The US Government should substantially increase investment within the African Continent.

His imagination of a better world is a continuation of the ascetic ideal. This association of all that is good as not of this world expresses a hatred for the only one we’ve got. Fantasizing about a world without suffering produces creative impotence---only our relationship to life can escape this paradox of resentment. Turanli: (“Nietzsche and the Later Wittgenstein” Journal of Nietzsche Studies 26 p. 55-63) “to imagine another, more valuable world is an expression of hatred for a world that makes one suffer … Escaping from this world because there is grief in it results in asceticism. … Paying respect to the ascetic ideal is longing for the world that is pure ... Craving for frictionless surfaces, for a … perfect world, is the result of the ressentiment of metaphysicans who suffer in this world. … The … philosopher … continues to repeat, "'My kingdom is not of this world'" … This is a longing for another world in which one does not suffer. It is to escape from this world; to create another … false world. … This … quest for another world, …, is the result of unproductive thinking. … "the impotence of the will to create" … Metaphysicians … try to discover the true, transcendental world that is already there rather than creating a world for themselves. … The way out of the circle created by the ressentiment … is the will to life rather than the will to truth. The will to truth can be overcome only through a Dionysian relationship to existence. This is the way to a new philosophy, which … aims "to show the fly the way out of the fly-bottle"” Their benevolence towards the oppressed is a thinly veiled attempt to exercise power over the subjugated. Nietzsche: (The Gay Science. P.38-39) “Benefiting and hurting others are ways of exercising one's power upon others … We … show benevolence to those who are already dependent on us … ; we want to increase their power because in that way we increase ours, or we want to show them how advantageous it is to be in our power—that way they will become more satisfied with their condition … Whether benefiting or hurting others … does not affect the ultimate value of our actions; even if we offer our lives, … this is a sacrifice that is offered for our desire for power …” Suffering is inevitable-the drive to abolish it holds life in contempt. The tension of the should in misfortune is what cultivates human greatness. Nietzsche 2: (Beyond Good and Evil P.153-154) “modes of thinking which measure the worth of things according to PLEASURE and PAIN… are … naivetes, … that is not sympathy as you understand it: … OUR sympathy is a … further-sighted sympathy … You want, … TO DO AWAY WITH SUFFERING; and … WE would rather have it increased and made worse than it has ever been! Well-being, … is certainly not a goal; it seems to us an END; a condition which at once renders man ludicrous and contemptible--and makes his destruction DESIRABLE! The discipline of … GREAT suffering--know ye not that it is only THIS discipline that has produced all the elevations of humanity hitherto? The tension of soul in misfortune which communicates to it its energy, its shuddering in view of rack and ruin, its inventiveness and bravery in … enduring, … misfortune, and whatever … spirit, … has been bestowed upon the soul--has it not been bestowed through … great suffering? In man CREATURE and CREATOR are united: in man there is not only … clay, mire, folly, chaos; but there is also the … the sculptor, the hardness of the hammer, … And that YOUR sympathy for the "creature in man" applies to that which has to be fashioned … to that which must necessarily SUFFER, and IS MEANT to suffer? … there are higher problems than the problems of pleasure and pain and sympathy; and all systems of philosophy which deal only with these are naivetes.” The ultimate result of this negative orientation toward life is the inability to live life to its fullest. Instead, the affirmative holds life in contempt for its pains, never understanding that life is suffering, starvation, and dying. The desire to seek redemption from life through the creation of a future moral order annihilates life in the present. This is the worst possible danger: our existence becomes a dreary perpetuation of biological life, devoid of meaning, waiting only for passive death. Nietzsche 3: (The Birth of Tragedy. Translated Golffing, 1956. p. 9-11) “the world was made to appear, … as an ever new vision projected by that grand sufferer for whom illusion is the only possible mode of redemption. … Yet in its essential traits it already prefigured that spirit of deep distrust and defiance which … was to resist to the bitter end any moral interpretation of existence whatsoever. It is here that one could find… a pessimism situated “beyond good and evil”; … a philosophy which dared place ethics … among the “deceptions.” Morality … became a mere fabrication … at best, an artistic fiction; at worst, an outrageous imposture.