1AC

Contemporary Geographic Zones of Nuclear Development Have

Emptied Island Spaces for the Purposes of Enabling The
Utilitarian Development of Science, Capitalism, and Militarism
Though Nuclear Power, Rendering it Remote and Uninhabited
and Permitting the Destruction of Native Peoples Through
nuclear testing and waste dumping. This Technological
Transformation Manifests Itself At the Margin of the Map
Kuletz 98
Valerie Kuletz is a is a Robert J. Lifton Fellow at Sarah Lawrence College. The Tainted
Desert, p. 6-8.
Science and the military meet in the deserts of the Southwest literally to transform
the landscape. "While militarization plays a large part in the creation of the nuclear
landscape, this landscape is the product of an even larger social and technological
transformation that emerged most forcefully in the second half of the twentieth
century. The emergence of nuclear culture occurred simultaneously with an
escalation in technological knowledge and practice nuclear power, commercial air
travel, television, computersthat has profoundly changed our lives and our
environment. The technological transformations of the postwar era are themselves
part of a process of rationalization-a particular kind of rationalization-that is
hundreds of years old and that has always resulted in hardship for Native
peoples: [It may be the central assumption of technological society that there is
virtue in overpowering nature and native peoples. The Indian problem today, as it
always has been, is directly related to the needs of technological societies to find
and obtain remotely located resources, in order to fuel an incessant and instrinsic
demand for growth and technological fulfillment. The process began in our country
hundreds of years ago when we wanted land and gold. Today it continues because
we want coal, oil, uranium, fish, and more land .. .. ~l these acts were and are
made possible by one fundamental rationalization: that our society represents the
ultimate expression of evolution, its final flowering. It is this attitude and its
corresponding - belief that native societies represent an earlier, lower form on the
evolutionary ladder, upon which we occupy the highest rung, that seem to unify all
modern political perspectives.'' Having emerged piece by piece over the last fifty
years, the nuclear landscape constitutes as much a social and political
geography as it does an environmental region. ~n~i~~nme~. Becauseit~~e"i=-recent phenomenon and has taken time to emerge in a recognizable form,
because it exists in desert lands, and because it is the child of secret operations
hidden behind the veil of national security, the nuclear landscape is to a large
extent an invisible landscape. One could argue that it exists in many places
throughout the continental United States, including Oak Ridge, Tennessee; nuclear
processing centers in Kentucky and Ohio; Hanford, Washington; Rocky Flats,
Colorado; and the Pantex plant in Amarillo, Texas.'4 Indeed, as a result of the Cold
War, the soil of the North American Great Plains has been seeded with a thousand
intercontinental ballistic missiles-sentinels of the nuclear age.'5

This erasure of Native peoples serves to support white

supremacy through a fiction that indigenous peoples of color
are officially negligible.
Vine, 11 (David Vine, Associate Professor of Anthropology at American University, Island of
Shame: The Secret History of the U.S. Military Base on Diego Garcia. Published by Princeton
University Press. Kindle Edition.
First and foremost, we cannot mince words. The expulsion was an act of racism. Because Chagossians
were considered black, because Chagossians were small in number and lacked any political
or economic clout, they were an easy target for removal. Because they were considered
black, planners could easily regard them as insignificant, as a nitty gritty detail. Planners
could think of them (in the moments that officials gave them any thought), as the CIA once put it, as
NEGL NEGLIGIBLE. 1 The fact is that nobody cared very much about these populations,
said former Defense Department official Gary Sick, who testified to Congress about the removals in 1975. It
was more of a nineteenth-century decision thought process than a twentieth- or twenty-first-century thought process. And I think

U.S.
officials, Sick said, were pleased to let the British do their dirty work for them. In this way, the
Chagossians expulsion and the pattern of forcibly displacing numerically small, non- white,
non-European colonized peoples to build bases resembles many forms of violence that tend
to afflict the poor, the dark, and the powerless, those who so often get treated as rubbish
people. Anthropologists Nancy Scheper-Hughes and Philippe Bourgois explain: The mad, the differently abled,
the mentally vulnerable have often fallen into this category of the unworthy living, as have the very
old and infirm, the sick-poor, and, of course, the despised racial, religious, sexual, and ethnic groups of
the moment. Erik Eriksen referred to pseudo-speciation as the human tendency to classify
some individuals or social groups as less than fully human.
that was the bind they got caught in. That this was sort of colonial thinking after the fact, about what you could do. And

This assumed naturalness of white supremacy allowed the

United States to remove the Bikinians from their Island in 1946
in preparation for testing nuclear bombs on their Atoll. The
United States told the Bikinians that their island would serve
for the good of mankind, prioritizing military might over the
good of the people of Bikini.
Niedenthal, Jack (2001-09-01). For the Good of Mankind. Bravo Publishers.
Kindle Edition.

