It was mentioned to me a while back that the National College Debate topic for this year is:
"The United States Federal Government should substantially reduce the size of its nuclear weapons arsenal, and/or substantially reduce and restrict the role and/or missions of its nuclear weapons arsenal."
A few people asked me to expand on my ideas about "anti-nuclear nuclearism," which clearly complicates the issue of whether the US should reduce its arsenal, and why those elites in control of the White House right now think this is the best path forward.
Instead of expanding on my previous stuff I'm posting a link to a recent paper that treats the question very differently. I hope the debaters find it interesting, if not useful.
The “Nuclear Threat,” and Other Mystical Approaches of Arms Control
This paper critiques inconsistencies and examples of avoidance in arms control policies and policy scholarship by approaching them as examples of mystification. Mystification serves to prevent critical inquiries into inequalities and forms of exploitation made possible through nuclearism, both within a nation state, and across the international system. It also serves to legitimate current policies by referring to unquestioned truths and assumptions. Demystification reveals how ideals and abstractions impede the attainment of critical consciousness and are barriers to the politicization of an issue. A reorientation of nonproliferation scholarship away from the state and elite foreign policy foundations and academic centers is proposed as a means of diversifying the study of human security in the nuclear age and making it relevant to broader constituencies.