Instigator / Pro

THBT Systemic Racism Is Definitely a Problem in the US


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 6 points ahead, the winner is...

Publication date
Last updated date
Number of rounds
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Contender / Con

Institutional racism, also known as systemic racism, is a form of racism that is embedded as normal practice within society or an organization. It can lead to such issues as discrimination in criminal justice, employment, housing, health care, political power, and education, among other issues.

Con cannot use the bible, simulation-ism (argument that the world is merely a simulation), or quantum physics

Burden of proof is shared.

Round 1
The Significance of Systemic Racism in the US
I. Framework
By its definition, systemic racism does not belong to any particular individual -- rather, it is the combination of efforts of people on a societal level. The marginalization of persons on their race has grown to a pervasive and intrinsic level to society -- which fulfills the idea of “systemic”. [30] Some confuse the ideas of systemic -- relating to the system -- with systematic -- acting according to plan or methodical. However, this semantic differentiation is not only counterproductive to society, it also ignores the fact that people make up the system of society as a whole. There doesn’t need to be any explicit laws that allow for systemic racism. The actions of the individuals and the ignorance of the government combine to the now infamous systemic racism in the United States. In other words, individuals are what make up the system.
II. Meta-analysis
A powerful analysis of multiple studies covers the overall problems with economics and incarceration with racial inequality.
This in-depth research looks deeply into the "State-level indicators of structural racism included four domains: (1) political participation; (2) employment and job status; (3) educational attainment; and (4) judicial treatment". Drawing from social models, Alicia argues that Blacks are suffering in terms of law-related problems. The experts vouch for action, to conclude "Results indicated that Blacks living in states with high levels of structural racism were generally more likely to report past-year myocardial infarction. " [1] 
I cannot stress how powerful and trustworthy this study is. They gather countless other researchers' information from the past, culminating in undeniable proof that people view blacks and minorities with contempt, looking over the entire past half-century for patterns and ensuring the truth of the evidence. The sheer amount of citations that the experts combine goes to highlight Con's lack of comprehensive knowledge. Merely taking some excerpts, it's clear that this study is astounding:
Blacks face significant disadvantages in educational attainment, income, wealth, credit, employment, and incarceration (CDC, 2011; Jones, 2000; Kaufman, Cooper, & McGee, 1997; Pager & Shepherd, 2008; Uggen & Manza, 2002; Williams & Collins, 1995). 2011 six states passed laws that ...have demonstrated to systematically exclude racial/ethnic minorities from voting[.] They are less likely than Whites to have official government identification (Parson & McLaughlin, 2007). Previous work by Hatzenbuehler, Keyes, and Hasin (2009) and Hatzenbuehler et al. (2010) has shown that state-level variation in policies and laws has substantial consequences for the health of minority groups.
After obtaining data from the US Census Bureau and carefully crunching numbers, the definitive correlation and causation are found within people' inherent beliefs and ideas, as well as the system itself: "Negative interactions for state elected officials, employment, and incarceration indicated that the effect of these measures of structural racism on myocardial infarction among Blacks differed significantly from that of Whites. "
The idea of health problems caused by systemic racism is not found within this study alone. Another researcher adds upon my evidence, noting "This article reviews several ways of conceptualizing structural racism, with a focus on social segregation, immigration policy, and intergenerational effects. Studies of disparities should more seriously consider the multiple dimensions of structural racism as fundamental causes of health disparities." [2]  
The empirical evidence stacks on and on.
III. Education:
Racism begins at a young age in school, which inherently causes this to continue in their life. This point links to incarceration due to the similarity between suspension/expulsion and putting someone in jail. The government is unwilling to fix the problems existing within school systems, extending forth the systemic racism. 
  • The racism is so significant that minorities feel distressed and mental issues regarding the problem. "Elevated levels of Cultural Mistrust, Cultural Race-Related Stress, and Individual Race Related Stress lead to increased use of Emotion-Based Coping behaviors ...." [3]
  • The above point is supported by Scientific Magazine: "Universities are not level playing fields where all students have an equal opportunity to participate and succeed. The misuse of standardized tests such as the GRE excludes students who could have otherwise succeeded (4). Once admitted, Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) face challenges when transitioning to college life (5) and are more likely to be nontraditional students." [6] Thus, even the tests naturally discriminate against minorities.
  • Another study regarding schooling proves that assumptions exist earlier on, which further enhances my incarceration point. People will assume things of blacks -- that they are more responsible, older, and maybe inherently related to Crime. From the American Psychology Association, "Our research found that black boys can be seen as responsible for their actions at an age when white boys still benefit from the assumption that children are essentially innocent" [17]. The negative interactions with black children caused the unconscious dehumanization of blacks. And since the assumptions start from such a young age, this continues well into adulthood, establishing the baseline that racism doesn't just come out of nowhere. 
  • Blacks are also suspended at a disproportional rate [18], noting that from federal data "for every 100 students with special needs in 2015-16, white students lost 43 days to suspension, while black students lost 121 days". The huge difference between the two races proves that the problem is systemic and significant. Indeed, a GAO report proves that the representation of suspended blacks was severe in percentage difference. 
  • "School to Prison" is a known term, where the schools cause the minority students to become ostracized. The extremely harsh punishments push them to become neglected and build upon their vulnerability, raising this point to the next level. [19] As a result of this educational racism, a very high proportion of minorities are also dropping out of school. [20] How does Con explain this, if this is not due to the problems I've listed?
  • Another research article furthers on how Brown V Board was not enough to dismantle our systemic Racism. "[Schools] remain effectively segregated due to the following: discrimination in schools by administrators, teachers, and students; racial bias in the school curriculum; the separation of students into different ability tracks reflecting racial, class, and gender stratification; and the use of standardized testing that contains significant racial and class bias." [25] The law wasn't effectively enforced, proving that our system has failed.