After the war, in December of 1945, President Harry S. Truman issued a directive to Army and Navy officials that
joint testing of nuclear weapons would be necessary to determine the effect of atomic bombs on American

Bikini, because of its location away from regular air and sea routes, was
chosen to be the new nuclear proving ground for the United States government. In
February of 1946 Commodore Ben H. Wyatt, the military governor of the Marshalls ,
traveled to Bikini. On a Sunday after church, he assembled the Bikinians to ask if
they would be willing to leave their atoll temporarily so that the United States could
begin testing atomic bombs for the good of mankind and to end all world wars. King Juda, then
the leader of the Bikinian people, stood up after much confused and sorrowful
deliberation among his people, and announced, We will go believing that
everything is in the hands of God. While the 167 Bikinians were getting ready for their exodus,
warships.

preparations for the U.S. nuclear testing program advanced rapidly. Some 242 naval ships, 156 aircraft, 25,000
radiation recording devices and the Navys 5,400 experimental rats, goats and pigs soon began to arrive for the
tests. Over 42,000 U.S. military and civilian personnel were involved in the testing program at Bikini. The nuclear
legacy of the Bikinians began in March of 1946 when they were first removed from their islands in preparation for
Operation Crossroads. The history of the Bikinian people from that day has been a story of their struggle to
understand scientific concepts as they relate to their islands, as well as the day-to-day problems of finding food,
raising families and maintaining their culture amidst the progression of events set in motion by the Cold War that
have been for the most part out of their control. In preparation for Operation Crossroads,

the Bikinians were

sent 125 miles eastward across the ocean on a U.S. Navy LST landing craft to Rongerik Atoll. The
islands of Rongerik Atoll were uninhabited because, traditionally, the Marshallese people
considered them to be unlivable due to their size (Rongerik is 1/ 6 the size of Bikini Atoll) and
because they had an inadequate water and food supply. There was also a deeprooted traditional belief that the atoll was inhabited by evil spirits. The
Administration left the Bikinians food stores sufficient only for several weeks. The
islanders soon discovered that the coconut trees and other local food crops produced very few fruits when

the Bikinians
began to suffer from starvation and fish poisoning due to the lack of edible fish in
the lagoon. Within two months after their arrival they began to beg U.S. officials to
move them back to Bikini. In July , the Bikinian leader, Juda, traveled with a U.S.
government delegation back to Bikini to view the results of the second atom bomb
test of Operation Crossroads, code named Baker. Juda returned to Rongerik and told
his people that the island was still intact, that the trees were still there, that Bikini
looked the same. The two atomic bomb blasts of Operation Crossroads were both about the size of the
compared to the yield of the trees on Bikini. As the food supply on Rongerik quickly ran out,

nuclear bomb dropped on Nagasaki, Japan. Eighteen tons of cinematography equipment and more than half of the
worlds supply of motion picture film were on hand to record the Able and Baker detonations, and also the

the food
shortages worsened on Rongerik; the small population of Bikinians was confronted
with near starvation. During the same period of time , the area of Micronesia was
designated as a United Nations Strategic Trust Territory to be administered by the
United States. Indeed, it was the only strategic trust ever created by the United Nations. In this agreement,
the U.S. committed itself to the United Nations directive to promote the economic
advancement and self-sufficiency of the inhabitants, and to this end shall... protect
the inhabitants against the loss of their lands and resources... The people of Bikini
have long seen the irony in the conduct of the Trust Territory agreement that
allowed the bombing of their homeland and that forced them into starvation on
Rongerik Atoll.
movement of the Bikinians from their atoll. From December of 1946 through January of 1947,

