities;

 voting aff is a prerequisite the creation of clear ethical values. Needs can be negative; thus, any conception of negative rights justifies the affirmative, ie I need to not be killed.

And the impacts

First, Capitalism is the root cause of every single impact. It causes incalculable deaths—nothing can outweigh—this is war (1:30)
Herod 7-Social Activist since 1968, owns an awesome website, Attended Columbia University and spent a year abroad at the University of Beirut (Lebanon)(James, 2007, “Getting Free” Pg. 22-23)
We must never forget that we are at war, however, and that we
AND
Hun look like boy scouts. This is a terrible enemy we face.

The existential risk of environmental destruction and nuclear war from the capitalist drive to infinitely exploit resources is an independent reason to vote affirmative, as extinction from nuclear war and environmental destruction are the end of all human aspiration; existence is a prerequisite to making ethical calculations or evaluating deontological standards. 

Ethics and VTL impact: Questioning of capitalist tendencies is a prerequisite to ethical determinations; it negates one’s value to life as producers and capitalists are both turned into machines in a constant race for production, and materials become measurements of humanity. Humans begin interacting with one another not based on ethical principles but economic ones. We have an a priori ethical obligation to reject global capitalism under any moral theory – capitalism makes its victims anonymous, destroying the ability to find value in life (46 seconds)
Zizek and Daly ‘4(Slavoj and Glyn, Conversations with Zizek page 18-19)
For Zizek, a confrontation with the obscenities of abundance capitalism also requires a transformation
AND
that, like Zizek’s own thought, exhorts us to risk the impossible.

Ethics first- you cannot separate your ethical orientation from the way in which you come to understand politics (40 sec)
Meszaros 95 (Istavan, Prof. Emeritus @ U of Sussex, Beyond Capital: Towards a Theory of Transition, p 409-410)
Politics and morality are so closely intertwined in the real world that it is hardly
AND
to be stirred up, but as something that has to be built. 

Contention 2 is Framing
The role of the judge is as an intellectual determining the value of our speech acts
2. Prefer our interp-
A. It’s a gateway—the validity of one’s method of knowledge is the entire starting point for political query—if you have a false understanding of the problem, your solution will fail.
Smith ’96 Steve, Professor of International Politics at the University of Wales, Aberystwyth, “Positivism and Beyond,” International theory: Positivism and beyond, New York: Cambridge University Press, 12-1 3
But the stakes are also high because of the links between theory and practice.
AND
are far more considerable than at first sight seem to be the case.
B. Key to education—no truth claim exists without establishing and defending a method. Otherwise, there’s no reason to believe the affirmative is true
C. The Aff impact turns framework- if the system is ultimately undesirable, then so is debating within it which means they have to win their methodology is good to win framework.
D. If you have any doubt about the negatives ability to solve their offense you should err heavily aff- all of their risk calculus occurs against a background of capitalism that creates and shapes how policymakers reach conclusions 

F. Put your theory shells away, Your education isn’t valuable and nothing is fair under capitalism- Capitalistic expansion has ruined education by promoting pedagogical practices that support corporate power, religious fundamentalism and neo-conservative ideology.
Giroux 4 (Henry, professor of Cultural Studies at McMaster University, “Public Pedagogy and the Politics of Neo-liberalism: making the political more pedagogical” Policy Futures in Education, Volume 2, Number 3 and 4, 2004)
At this point in American history, neo-liberal capitalism is not simply too
AND
30 years, particularly under the ruthless administration of George W. Bush.
Our advocacy is crucial to widen movements to a global scale and connect across geographical and ideological divides
Escobar 8 (Arturo, Kenan Distinguished Professor at UNC Chapel Hill, Ph.D, University of Calfornia, Berkeley, May 27. Third World Quarterly. Beyond the Third World: imperial globality, global coloniality and antiglobalisation social movements. Third World Quarterly, Vol 25, No 1, pp 207–230)
But this also means that there is a dire need for what Santos has called
AND
is common in the diversity of the counter-hegemonic drive.56