The publication first counters Con by showing that even the founding fathers had intended for the oppression of minorities: "[Those] who drafted the U.S. Constitution..built into the country’s foundation certain mechanisms designed to maintain the enslavement of African Americans to unjustly enrich many white Americans..".
Indeed, the article further lists that many cases show our unfair discrimination and inability to fulfill the ideals of equality. "Cases which have come to this Court depict a spectacle of slavery unwilling to die. . . . Negroes have been excluded over and again from juries . . . . They have been made to attend segregated and inferior schools . . . . They have been forced to live in segregated residential districts . . . ." The problems and accusations go on.
There is also expounding upon how white men tend to abuse their power within the education system. As a collective whole, merely a handful of individual racism could not have caused this problem. The corruption of bias influences the use of power, which stems from systemic racism. "The failure of school desegregation lies primarily in the hands of those with the greatest political, economic, and civic power, who have long been mostly white. White elites—including school board members, leaders of civic and business organizations, state and local legislators, and judges in state and federal courts—have made decisions that have reversed progress toward substantial school desegregation since the 1970s." 
Unfortunately, despite the momentary successes of Brown, our society remains unchanged with the practices of segregation. It's first highlighted that President Dwight Eisenhower faced pressure from white teachers and school leaders, making it impossible to make further progress. The history displays precisely this: "Oklahoma v. Dowell and freeman v. Pitts decisions indicated that the Supreme Court would permit large-scale resegregation of schools. The Freeman decision gave lower court judges much discretion to abandon supervision of desegregation before a school district was in full compliance.46 Today, as Orfieldand Eaton notes, “[d]esegregation remedies can even be removed when achievement gaps between the races have widened, or even if a district has never fully implemented an effective desegregation plan.” You can see how deep the racism goes, going beyond mere persons and now into the most trusted authorities in the US. 
Crucial resources are denied for black students, which inherently destroys ideals for equality and halts potential progress for the future.
If the power of desegregation wasn't obvious, my source further explains the education denied for blacks. Firstly they say, "One major study found that “black third-graders in predominantly white schools read better than initially similar blacks who have attended predominantly black schools.” Secondly, they support this by saying yet another study with 1,800 students found both white and black students performed better with desegregation. Why wouldn't they? After all, with greater equality, you have harmony, unity, team spirit, acceptance, all key for success. In contrast to the world I show where most black kids have trouble in their academics, the ideal world displays the great difference that we could have been making.
Next, in contrast to my education dropped and expulsion rates in usual schools, the research thirdly adds, "Black students from desegregated, substantially white schools typically are more successful in entering into the high-paying job and college networks than those students from traditionally segregated schools. Going to a substantially desegregated high school significantly increases the chance that a black or Latino student will attend college". Of course, common knowledge tells us that going to universities greatly helps you in your future career. I won't bother sourcing that. Instead, I will further that the states refuse to compromise, despite being a crucial component of the system, and a smaller sub-system in itself. 
The expert continues: "...the state not only tolerates the funding gulf between Milwaukee and its suburban counterparts, but it has also instituted policies that allow the gap to widen". The result is vastly reduced access to critical job networks that all people deserve to have. Also, the segregation arbitrarily prevents resource access as a result. "Research indicates that other critical resources, such as the availability of small classes and college placement courses, are not equitably distributed."  
I will spare you the summary of the rest of the report. The discrimination within the school and its impacts are continuously analyzed for at least a dozen pages. Needless to say that systemic racism has a very significant impact on education.
IV. Health Care:
Health Care inequality has caused countless deaths and inequality within the treatment. Our government has continued ignoring these problems and extended systemic racism.
Even if we account for socioeconomic equality, this alone cannot attribute to all the deaths and sicknesses gone untreated.
I have countless expert sources to support this.
  • More Health, existing even in Artificial Intelligence: "The U.S. health care system uses commercial algorithms to guide health decisions. Obermeyer et al. find evidence of racial bias in one widely used algorithm, such that Black patients assigned the same level of risk by the algorithm are sicker than White patients". [4] Scientific Magazine also stacks upon an agreement: "Algorithms designed to make decisions about health care incorporate biases that limit care for Black patients." [5]
  • The government has FAILED to implement the existing equalities and rights. This is backed by credible sources and the idea that the private sector does whatever it wants due to a lack of laws and regulations. "Racial disparities in health outcomes exist at alarming rates and can be seen in the prevalence of chronic health conditions...and police brutality. Furthermore, unequal access to quality health care disproportionately burdens communities of color and exacerbates racial disparities.
  •  “The COVID-19 pandemic has unveiled these inequities and made it impossible to ignore structural racism. Comprehensive research on the public health impacts of structural racism is needed to confront and dismantle the racist systems and practices that create racial disparities and to develop race-conscious public health approaches to reverse the existing disparities that have plagued our nation for too long. This point has been underscored by the federal government’s failure to adequately collect race and ethnicity data on COVID-19 testing, hospitalization, and deaths." [11]
  • This is not only supported by the collection of data but the real-world news. Yet another study highlighted " During the entire course of the pandemic so far, data compiled by the non‐profit APM Research Lab (2020) has shown that the crude death rate for Black Americans is more than double that for all other racialized groups. When adjusted for age, the risk of death from COVID‐19 is as much as nine times higher for African Americans than it is for whites (Bassett, Chen, & Krieger, 2020)." [15
