The Recent Protests/Riots Are Proof of White America's Racism & Hatred of Black People.
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 2 votes and with 11 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 8,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
The recent protests/riots came into fruition because of white America's true nature and feelings towards Black people. I've made similar debates that pertain to this topic, and no one has been able to prove me wrong. Whether it's taught or engrained, Whites are definitely the most racist group of people on the planet and history backs up all claims. I fully understand and agree that rioting is a necessary evil unto itself and I support it. Every racial group has rioted throughout the years in some form of fashion. People in today's society who denounce rioting are simply being hypercritical to the facts of life. The protests/riots have went global which further institutes and backs up my claim.
Case In Point: Statues of racist white people are being toppled in various countries. People all over the globe are calling out the Jewish community on their racism, lies & fallacy of being the real Jews. Bill Gates has been banned from entering certain countries because of his eugenics programs. White South Africans are complaining about keeping land that isn't theirs...As you can see, it's the same group of people who are causing all of the world's problems.
If you can prove that whites aren't the most racist group and are not the world's perpetrators then you're welcome to take this challenge.
The protests/riots are the example because white cops & white citizens have been murdering unarmed black people every single month in 2020...If that isn't racism then what would you call it?...To further backup the facts; you don't see black cops murdering unarmed whites every month.
The statues that are being toppled are of racist white men. Are they not?...If white Americans aren't racist then why would they want the statues to remain as is when the statues are clearly symbolic figures of racists/slave owners?...When it comes to Jewish people, they have a long history of racism.
King Leopold killed/tortured over 10 million Africans
Chinese didn't travel around the world inflicting this torment...On the other hand, white people have inflicted the same damage around the globe.
Chicago Law Enforcement held a torture ring for decades throughout the '70s, '80s and '90s
US government sterilized 1/3 of Puerto Rican women between 1930 to 1970
To be clear, the debate is on how white people are the most racist group of people, and as a con, I will have to prove that a different race or culture is more racist than white people. Also, I will be debating about actions in the modern era, not about events from fifty years before.
Good luck
Con is now getting his Asians confused. lol.....Why is Con making an argument for the Japanese after he has built his entire argument by referencing the Chinese???
When looking at current events, you'll notice a trend of white women who keeps making fraudulent 911 calls on Black men. This is now known as the "Karen" meme...It's gotten so out of hand to where legislation is being passed to punish white people for putting Black people's lives in danger. Yes, that's a human rights violation.
A country’s failure to act against abuses by private individuals, such as domestic violence, can itself be a human rights violation
Are you even aware that Black neighborhoods are heavily policed? Are you aware that American law enforcement uses military-grade vehicles & military-grade weaponry? Are you aware that there's a "Defund The Police" legislation being passed by congress?
My opponent mentions concentration camps as if the American Prison Industrial Complex doesn't count as a concentration camp...Are you aware that there are racist laws that target Black people?
There's a 100:1 Ratio that punishes blacks more than whites for drug use/sell. Isn't that racism?
To further back up my argument of white people's racism, meth & opioids are running rampant in white society but white lawmakers refuse to punish white addicts. There are now drug-injection sites that are setup for white addicts in the US & Canada.
As you can see, I've given several examples of white racism that matches & eclipses anything that's going on in China. Entire laws have been created to harm black people throughout history including the Black Codes, Redlining etc.
My reply: Are you even aware that the actual suspect was caught earlier that day before they Murdered Breonna Taylor?
In Finale, white people are the most racist group of people on the planet whether it's modern day or the past.
- Torture through drugs, sleep deprivation, forced interrogation, stress positions of pain, and electric shock
- Forced sterilization, contraception, and abortion, sometimes with drugs causing subjects to lose consciousness and end menstruation
- Brainwashing through cultural cleansing, forced classes, indoctrination, and propaganda
- Forced labor and child labor
- Organ harvesting
- Abuse through physical means of violence and beatings
- Destruction of culture and religion
- Inhumane living conditions at camps
- Rape
- Killings/murder and widespread death
- Killing
- Bodily/Mental Harm
- Deliberate physically destructive living conditions
- Preventive Birth
- Forced Transfer of children
Ok, so why would you mention Japan in the third round after you've based your entire on China?
