Instigator / Con

Mall

1492

rating

333

debates

40.69%

won

Topic

#2647

Your proposal not to avoid but to solvethe "race" issue.

Status

Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics

Better arguments

Better sources

Better legibility

Better conduct

After 2 votes and with 8 points ahead, the winner is...

seldiora

Tags

People

Parameters

Publication date: 11.26.2020 12:30PM
Last updated date: 01.06.2021 12:47PM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 4
Time for argument: Two days
Max argument characters: 10,000
Voting period: One month
Point system: Multiple criterions
Voting system: Open

Contender / Pro

seldiora

1417

rating

158

debates

32.59%

won

Description

Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, understand a subject better, help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.

Now I like to bring this topic to give you attempts at solving this problem. This may be what we need for new ideas, help to improve our world not just for us and now but for consecutive generations to come.

The proposal of self destruction or elimination of all humanity will not be allowed for this debate topic. Not only does it not meet the debate description terms and parameters but it's something that will not work. It's actually something suggesting to go in the opposite direction when we think about correcting the problem. Like the plumber ditching the leaking pipe saying problem solved. No, problem avoided and that's another debate , another time.

So I bring this again to try and see what you can come up with. Think more critically because we'll be alive all the way through to carry out the plan.

One person came up with religion as a proposal. I feel that it could of used more expansion to be made more clear about its impact and effectiveness as a cause of action.

Maybe that can be expounded here.

The following is just a reiteration of where your proposal should be shooting to or aiming for .

*****Please provide a proposed solution to "racism". What is your method, code, idea, formula, whatever, that will help replace or eliminate all "racism" so that everyone will receive the proper treatment not involving "racial" discrimination?

How would you work or have others work as proposed to improve "race relations"?

Now be it that it's a proposal, you can't prove your method will work. But you do have to prove it is the best method yet, possibly ever thought up.

If the deductive reasoning is there to stand tenable with your concept , I'll stand to concede that. If I am able to undermine what's said on the basis of invalid points, you can come back to try again in another challenge.*****

Now we're working towards a goal. The good news is that some progress has been made. Some laws have changed, justice has increased over the last few decades. Certainly there is a mass of folks that don't believe in the practice of "racism" anymore or never have and have never practiced it. We can see this with observation. No need to ad hoc the reality of this by saying "well a person can be a "racist" at anytime so by default they're "racist" anyhow." No quit deluding yourself. You're on this platform, I'm certainly not mistreating you due to the color of your skin.

So we've come a long ways , we still have a long ways to go as they say. Why work backwards to tear that down? Work, fight, improve, don't purge the world, make it a better one.

Please, for comments , questions, ideas, post them in the comment board.

Round 1

Mall

12.02.2020 02:32PM

Con

So we're talking about improvement of a thing.

In the finale, we want to see the change in the result .

The aftermath concerning the "race" issue we have seen to be brutal with so called law enforcement agents and civilians .

At the start with harassment, unnecessary to unjustified treatment leading to the end, the demise of an individual.

What can we do or say to eliminate this problem?

seldiora

12.02.2020 04:03PM

Pro

My solution is as such: implement significant federal level change to resolve the structural racism. The inherent problems lies in lack of educating and ensuring that police and judges are unbiased. With implementing various tests to ensure that they will not use racial profiling to resolve issues. Already, federal grants have allowed states to give the vast change necessary to begin the process. After federal level invests the money into ensuring that races are treated equally, it is inevitable that people will change their views. It's well knowns that education resolves a big part of racism after knowing people's equality and their circumstances are not to be judged.

Mall may try to argue the problem is never 100% resolved, however, I propose that there is a level of margin of error that should be accepted. We are only humans. Even doctors performing heart surgery only reach 99.999...% accuracy rather than 100%. It would be a miracle to not even have one patient die across hundreds of years of operations. One death is inevitable. But when an overwhelming amount of people die is the real problem. Similarly, racism on the small local level should not be considered a problem. Just as we get angry and jump to conclusions, we ought not prevent people exercising their freedom of speech. As offensive as it is, the government has no right to infiltrate my right to say the N-word to insult a black man. On the other hand, the law-enforcement positions with power are far more inexcusable and important to solve. These are the only thing that matter in structural racism. Individuals alone cannot compose the incredibly large problem of disproportional black men in jail. As such, once we resolve the idea with federal laws enforced on the states, we will resolve the big problem of racism in the US.