  • The large political, social, and economic forces combined are the sole explanation for the blacks, and con has no way to deny this. The expert explains that there is an undeniable correlation. The social forces shape up the toxic environment for the blacks to be unable to access health services. The synergy between the biology and the sociological processes combine to ruin the minorities. My researcher further explains, "already we see evidence of racial inequities in COVID‐19 treatment (Eligon & Burch, 2020), and we know that discrimination in healthcare settings adversely affects the management of chronic conditions like diabetes (Peek, Wagner, Tang, Baker, & Chin, 2011)."
  • Another expert's experiment proves that blacks even received better treatment under those who were more racially accepting than those who were not. Under current circumstances, the gap between white and black mortality is unacceptable -- even my research highlights that the gap could be reduced by up to 19% if we tackled systemic inequality. [14]
The effects of Systemic Racism are so terrible, that the MIT president himself admits and sends an urgent letter remarking the problems existing in the system, and speaks out for action against such. He even admitted that surface-level change was not enough: "...we need to acknowledge that it has not been effective enough the student members of the Academic Council Working Group recently emphasized, important work remains unfinished. What’s more, while MIT’s decentralized structure has allowed for great advances on inclusion in some units and departments, it has served to hamper Institute-wide progress. " [7] To discredit such a well-respected person of high status is, discarding the scholarly opinion that makes up the essence of society and truth. 
There is a famous term called the healthcare system, which extends similarly to racism's system. This is the umbrella term that includes all the private sectors combined with government action. According to, health care is "the method by which healthcare is financed, organized, and delivered to a population. It includes issues of access (for whom and to which services), expenditures, and resources (healthcare workers and facilities). " [12] My idea of government failure is supported by its ideals. "All governments have some degree of involvement in healthcare because essentially all countries have a centrally funded agency that is concerned with public health issues". Therefore each institute combined forms the entire system, making the MIT President's point valid in the context of systemic Racism.
V Incarceration
Blacks are being contained at a severely inappropriate and alarming rate. There is no explanation for this besides the systemic inequality in the system.
One scholarly article goes well into depth about this problem. It opens up with a strong statistic. "while making up only approximately 12% of the U.S. population, African Americans constitute 49% of its inmates." [13] George Bush admitted there was a problem with police making judgments about blacks.
"Vice President Al Gore promised that if elected, his first act as President would be to issue an executive order banning racial profiling. 21 Then Governor George W. Bush responded that he did not want to "federalize" the local police, but he did agree that something needed to be done about racial profiling." This is then supported by other studies and ideals. "In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Dr. John Lamberth of Temple University conducted a study to record the proportion of African-American drivers and ... Thirty-five percent of the cars pulled over had a black driver or passenger, while only thirteen percent of cars on the highway contained either a Black passenger or driver."
The author then provides extra context, adding on the war on drugs as an additional problem. "the federal sentencing guidelines and a growing minority of state sentencing guidelines dispense more severe punishments for use of crack cocaine, a drug used predominantly by African Americans, than for powder cocaine, a drug used predominantly by White Americans." The disproportional rate of guilty to the arrest is appalling. The author highlights: "African Americans constitute approximately 13% of the U.S. population and 13% of its drug users; however, African Americans constitute 35% of drug arrests, 55% of drug convictions, and 74% of drug imprisonments."
After this, the author notes how the amendments do not protect minorities, followed by the very supreme court cases that Pro has vouched for so much. There is an impossible way to enforce Equal Protection, displaying that the judicial branch didn't help reduce systemic racism. "Even in the United States v. Clary,153 … the district court focused on the theoretical nature of the provision instead of its actual results by attempting to prove that its purpose was subconsciously discriminatory.155… Senior Circuit Judge John R. Gibson asserted that the theory of protection against "unconscious racism" is untenable because "the Equal Protection Clause is violated 'only if that impact can be traced to a discriminatory purpose."  
Silton further follows through with the nail in the coffin, noting how the Supreme Court's interpretations precisely destroyed the Constitutional amendments themselves. "The Supreme Court made it possible for a racist officer to justify pulling over only African Americans by showing that he had the modicum of reasonableness necessary for probable cause 248 or, in cases of a Terry search, mere "articulable suspicion."
There are also inherent problems within the police themselves, causing inequality and enforcing the racial profiling stereotype that we have in the US. In yet another study, it's noted that "Through an analysis of 27 local news media articles on the topic of street checks, it is argued that the Police Services and local media discourse enact gaslighting, a form of psychological abuse that is used to manipulate an object(s) to deceive and undermine the credibility of the target. The psychological effects of gaslighting on people of color included a sense of alienation, disenfranchisement from the community, and distrust toward the police. Through a case study application, it is suggested that gaslighting is part of a systemic, historical process of racism that has been used by the police and government organizations to both illegal target people of color and deny complicity in racial profiling." The impact of the police's bias is very clear and has caused the public to also believe that serving as part of the system, the police are part of the systemic racism. 
David Williams is a famous researcher who proved my precise point here. The inherent problems of racism on multiple levels have caused countless deaths and jailing in terms of crimes. Socioeconomic inequality alone cannot explain this statistic [10]. The combination of structural, cultural, and individual racism makes up the undeniability of Systemic racism.
VI. Current evidence
Current trends highlight that the systemic racism is an unstoppable force. Business Insider displays 26 different charts, ranging from employment, income, wage gap, sentenced prisoners, etc. All which add up to the overall societal racism in the US. [26] If this wasn’t enough, a PhD author also has 100 additional statistics in a 2020 article that prove our system doesn’t treat blacks fairly. [27] Blacks lose trust in government and police due to the tension and fear. Vox notes that they are not only disproportionate economically, they also cannot even feel safe. [28] It’s as if we were oppressing them just like Hitler oppressed the Jews.
Even if Con would try to destroy my evidence based on the fact that most of them are not from 2020 (therefore not "currently a significant problem"), I still have sources that support the problems lying in equity and justice within the US, proving the Systemic Racism. One editorial published in 2020 further solidifies my present-tense problem. [16
