Youth Hegemony K

Strategy

Tips

Topshelf

1NC

Cards
( )Social change can only exist in the support of both hegemonic ideas and oppositional ideas !ur embrace of hegemony as a site of change can inherently force us to redefine hegemony as youth acti"ists and lead to actual change Negron#$on%ales &'( [Genevieve, Graduate student at Berkeley, Hegemony, Ideology & Oppositional
Consciousness:Undocumented out! and t!e "ersonal#"olitical $truggle%or &ducational 'ustice(, !ttp:))esc!olars!ip*org)uc)item)+,-./0t12page#3, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +).)6.*

Traditional social change mo"ement literature has under#theori%ed consciousness)7relegating it to little more than a *resource+ that can be *mobili%ed+ in the ser"ice of a social7 mo"ement 89cCart!y and :ald 3;;6<* Ne,er ,or- ,ithin this trend has identified the7important ,or- of *frames+ and (in)formalconceptual categories ,hich shape socialmo"ement7 participation and outcomes 8$no/ and Ben%ord 3;;;<* =!oug! t!is is !elp%ul, t!ere is still7 considera>le /ork to >e done on t!e ?uestion o% !o/ oppositional ideas arise) ta-e hold) and7 contribute to the building of political consciousness and social mo"ements. In t!is article, I7 argue that oppositional consciousness is not born ,hen counter#hegemonic ideas and practices7 ,in out o"er hegemonic ideas and practices.There is ne"er a total replacement)and it is actually7the practice and process of continually ,restling bet,een the t,o that / argue is generati"e of7 oppositional consciousness* 0ust as hegemony is e"er#changing and reconstituting itself7 8@illiams 6A1-)) so too is oppositional consciousness. I% /e understand oppositional7 consciousness in t!is /ay, /e can see !o/ ,restling ,ith the ongoing tension bet,een7 hegemony and counter#hegemony does not indicate a partially# formed consciousness or a7 *contradictory+ consciousness) as ot!er t!eorists !ave implied* Bat!er, this is actually a critical7 part of the ongoing process of the de"elopment of oppositional consciousness. ( )Their conception of politics as a battleground free%es acti"ism in youth. /n order to change 11111) ,e must recogni%e politics as a dialectic synthesis of ideas. 2mbracing 11111for the possibility of transformation is an integral part of youth participation and identity) ,hich allo,s us to further our ideas of the political This alternati"e reshapes our pedagogy to in"ol"e ne, acti"ism that can shape and influence future policy This is -ey to sol"ing your affirmati"e 3N4 Your form of political theory is incomplete and detrimental to the political acti"ism you try to propagate ,ithin the youth Negron#$on%ales &'( [Genevieve, Graduate student at Berkeley, Hegemony, Ideology & Oppositional Consciousness:
Undocumented out! and t!e "ersonal#"olitical $truggle %or &ducational 'ustice(, !ttp:))esc!olars!ip*org)uc)item)+,-./0t12page#3, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +).)6.*

insights into the role of exclusion in shaping political consciousness and7 acti"ism are significant because they challenge traditional ,ays of thin-ing aboutho, and ,hy 7 people engage in political ,or- on an indi"idual le"el and ho, that process ta-es place in 7 relation to other factors such as shame) fear) and the de"elopment of a political self# identity* In7 contrast to conventional t!eories a>out t!e %ormation o% oppositional consciousness, t!ese7 %indings s!o/ t!at oppositional consciousness is not solely a reaction to and an o"ercoming of7 hegemonic ideas. Instead) for the youth in t!is study, it is experienced as a state of tension and7 an outcome of a generati"e process that entails a constantnegotiation bet,een hegemonic and7 non#hegemonic ideas*
=oget!er, t!ese

5nderstanding thedialectic bet,een the hegemonic and the counterhegemonic7 allo,s us to mo"e a,ay from a totali%ing "ie, of liberatory consciousness and ma-e7 space for a non# linear) more nuanced ,ay to understand the de"elopment of oppositional7 consciousness and political engagement* =!is invites us to rethin- notions of ,hat political7 037engagement *loo-s+ li-e, in a /ay t!at does not make it a non#%unctional concept >y arguing t!at7 everyt!ing is resistance* Bat!er, this illuminates the assertion that political engagement and7 political consciousness is not a state of arri"al nor a final point on a spectrum) but a body of7 thoughts) experiences and actions that are negotiated o"er and o"er again*7 =!is %inding !olds implications %or !o/ ,e theori%e the role that ideas play in building7 social mo"ements* In %uture /ork, I /ill c!ange t!e scope o% my analysis and eCplain !o/ /!at7 !appens to oppositional
consciousness on an individual level s!apes /!at !appens on an7 organi,ational level, and ultimately on a movement >uilding level* @!at is clear is t!at 7

This struggle is deeply personal and7 transformati"e on an indi"idual le"el and also has the potential to change the course of history in7 the state*These young people are demanding a resolution to the contradiction that has shaped7 their li"es the reliance of the 5nited States on their presence and its simultaneous refusal to7 recogni%e them as human beings deser"ing of fundamental ci"il rights* Their insistence on being7 heard despite profound institutional exclusion demonstrates that their "oices ,ill not be silenced.
undocumented young people in Cali%ornia are pro%oundly c!anging t!e political landscape 7 t!roug! t!eir struggle %or educational Dustice*

( )3cti"ism that separates itself from the system destroys our ability to use the system and change it from the outside) rationally and transformati"ely This oppositional acti"ism often re#entrenches the system ,e fight to oppose. The plan entrenches our curriculum into an epistemological structure ,hich destroys the potential for our mo"ements !nly our alternati"e sol"es 5rrieta &'6 [Euis, 'r*, 5ssistant "ro%essor in C!icana and C!icago studies at t!e University o% Cali%ornia at Favis, =!e $ocial $tudies o%
Fomination: Cultural Hegemony and Ignorant 5ctivism(, !ttp:))///*academia*edu)6--GA6.)=!eHsocialHstudiesHo%HdominationHCulturalH!egemonyHandHignorantHactivism, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +).)6.*

!ften) the ,ord acti"ism con7ures7 up the image of /!at t!e media7 and ot!ers call radicals)( suc! as7
in%lamed 9eCican 5merican college7 students, %or eCample, /!o are passionate7 and emotional, demanding an immediate7 end to racism on t!eir college7 campus* 5not!er image may >e t!e7 t/enty#second ne/s sound >ite o% angry7 /omen in /!ite =#s!irts /!o travel7 %rom all over t!e country to t!e U*$*7 Capitol to eCpress t!eir %rustration /it!7 t!e current policies on drunk driving*7 5not!er image is o% protesters at @orld7

Some castigate7 acti"ist participants as immature and7 unsophisticated) ,hereas others describe7 their actions as repugnant and7 counterproducti"e to democracy and t!e7 5merican /ay o% li%e*( 9y point is t!at7acti"ism has been stereotyped, and participants7 can >e portrayed as ignorant(7 >y /ay o% various code /ords*7 'ames $* Eeming 83;;.<, in
=rade Organi,ation meetings eCpressing7 t!eir disapproval o% %urt!er eCpansion7 o% glo>al markets* Ignorant7 5ctivists: $ocial C!ange, IHig!er Order7 =!inking,J and t!e Kailure o% $ocial7 $tudies( in @!ere Fid $ocial $tudies7 Go @rongL 8@F$$G@<, implies t!at7acti"ism

and acti"ists of the *radical+7 type are ignorant* In t!is article, I argue7 t!at physical acti"ism is stereotyped7 precisely as radical and passionate)7 rather than logical) progressi"e) and7 rational) because people ,ho are less7 pri"ileged by the system ha"e traditionally7 engaged in such practices8Urrieta7 3;;0a<* O%ten, more physical forms of7expression are some of the fe,7 resources that the acti"ists ha"e a"ailable7 for ma-ing their "oices heard. In7 t!is essay) / 8uestion,hat acti"ism7 means as a practice for social change or)7 in the case of conser"ati"es) as an agent7 to maintain or strengthen the current7 cultural hegemony of the 5nited States*7 I argue t!at those ,hom more progressi"e7 people in our society call *conser"ati"e+7 or *right ,ing+ are "ery7 much acti"ists fighting to support their7 o,n agendas ,ithin a system that7 allo,s them to appear neutral) logical)7 progressi"e) and rational.@F$$G@ is7an acti"ist pro7ect based on irrational7 and shortsighted) but deeply ingrained)7 ideologies of cultural domination that7attempt to maintain and rein"igorate a7 system of cultural hegemony, in t!is7 case by means of the social studies curriculum*7 In a rapidly

c!anging multicultural7 society suc! as ours, such

acti"ist7 incursions must be criti8ued and 8uestioned7 for their legitimacy, >ecause,7although they appear to be neutral and)7 to some) rational) they may lead to further7 di"ision and ine8uality and ser"e to7 reinforce cultural domination.

