April Gauntlet Tower: Trial by Fire

I negate. Desire in its natural form is uncontrolled, creative, free flowing production. When society constructs itself it begins to code desire to condition people to think in terms of static end objects. While it seems intuitive to say we will naturally desire things, psychoanalysis takes it a step further to condition people on what is proper to desire. --- Section 1: desire as lack. Links and impacts. --- The aff case envokes the conception of what normativity requires. They talk about all the different reasons why animals aren't different from humans and how they needlessly suffer and why this requires and mandates rights. This is problematic because requirements suppress desire to a set code of what justice lacks rather than an on going flow of production that doesn’t stop. Lack is actually anti-production. Denying this conditions leaves humans in a vaccoulized state and allows fascism to replicate. Deleuze and Guattari write: Anti-Oedipus: pg. 26-29. Gilles and Felix "If desire produces, its product is real. ... Desire is the set of passive synthesis that engineer partial objects, flows, and bodies, and that function as units of production. ...Desire does not lack anything; … . It is, rather, ... desire that lacks a fixed subject; there is no fixed subject unless there is repression. ...Desire is a machine, and the object of desire is another machine connected to it. Hence the product is something removed or deducted from the process of producing: between the act of producing and the product, something becomes detached, thus giving the ... subject a residuum. ... what exists in fact is not lack, but passion, as a "natural and sensuous object." Desire is not bolstered by needs, ... needs are derived from desire: they are counterproducts within the real that desire produces. Lack is a countereffect of desire; it is deposited, distributed, vacuolized within a real that is natural and social. ...that what is missing is not things a subject feels the lack of somewhere deep down inside himself, but rather the objectivity of man, the objective being of man, for whom to desire is to produce, to produce within the realm of the real. ... Desire does not express a molar lack within the subject; rather, the molar organization deprives desire of its objective being. ... Lack is created, planned, and organized in and through social production. It is counterproduced as a result of the pressure of antiproduction;the latter falls back on the forces of production and appropriates them. ...The deliberate creation of lack as a function of market economy is the art of a dominant class. This involves deliberately organizing wants and needs amid an abundance of production; making all of desire teeter and fall victim to the great fear of not having one's needs satisfied; and making the object dependent upon a real production that is supposedly exterior to desire ... while at the same time the production of desire is categorized as fantasy and nothing but fantasy. ... We maintain that the social field is immediately invested by desire, that it is the historically determined product of desire, and that libido has no need of any mediation or sublimation, any psychic operation, any transformation, in order to invade and invest the productive forces and the relations of production. There is only desire and the social, and nothing else." Thus the affirmative’s lack-based framework is a problematic because its based on a flawed conception of desire. The AFF vaccoulizes people into only being valuable because they have objects or want things. This negates value in life because people are no longer intrinsically valuable but rather instruments to the socius. And this outweighs because it won’t matter if animals are the same as humans if humans have no value to their rights in the first place. Additionally the AFF becomes a perpetual cycle because by continuing the very root of the problems the AFF does nothing to “solve” but rather increases the very problems we have. --- SECTION 2: schizoanalysis. --- The alternative is to embrace the schizophrenic and unknown. We need to reject the affirmative’s methodology and move away from their molar paradigm. The revolution cannot come from the treaties signed or terrorists killed but rather through a reconceptualization of desire. D&G 2: “The ... thesis of schizoanalysis is therefore the distinction between two poles of social libidinal investment: the paranoiac, reactionary, and fascisizing pole, and the schizoid revolutionary pole. ... The two poles are defined, the one by the enslavement of production and the desiring-machines to the gregarious aggregates that they constitute on a large scale under a given form of power or selective sovereignty; the other h8579;by the inverse subordination and the overthrow of power the one by these molar structured aggregates that crush singularities, select them, and regularize those that they retain in codes or axiomatics; the other by the molecular multiplicities of singularities that on the contrary treat the large aggregates as so many useful materials for their own elaborations the one by the lines of integration and territorialization that arrest the flows, constrict them, turn them back, break them again according to the limits interior to the system, in such a way as to produce the images that come to fill the field of immanence peculiar to this system or this aggregate, the other by lines of escape that follow the decoded and deterritorialized flows, inventing their own nonfigurative breaks ... that produce new flows, always breaching the coded wall or the territorialized limit that separates them from desiring-production. ... the one is defined by subjugated groups the other by subject-groups. ... The fact remains that such an investment does not endure the light of day: it must always hide under assignable aims or interests presented as the general aims and interests, even though in reality the latter represent only the members of the dominant class or a fraction of this class. ... Even the most overt fascism speaks the language of goals, of law, order, and reason.” Now the affirmative is going to stand up and say “I don’t know what shizo is” or “that won’t work” but perhaps that is the very point. I’m endorsing the freedom possible now by abandoning self-repression for as long as possible. Politics begins and ends with desire and fascism only by analyzing the K can we solve. Deleuze and Guattari 3: Deleuze and Guattari 1980 (A Thousand Plateaus 214-215) “fascism implies a molecular regime that is distinct both from molar segments and their centralization. ... fascism invented the concept of the totalitarian State, ... The concept of the totalitarian State applies only at the macropolitical level, to a rigid segmentarity and a particular mode of totalization and centralization. But fascism is inseparable from a proliferation of molecular focuses in interaction, ... fascism is defined by a micro-black hole that stands on its own and communicates with the others, ... What makes fascism dangerous is its molecular or micropolitical power, for it is a mass movement: a cancerous body rather than a totalitarian organism. ... Only microfascism provides an answer to the global question: Why does desire desire its own repression, how can it desire its own repression? ... Desire is never separable from complex assemblages that necessarily tie into molecular levels, from microformations already shaping postures, attitudes, perceptions, ... Desire is never an undifferentiated instinctual energy, but itself results from a highly developed, engineered setup rich in interactions: a whole supple segmentarity that processes molecular energies and potentially gives desire a fascist determination. ... It's too easy to be antifascist on the molar level, and not even see the fascist inside you, the fascist you yourself sustain and nourish and cherish with molecules both personal and collective.” Thus fascism must be opposed on the micro level. And the Kritik is sufficient to negate because: You negate pre-fiat because every endorsement of schizoanalysis is a step close to recognizing inner freedom. Remember it’s not about whole scale change but about recognizing the fascist within all of us.Negate pre-standard because I’ve disproven that the affirmative’s conception of justice is fundamentally flawed. Method comes before conclusion because the way we reach a conclusion is fundamentally dependent on the warrant we use to get there. So even if they win that animal rights is consistent with justice the method they use to get that conclusion should be rejected. Negate post-fiat because the kritik turns the AFF case by showing that their method of justice creates fascism and prevents the true possibility rights and justice can have. As a re-explanation of the K: The links say desire is traditionally understood as wanting a real object. This is is perpetuated by the aff’s mindset of requirement and the AC specific links I’ve pointed out. This is a problematic understanding of desire because we become empty vessels only chasing after object after object. This wanting of desire makes people controlled and potential destroyed. This has two impacts a) the aff negates value in life by vaccoulizing people and b) they create the very problems that they attempt to “solve” and allow fascism to replicate itself. Finally, the alternative is to reunderstand desire through what the K calls schizoanaylysis. Under this paradigm we choose desire as the creation of experiences and reinvest desire not in what we want to have but in what we can create and experience. The alt solves on both a pre-fiat and post-fiat level.