Regionals Debate Prompt - Proposition

-->

BIRT multinational corporations

should be held accountable to international human rights law.

How do MNC's avoid persecution? Set statutes for contract takers to abide by in production.

Honourable judges, timekeeper, and respected members of the opposition. For too long, have multinational corporations been allowed to desecrate international human rights law. For too long, have they discarded their humanity for profits. For too long, have they exploited the fact that they provide something, that people either want, or that they need. It's time for us to tell them, that we are no longer going to tolerate that exploitation, and that's why, we on side proposition, are here today, to propose that multinational companies should, be held accountable to international human rights law.

So what are we talking about? First of all, Multinational Corporations have facilities and other assets in at least one country other than its home country. To hold Accountable is to have the moral and legal authority to bring into question the behaviour or attitude of the corporation. International Human Rights Law is as pursuant to the International Bill of Human Rights, which comprises the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

We believe, that it is in the spirit of this debate to set the parameters as being an international body, comprised of the United Nations, Non-Governmental Organizations, and other individuals concerned with the violations of international human rights law.

We believe, that in order to win this debate, we have to prove to you three things. We first have to prove, that multinational corporations, are violating international human rights law, and that if we fail to act, they will continue to desecrate those values which we hold dear. We also have to show you, that multinational corporations can indeed, be held accountable. Lastly, we will show you that our model, will indeed enforce, in principle and in practical grounds, both legal accountability and moral accountability.

Contention 1: Abuses of Human Rights & Why We Need to Act

• Time magazine article: Sweatshops in East Asia
  • In 2004, Nike systematically set up sweatshops in East Asia
    • 1. Absence of a living wage,
    • 2. Poor health/safety hazards
    • 3. Arbitrary discipline (verbal and physical)
    • 4. Fear and intimidation used when workers speak out or attempt to form a union
• Violates Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
  • Article 23, Section 1, guarantees right to just and favourable working conditions
  • Article 23, Section 4, guarantees right to form and join labour unions
  • Article 3, guarantees right to life
    • Absence of living wage doesn't provide this, more than 50% still below poverty line
• Some say better alternative;
  • We say not acceptable, we need to work to fulfill the standards set by IHR law
• According to Canadian Magazine, Dimensions, mining companies in Latin America ruined hundreds of acres of viable farm land through pollution
  • poor safety conditions have led to 10000s of cases of tuberculosis
  • consensus of local population, PEOPLE WANT CHANGE

• Won't change unless we do something about it
  • companies driven by profit
    • legally obligated to garner most profit for its shareholders
    • will set profits above adherence to human rights law
  • we want to lower their profit threshold
    • point where they still have positive gains
    • adherence to international human rights law = small decrease in profits
      • our model of accountability = larger fines for violations
    
    

Contention 2: Corporations Viewed as Singular Actors

To fully conceptualize accountability it must be made clear who is accountable, and to what degree, where that accountability arises from, towards who such accountability exists, and how such accountability is asserted.

• Corporations are accountable on two levels
  • Accountability is divided into
    • primary responsibility
      • actively involved in violating human rights
    • passive responsibility
      • it does not take action for the protection of its workers

• Accountability arises from a corporation's status of as an individual
  • legally
    • Fourteenth Amendment, added to the Constitution in 1868 to protect the rights of freed slaves, effectively made private corporations natural persons under the U.S. Constitution, and consequently has the same rights and protection extended to persons by the Bill of Rights, including the right to free speech.
    • If they are afforded the same rights and protections as individuals, they should also hold the same accountability as people
      • accountability for criminal actions
      • accountability for negligence towards the occurrence of criminal actions
  • logically
    • individuals make collective decisions for corporation
      • punishing that action punishes all who made the decision
    • corporate accountability is a check and balance
      • punishing individuals = personal punishment, corporations won't remember
    
    

Contention 3: How We'll Hold Them Accountable

Legal Accountability

IHRL is a law like any other. If you violate it, you must be punished.

• Enforced by Corporate Tribunal
  • parallel to International Criminal Court, Permanent Court of Arbitration of the Criminal Tribunal in the Hague
• Corporate Tribunal will fine more than what it takes to implement HR standards
  • minimal fines
    • makes process more efficient b/c most infringements are small

• progressive fines
  • more adequate for dealing with atrocious infringements

Moral Accountability

• Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, human rights activists
  • normative enforcement
    • condemnation, investigative journalism, raising awareness
  • practical enforcement
    • boycotts, sanctions, moratoriums

We need to be able to trust multinational companies to respect the human condition

Provide funding to NGO's such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International

My partner will extend on the specifics of Moral Accountability.