9in-s

:edia
( )3cti"ism isn&t 7ust opposition in the media and the streets) the protests. /t also exists in e"ery policy change and thin- tan- The aff falls into the pit traps of the negati"e media image of acti"ism) gutting sol"ency and -illing other mo"ements 5rrieta &'6 [Euis, 'r*, 5ssistant "ro%essor in C!icana and C!icago studies at t!e University o% Cali%ornia at Favis, =!e $ocial $tudies o%
Fomination: Cultural Hegemony and Ignorant 5ctivism(, !ttp:))///*academia*edu)6--GA6.)=!eHsocialHstudiesHo%HdominationHCulturalH!egemonyHandHignorantHactivism, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +).)6.* @!at is activismL Broadly de%ined,7acti"ism set o% issues* The

isthe acti"e participation, in7 various /ays, o% people advocating a7 particular image that7 activism con7ures up is not that of men7 and ,omen in business attire ,or-ing7 out of a thin- tan- in 5ustin, =eCas, or7 C!icago, IllinoisMmost often) the7 image is of young people shouting at7 police officers in full riot gear. ;hat has7 our media culture done to mediate this7 image of acti"istsL7The media are not neutral* Kor t!e last7 t/enty#%ive years, there has been a7 strong mo"ement among conser"ati"e7 acti"ists to redress the gains of the ci"il7 rights mo"ements and other more progressi"e7 accomplishments. That the7 media portray ,hat some people refer to7 as *lefto"er hippies+ in a negati"e ,ay7 is not a coincidence.

/mpacts

3T<< Can&t Change the System

( )3rguments that hegemony causes us to be blind to structural in7ustice and ,on&t change are 7ust plain ,rong. ;e can only ha"e intellectuals in a ,orld ,here forces li-e hegemony consolidate po,er in a fe, indi"iduals) ,hich not only pro"es that hegemony can be socially producti"e but also that the epistemology of their authors is suspect =ischman and :c9aren &'6 [Gustavo &*, 5ri,ona $tate University, "eter, University o% Cali%ornia, Eos 5ngeles, Bet!inking
Critical "edagogy and t!e Gramscian and Kreirean Eegacies: Krom Organic to Committed Intellectuals or Critical "edagogy, Commitment, and "raCis(, !ttp:))///*%reireproDect*org)articles)nodeN3;++)KutureN3;o%N3;C")mclaren%isc!*pd%, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +)0)6.* In our vie/, GramsciJs 86A16< ,or-

can help us in understanding the class7 contradictions that structure the sub7ecti"ities and self#acti"ity 8agency< of7 oppressed classes ,ith the understanding that hegemony does not ta-e place in7 an indeterminate terrain 8Oat,, 6AA1<* In
lig!t o% GramsciJs /ork, t!ere is a7 need to understand t!e overdetermination o% sel%#activity and su>Dective 7 agency >y larger structures o% capitalist social relations /it!in t!e glo>al division 7 o% la>or 8especially in t!e conteCt o% a restructured la>or demand<* =!e7 concept o% !egemony t!at is articulated >y many post#9arCists is o%ten recogni,ed 7 as a type o% trompe dJoeil,hereby

forces of domination are ,illfully7underrecogni%ed as the structured e8uanimity of ine"itability) chance) or irre"ersible7 fate. Historically, "ariable structural determinants of action are either7 detached from cultural formations and social practices or flatly ignored. >uilt7 into a number of theories of hegemony is the notion of the re"ersibility of cultural7 formations ,ithin specified con7unctures) as if such articulatory practices7 ,ere asocial or ahistorical or other,ise se"ered from the chains of class determination*7 5ccording to Oat, 86AA1<, this is clearly a misunderstanding o%7 Gramsci and omits the entire problem of domination* 9isappropriations o%7
GramsciJs /ork 8especially /it! t!e radical democracy( sc!ool< !ave e%%ectively 7 caused domination to !emorr!age into a pool o% relational negotiations7 in /!ic! certain ideological positions are /on t!roug! consent* Here, /e need7 to >e reminded t!at intellectuals

themsel"es are al,ays the products of ne,7 forms of collecti"e labor po,er brought about and consolidated by the forces of7 production.

3lternati"e

Sol"es 2mpirics
( ) Hegemonic structures ,ill al,ays exist in some ,ay or form The true 8uestion of acti"ism is ho, ,e ,ill shape the current order to create a ne, shape) a topological loo- at acti"ism and transformation) not a radical one li-e the 13C =ischman and :c9aren &'6 [Gustavo &*, 5ri,ona $tate University, "eter, University o% Cali%ornia, Eos 5ngeles, Bet!inking
Critical "edagogy and t!e Gramscian and Kreirean Eegacies: Krom Organic to Committed Intellectuals or Critical "edagogy, Commitment, and "raCis(, !ttp:))///*%reireproDect*org)articles)nodeN3;++)KutureN3;o%N3;C")mclaren%isc!*pd%, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +)0)6.*

roups and classes exist in a shifting and7 mediated relationship) in a structured field of complex relations and ideological7 forces stitched together out of social fragments and pri"ileging hierarchies)7 in structured asymmetries of po,er) in contending "ectors of influence) and in7 emergent) contingent alliances* @!en one eCamines ideology, one must not7 loo- for smooth lines of articulation or a set of seamless canonical ideas) but7 rather a regime of culture existing as a palimpsest of emergent and residual discourses*7 HallJs 86AA+< elo?uent position on t!is issue is /ort! ?uoting at7 lengt!:7 Gramsci al/ays insisted that hegemony is not exclusi"ely an ideological phenomenon*7There can be no hegemony ,ithout *the decisi"e nucleus of the economic*(7 On t!e ot!er !and, do not fall into the trap of the old mechanical 7economism and belie"e that if you can only get hold of the economy) you can7 mo"e the rest of life.The nature of po,er in the modern ,orld is that it is also7 constructed in relation to political) moral) intellectual) cultural) ideological and7 sexual 8uestions* The 8uestion of hegemony is al,ays the 8uestion of a ne, cultural7 order* The 8uestion /!ic! %acedGramsci in relation to Italy %aces us no/ in7 relation to Britain: ,hat is the nature of this ne, ci"ili%ation?Hegemony is not a7 state of grace ,hich is installed fore"er* ItJs not a %ormation /!ic! incorporates 7 every>ody* =!e notion o% a !istorical >loc( is precisely di%%erent %rom t!at o% a7 paci%ied, !omogeneous, ruling class* /t entails a 8uite different conception of7 ho, social forces and mo"ements) in their di"ersity) can be articulated into strategic7 alliances. To construct a ne, cultural order) you need not to reflect an7 already#formed collecti"e ,ill) but to fashion a ne, one) to inaugurate a ne,7 historical pro7ect. 8p* 61;<
5ccording to t!is %ormulation, g