The focus on testing as for the good of mankind has been

used in a specific campaign to cover over the experiences of
Pacific Islanders. This effacement of particularized cultural
experiences has enables systemic wars of extermination to
escape the process of nuclear criticism.
Kato 93, Kato, Masahide. 1993. "Nuclear Globalism: Traversing Rockets,
Satellites, and Nuclear War via the Strategic Gaze."Alternatives: Global, Local,
Political, 1993. 339. JSTOR
Nuclear war has been enclosed by two seemingly opposite yet complementary regimes of discourse: nationstate strategic discourse (nuclear deterrence, nuclear disarmament, nuclear non-proliferation, and so on)
and extra-nation-state (or extra-territorial) discourse (antinuclearism, nuclear criticism, and so on).
The epistemology of the former is entrenched in the "possible" exchange(s) of nuclear warheads among nation
states. The latter, which emerged in reaction to the former, holds the "possibility of extinction" at the center of its

share an intriguing
leap: from the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to the "possible" nuclear
explosions in an indefinite-yet-ever-closer- to-the-present future. Thus any nuclear
explosions after World War II do not qualify as nuclear war in the cognitive grid of
conventional nuclear discourse. Significantly, most nuclear explosions after World
War II took place in the sovereign territories of the Fourth World and Indigenous
Nations. This critical historical fact has been contained in the domain of nuclear
testing. Such obliteration of the history of undeclared nuclear warfare by nuclear
discourse does not merely posit the deficiency of the discourse. Rather, what it does
discursive production. In delineating the notion of "nuclear war," both of these discourses

is reveal the late capitalist form of domination , whereby an ongoing extermination

process of the periphery is blocked from constituting itself as a historical fact. In the
first half of this article, I trace this disqualification process of nuclear war against the Fourth
World and Indigenous Nations to the mode of perception that objectifies the
periphery in order to subordinate it to a reconstructed homogeneous time and
space. Particularly, I highlight the role of the strategic gaze of transnational capital in constructing a
homogeneous social totality (globalism) derived from the image of the globe. In the second half, I translate my
analysis of this mode of perception into an analysis of discursive formations by showing the ways in which

globalist discourse, predominant in nuclear criticism, effaces the history of nuclear

extermination from our consciousness. Last, by probing into the problem of technosub- jectivity,
which runs through both the global discourse and perception, I expose important aspects of the strategy of global
transnational capital/state.

Islanders still dont have equal rights, even though the US has
annexed them into its colonialist empire.
Brown 1901
(Henry Billings Brown, DOWNES v. BIDWELL, 182 U.S. 244, U.S. Supreme Court, 1901,
Accessed: 3/15/2015, RJS)

Patriotic and intelligent men may differ widely as to the desirableness of this or that
acquisition, but this is solely a political question. We can only consider this aspect of the
case so far as to say that no construction of the Constitution should be adopted which would
prevent Congress from considering each case upon its merits, unless the language of the
instrument imperatively demand it. A false step at this time might be fatal to the

development of what Chief Justice Marshall called the American empire. Choice in
some cases, the natural gravitation of small bodies towards large ones in others,
the result of a successful war in still others, may bring about conditions which would
render the annexation of distant posses- [182 U.S. 244, 287] sions desirable. If
those possessions are inhabited by alien races, differing from us in religion,
customs, laws, methods of taxation, and modes of thought, the administration of
government and justice, according to Anglo-Saxon principles, may for a time be
impossible; and the question at once arises whether large concessions ought not to
be made for a time, that ultimately our own theories may be carried out, and the
blessings of a free government under the Constitution extended to them. We
decline to hold that there is anything in the Constitution to forbid such action.

THE UNIVERSAL NOTION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS IS KEY

EXPRESSION OF WHITE SUPREMACY. WHITE SUPREMACY IS NOT
GROUNDED ON SEPARATION BUT ON THE INTEGRATION OF
PARTICULAR OTHERS INTO ITS UNIVERSALIZED NOTION OF
CULTURE.
Rodriguez '1 0
Dylan Rodriguez. "The Terms of Engagement: Warfare. White Locality, and Abolition," Critical Sociology.

