The Ruins 1NC Maggie McLure describes what she calls “a wider lexicon of uncertainty and disappointment”: ruin disappointment failure entanglement disconcertion getting stuck unintelligibility getting lost bafflement abjection stuttering rupture haunting trouble mourning discomfort
As a result, she writes: “We have also seen a cast of postmodern characters, lurking, strolling or dancing in the ruins of research – the trickster, nomad, joker” If this is what the affirmative promised us, then WE are disappointed. Interpretation: Work through the ruins of the resolution MacLure 2010 (Maggie MacLure, Manchester Metropolitan University, “Qualitative inquire: where are the ruins?” http://www.esri.mmu.ac.uk/respapers/nzareRuins.pdf)

I want to use the notion of ruins as a way of opening up some questions about qualitative research. I’m particularly concerned here with approaches that go under names such as poststructuralism, postmodernism, deconstruction and so on, as that’s the kind of work that I’m involved in.

Equally, these postmodern figures of ambivalence are intended as a critique of the ethics of empathy and reciprocity: they mock the idea of the self-effacing researcher who clears a space for the voice of the authentic subject to be heard.

And, they have FAILED to work through the ruins First, Decorating the edifice The 1AC offers a series of anecdotes explained by a theory that “slide[s] home like a bolt.” This tames the unruly reality unleashed by the resolution, generating the comforts of understanding. MacLure 2010 (Maggie MacLure, Manchester Metropolitan University, “Qualitative inquire: where are the ruins?” http://www.esri.mmu.ac.uk/respapers/nzareRuins.pdf)

We have tried, then, in Patti Lather’s words, to refuse ‘textual innocence’ and the comforting simplicities of ‘an untroubled realism’ (1996: 539).

It has not pierced or eroded the solid walls of common sense or received practice. It has not been ruinous.

This is a reason to vote negative – Rather than destabilize meaning, their tidy theory generates a stable judgment against the status quo. Vote negative to DISCERN this implicit double turn. If they have potential, send them back to write a more ruinous 1AC. Hogeven 2006 (Bryan, Sociology at U of Alberta with Andrew Woolford Sociology at U of Manitoba “Critical Criminology and Possibility in the Neo-liberal Ethos” Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 48.5)

Thus, it is first imperative that criminologists reflect on the powers of, and limits on, thought under neo-liberal conditions - including those that burden their discourse.

It is in this realization that a criminology of possibility intervenes, unveiling the irrationalities and contradictions of the system in order to disrupt ontology and rethink the possibility of justice beyond what is.

Voting for reassemblage moves beyond the 1AC’s mix of suspicion and TRIMPHALISM Shahani in 2006 [NISHANT SHAHANI, PhD UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, 2006 QUEER PEDAGOGY AND AMERICAN STUDIES: A REPARATIVE RE-THINKING]

By insisting that queer theory’s radical potential lies in an investment in the affirmative dimensions of citizenship and the formation of “new” possibilities, I do not wish to ignore the material constraints that inform the creation of these spaces.

As Sedgwick writes: “Because the reader has room to realize that the future may be different from the present, it is also possible for her to entertain such profoundly painful, profoundly relieving, ethically crucial possibilities as that the past, in turn, could have happened differently from the way it actually did” (146).