Sol"es >ad Hegemony

( )!ur alternati"e challenges the narrati"e of 3merican 2xceptionalism too@2mbracing our status as hegemonic empire) as youth acti"ists ,or-ing to reform it) allo,s us to learn from other historical empires& mista-es and successfully build nations. =erguson AB 8Piall Kerguson, G)3;)3;;0, Imperial Fenial(, intervie/ o% %erguson >y PonnaGorilovskaya, a sta%% /riter %or mot!er Dones,
!ttp:))mot!erDones*com)politics)3;;0);G)imperial#denial< PK: @ell, I t!ink t!e condition o% imperial

denial is a handicap because if you do not recogni%e that you are essentially performing the functions of an empire) you are incapable of learning from the mista-es of past empires. 3nd most 3mericans) policyma-ers) and commentators are trapped in this tunnel of 3merican historical experience and the assumption of 3merican 2xceptionalism. So ,hen they occupy /ra8 or 3fghanistan) they don&t say to themsel"esC */ ,onder ho, the >ritish got on? !r / ,onder ,hat the lessons of !ttoman rule in :esopotamia might be?+ They thin- the only thing that they ha"e to learn from is the Dietnam ;ar) and that is) of course) a completely irrele"ant precedent for ,hat&s going on at the moment. / thin- that&s one reason ,hy the 5nited States has 8uite a bad record of ma-ing its inter"entions and its attempts at nation building successful. @!y is t!at "resident Bus! can
only t!ink o% t/o good eCamples o% past success ## @est Germany and 'apan a%ter 6A0G ## /!ereas I, in my >ook, can t!ink o% at least 6; nota>le U*$* %ailures, %rom t!e "!ilippines t!roug! Haiti* 7 9'*com: @!y does t!e U*$* !ave suc! a >ad recordL 7 PK: One o% t!e t!ings I argue in t!e >ook is t!at compared /it! t!e Britis! &mpire a century ago, t!e United $tates is a%%licted >y t!ree de%icits* One o% t!em is economic* =!e current account de%icit o% G percent o% GF" translates into a !uge reliance on %oreign capital* @!ereas a !undred years ago, Britain /as t!e /orldJs >anker ## it eCported capital in net terms on a colossal scale and /as in a position to under/rite its imperial activities /it! serious investment* =!e United $tates is struggling to %ind t!e money %or t!e reconstruction o% Ira?* 9ost o% t!at 63G >illion dollars ## /!ic! is t!e current price tag ## is going straig!t to/ard t!eir military occupation costs* Quite a small %raction o% it is going on reconstruction* ou really struggle to >e a success%ul empire i% you are also t!e /orldJs >iggest de>tor* 7 =!e second de%icit is a manpo/er de%icit* =!ere are no colonists, no settlers /illing to leave t!e United $tates and go out and 5mericani,e t!e 9iddle &ast, t!e /ay t!at a !undred years ago t!ere /ere people pouring out o% t!e Britis! Isles, ready and /illing to live on t!e imperial perip!ery ## 5ustralia, Pe/ :ealand, $out! 5%rica, Canada, >ut also India and t!e 9iddle &ast* =!e only people out t!ere are military and t!ere arenRt t!at many o% t!em* =!e current occupation %orce in Ira? is a>out t!e same si,e as t!e Britis! occupation %orce in 6A3;, and t!e population o% Ira? o% course is muc!, muc! larger today* 7 But the

biggest problem, I t!ink,goes bac- to this issue of imperial denial. 3mericans ,ant to belie"e that you can in"ade) depose the bad guys) hold elections) and come home. They thin- that it can all be done in maybe EB months? 3nd this is 7ust fantasy. /t&s probably going to ta-e ten years at the basic minimum to ma-e /ra8 a stable) functioning mar-et economy ,ith something resembling democracy. 3nd / 7ust thin- that there is a complete lac- of realism about that here because people thin-) F!h) this isn&t empire) this is 7ust liberation. 3nd ,e ,ill be greeted ,ith s,eets and flo,ers ,hen ,e arri"e in >aghdad and they ,ill be so happy to see us) they&ll hold elections) and ,e can home) you -no,) for No"ember E and "ote.F Fream
on*

2xtension

>ad Hegemony

Seeing oursel"es as a youth that is ,or-ing to change the future disrupts American Exceptionalism) and sho,s us that ,e&re 7ust another empire@this lets us loo- at historical empires li-e the >ritish and the !ttoman and learn from their mista-es) a"oiding their pitfalls. Currentpolitical tunnel "ision says the only experience ,e can dra, from is Dietnam) or our current geopolitical affairs) that *;2 C3N&T CH3N$2 TH2 SYST2:+ li-e the 13C @this is what stops nation building from ,or-ing and transformations from occuring. The more historical experience ,e ha"e to dra, from the more successful and less damaging 5S nation#building ,ill be.The more we) as youth) can understand the system and ,or- ,ithin it) the better we will be able to make it.@That&s =erguson &B.

=rame,or-

Key to Geforming Hedagogy

( )!nly the alternati"e&s method of including participation in the system) as a space to reshape 5S politics and hegemony) allo,s us as youth acti"ists to truly approach an acti"ism ,hich can truly create change 5rrieta &'6 [Euis, 'r*, 5ssistant "ro%essor in C!icana and C!icago studies at t!e University o% Cali%ornia at Favis, =!e $ocial $tudies o%
Fomination: Cultural Hegemony and Ignorant 5ctivism(, !ttp:))///*academia*edu)6--GA6.)=!eHsocialHstudiesHo%HdominationHCulturalH!egemonyHandHignorantHactivism, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +).)6.*

9earning ho, to li"e together is ,hat7democracy is about. /t is not about systematically7excluding people or enforcing7a particular cultural perspecti"e as7the only "alid truth. 9earning to deliberateI and especially to engage in dialogueI is at the core of democratic practice andI principle, only t!at in a democracy like7our o/n, this seems not to be culturally7"alued. Through dialogue) people learn7to li"e together and to "alue differentI perspecti"es rather than merely to tolerateI each other or pretend that ,e really7are not that different) ,hich is the7uncritical and naJ"e cultural pluralist7approach to di"ersity.

:icropolitics Sol"es
( ):icropolitics is the root of all politics This means our youth methodology is uni8uely -ey to reforming actual politics # ;e see oursel"es as a blueprint for changeC Holitics shouldn&t be left to the experts in the halls of Congress) this dooms us to captured forms of acti"ism) li-e the 13C) only that end in misery and death and failure. Ceding the political ma-es a repeat of history ine"itableC global ,ar and depression on repeat. Dote aff to re#in"ent politics /ndependent reason to "ote affirmati"e Hatton A'K 8"aul, "olitical Pormativity and "ost#structuralism: t!e case o% Gilles Feleu,e(, SortraginsInstitutscollo?uium des
"!ilosop!isc!enInstituts der KreienUniversitTt, Berlin, am Fonnerstag, den 6G* Povem>er 3;;1, pgs* G#63 [CE4<

The normati"ity of 4eleu%e and $uattari&s concepts pro"ides a frame,or- ,ithin ,hich to e"aluate the character of particular e"ents and processes. They enable us to pose 8uestions such asC is this negati"e or positi"e reterritoriali%ation? /s this a genuine line of flight? ;ill it lead to a re"olutionary ne, assemblage in ,hich there is an increase of freedomor,ill it lead toa ne, form of captureor ,orseL 8Feleu,e and "arnet 6A-1: 60.#600<* Ho/ever, t!ere are t/o important %eatures o%
t!is normativity /!ic! distinguis! it %rom t!e kind o% normativity more commonly %ound in political p!ilosop!y* Kirst, it only provides criteria o% evaluation t!at are am>ivalent and conteCtual* Consider t!e lines o% %lig!t along /!ic! individual or collective assem>lages >reak do/n or >ecome trans%ormed* On t!e one !and, in so %ar as /e are interested in >ringing a>out c!ange /e cannot avoid eCperimentation /it! suc! lines

lines of flight are potential path,ays of mutation in an indi"idual or social fabric and sources of the affect associated /it! t!e passage %rom a lo/er to a !ig!er state o% po/er, namely Doy* On t!e ot!er !and, lines of flight ha"e their o,n dangers. !nce ha"ing bro-en out of the limits imposed by the molar forms of segmentarity and sub7ecti"ity) a line of flight may fail to connect /it! t!e necessary conditions o% creative development or >e incapa>le o% so connecting and turn instead into a line of destruction) death and despair 8Feleu,e and Guattari 6A-1: 33A<* In
>ecause Iit is al/ays on a line o% %lig!t t!at /e createJ 8Feleu,e and "arnet 6A-1: 6.G<* In t!is sense, t!e same manner, none o% t!e deterritorialising processes descri>ed in A Thousand Plateaus provides grounds %or unam>iguous practical political orientation* In t!e evaluative sc!ema outlined, not!ing is good or >ad in itsel% : Iit all depends on a care%ul systematic use U /eJre trying to say you can never guarantee a good outcome 8its not enoug! Dust to !ave a smooth space, %or eCample, to overcome striations and coercion, or a body without organs to overcome organi,ations<J 8Feleu,e 6AAG: .3<* $econd, /!ile Feleu,e and GuattariJs political orientation /as >roadly 9arCist in t!e sense t!at it /as anti#capitalist and envisaged t!e emergence o% ne/ and >etter %orms o% social and political li%e, t!ey did not engage directly /it! t!e political norms em>edded in eCisting political institutions and /ays o% li%e .