Further, this logic of multiculturalist white supremacist inclusion does not exclusively
rely on strategies of coercion or punishment to assimilate others such as in the
paradigmatic examples of bodily subjection that formed the institutional machinery of Native
American boarding and mission schools (Adams 1995; Smith 2005), but instead builds

upon the more plastic and sustainable platforms of consensus and collective
identity formation. I do not mean to suggest that either consensus building or identity
formation are benign projects of autonomous racial self-invention, somehow operating
independently of the structuring relations of dominance that characterize a given social
formation. Rather, I am arguing that the social technologies of white supremacy are, in

this historical moment, not reducible to discrete arrangements of institutionalized

(and state legitimated) violence or strategies of social exclusion (Da Silva 2007) but

are significantly altered and innovated through the crises of bodily proximity that
white locality bears to its alien (and even enemy) populations. It is in these
moments of discomfort, when white locality is internally populated by alien others
who have neither immigrated nor invaded the space, but have in multiple ways
become occupied by the praxis of white localityconstruction, that logics of
incorporation and inclusion become crucial to the historical project of white
supremacist globality.

Thus Tristan & I begin Talanoic-centered genealogy on the

militarization of the oceans,
We must illuminate that which has been obscured the
violence of imperialism perpetuates itself through willful
ignorance. Our genealogical project allows us to break down
the assumptions that have been naturalized by imperialist
epistemology.
Trask 6 Haunani-Kay The color of violence The color of violence Incite!

Anthology, p. 82
There is not just one binary opposition, but many oppositions. Within colonialism,
such as now practiced in my own country of Hawaii, violence against women of color,
especially our Native women, is both the economic and cultural violence of tourism, and of
militarism. It is the violence of our imprisonments: reservations, incarcerations,
diaporas. It is the violence of military bases, of the largest porting of nuclear
submarines in the world, of the inundation of our exquisite islands by eager settlers
and tourists from the American and Asian continents. These settlers have no
interest in, or concern about, our Native people. Settlers of all colors come to
HawaiI for refuge, for relaxation. They do not know, nor do they care, that our
Native government was overthrown by white sugar planters in 1893 with the willing
aid of the American troops; that our islands were annexed in 1898 against the
expressed wishes of our Native people; that our political status as Hawaiian citizens
was made impossible by forced annexation to the United States. Many non-Natives
have said that we should be grateful for the alleged opportunity of American
citizenship even if this has meant termination as an independent country. How do we,
as a terminated people, understand the color of violence? We look at all the non-Native settlers and tourists around

we are subjugated in our own land, suffering landlessness and poverty,

consigned by the American government to the periphery of our own country , to its
prisons and shanties, to its welfare rolls, hospital wards, and graveyards.
us and know

Our investigative method disrupts the policy-making

discourses of nuclear weapons that functions to impose the
universality of meaning
Multimer 2k, David, Associate professor of political science and deputy director, centre for international
and security sutidies at New York University, the weapons state: proliferation and the framing of security, 2000
Lynee Reinner Publisher

If intersubjective meanings constitute practices, engaging in practices involves

acting toward the world in the terms provided by a particular set of intersubjective
meanings. Practices can therefore be said to carry with them sets of meanings. If we

investigate state action in terms of practices, we can ask questions about the
constitutive intersubjective meanings, about the world these practices make
through reproducing meaning. As Roxanne Doty has argued, Policy makers function within
a discursive space that imposes meanings on their world and thus creates reality. At
this point I reconnect to the argument with which this chapter began, because the reality that is created in this
discursive space involves the identification of the objects of action, the actors, and
the interests that are pursued. The intersubjective understandings that constitute
practices can be thought of adapting Bouldings usage. As images that frame a particular
reality. This framing is fundamentally discursive; it is necessarily tied to the
language through which the frame is expressed. A problem for example, that of
proliferation of weapons is not presented to policymakers fully formed. Weapons
proliferation as a problem does not slowly dawn on states but rather is constituted
by those states in their practices. What is more, this practically constituted image of
a security problem shapes the interests states have at stake in that problem and
the forms of solutions that can be considered to resolve it. To understand how an
image shapes interest and policy, it is useful to consider the place of metaphor in
shaping understanding.
Our investigation is a necessary prerequisite to the topic. Until we decolonize our
relationship to the Pacific, all Ocean exploration will be military-driven.
Trask 6 Haunani-Kay The color of violence The color of violence Incite!
Anthology, p. 84
And so it is for people of color on this continent. We are non-white in a white universe. We are
different, and therefore inferior, categorically. And we are marked by captivity: economic, political,
and cultural captivity. Indeed, captivity is the condition of all the peoples of the Pacific region. Covering
half the earths surface, the Pacific is home to thirty-two countries and many nations. We are the largest
nuclearized region in the world. And we know one thing for certain: until the pacific
is decolonized, it cannot be demilitarized . Let me frighten you with some statistics. On Oahu,
the capitol of our state, and the most densely populated island, the military controls 25% of the land
area. Statewide, the combined American armed forces have 21 installations, 26
housing complexes, 8 training areas, and 19 miscellaneous bases and operating
sites. Beyond Oahu, Hawaii is the lynchpin of the American military strategy in the
Asia-Pacific region. It is home to the largest portage of nuclear-fueled ships and
submarines in the world. These ships are received, cleaned, and refashioned at
Pearl Harbor, where workers are called sponges because they absorb so much
radiation during cleaning. Regionally, in military terminology, Hawaii is the forward basing point for the
American military in the Pacific. The seventh fleet, which patrols the world from the Pacific to the African coast, is
stationed at Pearl Harbor. Planes and ships which test nuclear weapons in the Pacific leave from Pearl Harbor or