I didn't base my arguments on America. My argument is about white racism, which is global.
Con says "Each one of the "Karen" calls are for a reason: a white woman felt threatened by another man. Race may have been a motivation. A system trying to improve itself and eliminate racism. In China, this simply is not an option." My reply: So, basically you just proved my point on white racism. You also proved my point by saying that this is not an option in China because the Chinese aren't making fraudulent "Karen" calls on people of another race.
Are you aware that many of these police shootings of unarmed black people were recorded? How can you argue against a documented recording?
Well...I wonder what Tamir Rice, Sandra Bland, Alton Sterling, Walter Scott, Philando Castile etc., has to say about that...Oh that right! They can't speak because they were murdered by racist white cops
All of the names above; the cops were never charged despite the fact each murder was recorded
Since the data shows that more whites are arrested then why are more blacks in prison? My opponent is simply proving my point every time he speaks.
My opponent goes on to make excuses about the Breonna Taylor case which is the typical "M.O." of a racist.
- Argument: China's cultural genocide against PRO's case: no definite evidence of any racism connecting to death
- Sources: I provided sources for all claims. Pro, none for R4
- S&G + Conduct: vote CON
PRO had no arguments to show for in R1 (but he DID have a conduct violation. Calling CON racist indirectly). In R2, PRO attempts to make up ground by using mostly unevidenced assertions such as "you don't see black cops murdering unarmed whites every month" and things of the sort. PRO also did not explain how those assertions translated into the whole of the modern white race being racist against black people, except for a select few. As for the select few, many of his examples are dated, such as referencing King Leopold or the system of colonization in the 1800s. But PRO does make a valid argument in R2: In America, many whites do not support the tearing down of the "racist" statues, which reflects racism in American society as a whole.
On the other hand, CON's R1 & R2 ties everything very nicely to the resolution, proving that white America is not a racist society in the modern era. CON argues that PRO's main point is moot because the ties to the statues are cultural and not based on belief systems. CON also had an effective offensive point: in the modern era, the Chinese are the most racist ethnic group. So in comparison, the US is doing pretty good. As a voter, CON does a very good job convincing me that modern era whites are at least mild in comparison. However, CON may want to show that the actions of the Chinese government are actively supported by the Chinese people. If they are not, that could potentially blow a hole in CON's argument.
PRO changes up his strategy and throws the resolution out of the window from R3 onwards. PRO argues that the debate is actually about the global racism of whites instead of white America, despite the resolution being explicitly about white America only. Not only this, but PRO changes his tune and argues that the resolution was never about modern America, despite using present tense and arguing based on a current event. I'm labeling this as a conduct violation. PRO's arguments in these rounds consist of listing a bunch of individual events and stats about the general conditions of black people to prove that white society is racist.
From R3 onward, CON replies pointing out that PRO is disregarding the resolution. Then CON expertly dismantles the list of events and stats PRO threw at us.
Arguments and conduct go to CON.
It seems that before accepting the challenge, con stated what they believe the resolution meant in the comment section:
https://www.debateart.com/debates/2214/comment_links/28723
Which is basically a Rules Kritik:
https://tiny.cc/Kritik
Con's interpretation is: "the debate is on how white people are the most racist group of people"
With pro's constant complaints about how this debate isn't about white Americans, or recent things, or much of anything else from the resolution... Yeah, there's some actual benefit of insight to be gained by looking at the debate through con's proposed lense.
