Lets start close to the heart of the case sending the USFG

to Rlyeh with the affirmatives assertion that Cthulhu acts

as [Lacans] the Real which is wrong in two ways: first, the
Real resists symbolitization absolutely so being symbolized by
Cthluhu means that its not the Real and secondly, Lacans
concept of the real came after Call of Cthulhu so this posthoc relationship that was conjured up by some Canadian kid 80
years after the fact is super-dodgy.
This opens Cthulhu up to counter-interpretation: Lovecrafts
fiction provided him with a psychologically compensatory
outlet for the Victorian fictions most likely keenly felt in New
England. As a contemporary to Freud, Lovecrafts works show
a fear not just of the subconscious but of hubris against the
irrational pre-conscious and inherited corruption (crossreference The Rats in the Walls, Shadow Over Innsmouth).
But this is also clear in Call of Cthulhu. Lovecraft wrote:
Lovecraft 1928 [The Call of Cthulhu, available at
http://www.hplovecraft.com/writings/ texts/fiction/cc.aspx]
Those Old Ones were gone now, inside the earth and under the sea; but their
dead bodies had told their secrets in dreams to the first men, who formed
a cult which had never died. This was that cult, and the prisoners said it had
always existed and always would exist, hidden in distant wastes and dark
places all over the world until the time when the great priest Cthulhu, from his
dark house in the mighty city of Rlyeh under the waters, should rise and bring the
earth again beneath his sway. Some day he would call, when the stars were ready,
and the secret cult would always be waiting to liberate him. Meanwhile no
more must be told. There was a secret which even torture could not extract.
Mankind was not absolutely alone among the conscious things of earth,
for shapes came out of the dark to visit the faithful few.

This revisits the fear Freud would claim was banished to the
subconscious that humanity is not the pinnacle of evolution on
the earth and that our civilization has allowed us to
misinterpret the natural order which we, as a species, actually
carry forward with us from generation to generation what
Jung would call the collective subconscious. And indeed
everything about Cthulhu and Rlyeh are detailed out to
question what we consciously perceive as the natural order:

1) the sometimes-drowned city counters our belief in

terrestrial civilization and the stable social order it invites
us to participate in,
2) its non-Euclidean geometry wipes away our adherence to
linear thinking fed by false sensory information,
3) Cthulhus dead state shreds the veil we face between life
and death, and
Cthulhus dreams that influence peoples waking actions
throughout the world smudges the boundaries between the
safe and rational conscious life and the dangerous excursion of
the Freudian sub-conscious, into which anything unsafe for
conscious consumption is dumped a notion which has since
been generally disowned by psychologists but was an active
point of psychotherapy contemporary to Lovecraft.
Regardless, Cthulhu does not function as the Real because the
sublimity of the Real cant be reduced to fictional scary
monsters. Cthulhu instead functions as the pre-historic, calling
out to us from a time when our ancestors were beholden to a
dangerously unpredictable and morally indifferent
environment which we can only catch vague references to in
the epigenetic foundations of our collective subconscious,
redressed not to look like the source of danger that was
experienced, but to preserve the feeling of danger that was
experienced.

Inherency: Status quo shows that the

plan is ineffectual.
But ignoring that theyre wrong in the details, it appears that
the affirmative case wants the United States Federal
Government to have a sublime experience to re-instill fear and
awe as a corrective measure to skewed, dare I say
Euclidean, thinking about the world and our place in it. But
they cant ensure that visiting S. Latitude 47 9, W. Longitude
126 43 Lovecraft was very precise with those coordinates
would result in a sublime experience, and no fictions in the
85 years since Call of Cthulhu was published, up to or
inclusive of last years Godzilla movie (in which a giant
monster from the sea munches on its natural enemies with an
utter disregard for the human civilization its stomping
through), have proven an adequate proximation of the sublime
to bring the hubris of our species under control. Indeed, the
literary philosophy of cosmic horror has its own Wikipedia
entry, explaining that:

Perhaps the most prominent theme in cosmicism is the utter

insignificance of humanity. Lovecraft believed that the human
race will disappear. Other races will appear and disappear in
turn. The sky will become icy and void, pierced by the feeble
light of half-dead stars. Which will also disappear. Everything
will disappear. And what human beings do is just as free of
sense as the free motion of elementary particles. Good, evil,
morality, feelings? Pure Victorian fictions. Only egotism
exists. Cosmicism shares many characteristics with nihilism,
though one important difference is that cosmicism tends to
emphasize the inconsequentiality of humanity and its doings,
rather than summarily rejecting the possible existence of some
higher purpose (or purposes). For example, in Lovecrafts
Cthulhu stories, it is not so much the absence of meaning that
causes terror for the protagonists as it is their discovery that
they have absolutely no power to effect any change in the
vast, indifferent, and ultimately incomprehensible universe
that surrounds them. Whatever meaning or purpose may or
may not be invested in the actions of the cosmic beings in
Lovecrafts stories is completely inaccessible to the human
characters, in the way an amoeba (for example) is completely
unequipped to grasp the concepts that drive human behavior.