This kind of peaceful violence results in land

confiscations, contamination of our plants and animals and our peoples, and the
transformation of our archipelago into a poisonous war zone. Additionally, many of
the lands taken by the military are legally reserved lands for Hawaiians.
other military installations in Hawaii.

Debate is key we must challenge the assumed naturalness of Eurocentric

knowledge in the academy if we are to resist imperialist domination.
Dei 2 George Sefa, Professor of Sociology and Equity Studies@ Ontario Institute for Studies in
Education of the University of Toronto, "Rethinking the Role of Indigenous Knowledges in the
Academy,"
Ultimately, we have to consider the role of Indigenous knowledges in the academy
as primarily one of 'resistance' to Eurocentrism; that is, resistance to the dominance

of Eurocentric knowledge as the only valid way of knowing . It is resistance to

Eurocentricism masquerading as a universal body of thought. I interpret resistance as
referring to the social actions and practices of subordinate groups (and their allies) that contest hegemonic social
formations and knowledges, as well as unravel and dislodge strategies of domination (Haynes and Prakash 1991: 3).
Kellner (1995: 42) cautions against the letishization of resistance'. Abu-Lughod (1990) also reminds us of "...the
tendency to romanticize resistance, to read all forms of resistance as signs of the ineffectiveness of systems of
power and the resilience and creativity of the human spirit in its refusal to be dominated" (cited in Moore, 1997:89).
My use of resistance is closer to Parry's (1994) who points to Frantz Fanon and Amy Cesaire's work and their
"...unwillingness to abstract resistance from its moment of performance" (p. 179) [cited in Moore, 1997: 89]. Moore
(1997) correctly alludes to the "...importance of historical, cultural and geographical specificity to any
understanding of resistance" (p. 89). He further understands the limitation of placing the focus on the' intentions'
of, rather on than the consequences of, everyday human action and social practice (p. 89). Moore (1997) holds that

"...[r]ather than measuring resistance

against a yardstick of widespread social and political economic transformation, the
micro-politics of tactical manoeuvers... [take] center stag e" (p. 90). In other words, we
must view resistance in the academy as collective actions and strategies for
procedural and incremental change. Resistance starts by using received knowledges
to ask critical questions about the nature of the social order. Resistance also means seeing
we must explore alternative conceptions of resistance,

'small acts' as cumulative and significant for social change. As one of my Caribbean-born, African graduate students
wrote, "...I can't tell you how affirming it is to see 'patois' in the books I am evaluating for my thesis. A few years
ago, this would never have been possible...The fact that these languages make their way into texts at all is a
phenomenal act of resistance. Of course, I realize that the use of local languages outside their appropriate contexts
opens up a whole new set of challenges" (Lawson 1998). In thinking of Indigenous knowledges as 'resistance

we must acknowledge how easy it is to be complicit in the reproduction of

hegemonic Eurocentric and colonized knowledges in the academy. By failing to
speak out about Indigenous knowledges we have become complicit in the continued
marginalization and negation of such knowledges in the academy. The integration (that is,
knowledge'

centering) of Indigenous knowledges into the curricular, instructional and pedagogical practices of Western

We must consider how power-saturated issues of

academic social relations are used to validate different knowledges to serve
particular interests. Of course, we must also be wary and critical of the integration of Indigenous knowledges
academies cannot be an unquestioned exercise.

into the academy if it is pursued to serve the interests of the modern state and corporate capital. We must be

Indigenous
knowledges should be critical and oppositional in order to rupture stable knowledge.
concerned about the exploitative tendencies of Western academies in order to affirm the status quo.