/n the course of outlining the inherently political "ocation of philosophy) they suggest that philosophical concepts are critical of the present to the extent that they Aconnect up ,ith ,hat is real here and no, in the struggle against capitalismJ 8Feleu,e and Guattari 6AA0: 6;;<* Ho/ever, t!ey do not directly address t!e normative principles t!at
in%orm t!eir critical perspective on t!e present, muc! less t!e ?uestion !o/ t!ese mig!t >e articulated /it! t!ose principles t!at are supposed to govern political li%e in late capitalist societies* $o, %or eCample, /!ile t!ey insist on t!e importance o% political struggles in relation to /el%are and unemployment >ene%its, t!ey o%%er no normative t!eory in support o% t!e redistri>ution o% /ealt! or any principles o% a Dust distri>ution* @!ile t!ey point to t!e importance o% struggles %or regional and national autonomy, t!ey o%%er no normative grounds %or t!e esta>lis!ment o% di%%erential rig!ts %or cultural or national minorities 8Feleu,e and Guattari 6A-1: 016<* In t!is sense, t!eir political p!ilosop!y does not engage /it! t!e political values and normative concepts /!ic! are supposed to in%orm t!e >asic institutions o% modern li>eral democracies, suc! as t!e e?ual moral /ort! o% individuals, %reedom o% conscience, t!e rule o% la/, %airness in t!e distri>ution o% material goods produced >y social cooperation and so on* =!e principled di%%erences >et/een li>eral democratic, totalitarian and %ascist $tates are mentioned only in passing in t!e course o% t!eir analysis o% capitalism and present day politics as a process o% aCiomatisation o% t!e social and economic %ield 8Feleu,e and Guattari 6A-1: 0G0 V 0++ W 6AA0 : 6;+<* 5s a conse?uence, t!eir mac!inic social ontology remains %ormal in relation to actual societies and %orms o% political organisation* Feleu,eJs turn to/ards "olitical Pormativity Bead in t!e conteCt o% @estern 9arCism during t!e 6A+;s and 6A1;s, Feleu,e and GuattariJs %ailure to engage directly /it! t!e political values and normative concepts t!at are supposed to in%orm t!e >asic institutions o% modern li>eral democracies is not surprising* =!eir political p!ilosop!y predates /idespread understanding and acceptance o% t!e /ays in /!ic! 9arCJs criti?ue o% capitalist society is >ound up /it! concepts o% distri>utive Dustice, as it does t!e e%%orts to identi%y t!e relevant principles o% Dustice t!at occurred under t!e impact o% so#called analytic 9arCism in t!e course o% t!e 6A-;s* $ince t!en, t!e &nglis! speaking /orld !as seen numerous attempts to com>ine 9arCist social t!eory /it! t!e normative principles in%ormingvarieties o% le%t#li>eral political t!eory* 3 @!ile t!ese developments !ad little impact else/!ere,

there ,as a similar redisco"ery of ethical and political /n the case of 4eleu%e)
!is comments in intervie/s and ot!er

normati"ity in =rance

during t!is period, eCpressed in a rene/ed interest in !uman rig!ts, su>Dectivity, Dustice, e?uality and %reedom* @e can see evidence o% t!is, %or eCample, in t!e s!i%t in FerridaJs concerns t!at led !im to engage directly /it! concepts o% democracy, la/ and Dustice during t!e course o% t!e 6A-;s 8"atton 3;;1><*

then ;hat is Hhilosophy? amount toa significant step to,ards positi"e engagement ,ith the institutions and implicit political "alues of modern liberal democracy* =/o issues in particular signal t!is turn to/ards political normativity in !is later /ritings: %irst, !is comments a>out rig!ts and
occasional /riting during t!e 6A-;s and Durisprudence, and second, in t!e conteCt o% !is de%inition o% p!ilosop!y, !is remarks a>out democracy and I>ecoming#democratic*J Given t!at t!e term I>ecoming#democraticJ occurs only once in What is Philosophy? it /ould >e an eCaggeration to include it among t!e list o% concepts created >y Feleu,e and Guattari* Pevert!eless, I /ill try to s!o/ t!at some o% t!e elements o% t!eir earlier Ipolitical p!ilosop!yJ provide t!e resources needed to develop suc! a concept* 86< In a series o% intervie/s during t!e 6A-;s, Feleu,e responds to t!e rene/ed interest in !uman rig!ts during t!is period >y criticising t!e manner in /!ic! t!ese are represented as Ieternal valuesJ and Ine/ %orms o% transcendence*J . 5t t!e same time, !e makes it clear t!at !e is not opposed to rig!ts as suc! >ut only to t!e idea t!at t!ere is a de%initive and a#!istorical list o% supposed

rights are not the creation of codes or declarations but of 7urisprudence) ,here this implies ,or-ing ,ith the Asingularities& of a particular situation
universal rig!ts* He argues t!at 8Feleu,e 6AAG: 6G.<* He returns to t!e ?uestion o% rig!ts and Durisprudence in !is Abcdaireintervie/s /it! Claire "arnet recorded in 6A--, /!ere !e a%%irms t!e importance o% Durisprudence understood as t!e invention o% ne/ rig!ts, along /it! !is o/n %ascination %or t!e la/* 0 In !is 6AA; intervie/ /it! Pegri, IControl and Becoming,J !e rea%%irms t!e importance o% Durisprudence as a source o% la/ /it! re%erence to t!e ?uestion /!at rig!ts s!ould >e esta>lis!ed in relation to ne/ %orms o% >iotec!nology 8Feleu,e 6AAG: 6+A<* =!e very concept o% rig!ts implies a rule o% la/* It implies t!at certain kinds o% action on t!e part o% all citi,ens /ill >e protected >y la/ and, conversely, t!e en%orcement o% limits to t!e degree to /!ic! citi,ens can inter%ere /it! t!e actions o% ot!ers*G 83< 5lready in 6A1A Feleu,eJs IOpen Eetter to PegriJs 'udgesJ adopted t!e speaking position o% one Icommitted to democracyJ 8Feleu,e 3;;+: 6+A<* =!is t!eme >ecomes more pronounced in What is Philosophy? /!ere /e %ind a series o% !ig!ly critical remarks a>out actually eCisting democracies*+ Kar %rom dismissing t!e democratic ideal, t!ese comments imply

4eleu%e&smarxian support for becoming#re"olutionary as the path to,ards a ne, earth and a people to come is modulated by the call for resistance to existing forms of democracy in the name of a Abecoming#democratic that is not to be confused ,ith present constitutional states& 8Feleu,e and Guattari 6AA0: 66. translation modi%ied<*1In t!ese terms, /e can say t!at the normati"ity of 4eleu%e 8and GuattariJs< later political p!ilosop!y is defined by the relation bet,een becoming#re"olutionary and becoming# democratic.In order to reconstruct /!at Feleu,e means >y I>ecoming#democraticJ /e need to approac! t!is concept >y /ay o% t!e overtly political conception o% p!ilosop!y outlined in What is Philosophy? Hhilosophy is defined as the creation of concepts) ,here the creation of concepts Ain itself calls for a future form , %or a ne/ eart! and people
t!at ot!er actualisations o% t!e concept or Ipure eventJ o% democracy are possi>le* =!roug!out t!is >ook, t!at do not yet eCistJ 8Feleu,e and Guattari 6AA0: 6;-<* Clearly, t!is is a stipulative de%inition t!at applies to some >ut not all !istorical and

philosophy is a specific -ind of thought) defined in terms of its affinity ,ith absolute as opposed to relati"e deterritoriali%ation. 5s /e sa/ earlier, relative
eCisting %orms o% p!ilosop!y* On t!is account, deterritoriali,ation concerns t!e !istorical relations!ip o% t!ings to t!e territories into /!ic! t!ey are organised, including t!e manner in /!ic! t!ese territories >reak do/n and are trans%ormed or reconstituted into ne/ %orms* 5>solute deterritoriali,ation concerns t!e a#!istorical relations!ip o% t!ings and states o% a%%airs to t!e virtual realm o% >ecoming or pure events t!at is imper%ectly or partially eCpressed in /!at

it creates concepts that express such pure e"ents # to become) to capture) to deterritorialise) but also to go"ern democratically) to re"olt etc* # t!at p!ilosop!y is in!erently critical o% t!e
!appens* It is >ecause present in /!ic! it takes place* =o c!aracterise eCisting >odies and states o% a%%airs in terms o% suc! p!ilosop!ical concepts is to re#present t!em

