Three important notes about this file

2NC O/V

Their focus on race ignores alternate, cultural forms of differences

Meshing culturally different but racially similar groups together without an eye to difference has created history’s worse genocides- Hutu and Tutsi in Rwanda, Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims prove

Independently replicates a sociobiological mentality towards race which reduces the value of human life and opens the floodgates to moral atrocity like social Darwinism- that’s Hartigan
The alt is to engage the harms of the 1AC through a cultural perspective rather one than zoomed in on race

Disrupting static identity notions involves the greatest number of people in identity movements

Evades the trap of scapegoating all people who don’t belong to a particular racial group and involves alternate perspectives in social progress- proves the alternative is methodologically superior

Turns Case

Turns the aff – we can never solve white racism

Perea 10 [Cone, Wagner, Nugent, Johnson, Hazouri & Roth Professor of Law, University of Florida Levin College of Law, Juan, AN ESSAY ON THE ICONIC STATUS OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT AND ITS UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law, Vol. 18:1, Fall, p. 57-58, http://scs.student.virginia.edu/vjspl/18.2/Perea.pdf //liam]

Lastly, recognizing a fuller scope of civil rights struggles is important in helping us understand the full measure of unremedied past injustice. If we take no account of denials of civil rights to Mexican Americans, American Indians, and Native Hawaiians, among other groups, then we underestimate dramatically the scope of white racism. Every struggle against racism and oppression deserves recognition. The iconic status of the African-American Civil Rights Movement is a testament to the power of righteous struggle. While it certainly deserves its hallowed place in our history and our hearts, we should be careful that its long shadow not obscure the importance of other righteous struggles. If we care about justice, we should always be attuned to struggles for greater justice, whether or not they resemble the African-American struggle for civil rights. As inspiring as the African-American struggle has been, we may find additional inspiration, and more possibilities for justice, if we cast our gaze beyond the African-American Civil Rights Movement, gazing further back, further forward, and to the side.

Other Races Impact

The conception of race through a black/white paradigm marginalizes other races, excluding them from relevant policy discussions

Perea 97- prof of law @ UF, visiting prof @ Harvard, leading scholar on race and the law

(Juan, “The Black/White Binary Paradigm of Race,” California Law Review//MGD)

Paradigms of race shape our understanding of race and our definition of racial problems. The most pervasive and powerful paradigm of race in the United States is the Black/White binary paradigm. I define this paradigm as the conception that race in American consists, either exclusively or primarily, of only two constituent racial groups, the Black and the White. Many scholars of race reproduce this paradigm when they write and act as though only the Black and the White races matter for purposes of discussing race and social policy with regard to race. The mere recognition that “other people of color” exist, without careful attention to their voices, their histories, and their real presence, is merely a reassertion of the Black/White paradigm. If one conceives of race and racism as primarily of concern only to Blacks and Whites, and understands “other people of color” only through some unclear analogy to the “real” races, this just restates the binary paradigm with a slight concession to demographics. My assertion is that our shared understanding of race and racism is essentially limited to this Black/White binary paradigm. This paradigm defines, but also limits, the set of problems that may be recognized in racial discourse. Kuhn’s notion of “normal science,” which further articulates the paradigm and seeks to solve the problems perceivable because of the paradigm, also applies to “normal research” on race. Given the Black/White paradigm, we would expect to find that much research on race is concerned with understanding the dynamics of the Black and White races and attempting to solve the problems between Blacks and Whites. Within the paradigm, the relevant material facts are facts about Blacks and Whites. In addition, the paradigm dictates that all other racial identities and groups in the United States are best understood through the Black/White binary paradigm. Only a few writers even recognize that they use a Black/White paradigm as the frame of reference through which to understand racial relations. Most writers simply assume the importance and correctness of the paradigm, and leave the reader grasping for whatever significance descriptions of the Black/White binary relationship have for other people of color. As I shall discuss, because the Black/White binary paradigm is so widely accepted, other racialized groups like Latinos/as, Asian Americans, and Native Americans are often marginalized or ignored altogether. As Kuhn writes, “those that will not fit the box are often not seen at all.”

The exclusion of Latinos, Asian Americans and Native Americans in the Black/White paradigm plays into white domination

Bowman 1- prof of law @MSU, JD from Duke

(Kristi, Duke Law Journal “The New Face of School Desegregation,” http://www.law.duke.edu/shell/cite.pl?50+Duke+L.+J.+1751//MGD)

White privilege is reinforced when racial and ethnic groups are conceptualized not as White, African American, Latino, Asian American, Native American, etc., but instead as White or Non-White. Acknowledgement of differences among groups disappears in a White-Non-White paradigm, because instead of allowing racial or ethnic groups to identify themselves by what they are,238 all Non- [*pg 1787] White groups are explicitly identified by what they are not, and only by reference to whiteness. Although aspects of a specific Non-White group might be easier to identify than "White culture," this occurs because White culture is mainstream culture. The culture of a specific Non-White group appears distinctive because it deviates from the norm. Professor Martha Mahoney notes that a term such as "racially identifiable" in the context of housing and urban development generally refers "to locations that are racially identifiably black."239 The same is true in the context of education: racially identifiable means racially identifiably Non-White. The White-Non-White paradigm reinforces the power dynamic of the acted and the acted upon, of presence and absence, of the defining and the defined. The power that Whites receive from their unearned privilege in the White-Non-White duality "is, in fact, permission to escape [the debate of race] or to dominate."240 When federal courts reinforce this dynamic in the name of school desegregation, they perpetuate the normalized, mainstream practices and institutions that reinforce racial inequality. It is often these practices and institutions that are most damaging in terms of perpetuating oppression because they are not usually questioned. They are conceptualized as just normal.241 In contemporary school desegregation jurisprudence, Whites are normalized, and all Non-Whites are collapsed into the category of "other." Like African Americans, Latinos have been the victims of state-sanctioned educational segregation;242 but if courts gave attention to the present differences between African Americans and Latinos, courts' remedial orders would likely be structured differently. As will be discussed below, the recognition of Latinos and African Americans as distinct groups that continue to suffer different harms is easily within reach.