Instigator / Pro
0
1500
rating
0
debates
0.0%
won
Topic

Affirmative action causes racism.

Status
Voting

Participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.

The voting will end in:

00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
People
Time for argument
Two weeks
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One month
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Con
0
1421
rating
127
debates
31.89%
won
Description
~ 542 / 5,000

THBT: Affirmative action causes racism.

-Definition-
Affirmative action - Affirmative action is a policy in which an individual's colour, race, sex, religion or national origin are taken into account to increase opportunities provided to an underrepresented part of society.

Racism - prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group.

-Rules-
Forfeit = Instant loss
No kritks
Definitions are agreed upon

Round 1
Pro
To clarify, the definition's are as follows. 

Affirmative action - Affirmative action is a policy in which an individual's colour, race, sex, religion or national origin are taken into account to increase opportunities provided to an underrepresented part of society.

Racism - prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group.

Firstly, I would like to draw your attention to the following website, and especially to the first image. 


Essentially, it shows that Asians have a 140 point deduction purely because of their race. Racism is "prejudice against a person based on their membership of a particular race". If an Asian is getting points deducted because of their race, that would indeed be "prejudice against a person based on their membership of a particular race". 

Also, this is a good analogy I like to use. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUR_MCdnUAo


Con
Thanks pro.

THBT: Overall, affirmative action causes racism (currently)

Pros own article says we already solved this problem: 
“Espenshade and Radford used data from just a handful of schools in 1997, and it was data from before major court rulings changed how schools can consider race.“

As pro failed to show how A.A. creates racism in an overwhelming and unavoidable level directly, he has failed to uphold his burden of proof.

Round 2
Pro


To reiterate, my main contention is as follows. 

Affirmative action causes racism. 
I will not be adding the words overall or currently as you have done. 

Essentially, my opponent has constructed their argument purely based on this definition change. But no matter, I shall still deconstruct it. 

Pros own article says we already solved this problem: 
“Espenshade and Radford used data from just a handful of schools in 1997, and it was data from before major court rulings changed how schools can consider race.“

As pro failed to show how A.A. creates racism in an overwhelming and unavoidable level directly, he has failed to uphold his burden of proof.
Objection. 

To satisfy the BoP, I need not to find current examples of affirmative actions (though I could very easily do so as affirmative action is very much a thing),  I simply need to show that X causes Y, therefore, I uphold my BoP.

For my opponent to score victory, they must prove that the case I have provided does not showcase racism. Essentially, the question is, "does penalising Asians on their SAT scores purely because of their race inflict racism upon them" 
Con
I do not need to negate your one example. In countless laboratory experiments and cases, we must investigate countless events that occur and the way that they resolve. We thought that leaving a flask in the open can spontaneously generate life from nothing. We were wrong. With careful experimentation we disproved this notion of "spontaneous life". Similarly, Pro only shows us one singular case study, and even that study has managed to resolve its seeming problem. He has only shown a correlation of Affirmative Action and Racism. He has not displayed why it causes it. After all, AA is all about fighting racism and helping minorities in trouble. Without an overwhelming amount of evidence or expert analysis in his side, we can only assume he cherry picked one example to prove "AA *can* cause racism" or even that AA is correlated with racist acts. The refutation is upheld.
Round 3
Pro

I do not need to negate your one example.
Con's clearly does not understand how a BoP can be proved and disapproved. I have provided an example which satisfies the BoP and you have negated to answer to it, therefore keeping my BoP satisfactory. 

We thought that leaving a flask in the open can spontaneously generate life from nothing. We were wrong

Besides the obvious fact that this is a clear red herring, I will still respond to it. If an experiment, even a single experiment yielded results which shows that something did grow out of nothing, that would have to be investigated instead of dismissed. What I have done is provided that one instant. What you have done is dismissed it. 

Similarly, Pro only shows us one singular case study, and even that study has managed to resolve its seeming problem.
I have already dismissed this point in my last argument. The debate is specifically not about whether systemic racism is real, but whether affirmative action causes racism. 

He has only shown a correlation of Affirmative Action and Racism. He has not displayed why it causes it.
I'm not too sure what my opponent is getting at. Perhaps I didn't express myself clear enough. I will clarify my contention in the conclusion. 

After all, AA is all about fighting racism and helping minorities in trouble.
But it doesn't matter what one's intention is, the important thing is what AA has caused. It has indeed helped black people get into colleges but at the expenses of Asians who are almost certainly working harder and score higher. 


Conclsion

The following is a recap of my PoV and the points I have presented. 

I have demonstated that affirmitive action is racist, especially in the form of college accpetnce. I have shown that Asians are penalised 140 points purely because they are Asian. I then revistsed the definition of racim, which is as follows. 

Racism - prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group.
As Asians are being deducted purely because they are members of a particular race and not their ability, this would be considered racism. I then concluded that this 140 point reduction because of one's race is a direct result affirmitive action. If AA was too be abolished, then this point dedcution would be no more, meaning that affirmitive action does indeed result in racism. 

As I have satisfied the BoP, Vote Pro. 
Con
to overgeneralize AA as a whole to one singular example that has since been fixed goes to show that Pro does not understand how a "cause and effect" debate works. If I say gun control causes crime rates to drop, I can't just pick Australia and say "see? Gun control causes crime rates to drop". There are too many unknown variables similar here: the timing, the people who implemented AA at the time, and of course, the judicial interpretation to destroy the seeming act of racism. If I say our laws cause racism and mention slavery being allowed centuries ago, we must also bring up the present and the progress made; how the Supreme Court desires equality and at the highest level possible, we do our best to implement equality and thus laws cannot inherently cause racism. As the problem is localized to this one specific example of dropping Asian scores by 140 points and failure to point the cause to AA specifically (rather than, I don't know, the lawmakers during the time?), Pro has lost this debate.