Mall must tell us why this would not work, or why we cannot even accept me insulting a black man to exercise my freedom of speech. The victim is free to insult me back based on my own race. There is only the inherent problem of conflict here, with no true impact on nationwide racism.

Round 2

Mall

12.03.2020 06:01PM

Con

"My solution is as such: implement significant federal level change to resolve the structural racism. The inherent problems lies in lack of educating and ensuring that police and judges are unbiased. With implementing various tests to ensure that they will not use racial profiling to resolve issues. "

You know you may hear on the news about social justice and police reform.

This isn't a solution as it hasn't solved anything but it is a proposal. Why hasn't this worked yet ?

"Already, federal grants have allowed states to give the vast change necessary to begin the process. After federal level invests the money into ensuring that races are treated equally, it is inevitable that people will change their views. It's well knowns that education resolves a big part of racism after knowing people's equality and their circumstances are not to be judged. "

Aside from government, let's look at personal situations.

Does it take money for one to sit down and educate another about the ills of discrimination and prejudice?

At the end of the conversation, we know all "racism" has ended how?

Someone that is genuinely, bonafide "racist" thinking high regard of a group over another based on color and that's the embrace of the culture, what can you say to cause them to change how they feel? Do you think money can buy virtue?

"Similarly, racism on the small local level should not be considered a problem. "

A boy in a small town beaten and mutilated behind "racist" terrorism , that's a problem. If the boy was alive today, he'd tell you he faced a problem that day. Now this wasn't necessary all over the globe but just in some small area somewhere.

What do you mean it's not a problem?

As the description said, ***eliminate all racism***. Smoking a cigarette occasionally is not non-problematic due to the time spent on the activity being on a small scale, small time window. What they teach us about moderation is an illusion. It's just a way out even though to suffer small damage in the process.

We want no damage at all and no mistreatment at all.

"As offensive as it is, the government has no right to infiltrate my right to say the N-word to insult a black man. "

Then your proposal is null and void. See we think we've gotten some where but really have gone in a circle. The illusion of rights. Whatever the law allows not to be criminal in this country isn't. Thought, speech and action have to be outlined in your proposal. It has to get to the foundation ,core, root of the problem. If there's nothing in what you suggest to affect the language of "wrongness", the attitudes haven't changed and you have not stopped for what could be for potential action.

More on the law. Your rights are given or taken based on the level of harm and offense upon your execution of them. It's what you're free to do and not free to do. Like I said in this country, the leniency is given more to the speech. So all and all , with this said, you have now concluded that "racism" can't be eliminated not one bit without it being illegal.

So the question is , can your proposal be good enough to sway the government, congress, presidential administration?

"As such, once we resolve the idea with federal laws enforced on the states, we will resolve the big problem of racism in the US."

I guess from there on , the rest of the world.

"Mall must tell us why this would not work, or why we cannot even accept me insulting a black man to exercise my freedom of speech. The victim is free to insult me back based on my own race. There is only the inherent problem of conflict here, with no true impact on nationwide racism."

One , nothing you've presented has worked. What you're offering has been talked about in some form or fashion for years. These discussions take place with the NAACP, CBC, BLM, Antifa, etc.

All it is , is just talk. It sounds good but at the end of last week, somebody was laid to rest. Some teddy bear put up, some flowers given and some candles lit. We need a proposal that deals with thought, speech and action. If that means policing what you say, well good reason for it .