The article notes that the vast majority of blacks experience at least one form of racism. Nearly 80% of blacks reported experiencing discrimination, resulting in isolation and alienation. They also feel less supported and committed, perhaps even having an "emotional tax in the workplace". The research further proves the economic inequality, showing that the wealth gap is significantly related to segregation. The "adverse intersectionality is expected to occur due to (1) a compounding of overrepresentation in lower-paying ... and (2) underrepresentation in highest growth geographies". The association of minorities with bad-paying jobs leads to an endless cycle where blacks are forced into poverty due to racial biases. 
The expert furthers that racial injustice even causes psychological distress. The most famous example, George Floyd, caused massive riots calling out the message "black lives matter". There are repeats of the same problems I keep listing: health care, wages and wealth, policing and criminal justice, education, etc. It doesn't matter if we consider exactly 2020 or two years ago; both cases have significant evidence to support my position. 
Similarly, other laws like redlining continue in the present. Blacks still have problem obtaining loans to buy housing. The grandchildren of those who suffered under the racist policy results in a compounded disparity. Whites were able to buy houses and grow rich, while blacks lost those opportunities. [29] The discrimination within the mortgages and lack of wealth kept the communities separated by race. 
VII. Occupational Racism
Systemic racism exists clearly throughout careers for minorities as well. In a Journal of Occupational Science, the expert echoes my previous research, first listing all the instances that further prove my argument: " Voting laws (Jones & Williams, 2018), educational systems (Kozol, 1991), housing policies (Gonda, 2015; Rothstein, 2017), judicial and penal systems (Cole, 1999), healthcare systems (Hoberman, 2012), labor markets (Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2004), deep social prejudices (Greenwald et al., 2009), and countless other everyday instances of racism (Kendi, 2019) systematically oppress people of color." If this wasn't enough, he also goes on to analyze the problems within jobs. Because having a job counters homelessness and poverty, this is still related to the economic factors listed above. 
The expert explains the "systemic" level of racism. In our society, we have a hierarchal relation of people to their skin color. The categorization had been used far in the past to justify the dehumanization and slavery of blacks. After the talks of the entire history of slavery and Jim Crow laws, he leads into our modern-day setting. He explains that "racism was still present in the expectations of this occupation. Black drivers were not permitted to pass White drivers and could face violence from police or vigilantes if they did so (Berrey, 2015)." He also lists examples of blacks gaining more rights and fighting against expectations especially with avenging the police brutality, proving that the problem existed.
He then notes that the unemployment of blacks, caused once more by racist employers [24], was the true cause of the crimes: "US residents often assume higher crime rates are directly correlated with higher numbers of residents of color, but there is no such correlation; in fact, unemployment is a much more accurate predictor of crime (Kendi, 2019)". In other words, we are giving a big reason for the crimes to occur. We are the problem. If we resolved our biases and hired people regardless of color, we would inherently prevent crimes. The system has a feedback loop that lets our racial bias feedback into inherent reasons for blacks to fulfill our expectations. A vicious, inescapable cycle, unless we change our mind.
Pre-Rebuttal: Legal Laws Against Blacks
Despite all my evidence, Con will likely remain ignorant and try to point out I haven't pointed out any laws that inherently defeat Blacks' rights and liberties. Yet my very first source demonstrates that our basis was racist and wrong, forcing us to work towards change. As the research lists, our foundation had racist laws, to begin with. "US legal and political institutions have a long history of establishing racist laws and policies that actively segregated and subordinated racial groups on many levels (Davis and Graham 1995; Feagin 2006; Lopez 2006; Bell 2008). The US Constitution and early and later US Supreme Court cases operated to create and sanction a slave society and then a Jim Crow society that denied rights, opportunities, and citizenship to people of African, Asian, and Latin American descent. As critical race legal theorists demonstrate (Bell 2005), recent conservative political policies and legal rulings continue to legally or informally uphold segregated realities for whites and racial minorities." [21]
At last, all my arguments finally come together. You can see the big picture now. The Supreme Court contradicted itself and was unwilling to listen to the people. Despite Brown V Board of Education, all of that was just a front, and education remains unconsciously biased towards blacks. Combined with the inability to access healthcare and difficulty in jobs, we find that blacks suffer a difficult life. And the result is either poverty or jail for the vast majority of circumstances.
And if Voters doubt that I have fulfilled the definition of systemic racism, I will bring one last source that combines it all together. Systemic is not just about explicit laws that say "you can practice racism." As realizes, "All definitions make clear that racism is not simply the result of private prejudices held by individuals,8 but is also produced and reproduced by laws, rules, and practices, sanctioned and even implemented by various levels of government, and embedded in the economic system as well as in cultural and societal norms." []
Call to Action
Understandably, Con and many others feel the way they do. Some are simply not knowledgeable enough and only know about one side of the debate. But learning history and the truth paves a path towards greater understanding. As yet another study highlights, educating history lets us learn about how and why systemic racism exists today. The researchers stated, " Participants listened to a control clip or historian Richard Rothstein discuss the federal government’s role in creating Black ghettos, and how racialized space still perpetuates structural inequality today (cf. Bonam, et al 2015)", [9] and as a result, they were able to further the battle against Systemic racism today, changing people's point of view for the better.
My voters, friends, the time to act against systemic racism is here and now. Already, six corporations have donated millions to billions of dollars to fight the inherent bias within people. [8] Police and judges have not self-reflected or educated themselves enough, and the evidence I have provided is as resounding as any scientific theory, such as evolution or the age of the earth. To deny the existence of systemic racism is to deny the very effort to fight for equality, and potentially return to a world where white males dominated and minorities are snuffed out like a candle. It is true that the Supreme Court, with 12 incredibly strict judges, has established a baseline. But it takes more than 12 to change the world and to demonstrate the lack of systemic racism.