With all that in mind, it does not dismiss the original resolution, So I'm going to weight this debate with duel BoP: Pro has to prove the resolution as written, con has to prove the alternative. The primary is still the original. Mainly, I'm not dismissing con's case as a mere whataboutism. Embarrassingly, pro lends the greatest support for this by insisting they meant for the debate to be about: "Whites are definitely the most racist group of people on the planet and history backs up all claims"
Conduct:
R1, before con could post anything, pro rants and raves about con not answering imaginary questions. This sets the tone from them going forward, with accusations of lying and such.
S&G:
Pro chose to harm legibility by writing the majority of their replies in all bold. Pro on the other hand was organized and did not intentionally make their case unreadable.
Sources:
After some misfiring of posting stuff in the comments, con excelled at this. Using the FBI data to undermine the gist of pro's claims was a good highlight, which pro decided to drop. Pro of course has a greater number of sources, but immediately harmed credibility by insisting that the average white American today is a hundreds of year old immortal man who likely never stepped foot in the Americas (King Leopold II).
Under the second resolution, con's sources prove the crimes against humanity. Pro tries to dismiss them insisting that China being more racist would not make them more racist (weird...).
Arguments:
Pro gets side tracked never trying to uphold the resolution, and even repeatedly insisting the debate is not about the resolution he wrote. Apparently "the modern age" has absolutely nothing to do with "recent" times which this debate necessitates. Frequently going over a hundred years ago, and not even within the Americas, this causes a massive BoP failure.
Con on the other hand first highlighted the problem, then moved on to their own case to show concentration camps for non-criminals on the basis of race. On the primary resolution they showed twice as many whites killed by police than blacks (which I know statistics well enough to understand why it's still a troubling figure, but it was pro's job to challenge than rather than just drop the point).
The new voting format on the phone looks strange
no problem
Thank you for the vote!
FYI, 7-point votes are very rare.
If looking over old debates on this site, a really good set to check out is:
https://www.debateart.com/participants/semperfortis/debates?type=finished
Thank you for the vote! I have definitely a lot to learn. After reading some of your debates, I seem that I could be far more concise in my arguments.
I will vote.
Oromagi, Ragnar, Whiteflame, Jeff_Goldblum, Virtuoso, blamonkey... there's a lot of good debaters that I personally take tips from. I usually learn the most when they hand my ass to me in a debate
Thank you! After reading your strong arguments along with Oramagi, Ragnar, etc, I have been making changes to the way I debate. Glad that it is apparent!
I can already see you starting to alter your debate strategy and structure based on our previous debate, you are learning extremely quickly. I may leave a vote if I get the time
Please read the debate and vote. Thank you!
Thanks for the help, I'll include it into the final round. Even in the case that every single claim made by PRO is true beyond a reasonable doubt, he still cannot win as he did not dispute any part of my case involving mass killings and torture of millions of Uyghur Muslims in China. Thus, regardless, none of what he has said is classified as even close to a human rights violation let alone to the scale affecting millions (as these police shootings affect a hundred people per year).
Back to class, my friend. Your source article from Bloomberg admits: "The FBI finally launched its database on police-involved shootings just this year, [i.e., Aug, 2019] which is why researchers rely on databases created by journalists. And even the subset of data that academics have been working with—police shooting fatalities—have their own range of limitations." Not to mention that it lacks statistical data background, such as the all important margin of error, which journalist-based surveys consistently and historically, are too large in range to be sufficiently accurate data. Not to mention that journalist-based surveys are also consistently and historically biased, agenda-driven surveys. I happen to be a certified Six Sigma Black Belt. Don't know what that is? Look it up. I live and breath this stuff.
But I'm not your debate opponent. pay attention to him, not me.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-06/race-and-police-shootings-what-new-research-says...
“The vast majority between 90% - 95% of civilians shot by cops were actively attacking police/citizens when they were shot and there were more whites who were committing attacks when police killed them than were Blacks."....Well, well, well...Perfectly explains those 354 white deaths doesn't it?
CLASS DISMISSED!...but I admire your effort.