This is ,hat 4eleu%e calls the Acounteractuali%ation& of phenomenaC such philosophical redescription enables us to see things differently or to see them as they might become rather than as they currently are. In t!is manner, t!e invention o% ne/ concepts
in t!oug!t as t!e eCpression o% Ipure eventsJ or I>ecomings*J can assist t!e deterritoriali,ation o% eCisting structures and t!e emergence o% ne/ ones /it!out, !o/ever, >eing tied to any positive political program* In t!is respect, Feleu,eJs conception o% t!e political task o% p!ilosop!y is close to t!at o% Koucault, /!o descri>es t!e aim o% !is genealogical criticism as t!e identi%ication o% limits to present /ays o% t!inking, acting and speaking in order to %ind points o% di%%erence or eCit %rom t!e past 8Koucault 6AA1: .6G<* Feleu,e appears to go %urt!er t!an Koucault in suggesting t!at t!ere is a utopian dimension to p!ilosop!y as !e understands it* &tymologically, !e /rites, utopia means Ia>solute deterritoriali,ation >ut al/ays at t!e critical point at /!ic! it is connected

,hen there is a connection bet,een the absolute deterritoriali%ation expressed in concepts and forms of relati"e deterritoriali%ationalready at ,or- in the social field) philosophy becomes utopian and achie"es its political "ocation) taking t!e criticism o% its o/n time Ito its !ig!est pointJ 8Feleu,e and Guattari 6AA0: AA<*
/it! t!e present relative milieuJ 8Feleu,e and Guattari 6AA0: 6;;<* In ot!er /ords, Feleu,ian p!ilosop!y is utopian, not in t!e sense t!at it posits an ideal society or sets out principles o% Dustice in t!e lig!t o% /!ic! /e mig!t identi%y t!e s!ortcomings o% eCisting societies, >ut in t!e sense t!at it creates concepts t!at can link up /it! processes o% deterritoriali,ation present in a given !istorical milieu, in%orming t!e perceptions and t!ere%ore t!e actions o% t!ose involved* =!is is an immanent utopianism t!at can >e compared in some respects to Ba/lsJs Irealistic utopianismJ 8see >elo/<*-Becoming#democratic =!is >rie% account o% Feleu,eJs immanent utopianism !elps us to see !o/ t!e concept o% I>ecoming#democraticJ mig!t serve t!e political %unction o% p!ilosop!y as !e de%ines it*

4ifferent forms of democratic political society amount to determinate actuali%ations of the concept or Apure e"ent& of democracy* I% /e suppose t!at eCisting processes o% deterritoriali,ation or Ilines o% %lig!tJ in

this -ind of immanent utopianism ,ill dra, upon elements of existing political normati"ity to suggest ,ays in ,hich the in7ustice or intolerability of present institutional forms of social life might be remo"ed. I>ecoming#democratic&therefore points to ,ays of criticising the ,or-ings of actually existing democracies in t!e name o% t!e egalitarian principles t!at are supposed to in%orm t!eir institutions and political practices* In Feleu,ean terms ) the philosophical concept of democracy is a means to counter#actuali%e ,hat passes for democratic society in the present) /!ile >ecoming#democratic allo/s us
modern societies include t!e ideals or opinions t!at motivate or in%orm particular %orms o% resistance, it %ollo/s t!at to counter#actuali,e movements or processes o% democrati,ation* "!ilosop!y pursues or supports suc! processes o% >ecoming#democratic, %or

,hen it challenges existing opinions about ,hat is acceptable ,right or 7ust ,ith the aim of extending the actuali%ation of democracy ,ithin contemporary societies. =!e compleC
eCample, concept o% democracy ties toget!er a num>er o% t!e political norms at t!e !eart o% modern political t!oug!t* In principle, t!ere /ill >e as many /ays o% >ecoming#democratic as t!ere are elements o% t!e concept o% democracy* In practice, p!ilosop!y can only e%%ectively advance t!e >ecoming#democratic o% a given political society /!en it engages /it! deterritoriali,ing movements t!at rely upon actuali,ed or actuali,a>le elements o% democratic political normativity* Feleu,e o%%ers no detailed account o% Dust /!at !e understands >y I>ecoming#democraticJ and it is

9i-e all forms of deterritoriali%ation) this one is not ,ithout its dangers* =!e comments on Heidegger in What is Philosophy? remind us t!at it is not enoug! to put oneJs %ait! in t!e people C it depends on ,hat people and ho, they are constituted as a political community 8Feleu,e and Guattari 6AA0: 6;-#6;A<* 5t t!e same time, it is not di%%icult to %ind
not di%%icult to imagine %orms o% populism t!at go against t!e grain o% !is political sensi>ility* elements in !is /ork /it! Guattari t!at ena>le us to %ill out t!e concept o% >ecoming#democratic* Kor eCample: 86< One o% t!e sources o% con%lict t!at !as >een present ever since t!e introduction o% modern democratic government !as >een t!e coeCistence o% %ormally e?ual rig!ts alongside enormous disparities o% material condition* =!e !istory o% modern democracies !as >een in part a !istory o% struggle to reduce material ine?uality and to ensure t!at t!e >asic rig!ts o% citi,ens !ave at least approCimately e?ual value %or all* Feleu,e alludes to t!is ongoing pro>lem /!en !e contrasts t!e universality o% t!e market /it! t!e manner in /!ic! it une?ually distri>utes poverty as /ell as enormous /ealt!* He is critical o% t!e

AThere is no democratic state that is not compromised to the "ery core by its part in generating human misery& 8Feleu,e 6AAG: 61.<*AGiven t!at
/ay in /!ic! modern democratic states %ail to live up to t!eir egalitarian promise: t!e >ene%its o% market economies are not universally s!ared and ine?ualities o% condition are !anded do/n %rom generation to generation in direct contravention o% t!e principle t!at all are >orn e?ual, t!en /e can say t!at ac!ieving a more Dust distri>ution o% material social goods is one vector o% I>ecoming#democratic*J 83< 5not!er constant source o% con%lict in democratic nation states ever since t!eir inception !as >een t!e struggle to

4emocracy has al,ays relied upon the principle of ma7ority rule) but the prior 8uestion Ama7ority of ,hom& has al,ays been settled in ad"ance and usually not by democratic means. =!is eCposes a
>roaden t!e >ase o% t!ose /!o count as citi,ens and t!us enDoy %ull access to t!e entire range o% >asic legal and political rig!ts* %ault in one o% t!e key components o% t!e concept o% democracy, namely t!e concept o% maDority* =!is can mean eit!er t!e ?uantitative maDority o% t!ose counted or t!e ?ualitative maDority o% t!ose among t!e population at large /!o are considered %it to >e counted* Feleu,e and Guattari rely upon t!e latter, ?ualitative sense o% maDority in A Thousand Plateaus /!en t!ey point to t!e eCistence o% a maDoritarian I%actJ in contemporary &uropean derived societies, namely t!e priority o% It!e average adult#/!ite#!eteroseCual# &uropean#male#speaking a standard