Since this is a large topic with a lot of parts, for a brief overview, I’m going to refute the individual parts of the pro, show an alternative reasoning, and then kritik the resolution in two different methods.As a bit of a side note, I may have contradicting advocacies in my alternative reasoning and advocacies of my kritiks, but I will collapse to one by the end of the debate. If my opponent wants to make an argument that’s unfair, then I’ll have that meta-debate, but until then, understand that it’s important to truth testing the pro-opinion from multiple angles while also guaranteeing that we get the most education possible on the topic. These should count as goodenough reasons to legitimize the action of contradicting advocacies, at least until my opponent claims it’s unfair.

First, an analysis of the framework. I would argue that we have to reject the framework the has been put up by aff based on its final conclusion. The idea that the actions of individuals can account for systemic racism is a bad framework for multiple reasons. First, it’s an unfair burden for me to meet because this justifies that if one person commits a hate crime,that would justify systemic racism. Secondly, this is uniquely false, even if individuals make up the system, it’s still key that the system reflects certain values for those values to be systemic. This is the equivalent of saying America is a black nationalist nation because there’s one black nationalist individual somewhere. So, as an alternative framework that doesn’t destroy the educational value and fairness of the debate, we should recognize that for something to be systemic, there has to be an organizational bias and intent.This doesn’t necessarily mean direct rules or laws, but some sort of proof that it’s truly systemic and not just a patchwork of individuals.