However, our caution and cynicism should not lead to us to claim a separate space for Indigenous knowledges
in/outside the academy. We must be careful that our academic practice and politics do not feed on the marginality
of Indigenous knowledges. Maintaining a separate space for Indigenous knowledge feeds on the problematic idea
that Indigenous ways of knowing/knowledges sit in a pristine fashion outside of the effects of other bodies of

varied knowledge forms belong in the academy . Hence, we must

understand our individual and collective academic complicities in creating this
marginality by our failure to speak about multiple knowledges in curricular,
instructional, pedagogic and textual practices. We must center the varied,
alternative and sometimes oppositional discourses and knowledges systems in our
academic communicative and pedagogical practices.
knowledge. In fact,

Genealogy ruptures stable notions of the subject. We can

question the historical removal of subjectivity from
marginalized people through genealogy.
Clifford 1, Michael, Political Genealogy after Foucault: Savage Identities, p. 12-13
The problem of freedom is perhaps the most important issue in any philosophical
consideration of political subjectivity. In contrast to the juridical, rights based conceptions of
freedom peculiar to the liberal tradition, Foucault offers us an understanding of freedom that is quite
different, an understanding that is in part effected by rethinking, through genealogy, the
formation of political subjectivity. Genealogy can be understood as the discipline that
exposes the entrenched forms of valuation and structuralized practices that

determine what we are. In so doing, genealogy creates distance that is, spaces of
freedom from those forms. In this sense, Foucault s own work is, potentially at least, a vehicle of such
freedom. That is, there is a liberational aspect to Foucault s work which consists in delimiting, or
transgressing, the historically contingent limitations imposed upon us by the interplay
of discursive practices, power relations, and modes of subjectivation. I shall want to show
that this liberational aspect lies in what Foucault has called counter memory. Freedom through
counter memory presents itself as a strategic option to the ideological and philosophically suspect notions of
positive and negative freedom offered to us from the liberal tradition.

Our investigation is necessary to combat the

oppressive decisionmaking of the status quo. The
distance between those who make decisions and those
who are affected by them allows for policies like the
testing of nuclear weapons in the Marshall islands.
Only the historical education provided by the
affirmative can begin to combat that tradition.
Anthony 95
Carl Anthony is the Executive Director of the Urban Habitat Program
and the chair of the East Bay Conversion Reinvestment Commission
Remembering the Cuban Missile Crisis: Freedom from Annihilation Is a
Human Right Spring Summer 1995 http://urbanhabitat.org/node/945
Nuclear weapons are tools of a conquering, violent culture. Racism at domestic and
international levels heightens the potential vulnerability and miscalculation
surrounding nuclear proliferation. Few people of color have had any role in debate,
development, or decision-making about the goals of this brutal technology. In a
nuclear holocaust whole populations will be vaporized in the flash of an eye.
People deciding the appropriateness of such a choice inevitably would bring their
prejudices and fears to the devastating decision to annihilate whole peoples.
The concentration of nuclear power in the hands of a Eurocentric technological elite,
paranoid about the aims and aspirations of the majority of the world's population
people of colormagnifies the potential for global disaster. The great and growing
gulf of human communication between the rich and poor, European and nonEuropean, multiplies the potential antagonism that could result in planetary
holocaust. In this context organizing against nuclear proliferation is, by definition,
a multicultural effort, bringing the intelligence and wisdom of every community to
the global task of defeating the excesses of racism, human aggression, and
technology-gone-berserk.

Talanoa allows us to deny assumptions and thus fully

comprehend the individual participant.
Farrelly and Nabobo-Baba, 12 (Dr. Trisa Farrelly, Lecturer Anthropology Programme, School of
People, Environment, and Planning, Massey University and Unaisi Nabobo-Baba, Associate Professor,
School of Education, University of Guam, Talanoa as Empathic Research, Presentation at the
International Development Conference 2012, Auckland, New Zealand)
http://www.devnet.org.nz/sites/default/files/Farrelly,%20Trisia%20&%20Nabobo-Baba,%20Unaisi
%20Talanoa%20as%20Empathic%20Research%20[paper]_0.pdf

-[So a purely verbal exchange on the mat is not enough to achieve valid research data from talanoa. But
Hollan (2008) argues that even the most admirable efforts at attunement are not enough for
empathic understanding. What is needed, he argues is on-going dialogue as ...[an]...

active investigation into the ways people in different times and places promote or
discourage understanding of themselves (my emphasis, p. 475). This on-going dialogue as
inter-subjective process distinguishes empathy from mere projection (that is, the attribution
of ones emotional reactions and perspectives to another) (Margulies, 1989 cited in Hollan (2008, p. 476).