The adult) ,hite et cetera male is ma7oritarian not because he is numerically in the ma7ority but because he forms the standard against ,hich the rights and duties of all citi%ens are measured * =!ey de%ine minoritarian>ecomings as t!e variety o% /ays in /!ic! individuals and groups %ail to con%orm to t!is standard* The social mo"ements corresponding to these becomings ha"e gi"en rise to a succession of measures to extend the scope of the standard and thereby broaden the sub7ect of democracyC %irst, >y eCtending t!e vote to /omen and ot!er minoritiesW second, >y c!anging t!e
languageJ 8Feleu,e and Guattari 6A-1: 6;G<* nature o% political institutions and procedures to ena>le t!ese ne/ly en%ranc!ised mem>ers to participate on e?ual terms* &%%orts to c!ange t!e nature o% pu>lic institutions in /ays t!at >ot! ackno/ledge and accommodate many kinds o% di%%erence are ongoing in democratic societies, %or eCample in relation to seCual di%%erence, seCual pre%erence, di%%erent p!ysical and mental a>ilities, cultural and religious a%%iliations* Feleu,e and Guattari a%%irm t!e importance o% e%%orts to enlarge t!e c!aracter o% t!e maDority, even as t!ey insist t!at t!e po/er o% minorities Iis not measured >y t!eir capacity to enter into and make t!emselves %elt /it!in t!e maDority systemJ 8Feleu,e and Guattari 6A-1: 016<* By t!eir nature, processes o% minoritarian#>ecoming /ill al/ays eCceed or escape %rom t!e con%ines o% any given maDority* =!ey carry t!e potential to trans%orm t!e a%%ects, >elie%s and political sensi>ilities o% a population in /ays t!at amount to t!e advent o% a ne/ people* In turn, to t!e eCtent t!at a people is constituted as a political community, t!e trans%ormations it undergoes /ill a%%ect its conceptions o% /!at is %air and Dust and t!ere%ore t!e nature o% t!e rig!ts and duties attri>uted to t!e ne/ maDority*6; 9inoritarian>ecomings t!ere%ore provide anot!er vector o% I>ecoming#democratic*J 8.<

3 third struggle concerns the principle of legitimacy that go"erns decisions in a democratic polity* In !is IControl and BecomingJ intervie/ /it! Pegri, Feleu,e comments on t!e importance o% Durisprudence as a source o% la/ and ne/ rig!ts /it! re%erence to t!e ?uestion o% rig!ts in relation to ne/ %orms o% >iotec!nology* He goes on to add t!at ,e mustn&t lea"e decisions on such matters to 7udges or experts. @!at is re?uired is not more committees o% supposedly /ell ?uali%ied
/ise men to determine rig!ts >ut rat!er Iuser groupsJ 8Feleu,e 6AAG: 6+A#61;<* =!e implicit principle in t!is recommendation is t!e democratic idea t!at decisions oug!t to >e taken in consultation /it! t!ose most a%%ected >y t!em* =!is is one o% t!e %ounding principles o% modern

democratic governance and many t!eorists recommend its eCtension and application to ne/ conteCts suc! as t!e /orkplace 8"e%%er 6AA;: 06A#

,hether or not someone is entitled to a say in a particular decision depends upon ,hether or not their interests are li-ely to be affected >y t!e outcome and upon t!e nature o% t!ose interests: the more fundamental the interest the greater their entitlement to a "oice in the decision#ma-ing process 8$!apiro 3;;.: G3<* Feleu,eJs proposed application o% t!e principle in t!e realm o% >iotec!nologies gives
03;<* Ian $!apiro argues t!at reason to t!ink t!at t!e opening#up o% decision making procedures t!roug!out society constitutes a %urt!er vector o% I>ecoming#democratic*J

( ) The only reason the system exists as it does is because people before us accepted it and created it) ,e ha"e the potential to truly change the ,orld 4eleu%e and $uattariLM' 85=" 360#36G<
It is not sufficient to define bureaucracy by a rigid segmentarity ,ith compartmentali,ation o% contiguous o%%ices, an office manager in each segment) and the corresponding centrali%ation at the end of the hall or on top of the to,er. Kor at t!e same time t!ere is a /!ole >ureaucratic segmentation, a suppleness o% and communication >et/een o%%ices, a >ureaucratic perversion, a permanent inventiveness or creativity practiced even against administrative regulations* I% Oa%ka is t!e greatest t!eorist o% >ureaucracy, it is >ecause !e s!o/s !o/, at a certain level 8>ut /!ic! oneL it is not locali,a>le<, the barriers bet,een offices cease to be Fa

definite di"iding lineF and are immersed in a molecular medium(milieu) that dissol"es them and simultaneously ma-es the office manager proliferate into microfigures impossible to recogni%e or identify) discernible only ,hen they are centrali%ableC another regime) coexistent ,ith the separation and totali%ation of the rigid segments*I; @e /ould even say t!at fascism implies a molecular regime that is distinct both from molar segments and their centrali%ation. 4oubtless) fascism in"ented the concept of the totalitarian State) but there is no reason to define fascism by a concept of its o,n de"isingC there are totalitarian States) of the Stalinist or military dictatorship type) that are not fascist.The concept of the totalitarian State applies only at the macropoliticalle"el) to a rigid segmentarity and a particular mode of totali%ation and centrali%ation.>ut fascism is inseparable from a proliferation of molecular focuses in interaction) ,hich s-ip from point to point) before beginning to resonate together in the National Socialist State* Gural fascism and city or neighborhood fascism, yout! %ascism and /ar veteranRs %ascism, %ascism o% t!e Ee%t and
%ascism o% t!e Big!t, %ascism o% t!e couple, %amily, sc!ool, and o%%ice: e"ery fascism is defined by a micro#blachole that stands on its o,n and communicates ,ith the others) before resonating in a great) generali%ed central blac- hole*6R =!ere is %ascism /!en a war machine is installed in eac! !ole, in every nic!e* &ven a%ter t!e Pational $ocialist $tate !ad >een esta>lis!ed, micro%ascisms persisted t!at gave it une?ualed a>ility to act upon t!e Xmasses*X Faniel Guerin is correct to say t!at if Hitler too- po,er) rather then ta-ing o"er the

$erman State administration) it ,as because from the beginning he had at his disposal microorgani%ations gi"ing him Fan une8ualed) irreplaceable ability to penetrate e"ery cell of society)F in other ,ords) a molecular and supple segmentarity) flo,s capable of suffusing e"ery -ind of cell. Con"ersely) if capitalism came to consider the fascist experience as catastrophic) if it preferred to ally itself ,ith Stalinist totalitarianism) ,hich from its point of "ie, ,as much more sensible and manageable) it ,as because the segmentarity and centrali%ation of the latter ,as more classical and less fluid.;hat ma-es fascism dangerous is its molecular or micropolitical po,er) for it is a mass mo"ementC a cancerous body rather than a totalitarian organism. 5merican %ilm !as o%ten depicted t!ese molecular %ocal pointsW >and, gang, sect, %amily, to/n, neig!>or!ood, ve!icle %ascisms spare no one* !nly microfascism pro"ides an ans,er

to the global 8uestionC7;hy does desire desire its o,n repression) ho, can it desire its o,n repression? The masses certainly do not passi"ely submit to po,erN nor do they F,antF to be repressed) in a -ind of masochistic hysteriaN nor are they tric-ed by an ideological lure. 4esire is ne"er separable from complex assemblages that necessarily tie into molecular le"els) from microformations already shaping postures, attitudes, perceptions, expectations) semiotic systems) etc* 4esire is ne"er an undifferentiated instinctual energy) but itself results from a highly de"eloped) engineered setup rich in interactions: a /!ole supple segmentarity t!at processes molecular energies and potentially gives desire a %ascist determination* Ee%tist organi,ations /ill not >e t!e last to secrete micro%ascisms* /tLs too easy to be antifascist on the molar le"el) and not e"en see the fascist inside you) the fascist you yourself sustain and nourish and cherish ,ith molecules both personal and collecti"e.

Gole of the 3cti"ist</ntellectual

( ) /ntellectuals and acti"ists should ta-e their roles as our of transformati"e) ,or-ing to change the system) 8uestioning their stance and the stance of other) embracing the system as a sight for change =ischman and :c9aren &'6 [Gustavo &*, 5ri,ona $tate University, "eter, University o% Cali%ornia, Eos 5ngeles, Bet!inking
Critical "edagogy and t!e Gramscian and Kreirean Eegacies: Krom Organic to Committed Intellectuals or Critical "edagogy, Commitment, and "raCis(, !ttp:))///*%reireproDect*org)articles)nodeN3;++)KutureN3;o%N3;C")mclaren%isc!*pd%, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +)0)6.* 5 central and related aspect o% critical pedagogy is t!e role o% educators in7 t!e process o% educational criti?ue* Henry $iroux 86AA.< has

described educators7 as *transformati"e intellectuals+ because they ta-e a critical stance to,ard7 their o,n practice and the practice of others to engage in debate and in8uiry* In7 doing so, educators become acti"e in shaping the curriculum , ha"ing a role in7 shaping school policy) defining educational philosophies) and ,or-ing ,ith7 their communities in di"erse capacities.Transformati"e intellectuals are a,are7 of their o,n theoretical con"ictions and are s-illed in strategies for translating7 them into practice 8GirouC, 6AA., 3;;3<*GirouC >uilds !ere on t!e Gramscian7 concept o% praCis, or t!eoretically oriented action, and t!at o% the intellectual) 7 /!o has a prominent role to play in promoting an agenda for change.