… the furious, vindictive hatred of life implicit in that system of … values, … From the very first, Christianity spelled life loathing itself, and that loathing was simply disguised, … with notions of an “other” and “better” life. A hatred of the “world” a curse on the affective urges, a fear of beauty and sensuality, … a yearning for extinction, cessation of all effort until the great “Sabbath of Sabbaths”—this whole cluster of distortions, … always struck me as … the most dangerous, … form the will to destruction can take; … And since according to … absolute ethics) life will always be in the wrong, it followed … that one … must view it as an object not only unworthy of our desire but absolutely worthless in itself. As for morality … could it be anything but a will to deny life, a secret instinct of destruction, … the beginning of the end?—and, for that very reason, the Supreme Danger?” The affirmative’s embracing of humanity designates an unhuman enemy—endless wars and violence have been carried out in the name of their universal appeal to the human. Rasch: (“Human rights as geopolitics” Cultural Critique 54, Spring. p 135-6) “the … humanitarian attempt to construct a world of universal friendship produces… by internal necessity, ever new enemies.… humanity. By virtue of its universality … has … no clear distinction between … inside and … outside. Does humanity embrace all humans? … If not, against whom or what does it wage its wars? … Christianity distinguishes between believers and nonbelievers. Since nonbelievers can become believers, they must be of the same category of being. To be human … then, is the horizon within which the distinction between believers and nonbelievers is made. … humanity … is not part of the distinction, but … makes the distinction possible. However, once the term used to describe the … distinction also becomes that distinction's positive pole, it needs its negative opposite. … setting off the inhuman from the human is followed by an even deeper split, the one between the superhuman and the subhuman. In the same way that the human creates the inhuman, so in the history of humanity the superhuman brings about … the subhuman ... political opposition to liberalism is itself deemed illegitimate. … liberal pluralism, … reduces the political to the social … and … nullifies all truly political opposition by simply excommunicating its opponents … only an unregenerate barbarian could fail to recognize the irrefutable benefits of the liberal order.” The alternative is to embrace suffering as something positive and necessary to life. Reject the idea that suffering is something to be avoided. Wrisley: (George, “What Should Our Attitude Towards Suffering Be,” Nietzsche and Suffeirng- A Choice of Attitudes and Ideals, pg 4-5, http://www.georgewrisley.com...) “the meaning of our suffering … has been the problem … The first possibility concerns a religious ethic that … views suffering as undesirable, but which … uses … deleterious means to provide a meaning for human suffering. The second possibility concerns … the idea of giving meaning to suffering through acknowledging its necessary role in human enhancement and greatness. Since the religious ethic sees suffering as undesirable and thus something ultimately to be avoided … the means it uses to give suffering meaning are ultimately mendacious, … Nietzsche’s positive alternative—one that embraces the necessary role suffering … we should modify so that we no longer see suffering as something to be avoided.”To summarize the NC, his arguments are arguing for ways to improve conditions in Africa, thereby reducing suffering. I'm arguing, via my case, why we shouldn't be looking to reduce suffering. This means my case functions apriori to his case. This means that if I'm winning my case, then I win the debate because I control the internal link and internal warrant to his impacts. But let's go to his arguments. Since I'm running out of space I'll go more in detail in the next round but I want to at least touch on it now.First, there's no actual solvency to any of his arguments. All he posts are short, syllogicstic, blippy arguments with no actual reason why those argument solve the problems he's trying to fix. So even if you buy his arguments, he doesn't have any link to his impacts without proving how his arguments solve the problems he's trying to fix.Second, aid and investments actually are detrimental to Africa. I'll go more into specifics next round, but needless to say the article concludes "If nothing else, aid to Africa seems to have lowered rather than increased economic growth."(1) Third, aid decreases natives' will to work on their own, breeding dependence. To quote directly from the article, "Aid has driven Africans to lose confidence in their abilities and opportunities. It has promoted a culture of dependence - a culture of relying on other people’s help."(2)(1) - http://tinyurl.com...;(2) - http://tinyurl.com...;