Now we want to highlight that cosmicism tends to emphasize

the inconsequentiality of humanity and its doings because that
wipes every impact theyve got off the flow and Lovecrafts
assertion Good, evil, morality, feelings? Pure Victorian
fictions. Only egotism exists. collapses their framework on
itself. And yet in Beyond Good & Evil, Nietzsche attacks this
position, writing:
there may even be puritanical fanatics of conscience, who
prefer to put their last trust in a sure nothing, rather than in
an uncertain something. But that is Nihilism, and the sign of a
despairing, mortally wearied soul, notwithstanding the
courageous bearing such a virtue may display. It seems,
however, to be otherwise with stronger and livelier thinkers
who are still eager for life.
And thus we present

Counterplan: Astronomy
So we therefore propose this non-fiction, non-topical
counterplan, as written by astrophysicist Carl Sagan in Pale
Blue Dot (1994), which, while unconventional, makes more
sense than anything the affirmative read
Spacecraft left our planetary neighborhood for the fringes of the solar system,
engineers turned it around for one last look at its home planet. Voyager 1 was about
6.4 billion kilometers (4 billion miles) away, and approximately 32 degrees above
the ecliptic plane, when it captured this portrait of our world. Caught in the center of
scattered light rays (a result of taking the picture so close to the Sun), Earth
appears as a tiny point of light, a crescent only 0.12 pixel in size. Look again at that
dot. Thats here. Thats home. Thats us. On it everyone you love, everyone you
know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their
lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions,
ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and
coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every
young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer,
every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every superstar, every supreme
leader, every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived thereon a mote of
dust suspended in a sunbeam. The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic
arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so
that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction
of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of
this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how
frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how
fervent their hatreds. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion
that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point
of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our
obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to
save us from ourselves. The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life.
There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could
migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where
we make our stand. It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and characterbuilding experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human
conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our
responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the
pale blue dot, the only home weve ever known.

Disowned Land cards (#3) are wrong about science

Land asserted that physics is forever pompously asserting that it is on the verge of
completion. The contempt for reality manifested by such pronouncements is
unfathomable. without citing any actual physicist to support his claim. Indeed,
contrary to this is nobel-winning physicist Dr. Richard Feynmans analysis of a
flower:

I have a friend whos an artist and has sometimes taken a view which I dont agree
with very well. Hell hold up a flower and say look how beautiful it is, and Ill
agree. Then he says I as an artist can see how beautiful this is but you as a
scientist take this all apart and it becomes a dull thing, and I think that hes kind of
nutty. First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people and to me too,
I believe. Although I may not be quite as refined aesthetically as he is I can
appreciate the beauty of a flower. At the same time, I see much more about the
flower than he sees. I could imagine the cells in there, the complicated actions
inside, which also have a beauty. I mean its not just beauty at this dimension, at
one centimeter; theres also beauty at smaller dimensions, the inner structure, also
the processes. The fact that the colors in the flower evolved in order to attract
insects to pollinate it is interesting; it means that insects can see the color. It adds a
question: does this aesthetic sense also exist in the lower forms? Why is it
aesthetic? All kinds of interesting questions which the science knowledge only adds
to the excitement, the mystery and the awe of a flower. It only adds. I dont
understand how it subtracts.

Thus a good scientist can add to the wonder of conscious living and should not be
categorically disregarded.

Disowned Land cards (#3) self-negate by attacking philosophy

But Land moved on to ironically attack philosophy: philosophy has now reached the
stage where it has lost all confidence in its power to know, where envy has totally
replaced parental pride, and where the stylistic consequences of its bad conscience
have devastated its discourse to the point of illegibility, clearly foreshadowing his
exit from the profession, but also suggesting that what he wants is to regress his
(former) profession to a childlike innocence before anything was actually known but
much was about to be discovered, indicative of a need for psychotherapy to
progress him to a functional adulthood (which hopefully hes received, and perhaps
prompted the move to Shanghai). But this complaint is not new; it easily dates back
centuries to J.W. Goethe when he wrote in his epic poem Faust: Ive studied now
Philosophy And Jurisprudence, Medicine, And even, alas! Theology, From end to
end, with labor keen; And here, poor fool! with all my lore I stand, no wiser than
before leading us to

Counterplan 2: The United States Federal Government should stage a massresignation to take up farming.