I note you failed to cite any source for you allegation of demolishing my argument. You can say it, but research is my best friend and surest guide, and the research data refutes your claim. According to https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/nationaltrends, over the inclusive years of 2013 to 2019 [7 years], police shootings/killings of blacks over the period amounted to 244 unarmed citizen deaths, while police shootings/killings of unarmed whites was 354 citizen deaths. Come on, man, do your research. Your claims are dead fish, and do not help your debate in any way. It's called BoP, and it's yours.
45 seconds? Looks like 11 hours to me, between my post and yours. Time is not your friend, either.
Now, breakdown those statistics into Unarmed Shootings between cops & citizens.
Yes, I just demolished your argument within 45 seconds of reading it.
Don't worry, I have included that reference to the exact same statistic in my R2, although I should have included specific numbers instead of just saying that whites are shot twice as much by police than blacks:
"Every single year in the past four years, nearly twice as many white people are killed as blacks, despite blacks performing more murder, manslaughter, and robbery than whites. In fact, as far as total crimes done, white perform twice as many than blacks, and are killed twice as much by police, thus no conclusive argument can be made that black people are being targeted and killed based on race and not by actions"
In round 3, PRO did not dispute any of these facts.
"The recent protests/riots came into fruition because of white America's true nature and feelings towards Black people." I would challenge your r1 claim [uncited, I'll note] on the basis f this statistic: https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/
which turns the tables on your "facts." In the period referenced, 2017 - 2020 [inclusive and to the current date of 2020] 778 blacks have been shot and killed by police, while 1,441 whites have been shot and killed by police. What is America's true nature, again?
Dude, What agreement?
Remember, I created this debate which means that I'm well aware of what the topic is. You chose to box yourself in by basing your entire argument with a timeframe & specific location.
White-American racism is not the topic. White racism in general is the topic which is global.
ATTENTION VOTERS:
I forgot to add one more point in response to the point on King Leopold for R2:
As I established that he was from centuries ago and does not apply to this argument, I forgot to add that he was also not from America and is another reason his actions do not apply.
I apologize for this mistake
I think it was well established that by Recent...America, we agreed upon events that have happened in the recent years and still are continuing today.
King Leopold II was not from any of the Americas, and died well over a hundred years ago. Yet he seems to be who you believe the average white American is today.
Ahhh C'mon...he said the modern era. I presented factual information for the modern era as well as documented evidence of the past.
I'm not gonna let him write his own narrative when it was myself who created the topic.
Incoherence is his main debate strategy.
Reading R2, it seems the instigator did not read two key phrases within the resolution: "The Recent ... America"
I said it was clever, not foolproof.
Clever argument?? Vector's knees are about to give out and he's one punch away from getting K.O'd.
Thank you!
I was curious how you were going to provide a counter-example, but the more I think about it China is a pretty great one. It was a clever argument, good job
Thanks for the help! I'll definitely be using the guide in the future.
My bad, I forgot to include my sources.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_re-education_camps (Used for data and estimates)
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/features/uighurs/
Quotes are from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-50511063
“ Sometimes I read something so blatantly wrong I don't even know where to begin to refute it... this is one of those times.”
I had one of those occasions arguing with trolls. When that happens, you’ve got yourself a win.
For each of you, when citing any important facts, please provide a link for verification.
As an example, re-education camps in China: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-50511063
Or China trying to improve it's justice system: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-53666557
As always, here's a handy guide for debate formatting with a few argument tips:
https://tiny.cc/DebateArt
Good luck
I look forward to the debate. To be clear, the debate is on how white people are the most racist group of people, and as a con, I will have to prove that a different race or culture is more racist than white people. Also, I will be debating about actions in the modern era, not about events from fifty years before. This debate is for the modern world, in which you claim that white people are above all else the most racists group of people on earth.
Sometimes I read something so blatantly wrong I don't even know where to begin to refute it... this is one of those times.