"In developing countries, environmental protection should be prioritized over resource extraction wh

I negate resolved: "In developing countries, environmental protection should be prioritized over resource extraction when the two are in conflict." When a country is developing it is in a state in which it, "[has] few industries" and many poor people who are unable to buy the things they need."1 Also, environmental protection can be defined as "prevention (avoidance) strategies to protect the environment from future damage or degradation; and control measures to restore and maintain environmental quality."2 Finally, resources can be defined as, "materials and capacities (as mineral deposits and waterpower) supplied by nature."3 The value of this debate is the Natural Function of Nature. In order to function properly, nature must be a fluctuating system containing all species and beings struggling to be named the top of the universal hierarchy. In order for nature to be in its most natural form, all beings must be on a playing field in which they are striving to be the best-without one group sitting dormant on top thereby sabotaging the system. Thus, in order to keep the system in an on-going flow the standard of this round must be Systematic Life. Prefer this standard because it is the only way the natural function of nature can be derived from our current situation on Earth. Moral values are ideas conceptualized by man that restrain him from reaching his full potential. Nietzsche 1: "[W]e need a critique of moral values, the value of these values should itself, for once, be examined [...] People have taken the value of these "values" as given, as factual, as beyond all questioning; up till now, nobody has had the remotest doubt or hesitation in placing higher value on the "good man" than on "the evil", higher value in the sense of advancement, benefit and prosperity [Gedeihlichkeit] for man in general (and this includes man"s future). What if the opposite were true? [...] So that morality itself were to blame if man, as species, [des Typus Mensch] never reached his highest potential power and splendour?"1 Without morality, mankind is able to strive for the top of the system as intended by nature. Yacasua "74: "Morals, as defined and practiced, may be said to stand in opposition to what has variously been described as instinct, nature, the law of the jungle and so on. For this reason some have regarded morals [are] unatural and as having no legitmite place in nature, while [some] have been equally convinced that morals are all that stand between man and the beasts, and that they are the essential means if man"s salvation. Inasmuch , therefore, as nature countenances no paradox it is evident that the ladder to be wrong. [No] animals - and certainly no mammals - are wholly devoid of either inherited or acquired rules of conduct."2 Barriers set up by man to represent the "inherent differences" between man and animal are mainly centered with this idea of morality. In disproving morality, we become aware that if all equals in the system are competitors to the throne and humans are part of this equal set, then humans are to fight just as animals alike. Thus, in proving morality false we can wrap our minds around the fact that according to what natural nature entails we as humans are not excused from the system and therefore cannot exist inactive above it. _______________________________________________________________________ 1 Nietzsche"s Metaethical Stance, Nadeem J. Z. Hussain 2 L T. Yacasua, "The Phi Delta Kappan" vol . 55, no. 9 (May,1974) pp.608-610 The system does this for us; and while to most it seems rather unfair that it is mandatory to take part in the system, it is beneficial to our species in that we can develop and gain intellect. Hence, in order for humans to move forward we must be forced from our rest above the system. Nietzsche 2: "My demand upon the philosopher is known, that he take his stand [We must take a stand] beyond good and evil and leave the illusion of moral judgment beneath [ourselves]. This demand follows from an insight which I was the first to formulate: that there are altogether no moral facts. Moral judgments agree with religious ones in believing in realities which are no realities. Morality is merely an interpretation of certain phenomena"more precisely a misinterpretation. Moral judgments, like religious ones, belong to a stage of ignorance at which ... "truth," ... designates all sorts of things which we today call "imaginings"."3 (TI "Improvers" 1)." In conjunction with the rejection of ideas of morality and inequality between animals and man, we must also reject any form of utilitarianism, for its importance is based solely on moral values, which have now been proven illegitimate. Nietzsche 3: "[Quite simply,] We need to strive to be more just in our evaluations of life and the living by, for example, thinking "beyond good and evil"."4 With morality, inequality, and utilitarianism out of the way, my standard is a prerequisite to all others, for it allows for the oscillations found in the natural state of nature as no other mechanism can.