In Goethes Faust, Mephistopheles initial advice to Fausts existential dilemma is

simply this:

Betake thyself to yonder field, There hoe and dig, as thy condition; Restrain thyself,
thy sense and will Within a narrow sphere to flourish; With unmixed food thy body
nourish; Live with the ox as ox, and think it not a theft That thou manurst the acre
which thou reapest; That, trust me, is the best mode left, Whereby for eighty
years thy youth thou keepest!

Now its important to note that Faust rejects this, as is necessary for his epic drama,
but it is another alternative to the aggressive anti-humanism of the affirmative
position if astronomy doesnt move you as much as it moves us.

Warrant is wrong on enlightenment versus ocean (#1)

But their case is wrong from the top: enlightenment philosophy is not based on fear
of the ocean but on love of consciousness and reason as a stable framework for
growth and development to an excess, which allows for the unchecked and
possibly dangerous growth of the unattended subconscious. This is actually quite
common in middle management throughout the corporate world today, even
seeping into schools: a belief in management by measurement, but anything that
isnt measured is pretty much ignored. This is why we maintain a fear of cthonic
forces symbolically undermining our heroic willpower, whether it be Cthulhu or Jaws
under the water, or Bane tunneling under Gotham, or the Underminer tunneling
under whatever city the Incredibles lived in, or Grendels Mother: we are confident
in our ability to deal with whats on the surface, but what lies beneath is a source of
worry, and has been from Beowulf to Batman. The ocean, thought of both as a
surface and an abyss of vast space with the Greeks assigning Poseidon to the
surface and Phorcys to the hidden dangers of the deep serves as a metaphor for
the edge of our subconscious and the instincts and feelings it can generate and
subject our mind and body to. Fear of the subconscious and irrational far pre-dates
the enlightenment; the enlightenment just codified the love of conscious reason and
really has nothing to do with the actual ocean at all.

Warrant is is wrong on fascism versus ocean (#2)

Then they double-down on this faux-fear of the ocean and say that fascism will try
to annihilate unknown people because it fears them. This is ridiculous and their
evidence shows it: fascism picks fights with different people who are clearly known
to be weak and vulnerable. Dissent, diversity, and Otherness must be identified
before it can be purged: just ask Hitler or Stalin or Mao or Mussolini. Indeed,
identification is at the root of oppressive power as Foucault identifies in Discipline
and Punish:

For a long time ordinary individuality the everyday individuality of everybody

remained below the threshold of description. To be looked at, observed, described in
detail, followed from day to day by an uninterrupted writing was a privilege. The
chronicle of a man, the account of his life, his historiography, written as he lived out
his life formed part of the rituals of his power. The disciplinary methods reversed
this relation, lowered the threshold of describable individuality and made of this
description a means of control and a method of domination. It is no longer a
monument for future memory, but a document for possible use. And this new
describability is all the more marked in that the disciplinary framework is a strict
one: the child, the patient, the madman, the prisoner, were to become, with
increasing ease from the eighteenth century and according to a curve which is that
of the mechanisms of discipline, the object of individual descriptions and
biographical accounts. This turning of real lives into writing is no longer a procedure
of heroization; it functions as a procedure of objectification and subjection.

We can even see this in our own national politics: after all, isnt it easier to talk
about how our civilization is at risk because of homosexuality (formerly
Communists) or the illegal immigrants (formerly Gypsies) or those insidious Muslims
(formerly Jews) or those intractably incompetent Republicans (formerly Democrats)
than address our inability to draw down nuclear weapons, or wean ourselves off of
fossil fuels, or have a genuinely representative government of, by, and for the
people?

Disadvantage: plan provokes mass exterminations

So while fascism does do mass exterminations of human life, theyre not driven by a
desire to dominate the unknown, but a desire to dominate while recoiling from the
unknown. So by forcing a confrontation with the subconscious unknown and the
primal perils therein, our opponents ensure that there will be an escalation of
purges, mass exterminations, and genocides brought about as a direct reaction to
their espoused plan. Which would be a case turn if they thought genocide matters,
but their framework of cosmic horror maintains that it doesnt.

We, however, being the stronger and livelier thinkers who are still eager for life,
believe that we have a responsibility to deal more kindly with one another and are
thus opposed to the affirmative plan that would provoke mass exterminations.