It is this on-going inter-subjective process of participant-observation that helps us to

confirm or deny our initial assumptions about our participants feelings and
perspectives. We need to check that our bodily reactions and imaginings of how
someone perceives their world are as accurate as possible : For example, we could say to our
participant: When we were working in your teitei, I noticed that you grew very quiet for a time. It was
when you were talking about your new role in the project. Are you worried about the new responsibilities
this will bring?

Focusing on other causes glosses over political and racial

motivations for nuclear testing. Genealogy is necessary to
expose the multi-faceted nature of oppression. We dont deny
the importance of economics but race and economics must
not be seen as mutually preclusive.
Farrell, James J. 87. "The crossroads of Bikini." Journal Of American Culture
(01911813) 10, 55-66.

For Blandy, disarmament or delay in developing nuclear weapons fundamentally threatened an American way of life
nourished by "freedom from the fetters of regimentation or class barriers." "We certainly feel that this system of
free enterprise is worth preserving, not only for our own benefit, but as a shining example to all peoples to adopt as

Blandy asked, "do we think that if we lead the way to immediate and
complete disarmament we can still maintain our free enterprise or the standard of
living which it has brought us?" In 1946, as Americans still grappled wiih inflation, strikes, and the
they see fit. "But,"

uncertainties of postwar economic conversion, such a question carried additional weight. Ii made the testing of
atomic bombs a domestic issue, deterring the threat of socialism as well as the threat of communism. It spoke

Americans who felt that "it isn't the Bikini blowup that bothers me so much as
the blowup of prices," assuring them that the atomic bomb guaranteed economic security
as well as national security.^ To remain a city upon a hill, a shining example of
American capitalism, Blandy claimed that the United States must learn the lessons of World War II. U.S.
directly to

preparedness, claimed Blandy, "would undoubtedly have balked [Japan's] venture of conquest and plunder in the

Americans should hecome realists, thinking "of the world as it is, not yet as
we would like to see it." Then they would see, he concluded, that "the only practical
preventive of war is that peace-loving, nonaggressive nations with great resources,
like the United States of America, shall remain strong. "^
Pacific."

Our challenge to Western epistemology is a necessary step in breaking

down anthropocentrism only fortifying indigenous knowledges can
return us to harmony with nature that will reduce the drive to exploit
the earth
Trask 93, Haunani-Kay, From a Native Daughter: Colonialism and Sovereignty in Hawaii 1993,
p. 34-36 TJ
In our genealogy, Papahanaumoku, "earth mother," mated with Wakea, "sky father," from whence came our islands,
or moku. Out of our beloved islands came the taro, our immediate progenitor, and from the taro, our cl1iefs and
people.

Our relationship to the cosmos is thus familial. As in all of Polynesia, so in Hawai'i: elder
The wisdom of our creation is

sibling must feed and care for younger sibling, who returns honor and love.

reciprocal obligation. If we husband our lands and waters, they will feed and care for
us. In our language, the name for this relationship is malama 'aina, "care for the land," who will care for all family
members in turn. This indigenous knowledge is not unique to Hawaiians but is shared by most indigenous peoples
throughout the world. The voices of Native peoples, much popularized in these frightening times, speak a different
language than Old World nationalism. Our claims to uniqueness, to cultural integrity, should not be misidentified as

We are stewards of the earth, our mother, and we offer an ancient,

umbilical wisdom about how to protect and ensure her life. This lesson of our cultures has
never been more crucial to global survival. To put the case in Western terms: biodiversity is guaranteed
through human diversity. No one knows how better to care for Hawai'i, our island
home, than those of us who have lived here for thousands of years. On the other
side of the world from us, no people understand the desert better than those who
inhabit her. And so on and so on, throughout the magnificently varied places of the earth . Forest people
know the forest; mountain people know the mountains; plains people know the
plains. This is an elemental wisdom that has nearly disappeared because of
industrialization, greed, and hatred of that which is wild and sensuous.
"tribalism."