While my opponent brings up a meta-analysis, I’ll just focus on the individual points brought up in it, as well as the following points, which in order will be voting, education, healthcare, incarceration, current statistics, and occupational racism. If the meta-analysis just describes these points, then it’s not unique offense if I answer all these points individually.

First, we look at voting. The biggest argument in regard to voting is minorities are less likely to have identification, so state laws make it harder to vote. This is blatantly false. Voter ID laws don’t actually have any statistical effect on minority voting rates and studies that have found that have debunked them as those studies had mathematical errors among other things. On top of that, these laws, due to their perceived racial bias, actually galvanizes minority votes, as can be seen with Native Americans in South Dakota. This means that it might actually be an example of systemic efforts to galvanize minority voters. Lastly, if there is any sort of barrier, it’s because of the costs and time associated with having to get an ID, which is an attack on the impoverished proletariat of all colors,not the racial minorities of America.


Next, we move to education where my opponent begins an attack on standardized testing. There are two reasons this isn’t racially based, the first is its origin. It began in China to test municipal workers, but why wasit brought to the West? As progressive reform became a part of the Industrial Revolution, it was used to mass test students in a way to show their aptitude to working in industrial factories. This is an example how the bourgeois develop tools to control the proletariat, regardless of race. Even if there are racist implications of the test, multiple universities, 109,utilize a method of taking race-based affirmative action into account. Past This, the SAT test is implementing the Landscape,which measures all of the societal issues around a test taker.

My opponent then brings up a host of issues related to discipline in schools. The problem is statistics in question do not take into account the behavior of minority students in the classroom. Black maleteenagers commit homicide tentimes more often than white male teenager. The same source found that majority minority schools have ten times the rate of gang activity,five times the rate of widespread weekly disorder in schools, and four times as many reported weekly verbal abuses of teachers, compared to schools with 5%-20%minority populations. The source predicts this comes from financially stressed single-family households, once again showing how the proletariat suffers as a whole.

Next, my opponent claims that education was never desegregated.His arguments are for things I’ve already shown as false as well as issues that divide among class, which furthers the idea that this is a war on theproletariat, not on minorities. They then bring up the fact that desegregation wasn’t fully implemented, but is there an evidence that there is still segregationist rules, laws, or regulations in the status quo? Without this,then desegregation still happened, meaning there’s no evidence of systemic racism in the status quo.

