Ethics+K

A. Link:The ethical obligation constructed in the 1AC constructs the idea that there is one correct lens under which to view international relations. This idea leads to a clash between people, communities, and states with different ideals, and perpetuates wars to colonize and teach the other of the correct ethic Mark F.N. Franke, B.A. History, B.A. Philosophy, M.A. Contemporary Social and Political Thought, Ph.D. Political Science, 2k, European Journal of International Relations, Volume 6 Issue 3, Refusing an ethical approach to world politics in favour of political ethics, http://ejt.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/6/3/307, Boxer The grounds that propel International Relations and, consequently, the general concern of international ethics themselves, though, are surely not of an ethical character per se. International Relations and the considerations of ethics made possible within that vision respond primarily to the notion that there is no natural structure or code upon which actions and judgements in human relations may be legitimately justified in any final sense. No person or group of persons has view to any thing like what one might call the universal conditions of humanity. Each is limited to particular perspectives and cultural mappings of how a human universe may appear if local understandings could be extended globally. It is for this reason that persons are said to be naturally in a state of war with each other.5 In trying to orient themselves to one another and the things that come of interest to them via experience and reports of the experiences of others, humans run inevitably into a cartographic crisis with one another, a crisis regarding how each ought to orient her- or himself to others. Even prior to any kind of base power struggle that Realists may attribute to them, people come into a conflict of ideas and representations of what the world of experience might be. The multiple images that different humans may project or adopt in trying to understand the potential range of their respective interests and movements share no natural grounds in common. There is no one place, life or vision in which all humans commonly partake.

Ethiks 1NC

B. Impact: This moral ordering allows the states to require all citizens to think in the same way that the state does, cooping their rights, and normalizing the citizenry, destroying all value to life Mark F.N. Franke, B.A. History, B.A. Philosophy, M.A. Contemporary Social and Political Thought, Ph.D. Political Science, 2k, European Journal of International Relations, Volume 6 Issue 3, Refusing an ethical approach to world politics in favour of political ethics, http://ejt.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/6/3/307, Boxer Rather than being a repository and force of political power in the world, the modern state, where sovereignty is said to rest first in the people, is a ground for ethics. And it gains its right as such via the political efforts that found and sustain it. Whether it is popularly constructed through the fabled general will and social contract or founded through the forces of conquest, terror, theology or revolution, the state provides a socially constructed human universe in which one vision and map holds sway for all. It is a space in which all individuals are required to submit to one fundamental set of principles and ideas of inter-human relations, expressed through a constitution and laws. As such, the liberal state provides a matrix in which members may and must conform to a particular set of codes of conduct, notions of responsibility and rules of judgement. The state is at base a moral order created through political conflict and cooperation to overcome the anarchy that naturally makes ethics always uncertain and open to question. Furthermore, the state functions primarily to enforce a specific and identical ethical subject position in each of its members. As beings who are understood to fit equally within the same sovereign order, citizens of a modern liberal state are required to appreciate themselves and one another as essentially the same kind of being. They must not only understand that each one of them enjoys the same world but could also partake of the same perspective of that world. The citizen of the state, in other words, must cast away particular perspective in favour of the notion that she or he may see her- or himself reflected in the attitude of the state as it exists. Moreover, she or he must accept the fact that the vision and character attributed to this human sub-universe may be changed only as permitted by the amendments acknowledged through the constitution under which each enjoys her or his identity as an ethical being. The state not only normalizes the limits and structure of political associations. It also provides mechanisms through which the normalization of humans may occur, where the title of citizenship and normalcy are coextensive and where the notion of criminality allows for the correction of citizens.6

Ethiks 1NC

C. Alternative: Vote negative to reject the affirmatives ethical framing of the world. Only by using a discourse of politics and rejecting the idea that there is one correct and moral option can we use the political process to debate and ultimately find the best possible policy Mark F.N. Franke, B.A. History, B.A. Philosophy, M.A. Contemporary Social and Political Thought, Ph.D. Political Science, 2k, European Journal of International Relations, Volume 6 Issue 3, Refusing an ethical approach to world politics in favour of political ethics, http://ejt.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/6/3/307, Boxer I therefore reject the project of rethinking international ethics which is granted such considerable value by these theorists.3 For, despite the great sensitivity expressed in their works to the processes by which the ethical is constituted in international affairs, this overall project pays insufficient attention to how the possibility to rethink international ethics is limited by the idea of an international context to begin with. Rethinking international ethics may provide alternative readings to how the limits to ethical life in this world are to be understood. However, if a critique of international ethics is to allow ethical theory that is not ultimately total in scope, it must give up on the international, framed either as the ‘international’, ‘world’ or ‘globe’, as its organizing concept. Otherwise, the strong possibility of producing a theory of ethics that presumes universal application or validity remains. Conjointly, evasion of a totalized reading of international ethics is possible only insofar as a primary attention to ethics is quit as well. For, I contend, supposing even that a particular-oriented reading of the ethical is tenable in contrast to the crude generalism of International Relations still suggests that it is possible to call upon central moral principles that may apply to or are made manifest within all points of human concern. To turn the validity of a prior sentiment more appropriately on its head, I finally argue that ethics is always politically situated. Ethics is itself an approach to human life that stands upon some form of global outlook, whether that world is seen as heterogeneous or homogeneous. And the worldview to which any particular ethical approach may pertain can never be a fact in itself. If the final limits to possible human experience and social and political life were not contestable, the ethical would not be a question. Rather, the set of international, globular or worldly limits expressed in a theory of ethics is determined through prior political struggles through which the principles of human conduct and relations are to be established. An ethical approach rests always on the persuasive quality of one understanding of being human over others. Thus, a full critique of the ethical in terms of the international must direct its attention first and foremost to the unceasing and unsystematic political negotiation through which worldviews are generated and replaced, suspending focus on both the international and ethical. For it is in these processes that the ethical and the international are made thinkable from the start.