Eliminating all "racism" would mean dealing with thought, speech and action. So your proposal has to be powerful to the point of renewing mindsets.

seldiora

12.03.2020 06:32PM

Pro

Our current problem is explained well by a news article (https://www.smartcitymemphis.com/2020/07/ending-systemic-racism-what-should-government-do/). We are ignoring the people who are being mistreated and not taking big action. Laws are taking too long to pass. We must have a "prevention first approach" and make a priority to have a campaign to end the war on crime. The many steps to resolve the criminalization problems will definitely end this problem. The evidence is from thousands of years ago when prisons did not exist at all, before we took advantage of slaves in Africa. People in the Athens and Rome had equal rights with regards to race. Though the gender was a problem, that is outside the scope of the debate.

Nevertheless, crime has always existed throughout the human history. It is impractical and ridiculous to expect that nobody will ever commit a crime. Mall has given us no reasoning why we should expect imperfect humans to never make a single mistake. He has still not noted why I cannot exercise racism so long as there is no actual harm inflicted. Unlike being denied education or being put in jail, a single sentence of insult's impact is so little and merely inconvenient that I doubt we should even prevent insulting based on physical traits. Based on Mall's logic, we may not even be able to say anything bad about the government. The slippery slope would be ridiculous if we didn't allow for even the least bit of error margin. As structural racism is the big issue within America, I propose we solve it as our main focus. It is pointless to crack down on individual acts of racism that do not have any big impact whatsoever.

Round 3

Mall

12.04.2020 06:52PM

Con

"We are ignoring the people who are being mistreated and not taking big action. Laws are taking too long to pass. "

So your proposal to speed up the process is what?

"We must have a "prevention first approach" and make a priority to have a campaign to end the war on crime. The many steps to resolve the criminalization problems will definitely end this problem. "

So unpack that. What does the "prevention first approach" consist of?

What does the campaign or support to end whatever it is consist of ?

See this sounds good like a pie that looks good. We need the filling in that pie like the details needed in this plan.

Please outline what we're doing specifically starting with thought , speech , action.

"He has still not noted why I cannot exercise racism so long as there is no actual harm inflicted. "

If there is no such thing as physical harmful "racism", then all these social organizations wouldn't exist against it. This is all we hear on the news in which you I guess are aware of.

If none of this exists, then it contradicts everything you've said regarding support to stop crime. I believe they call them hate crimes which is a subset of crime.

After all this , you're saying there really is no problem so why accept a debate challenge for you to propose a solution to a problem that doesn't exist?

Just a reminder that the challenge is for you to come up with a proposal to eliminate ***all "racism" and what it is that would make an improvement of the present situation .

It is not for me to justify why all and not some "racism" should still exist and that wouldn't be an improvement as a result. The result would still be the same as there would still be mistreatment.

Your goal is to get rid of mistreatment. Why do you wish to save some of it?

"a single sentence of insult's impact is so little and merely inconvenient that I doubt we should even prevent insulting based on physical traits. "

This is something you can't decide for me or determine for anybody else. The level of impact of mistreatment in language or action is based on the victim being victimized. People go into depression, develop suicidal tendencies and people get hostile all off of No language alone. Then violence ensues just from what someone said.

So instead of trying to measure from major to least harm, make an improvement to do away with it all.

"Based on Mall's logic, we may not even be able to say anything bad about the government."

Does that have anything to do with the "race" problem?

" The slippery slope would be ridiculous if we didn't allow for even the least bit of error margin."

Another way of saying you have no proposal to eliminate the problem.

" As structural racism is the big issue within America, I propose we solve it as our main focus. It is pointless to crack down on individual acts of racism that do not have any big impact whatsoever."

So the "race" problem doesn't exist all over the world. Ok, wherever it is, get rid of it.

I don't know how you can measure someone's individual mistreatment and say it's not worthy of not happening to a person. I know if I was being verbally attacked whether at the workplace or where I live, I would want help or a suggestion to solve my difficulty. It sounds like you're saying "no, it's an isolated problem, forget that".

The proposal is to eliminate all "racism" as it starts with thought , language then to destruction. As we can see down through history to the present day.

Most likely why we still have this problem is because of this half stepping proposal. The pharmaceutical way to so called solving the issue is just to treat the symptoms. Get rid of the symptoms. The natural , holistic way is to treat the cause, the root, take it and throw it out.