Lastly, we see my opponent talk about how black students in white majority schools do better than black students in black majority schools.As a meta-debate point beforehand, they don’t solve for any harms, so they don’t get to try and weigh this against any other impacts because the topic isn’t a call to action. The resolution is a question of truth, namely the existence of systemic racism. Don’t allow my opponent to claim they solve for harms or impacts when they simply are truth testing the resolution. Past that,however, the only point that helps support their burden of proof is the idea that blacks do better in white areas because of division of resources. This is because of the class disparity. This disparity is fully explained by class. The Biggest divisions are based on class. Even when analysts try to say that it is a racial divide rather than a class based divide, the main reasoning for this (even in my own article) is the fact that the entire neighborhood is poor because of minority based income differences. This still shows that the difference in education is an active war against the proletariat.


First, we get the issue of how AI in healthcare gives lower risks assertions to black populations, but my opponent’s analysis fails to look at why. The race blind AI gave black people lower risk levels because the average amount of money they spend on healthcare is less. Another example of the violence to the proletariat.

Next, we can bundle a couple of my opponent’s argument about access to healthcare and the impacts that has had on mortality rates and COVID-19 mortality rates. Cross apply the point that he isn’t solving impacts,but simply trying to prove the resolution true. Also, even if we look at the issues of healthcare access, while Native American and Hispanic groups are less likely to have access, the number one reason is because they are more likely to be impoverished. This is once again proof of the violence to the proletariat, especially when I cross apply my opponent’s point that the biggest reason is lack of regulation on private healthcare.

The next argument is that individual doctors can give worse treatment. This is once again the issue with why we can’t force me to solve for individual action. Individual doctors are being racist, and while this is awful, this isn’t evidence of systemic racism.

Next, my opponent uses an appeal to authority by saying that the unwarranted opinion of the unnamed MIT president feels there is systemic racism. I’ve shown at every individual issue there isn’t, so don’t buy this, especially since it’s just their opinion.


While racism in the US justice system is almost taken for granted by the general electorate, this is over simplified. First, the question is about arrest rates, but these match victim reports. Even if police are systemically racist,there’s no reason hundreds of thousands of victims would share the same racial bias. Past this, the same source shows that the 75 largest urban counties have lower chances for prosecution on felonies as well as less likely to be found guilty. The only statistic that points to systemic racism is that they were more likely to receive prison sentences, but this can be explained by the nature of the crimes and previous records. Next, my opponent cites crack laws compared to cocaine laws, but deems to not mention meth prison sentences. 54% white, 2% black yet still carries the same punishment according to the same source. The real difference is that crack and meth are seen as low-class drugs used by urban blacks and rural whites respectively, while cocaine is an upper-class drug, once again showing the class disparity at the true heart of the issue. On top of this, the original calls to action about crack were from black activists trying to stop the violent drug trade in inner cities.

The arguments my opponent makes about the court's failure to stop racism doesn’t matter because the statistics that would supposedly result from these issues are debunked. Same with policing.

Current Statistics/Occupational Racism

The first argument outlined in the debate is that a large majority of blacks have reported experiencing discrimination. I would argue that this is also reciprocated in the fact that 55% of white people feel that white discrimination exists. While This is different than the percentage that have experienced racism, this idea that both sides believe they are being discriminated against is going to be very important later on. I would also argue that this comes from the over politicization of the issue. If we develop entire branches of critical literature and study to an idea, that idea is going to be artificially inflated in the eyes of all involved. 

My opponent also brings up issues of social mobility through both jobs and loans and says that discrimination stops them from getting resources while they are impoverished. My opponent is claiming that poor individuals are having trouble getting higher paid jobs and loans because of their skin color, but it’s because of their poverty. Social mobility is a joke, regardless of race. My opponent doesn’t do any comparison of black or white rates compared from equal class backgrounds because the proletariat will always be held back. Cross apply this idea as an answer we see occupational racism.