Public Pressure can create change. Questioning Nike's factories, girl started movement in US. Nike Oh Shit paid 600 hours of overdue wages. We believe that corporations should be held accountable because basic humans needs should be respected.

Therefore what we've clearly shown you, is that both on principal, and practical grounds, this motion must stand. A right without a remedy is no right at all.

SPEECH 2:

Contention 1: Extension - Morally Accountable

Contention 2: Root of the Problem

Contention 3: Race-to-the-bottom

only through applying this universally can we eliminate RTTB

Contention 4: Neo-Colonialism

corporations are here to stay

International human rights law as espoused by the United Nations Charter. Specifically the subsections regarding International Labor Laws,

ACTOR RESPONSIBLE?

Transnational corporations must be held accountable for violations against international human rights laws. They are powerful, often beyond that of the governments in which they work. Their power to manipulate and control important members of government disable government attempts to regulate the corporation or to otherwise impose any permissible laws.

ENFORCEMENT?

The measures of International Human Rights be enforced by the International Criminal Court in accordance with laws set forth by the Tribunal with the support of governments in which the corporations choose to reside.

Written for 2012 Vancouver West Regionals Debate Championships

Communitarians: Evolving Social Constructs

-->

You never change things by

fighting the existing reality.

To change something, build

a new model that makes the

existing model obsolete.

~ Buckminster Fuller

Purpose and Definition of Intentional Communities:

Have you ever wanted to live in a society where crime is non-existent, inequality is unheard of, and the pursuit of happiness is guaranteed? Communitarians are social pioneers who seek to create communities where such conditions are fulfilled. Often, members of intentional communities will hold common social, political, economic, and spiritual views, thus sharing in the responsibilities and resources of the community. The Fellowship for Intentional Community (FIC) states the purpose of communal living as “sustainable living, personal and community transformation, and peaceful social evolution” (The Fellowship, 6).

History of Intentional Communities:

Intentional communities had their roots in the founding of North America. During the 1820's and 1830's, “utopian communities” were established in protest of what individuals saw as the rise of moral corruptibility and religious putrefaction (Utopian, 1). The Oneida Community, Brook Farm, and Fruitlands were such communities experimenting with the belief that a total reorganization of society would lead to its perfection, and ultimately, utopia (26b, 1).

Communitarians in Our World Today:

Theoretical utopia first captured the imagination of these communitarians, but it was the growing disenchantment with mainstream society that led this perception to reality. America had become extremely powerful during the latter half of the 20^th Century. However, the country's pleasure in global hegemony was not shared by all. Many citizens saw the military-industrial complex as an evil institution which contradicted everything America stood for. They believed that legislation designed to protect citizens actually took away more rights than it did provide security of person. Moreover, the laissez-faire policy towards large businesses created an undeniable disparity in wealth between the very rich and the very poor. The inability even of today's society to provide solutions to these problems, has given birth to reactionary solution – modern-day intentional communities. (Pedersen, 10)

The intentional communities of the present have come a long way since their puritanical founding in 19^th Century New England. They have also experienced many changes since their “free-loving” childhood during the counter-culture movement of the 1960's (The 1960's, 3). Yet, the communitarians of today live by values which coalesce the old, and the new. There is no single way to categorize these communities, for they are as diverse as they are numerous. However, they do share in the belief that their way of living presents a viable alternative to mainstream society.

Amish communities in Ohio, for example, adhere to a strict code of religious conduct, which was in response to what they saw as religious indolence during the late 17^th Century. For centuries, they have been able to maintain a self-sustaining model of rural simplicity. While they have been mostly successful in preserving their spiritual roots, the current information-technology era presents them with a whole new set of challenges that only adaptation and remodelling would solve. (The Amish, 3)

These challenges are shared by residents of Twin Oaks, arguably the most successful and longest-running intentional community of the modern era. Founded in 1967 on 450 acres of land in Virginia, the Twin Oaks community now boasts a following of 100 people (Twin Oaks Community, 1).

