Poverty Rhetoric Kritik – index

Download 112.87 Kb.
Date conversion07.02.2017
Size112.87 Kb.
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8

WDW 2009 Poverty Rhetoric K

dZiegler – Pre-Camp /

Poverty Rhetoric Kritik – INDEX

Poverty Rhetoric Kritik – INDEX 1

Poverty Rhetoric – 1NC 2

Poverty Rhetoric – 1NC 3

Poverty Rhetoric – 1NC 4

Link – Black Mothers 5

Link – Black Mothers 6

Link – Single Black Mothers 7

Link – Programs Aimed To Single Mothers 8

Link – “Welfare Queens” 9

Link – Distinguishing “The Poor” 10

Link – The Deserving Poor 11

Link – Social Security 12

Impact – No Solvency 13

AT: We’re Benevolent 14

AT: Compassion Good 15

AT: Poverty Inevitable/Gotta Fight It 16

AT: Framework 17

AT: Reps Don’t Shape Reality 18

**Aff Answers** 19

AT: Poverty Rhetoric – 2AC 19

AT: Poverty Rhetoric – 2AC 21

AT: Poverty Rhetoric – 2AC 23

AT: Poverty Rhetoric – 2AC 24

Poverty Rhetoric – 1NC

Gestures towards persons in poverty are rhetorically dangerous. Such gestures underscore that poverty is a continuum – a tautological state of being defined only in relation to a lack of abundance. This positions the poor as a morally deviant subject to make their suffering intellectually coherent.

Thomas Ross, Prof. of Law @ U. of Pitt., June 1991 (“The Rheotric of Poverty: Their Immorality, Our Helplessness”, 79 Geo. L.J. 1499, p. l/n)

The rhetoric of poverty in the 1980s was exemplified by the myth of the welfare mother with a Cadillac and by the rise of yet another category of the poor, the "underclass." n27 This new category of the poor included: (a) the passive poor, usually long-term welfare recipients; (b) the hostile street criminals who terrorize most cities, and who are often school dropouts and drug addicts; (c) the hustlers, who, like street criminals, may not be poor and who earn their livelihood in an underground economy, but rarely commit violent crimes; (d) the traumatized drunks, drifters, homeless shopping-bag ladies and released mental patients who frequently roam or collapse on city streets. n28 Membership in the underclass was determined by behavior which was either patently immoral or socially deviant. The Concept of the underclass etched deeper the division between us and them. It also connected perfectly with the rhetorical theme of moral weakness. Except for some examples of the "traumatized" members of the underclass, the behavior that characterized the underclass was criminal, deviant, or that of a person without hope or dignity. The idea of the "passive" poor, people beyond hope and without any sense of initiative, expressed the pervasive notion that poor people were unwilling to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and were instead happy to feed at the public trough. n29 The "underclass" thus was a late twentieth century form of the historically  [*1508]  persistent category, the undeserving poor. And like its historical antecedents, the idea of the "underclass" seemed to be driven more by ideology than by any attempt accurately to generalize about the circumstances and nature of poverty in America. Michael Katz contrasted the idea of the underclass and the reality: [A]s a metaphor, the underclass obscures more than it reveals. It glosses over differences in condition that require varied forms of help, and it passes lightly over two salient features of poverty and welfare in America: their widespread and transient character. In the Michigan study, which followed a large sample of American families for 10 years, . . . [b]oth poverty and welfare use . . . lasted relatively briefly, and children whose parents relied on welfare were no more likely to need public assistance as adults than were others in the sample. What the study shows, in short, is that poverty is more accurately perceived now, as before in American history, as a point on a continuum rather than a sharp, clearly demarcated category of social experience. In truth, the forces that push individuals and families into poverty originate in the structure of America's political economy. Some of us are lucky, not different. n30 As a metaphor, the underclass is the perfect expression of the rhetorical themes of difference and deviance. Perhaps because it so perfectly expresses these persistent historical themes, it has remained as part of the public discourse on poverty notwithstanding its metaphoric and distorting quality. The precise content of the commonly held assumptions about the poor has changed throughout American history. The idea of the nineteenth century "pauper" is different from the idea of the late twentieth century "underclass." Still, the basic premises of the rhetoric of poverty run through history, drawing lines between groups of people and labeling categories as deviant and undeserving. There has always been an "us/them" conception of people in poverty. We have always found ways to make their suffering intellectually coherent. n31

Poverty Rhetoric – 1NC

This only serves an otherizing function in which we view human agency as a commitment to economic development – this denies all human worth.

Carmen Raff, Postgraduate Research Director @ U. of Manchester in Rural/Social Comm Development, 1996 (“Autonomous Development Humanizing the Landscape: An Excursion into Radical Thinking & Practice)

In the course of the quest for humanization, people may be confronted and challenged by dehumanizing myths and practices which, because they are dehumanizing, are oppressive for all involved. The making of culture and the writing of history are at the core of autonomous human agency. Oppression occurs when these two specifically human and humanizing functions are inhibited: the culture of silence is not the culture of those who cannot speak, but of those who are inhibited or prevented from being fully human. People are oppressed in many different ways: Augusto Boal even speaks of' 'the cop in the mind' when referring to affluent Northern societies where suicide and drug abuse and commodity fetishism are rife. They may be oppressed physically through unemployment, under­employment, insecurity, malnutrition and homelessness. They may be oppressed intellectually by ideologies which, in the last resort, serve the vested interests of those who directly or indirectly exploit them, or may even have removed them altogether from their profit- and business-centered calculations. What is at the same time depressing and a generator of hope is the realization that those conditions, those ideologies, are not acts of God, but are man-made. 'Man' here means more often than not, the male of the species. 'Development' is another word for human agency, the undoing of 'envelopment': development exists where people act as subjects and are not acted upon as objects, targets and 'beneficiaries' nor manipulated as 'participants' in designs and projects not of their own participulation (Chapter 3). There is development where there is space for the flowering of human creativity and the right to invent our own future' (Thomas Sankara)is reclaimed.

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8

The database is protected by copyright ©dentisty.org 2016
send message

    Main page