3T<< You 4on&t $et $iroux

1. The thesis of each card still supports our argument) e"en if $iroux doesn&t Oalso the role of the intellectual<acti"istO E. ;e are the frea-ing epitome of $iroux&s philosophy =ischman and :c9aren &'6 [Gustavo &*, 5ri,ona $tate University, "eter, University o% Cali%ornia, Eos 5ngeles, Bet!inking
Critical "edagogy and t!e Gramscian and Kreirean Eegacies: Krom Organic to Committed Intellectuals or Critical "edagogy, Commitment, and "raCis(, !ttp:))///*%reireproDect*org)articles)nodeN3;++)KutureN3;o%N3;C")mclaren%isc!*pd%, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +)0)6.* 5 central and related aspect o% critical pedagogy is t!e role o% educators in7 t!e process o% educational criti?ue* Henry $iroux 86AA.< has

described educators7 as *transformati"e intellectuals+ because they ta-e a critical stance to,ard7 their o,n practice and the practice of others to engage in debate and in8uiry* In7 doing so, educators become acti"e in shaping the curriculum , ha"ing a role in7 shaping school policy) defining educational philosophies) and ,or-ing ,ith7 their communities in di"erse capacities.Transformati"e intellectuals are a,are7 of their o,n theoretical con"ictions and are s-illed in strategies for translating7 them into practice 8GirouC, 6AA., 3;;3<*GirouC >uilds !ere on t!e Gramscian7 concept o% praCis, or t!eoretically oriented action, and t!at o% the intellectual) 7 /!o has a prominent role to play in promoting an agenda for change.

3ns,ers

3T<< $eneric !ffense

( ) Hegemonic structures are ine"itable and change is ine"itable ;e can only ma-e it better =ischman and :c9aren &'6 [Gustavo &*, 5ri,ona $tate University, "eter, University o% Cali%ornia, Eos 5ngeles, Bet!inking
Critical "edagogy and t!e Gramscian and Kreirean Eegacies: Krom Organic to Committed Intellectuals or Critical "edagogy, Commitment, and "raCis(, !ttp:))///*%reireproDect*org)articles)nodeN3;++)KutureN3;o%N3;C")mclaren%isc!*pd%, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +)0)6.* $tuart Hall, &rnesto 9aclau)

and C!antal :ouffe 86A-+< !ave de"eloped a7 conception of hegemony as an e"er#e"ol"ing set of political) economic) ideological)7 and cultural processes by ,hich the dominant social sectors 8or !egemonic7 >loc< elicit consent from the popular sectors. 3nd yet hegemony is7 inseparable from conflicts and struggles o"er it. In t!is process, the struggle for7 control o"er the symbolic and economic domains of any gi"en society and the7 role the state plays in such struggles cannot be diminished* =!e pro>lem /it!7 t!e vie/ o% !egemony articulated >y Eaclau, 9ou%%e,
and Hall is t!at in t!eir7 emp!asis, to distance t!emselves %rom /!at t!ey consider to >e a crude7economism, t!ey o%ten seriously neglected t!e %undamental social contradiction7 >et/een capital and la>or and resecured t!e pro!i>itions on c!allenging 7 t!e contradictions o% capitalism /!ile at t!e same time positing cultural struggles7 associated /it! c!anges in t!e mode o% accumulation, eCc!ange, and circulation 7 o% capital as superordinate over material relations o% eCploitation linked 7 to production 8i*e*, to t!e eCtraction o% surplus la>or %rom /orkers /!o !ave 7 not!ing else to sell >ut t!eir capacity to la>or, t!eir la>or po/er<*

3T<< Spanos *3nnihilation+

1. ;e G2=!G: 5S hegemony and structures) not embrace the current system That&s our 111e"idence111. /f ,e pro"e any part of the 1NC) that&s a reason ,e sol"e this) and you can&t OOO/f NeededOOOP it ,on&t be E. ;e&ll ans,er their Spanos impact on point his ,arrant is that inter"entionism ,ill spiral out of control) en"eloping the globe 3) /nter"entionism ,on&t sno,ball 2conomics :andelbaum A11 89ic!ael 9andel>aum, 5* Herter "ro%essor o% 5merican Koreign "olicy, t!e "aul H* Pit,e $c!ool o% 5dvanced
International $tudies, 'o!ns Hopkins University, @as!ington FCW and Firector, "roDect on &ast#@est Belations, Council on Koreign Belations, CKB A;t! 5nniversary $eries on Bene/ing 5merica: 5merican "o/er and "ro%ligacy,( 'an 3;66<

the inter"entions in Somalia, in >osnia, in Koso"o, in Haiti >elong /it! t!e interventions in 3fghanistan and /ra8, alt!oug! t!ey ,ere underta-en by different administrations for different reasons) and had different costs.>ut all of them ended up in the protracted) unexpected) un,anted and expensi"e tasof nation building.INation building has ne"er been popular.The country has ne"er li-ed it./t li-es it e"en less no,.3nd / thin- ,eLre not going to do it again.@eRre not going to do it >ecause t!ere /onRt >e enoug! money* ;eLre not going to do it because there ,ill be other demands on the public purse.;e ,onLt do it because ,eLll be busy enough doing the things that / thin- ought to be done in foreign policy.3nd ,e ,onLt do it because it ,ill be clear to politicians that the range of legitimate choices that they ha"e in foreign policy ,ill ha"e narro,ed and ,ill exclude inter"entions of that -ind*$o I >elieve and I say in t!e >ook t!at t!e last ## the first t,o post#Cold ;ar decades can be seen as a single unit.3nd that unit has come to an end*
95PF&EB5U9:I t!ink it is, Bic!ard*5nd I t!ink t!at t!is period really goes >ack t/o decades*I t!ink t!e /ars or

>) /nter"entionism ,on&t sno,ball No moti"e :athieson and Youngs AQ 8Favid 9at!ieson and, 5ssociate Kello/ at KBIF&* He !olds a doctorate %rom t!e University o%
Eondon, Bic!ard oungs +, Co#ordinator o% t!e Femocratisationprogramme at KBIF&, and lecturer at t!e University o% @ar/ick, Femocracy "romotion and t!e &uropean Ee%t: 5m>ivalence Con%usedL(, Fecem>er, /orking paper 3A at KBIF&<

The left needs to get beyond a line of Athe 5S is imposing democracy by force) therefore ,e must retreat from democracy promotion&* "resident Bus! can >e criticised %or many t!ings >ut not 8yet< %or Iimposing democracy >y military %orceJ* ;hile the 5S has been routinely berated for see-ing to Aimpose& democracy in blan-et fashion around t!e /orld,the notable shift has in %act been bac- to,ards protecting alliances ,ith non#democratic states suc! as "akistan, $audi 5ra>ia and C!ina* =!e >ush administration !as launched t,o military in"asions)andneither of these had democracy promotion as their main ob7ecti"e) but rat!er as side effect* Beyond 5%g!anistan and Ira?, Kreedom House lists 0A countries in t!e /orld t!at still lack >asic democratic rig!tsW countries /!ere there is 8as o% t!is /riting< little e"idence that the 5S has planned to in"ade in democracy&s name* &?ually important, leftist analysts and politicians on t!e ot!er 8pro#Ira? invasion< side o% t!e de>ate must also de#lin- their "ie,s on /ra8 from the broader democracy agenda. 3 fixation ,ith 7ustifying the /ra8 in"asion %rom a progressive point o% vie/ is also in danger of obscuring a clearer "ision on more proacti"e democracy promotion*3A This Ademocracy by force& debate is a di"ersion* One analyst points out t!at this debate has dragged the 2uropean left into rallying forcefully behind t!e Iimperialism& Dudged to lie >e!ind a small num>er o% interventions, but to ignore

the far larger number of cases around t!e /orld ,here the ;est has by its inaction and silence been complicit ,ith autocracy*.; There is no prospect of a far#reaching Adoctrine of democratic inter"entionJ* 4ebate at the multilateral le"el has long settled on the "ie, that an absence of democracy cannot in itself 7ustify military inter"ention in a particular country. 3t least for the present) no state appears li-ely to challenge this* =!e morality o% military intervention is o% course a crucial issue %or international et!icsW >ut,the core business of democracy promotion is essentially about ci"ilian strategies. /t is here ,here the left must engage and ha"e something more creati"e and producti"e to say* 9ore t!an any ot!er %oreign policy issue o% modern times, /ra8 has split the 2uropean left* $ome
important points !ave >een made, not least t!ose around t!e validity o% international la/ and t!e e%%icacy o% using armies %or regime c!ange* But

the debate hasalsobeen damaging and confused* @!en not actively disagreeing /it! eac! ot!er some on t!e le%t !ave
appeared simply to >e talking at cross#purposes* =ony BlairJs speec!es a>ound /it! re%erences linking democracy /it! %irmness /!ilst :apatero constantly stresses t!e need %or democracy t!roug! non#prescriptive dialogue* The