It began as a non-structured social experiment attempting to put into practice the utopian ideals espoused by B. F. Skinner's Walden Two. Although several important theories generated by Skinner were implemented, the community outgrew its behaviourist principles. (Walden Two, 4)

New Social Constructs:

Communitarians of Twin Oaks gather in favour of “cooperation, sharing, nonviolence, equality, and ecology” (Welcome, 1). In the half-century since its inception, the community of Twin Oaks has revolutionized traditional views on conducting government, resource division, and societal advancement. Decentralized government is conducted through a collection of voluntary managers, planners, and committees. Even then, there is no class division or clash between hierarchies of power. The most distinctive component of the Twin Oaks community, however, may be its method of resource distribution. Individual contribution is given in the areas of business and domestic work. Instead of receiving monetary wages for work done, individuals receive credit-hours. Each individual needs only meet the 42 hours per week work requirement. (Twin Oaks Intentional, 2) Moreover, the community provides housing, food, and healthcare, as well as spending money. The cottage-industry products sold and services offered by Twin Oaks include hammocks, tofu, vegetarian sausages, and book indexing. The income earned from these businesses are then distributed equally among its members. What's more, these business are owned by the community. In 2006, the Twin Oaks Community earned a total of $600,000. (Twin Oaks Community: History, 4)

Although that amount of money may not seem like a lot to members of contemporary society, it is more than enough to sustain an altered perspective of societal progress. A clear distinction is made between personal needs and personal wants. Personal needs are taken care of through subsidiary farming in garden plots, natural water sources, and self-producing clothing and housing. Individuals are then free to pursue their individual wants with their spending money, and in many cases, to pool their income to better the community. Twin Oaks communitarians, for example, have added solar-heated water systems, music equipment, and volleyball courts which they all share. (Twin Oaks Intentional, 2)

Practical Implications:

In fact, intentional communities such as the community at Twin Oaks have aroused a new social perception among the inhabitants of planet Earth. Gradually, more and more people have come to realize the possibilities of living in harmony with nature (Foundation, 3). They have realized that nature and individual pursuits for happiness are not mutually exclusive. They have also realized the need to reach to others when they are in need. The intentional community of The Farm, in Tennessee, established a branch of its organization as one that focuses on reaching out to others. Called “Plenty,” it focuses on the ability of Earth to support all its people in harmony. Stephen Gaskin, founder of the Farm, said “there is plenty, to feed everyone in the world, if it were fairly, and accurately distributed.” (The Farm, 5). This author is hopeful that countless other movements will be inspired by the successful introduction of intentional communities.

There is no better example, of the possibility of total, equitable, resource distribution than that of the Twin Oaks Community. There is no better proof, that individuals of different creeds, races, and religions, can co-exist harmoniously while holding a common purpose. The communitarians of Twin Oaks may not be the strongest economically, or the most powerful militarily, but they seem to be genuinely happy with their lives. If happiness is what we strive for, then why can the social constructs explored by the community of Twin Oaks not be applied universally? Who can deny happiness? Is it not only a matter of spreading the social constructs we have learned to a more global scale?

Written for English 12

Works Cited

"The 1960's Counterculture - The Movement and Photos." Pennsylvania Arts And Music. Web. 02 Mar. 2012. .

"26b. Experiments with Utopia." Experiments with Utopia [ushistory.org]. Web. 24 Feb. 2012. .

"The Amish: History, Beliefs, Practices, Conflicts, Etc." THE AMISH: History, Beliefs, Practices, Etc. Web. 29 Feb. 2012. .

"The Farm." Hippie Museum. Web. 29 Feb. 2012. .

"The Fellowship for Intentional Community's Non-profit Purposes." Intentional Communities Website. The Fellowship for Intentional Community. Web. 18 Feb. 2012. .

"Foundation For Deep Ecology :: Deep Ecology Movement." Foundation For Deep Ecology. Web. 28 Feb. 2012. .

Pedersen, Erica. "San Francisco Counterculture: Beatnik 1950s and Psychedelic 1960s." San Francisco City Guide. Web. 27 Feb. 2012. .

"Twin Oaks Community :: Communities Directory." Intentional Communities Website. Web. 29 Feb. 2012. .

"Twin Oaks Community: History of a Successful Commune - Culture Change Magazine #20." Culture Change. Sustainable Energy Institute. Web. 29 Feb. 2012. .

"Twin Oaks Intentional Community." Twin Oaks Community. Web. 01 Mar. 2012. .

"Utopian Socialism." Digital History. 01 Mar. 2012. Web. 25 Feb. 2012. .

"Walden Two Fan Site." Twin Oaks Intentional Community Homepage. Web. 29 Feb. 2012. .

"Welcome to Twin Oaks Intentional Community." Home. Twin Oaks Intentional Community. Web. 29 Feb. 2012. .

Shafia Case - Preemptive Strike on Honor Killings

It's very hard to evaluate the success of any preemptive measures. I'm sure that the sectors responsible for oversight, which include local law enforcement, school officials, and health professionals, did the best they could under the circumstances to prevent any tragedy of human life. However, like what Brianna said, the culture barrier between ethnic Afghans and Canadians caused this case to circumvent protective measures. Also, the plethora of cultures has made policy-making extremely difficult. Often, the best policy for politicians is no policy at all. Sitting on the fence is the only way to prevent collateral damage on their party's reputation or their own election hopes.