That starts with the mindset.

Starting there, the problem is gone and there's no remission.

seldiora

12.05.2020 01:10AM

Pro

Mall keeps asserting an absurdity and an impossibility. The "Race issue" has only been considered an issue with action combined with beliefs. It is not a crime to merely declare that I will commit a crime and do nothing about it. It is similarly not an issue if I claim black men are terrible but nevertheless use no violence on them, and use random decision making to ensure they receive fair treatment. Mall keeps requesting more and more specific proposals to the precise nature of how my laws will work, but I only need to suggest an overall framework. After all, the legislators will be the ones actually implementing and pulling through. If the federal government ought to implement these laws, I have managed to successfully give a proposal, however vague, that is advisable and would be a net benefit. Indeed, we have already managed to get rid of slavery from hundreds of years ago. With woman gaining voting rights, it's clear that the pattern of the federal investment is able to resolve bias within race and even gender. As such, the proposal of enacting significant federal laws to educate police men and resolve inequality will resolve the vast majority of racism problem. When we consider solving some problem, such as climate change or gun control, we restrict it to an acceptable rate and low amount of risk. Unless Mall can point out some situation where we were able to solve anything with perfection, then his demand is completely unreasonable, and we should accept that ridding the vast majority of racism would fulfill the premise to "solve racism". Mall has not countered the theoretical situation where there is zero racism in an alternate world, but our liberties are so restricted that we cannot say any bad thing about anyone. This world is much worse than our current world as a mere insult cannot outweigh the need to express oneself. After all, it is through our mistakes and knowing our flaws that we improve.

Round 4

Mall

12.07.2020 12:34AM

Con

"Mall keeps asserting an absurdity and an impossibility. "

Then no proposal. Instead of disregarding the terms of the debate, just say you don't have a proposal that meets the terms.

Why force feed something?

"The "Race issue" has only been considered an issue with action combined with beliefs. "

Mistreatment yes, my fellow man and I wish not to be mistreated in any form or fashion.

Will you help us?

"It is not a crime to merely declare that I will commit a crime and do nothing about it."

Why settle with a society like that? Let me ask, are you going to live in a community where there is the mantra of liberty and justice for all versus aspiring career criminals?

" It is similarly not an issue if I claim black men are terrible but nevertheless use no violence on them, and use random decision making to ensure they receive fair treatment. "

This has no thing to do with "racism".

"Mall keeps requesting more and more specific proposals to the precise nature of how my laws will work, but I only need to suggest an overall framework. After all, the legislators will be the ones actually implementing and pulling through. If the federal government ought to implement these laws, I have managed to successfully give a proposal, however vague, that is advisable and would be a net benefit."

Do you have a proposal for us concerning our thought , speech and action with replacing all " racism" with justice?

"As such, the proposal of enacting significant federal laws to educate police men and resolve inequality will resolve the vast majority of racism problem"

Educate police about what?

Resolve how by doing what?

I still don't know what the details and do's are.

"Unless Mall can point out some situation where we were able to solve anything with perfection, then his demand is completely unreasonable, and we should accept that ridding the vast majority of racism would fulfill the premise to "solve racism". "

I don't think I said "perfection" exists. Nor does solving a problem has to do with "perfection". This is just a cop out way of saying you have no proposal but yet take on the debate anyway thinking that you just change the terms up .

Also for you to be complacent with getting rid of some of the mistreatment and encouraging others to do the same instead of doing what is obviously an improvement of ridding some, ridding it all is just cancerous to us victims out here. What can be better than me living without any of my heartache? We don't fight for crumbs at the table. We stand up to have the surpeme court give everything in the name of justice on a silver platter. We don't fight to stop at the majority. We keep going. This is the same mentality for you so called pro life people that only want to decrease abortions in lieu of shutting it down altogether.