2uropean left ris-s regressing to an unsatisfactory binary distinction bet,een Ainter"ention& and Adoing nothing& in non# democratic countries* Ironically, ,hile it lambasts 5S military po,er) the left itsel% appears to ha"e slid bac- to,ards a ;estphalian "ie, of international relations, reversing t!e evolution in its o/n
internal de>ates during t!e 6AA;s*

C) Hrefer our impacts their long#term ine"itability claim is nonfalsifiable our short term scenarios are more "alid =ett,eis AB 8C!ristop!er '* Kett/eis, assistant pro%essor o% national security a%%airs at t!e U*$* Paval @ar College, 9ay 3;;0 &valuating
IBRs Crystal Balls: Ho/ "redictions o% t!e Kuture Have @it!stood Kourteen ears o% Unipolarity( International $tudies Bevie/ Solume +, Issue 6, "ages 1A#6;0< Kinally, and per!aps least important, t!e c!arge t!at %ourteen years is too soon to em>ark on t!is venture is >ot! overly literal and restrictiveW a%ter all, it

is possible to pro7ect a fe, years beyond the immediate time hori%on ,ith a good degree of accuracy. Beasona>le proDections o% economic potential and military spending are availa>le %or t!e neCt %e/ years %or t!e
great po/ers* One o% t!e more ro>ust, i% unsurprising, %indings o% ?uantitative international relations sc!olars!ip is t!at t!e >est predictor o% events in year Y is t!e situation in year 8YZ6<* =e,

,ould argue that drastic changes in the international system are terribly li-ely in the immediate future) say, over t!e neCt couple o% years* =!us, t!e %ourteen year time !ori,on used in t!is essay is, in reality, a >it longer* The ob"ious reaction by any s-eptic to this "entureMsome form of F7ust you ,aitXMis too open#ended to be useful and renders the predictions unfalsifiable. Scholars ,ho defend their probabilistic and e"en ine"itable predictions about the e"olution of the international system by as-ing for more time can ne"er be pro"en ,rong. 4espite ob7ections to the contrary) nothing in the logic of these pro7ections suggests a reason to expect a delay in the beginning of their de"elopment. >y no,) fourteen years after the fall of the >erlin ;all) the trends that these "isions predicted ought to ha"e at least begun to ma-e themsel"es apparent in measurable ,ays. 5 little later t!is

Youth Hegemony =rame,or-

Topshelf

=rame,or- 1NC
( ) ;e&re going to control the uniqueness 8uestion on the frame,or- flo, Current pedagogical methods cannot teach us critical thin-ing s-ills or acti"ism in oppressed groups Hrefer our e"idence citing specific studies about these groups and modern teaching methods 5rrieta &'6 [Euis, 'r*, 5ssistant "ro%essor in C!icana and C!icago studies at t!e University o% Cali%ornia at Favis, =!e $ocial $tudies o%
Fomination: Cultural Hegemony and Ignorant 5ctivism(, !ttp:))///*academia*edu)6--GA6.)=!eHsocialHstudiesHo%HdominationHCulturalH!egemonyHandHignorantHactivism, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +).)6.*

9eming 83;;.< postulates7 from a deficiency position, using7 a traditional cognitive developmental7 perspective based on one study 8Oitc!ner7 and Oing 6A-G< that school#aged7 students cannot produce the form of7 reasoning that the Contro"ersial Hublic7 /ssues 8C"I< approach to learning7 demands* Eeming %urt!er states t!at7school#aged students are not capable ofI performing the cogniti"e tas-s re8uired7 by the CH/ curricula to de"elop higherorderI thin-ing. Not only are 9eming&s7 arguments from a deficit perspecti"eI and insulting to youth) but his insistence7 on teaching to pro"ide students7 ,ith only a *store of information+ also7 is based on perceptions of students as7 empty slates ,ith little ability for complex7 reasoning) or ,hat =reire 86A1;<7called the ban-ing approach to education*
$peci%ically,

( ) 2"en progressi"e pedagogies that study the oppression of institutions play into an ahistorical role of knowledge /t destroys critical analysis and thin-ing s-ills that are -ey to reforming our pedagogical notions of oppressi"e systems This makes framework a netbenefit to the K 5rrieta &'6 [Euis, 'r*, 5ssistant "ro%essor in C!icana and C!icago studies at t!e University o% Cali%ornia at Favis, =!e $ocial $tudies o%
Fomination: Cultural Hegemony and Ignorant 5ctivism(, !ttp:))///*academia*edu)6--GA6.)=!eHsocialHstudiesHo%HdominationHCulturalH!egemonyHandHignorantHactivism, 'Cook*4 5ccessed +).)6.*

The regressi"e push for traditional7social studies content -no,ledge, suc!7 as t!at espoused in @F$$G@, is an7 acti"ist incursion not only to maintain7 the status 8uo of ine8uality but also to7 regress to acti"e domination ideologies.7 I do not maintain t!at domination ideologies7 are generally a>out a speci%ic7 group o% people in U*$* society, >ut7 rat!er about the frame,or-s that sustain7 a system of pri"ileges that in turn has7 replicated pri"ileges and subse8uently7 benefited and continues to benefit certain7 people in this society 8Bonilla#$ilva7 3;;6<* =!ose privileges are usually7 masked under t!e guise o% t!e ideals o%7 meritocracy,
e?uality, and t!e individualist7 merits o% capitalism t!at !ave %unctioned7 more as national propositions7 8myt!s< t!an social reality*7 =!e social studies o% domination t!at7 activist documents suc! as @F$$G@7 promote is >ased on t!e ideologies o%7 domination t!at are %oundational to t!e7 United $tates* Through content

-no,ledge7 based on heroification) blind patriotism7 8Eoe/en 6AAG<, and spectator7 democracy 8Boss 3;;;<, the current7 ine8ualities of society and the general7 apathy to,ard ci"ic engagement are7 reproduced. Such ideologies of domination7 and reproduction include upholding7 the traditional pantheon of heroesN the7 glorification of ,ars and systems such7 as capitalism) neoimperialism) and indi"idualismN7 and the teleological myth7 that the 5nited States is the most democratic7nation in the ,orld. These foci in7 t!e social studies curriculum generally7 -eep 3mericans ci"ically illiterate7 89arciano 6AA1< through the use of7 biased content that distorts and romantici%es7 5.S. history. This standard "ersion7 of social studies content -no,ledge has7 been in place for so long that generations7 of people ha"e accepted it as a7 matter of fact or as neutral -no,ledge. ;hen conser"ati"e acti"ists ad"ocate7 for traditional content -no,ledge that7 does not, in t!eir opinion, distort 3merican7 history 8&llington and &aton 3;;.))7 rather than for the critical#thin-ing7 s-ills that lead to participatory citi%enship 7 8Boss

the 8uestion ,hether7 ,hat they ad"ocate is biased is rarely7 raised. The fact that they refer to that7 -no,ledge as core -no,ledge already7 pri"ileges the -no,ledge o"er other7 epistemologies) ma-ing claims for it as7 foundational. The social studies of domination7 t!at @F$$G@ advocates, some7 assert, is based on lies 8Eoe/en 6AAG<7 that portray an unrealistically perfect7 se8uence of e"ents in 3merican history7 %or t!e last 33A years) e"en ,hen the7 often uncritical study of such institutions7 as sla"ery) such ideologies as manifest7 destiny) e"ents such as the Nati"e7 3merican genocide) or such people as7 :artin 9uther King 0r. are included in7 more progressi"e curricula.
3;;;<,