What I would say is due to the enormous sensitivity, and rare occurance of such cases, these circumstances cannot be successfully prevented, nor should we take action to prevent these circumstances. I do not mean that human life is invaluable, but that liberty and fairness is more important to the preservation of any values which we hold as a society. If we did take action to prevent "honor-killings", what would result is ethnic discrimination beyond that of "random" security checks at airports. Because a few individuals of Arabic descent chose to attack the Western world through acts of terrorism, the whole Arabic world has been thrown into warfare and chaos. What's more, American, Canadian, and World citizens of Arabic descent are persecuted based on their superficial appearances. They are slotted into profiles of bad men even though they have done nothing to deserve it.

If we do decide to actively prevent these "honor-killings" beyond the measures that we are already taking, what will take place next is far worse than the loss of human life. It is life not worth living. The government and third-party institutions will be able to intrude on the lives of innocent people "on suspicion." It will lead to the loss of democratic rights as we know it, and the proliferation of ever-greater power for the government to monitor and control the lives which we hold to be private. Our sanctity of body and mind will be stolen, democracy will fester and rot, and eventually, the values which we so champion will no longer be our champions.

Old Journal Entry On William Shakespeare's Sonnet 71: #4

-->

Entry 4 – November 2, 2011

Sonnet 71 enticed me with its somber yet resilient attitude towards death. As a sonnet, it fulfills all the necessary components and more. With a few exceptions (such as line 12), the meter and rhythmic structure of this poem fits that of a sonnet. The end rhyme schemes were consistent, although a few ended in slant rhyme rather than perfect rhyme. Many literary elements were imbedded successfully within this poem; alliteration, consonance, personification, metaphor, and anastrophe to name a few. Overall, the poem was able to intrigue with its strength of language.

As a piece of writing supposedly by William Shakespeare, it greatly disappointed me. Shakespeare appeals to me because of his ability to explore a multitude of themes within a simple piece of writing. When I look into any of Shakespeare's work, I can peal back layer after layer of meaning. He had opened my eyes to how literary elements could be so intertwined in order to provide a deeper profundity. I found this sonnet of his to be in stark contrast to many of his other works – barren. What he explores in this sonnet is a theme which has been told and retold by innumerable men. It would be as if Voltaire wrote about the correct methods to summer harvesting.

In his defence, some may argue that the constricting features of sonnet form limits the ability of the poet to fully express a range of ideas. This is not true.

Taking a look at the over-studied sonnet 116, we can see that it explores a plethora of ideas. It is passionate, witty, and overflowing with great metaphors. Maybe this is the reason for the popularity of Sonnet 116, and the relative obscurity of Sonnet 71. Both these sonnets were written by the same man.

Perhaps I am just being too picky, or have not yet realized how great this sonnet really is. To expect some sort of enlightening reverie from a mere fourteen lines of verse, is unrealistic to say the least. What really destroyed the magnificence of this poem for me, was the personal nature of it. I feel that the best poetry is written when ideas are humanized, and not the other way around.

The reputation of a man precedes him, I guess.

Written for English Literature 12

Old Journal Entry On William Shakespeare's Sonnet 71: #3

-->

Entry 3 – October 31, 2011

Wow. After consulting with two notable Shakespearean critics – Amanda Mabillard and W. J. Rolfe – I have found some incongruities which I would like to address. First and foremost, I have been consistently mistaken in my belief that the silent auditor within the poem was the speaker's lover. There is evidence to suggest that the speaker within Sonnet 71 is Shakespeare himself. According to Rolfe, there are many who believe that the collection of sonnets – including sonnet 71 – were in nature autobiographical because of their dedication to a certain Mr. W. H. (Shakespeare's p. XIV)

Accordingly, sonnet 71 was actually written for one of Shakespeare's patrons, a man by the name of Henry Wriothesley, Earl of Southampton. This is where things begin to get interesting. Supposedly, the speaker is a notably older man, addressing the idealized form of a young man – Southampton (Mabillard par. 2). Keeping this in mind, the traditional interpretation of a lover becomes that of a dear friend. However, the extend of affection shown by the speaker seems to suggest something more than friendship – romance, perhaps. In her critique, Mabillard acknowledges the relationship between an older and younger man, but still refers to the silent auditor as the lover. It raises questions about the implied sexuality of Shakespeare, but we shall leave that sensitive topic alone.

