Civil Disobedience in a Democracy Is Not Morally Justified

!

New

 Snowden

 NC

Because

 it

 is

 not

 jus-fied

 to

 put

 the

 security

 of

 an

 en-re

 na-on

 at

 risk,

 I

 negate

 the

 resolu-on

 Resolved:

  Civil

 disobedience

 in

 a

 democracy

 is

 morally

 jus-fied.

! I

 offer

 the

 following

 defini-ons

 to

 clarify

 the

 debate.

  ! ! I

 value

 Na/onal

 Security.

  ! ! !

Civil

 disobedience:

 the

 refusal

 to

 obey

 laws

 as

 a

 way

 of

 forcing

 the

 government

 to

 do

 or

 change

  something

 according

 to

This

 is

 because

 for

 a

 democracy

 to

 func-on

 properly

 it

 needs

 to

 be

 secure,

 otherwise

 threats

 will

 prevent

  democra-c

 processes

 from

 happening.

  Thus,

 in

 order

 to

 promote

 security,

 which

 is

 a

 pre-­‐requisite

 for

 a

 proper

 democracy,

 the

 standard

 for

  evalua-ng

 the

 round

 is

 preven/ng

 na/onal

 security

 threats.

 So,

 if

 I

 prove

 how

 I’m

 preven-ng

 na-onal

  security

 threats

 beHer

 than

 Sydney

 can,

 then

 the

 debate

 round

 should

 go

 for

 me

 as

 I’m

 best

 protec-ng

 a

  democracy

 in

 the

 first

 place.

  The

 thesis

 and

 sole

 conten-on

 of

 the

 nega-ve

 case

 is

 that

 current

 acts

 of

 civil

 disobedience

 threatens

  na-onal

 security

 both

 externally

 and

 internally.

! Sub-­‐point

 A

 is

 external

 harms.

  ! !

First

 Edward

 Snowden’s

 release

 of

 governmental

 informa/on

 is

 an

 act

 of

 civil

  disobedience.

 Jathan

 Sadoski

 writes

 ...