"Mall has not countered the theoretical situation where there is zero racism in an alternate world, but our liberties are so restricted that we cannot say any bad thing about anyone. This world is much worse than our current world as a mere insult cannot outweigh the need to express oneself. After all, it is through our mistakes and knowing our flaws that we improve."

My counter is that you have no proposal. That's why you're settling for easing the symptoms of the "race " problem. But you have no cure to get rid of it. Now you expect me to justify why it's not possible to cure something when I'm not the medical scientist here. You're supposed to be . If you say it's impossible , you say " I'm sorry sir, I cannot produce a cure , something that would be an improvement over a quick fix which leaves the end result unchanged and so I am therefore unable to accept the debate. The result will be the same after the proposal and still be just like it was before the mentioning of the proposal. Although the route changes I guess, still headed towards this forsaken heinous destination.

As I say , the "racism" starts at the mind. Just making sure there will be no actions behind it won't work. History has shown it as well as the present. The brutality , lynching , overt treatment has reduced to perhaps just language due to the restraint of the law. The problem is still there dormant in people's minds and when the first chance comes along, the end comes for the victim.

That's no more to add that wouldn't be reiterated.

seldiora

12.07.2020 12:44AM

Pro

Mall keeps making assumptions, but well educated men kept in check by federal law will be encouraged to let aside their racism. Based on the fact that in daily life we can hold others equal to us despite being different shows that racism can be resolved. If we remove the abuse of power then we will resolve the big problem of racism. Federal level of laws will definitely work as the encouragement of equality will lead to resolution of racism. I rest my case.

Mall

01.06.2021 12:47PM

We'll still have the "race " problem y'all so we've all lost.

oromagi

11.30.2020 06:14PM

-->

@Mall

science, education, personal experience

Mall

11.28.2020 06:53PM

I won't question right now , that a "temporary solution" is an actual solution.
But keep thinking. It can be easy to avoid a problem and not improve a situation.

Just by deductive reasoning, if things have changed within the past decades concerning equality and justice, why wouldn't there be something to further improve and continue the progression of the positive things to the point of no more "race" problem?

Don't tell me we've just gotten complacent with little changes .

MisterChris

11.28.2020 06:10PM

-->

@Mall

I genuinely don't think there is a permanent solution to racism, if we are ignoring the wiping out of humanity.

Mall

11.28.2020 03:35PM

Same conditions as last time . You can see the same thing reiterated here.

I understand folks was confusing the word ***solve** with ***avoid*** but this challenge just as before never challenged how do we go about avoiding a problem.

I see there are still no takers . You concede you have no proposal to a solution just like before.
This is your chance.

MisterChris

11.28.2020 05:44AM

good to see you starting to be more cautious about your resolutions and win conditions

Barney

12.19.2020 11:51AM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Pro proposes a solution that if enacted could potentially solve the problems in their current form, and con complains it has not already solved everything... Rinse and repeat.

The problem may stem from them operating under different definitions for key terms, yet as someone fluent in English, I saw nothing wrong with pro's proposal as it relates to the current form of the race issue. While it would not instantly undo the damage, or make a new age of enlightenment with interstellar travel, it would deal with the issue as it stands today. To use an analogy, a doctor solving a gunshot wound does not make it so the wound never occurred, but they prevent it from killing the patent and start them on the path to recover (which they would otherwise just bleed out as things progress naturally when untreated).

fauxlaw

12.07.2020 04:59PM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Argument: Con's [the instigator] "argument" is a repetition of the resolution, without true argument of specific "proposal" from Con's perspective. Rather, Con spends four rounds prodding Pro to explain his arguments in further detail. Pro offers the requested proposal via legislative change, but also addresses individual thought and action as a significant need. Con never achieves a sound argument against these proposals, merely claiming it is not enough. Points to Pro.

Sources: Not much to judge on here. Con offers no sourcing whatsoever. Pro offers valid sources on education and systematic legslation in R1 & , respectively, to support his arguments. Points to Pro.

S&G: tie

Conduct: tie.

Your proposal ***not to avoid but to solve***the "race" issue.

Your proposal not to avoid but to solvethe "race" issue.