Very little criticism was given to the sonnet as an individual entity. Both critics speak favorably about the sonnet, citing the good use of syntax; namely figurative devices. While Rolfe likens the speaker's tone to modesty, Mabillard suggests that it negatively connotes self-pity. I agree with the latter's opinion in that the speaker highlights the miserable condition of his life. Whether this is conducive to the author's melancholic mood or an attempt to evoke pity for the reader, I do not know for sure. However, I thought that this tone of self-pity greatly undermined the obvious purpose of the speaker; one seeking to lessen the pain caused by his death. At this point, I suspect that Shakespeare may have been trying to say the opposite of the poem's superficial context. He may be asking the auditor to keep memory of him even after his death.

Written for English Literature 12

Old Journal Entry On William Shakespeare's Sonnet 71: #2

-->

Entry 2 – October 29, 2011

My interpretation of the poem after a second reading remains much the same as the first. However, I am able to see the poem in a more positive light now. As much as the poem goes on to discuss the implications of death, it also explores the bond of love. Although Shakespeare's approach to the topic of death was banal, his approach to discussing love is unequivocally innovative.

In literature, love is commonly seen as being fickle, hard to obtain, or lacklustre. The subject of love frequently evokes the themes of loyalty, sorrow, and fidelity.

The speaker in the poem approached the subject of love with an attitude contrary to most of the afore-mentioned values. Instead of convincing his love that they can last forever, the speaker tells his lover to forget about him. Using a imperative tone of speech, the speaker forbids his lover from remembering him, even as she “ [looks] upon this verse” (ln. 6). The speaker basically urges his lover to expunge all thoughts of him, living or dead. The speaker construes this meaning in quite a forceful way, although the tone does become less harsh starting in line 7.

There are contradictions within the poem itself. As evidenced by the words “vile” (ln. 4), “clay” (ln. 10), and “decay” (ln. 12), the speaker's state of being after death is far from idyllic. Rather, his death brings forth sickening images of decomposition, and the entrapment of his body compacted into clay (the earth). I am tempted to say that the speaker purposefully painted this image in order to evoke some sort of pity for himself. Another possible explanation is that the speaker wanted to show his defiance to whatever death may bring.

If the former were true, then a conflict of theme would ensue; where on the one hand, the speaker persuades his lover to forget him, and on the other, he brings forth imagery evoking pathetic sentiments. If the latter were true, then the speaker is a magnanimous lover, as well as a person. While many men seek remembrance by the whole world, this man in the poem, seeks to fade into oblivion. Maybe this is true love, or maybe just the result of a drunken reverie.

Written for English Literature 12

Old Journal Entry On William Shakespeare's Sonnet 71: #1

-->

Entry 1 – October 28, 2011

Upon preliminary inspection, I found this poem to surprisingly be lacking in depth and originality. One would suspect that the poem, having been authored by none other than the great Shakespeare himself, would encompass some great literary profundity. However, the poem talks about a relatively overused literary theme; overcoming loss.

In his Sonnet 71, Shakespeare creates a speaker who has passed away. It seems reasonable to conclude that there are no underlying meanings other than the death of his physical body. The speaker focuses on the effect that his death on whomever he is addressing – which in this case seems to be his lover. If this is the case, Shakespeare has shown that the speaker is inordinately possessive of his lover. This is evidenced in the fact that he should try to control the thoughts and actions of his lover even during his afterlife – which must be a creepy experience for the implied auditor of the poem.

Although I can appreciate this half-zombie speaker's hopes of comforting his love, it seems redundant of a certain cycle. The cycle is something that any person could describe; death leads to mourning, mourning leads to consolation, consolation heals the wounds. The imagery that Shakespeare employs is also quite commonplace. The “bell” has always been synonymous to signalling of death (ln. 2). It is also not hard to see what he is referring to when talking about the dwelling place of the “vilest worms” (ln. 4). The speaker also describes being “compounded... with clay”, a very obvious reference to burial. These are just some examples of how a cliche effect was achieved by this sonnet.

Despite the cliche content, there are good examples of alliteration in lines 2 and 4. Shakespeare also employs pertinent diction. However, I felt disappointed and cheated in that this sonnet failed to amaze me. Death in itself, is such a powerful concept – especially when applied to the art of creating literature. It is innately terrifying, yet it is also mesmerizing. It is the cruel practitioner of termination, yet it is also the merciful angel of release. I feel that death loses much of its power and hold over the reader when it becomes centred around the speaker rather than the concept of death itself.

Written for English Literature 12