Alternative Reasoning

If you’ve been reading what I’ve had to say for the entire debate, you’ll see that I use a lot of Marxist buzzwords like proletariat and bourgeois, and I promise I did this for more reasons than the fact that they’re fun to say. The arguments about systemic racism all stem from a singular alternate cause, and this is poverty. The poverty that faces minorities was caused by historical systemic racism, but there is no current systemic racism.All of the issues we see today are all causes of poverty, meaning that the real issue at hand is how the cycle of poverty can’t be broken, regardless of race.While this is a somewhat nuanced opinion to take, I feel that this is the heart of the truth. Historical racism caused minorities to be at a disadvantaged economically, and now that these racist barriers have been removed, they can’t get ahead because of the systemic barriers in the face of poverty. This means your vote is no longer “pro means systemic racism is a reality and con means it isn’t”, but now “pro means systemic racism is the best reasoning for these impacts while con means poverty is the best reasoning for these impacts”. With This in mind, cross apply every individual argument mad on my opponent’s cases reasons to prefer poverty being the best reasoning for these impacts.

Kritik: Pro must have an advocacy.

For a generic overview, I hope to kritik how my opponent has authored the topic, as well as how they have responded to the topic. To do this, I’m going to utilize an analysis to describe the issue as a whole, a framework to discuss why this issue is most important, links as proof they engage in what I’m claiming they do, impacts to show that unsolved they irreversible harm the debate space, and lastly an alternative way to engage with topic authoring and how to respond to this topic.


To give a brief overview to help make the argument come together easier, I’m going to show that topics that blatantly ask pro to confirm the existence of truisms is harmful to the debate space as a whole.Without positing a solution, the debate is way too far skewed to the pro, as well as it normalizes the idea that these problems are unsolvable. This means acon vote is necessary to ensure that future debaters will engage with these topics in a more fair and educational way.


This Kritik needs to be evaluated before the rest of the round for two reasons.

1.    This is kritik of how the resolution was written, meaning that if the topic was written in a way that it skews con out of a fair debate, then the rest of the debate is a moot point.

2.    Impacts to the debate space need to be prioritized because as judges and debaters, we can actually fix these issues while everything else isn’t truly in our power to change.


There are multiple actions that the topic author/pro has taken to specifically skew the debate.

1.    As topic author, my opponent calls for a truth test of systemic racism as a problem. This is a general truism, as can be seen by the mountains of data my opponent has been able to bring up. By forcing the debate to be a simple truth test of these ideas, it stops conversations of solutions.

2.    As pro, my opponent does not try to solve systemic racism, but simply prove it’s existence. I’ve critiqued the role that the authoring of the resolution had, but also showing pro did not attempt to posit a solution either is key.

3.    My opponent has a “call to action” section, but this is simply a conclusion to their first doc, and not an actual call to action. The closest to action they say is that solutions to systemic racism require us to first believe in it, but this is not equivalent to defending and advocacy for change.


There are two impacts, one to the debate space and one to the epistemology around racism.

1.    Within the debate space, we have to acknowledge that we have a rank and score and win percentage that every debater wants to look good, however, when we let this drive to have good numbers influence the topics we use, we then see a loss of educational quality in our debates. Thistopic is a prime example of that. The author of the topic/pro has made the burden of the pro to prove a statistical truth true. This harms the educational and clash-based value to debate that brings us all here. To ensure that debateart doesn’t collapse like other websites (, for example) we have to,as a community, punish intentionally uncompetitive topics. Every value that debates brings us, joy, topic education, portable communication and research skills,and anything else that we get out of this is doomed to collapse by debates like this one. If the resolution seems so one-sided as to heavily favor pro, then utilize the kritik as a way to rectify that.

2.    When we utilize topics that seek to truth test violent truisms, it does nothing but lead to possible harm in racial minority groups and continue the institutional immobilism that allows these conditions to continue. We very specifically need to move away from personal conversations and immobility academics and move forward to calling for very specific solutions. Doing anything else does nothing but reciprocate this violence and allow for it to be spread without institutional challenge.


Vote negative to endorse solution-based resolution writing.
The alternative is bolded so I have a very clear advocacy. Judges should vote negative to endorse a system of writing where resolutions are written either advocating a clear solution to a problem or are an open-ended way for pro to bring in solutions. This is key to alleviating the harms brought up in the kritik, as well as it solves for the affirmative. A conversation with a directly implemented solution would also account for the conversation to confirm systemic racism as true, but also go the next step to either solve itor at least decrease the harms in one or multiple areas. It’s the benefit of the affirmative and avoids the harms of the kritik.

Kritik: Marxist Critique

It’ll utilize the same order as before, however, I won’t utilize a framework because there isn’t a reason to prioritize the kritik.


The point of this kritik is going to show how the pro in both their authorship and representation of the resolution further the goals of capitalism. This is then going to be followed why this is uniquely bad, both in regard to capitalism and structural racism. Finally, we’re going to end with an alternative that shifts away from this.


1.    Talks of structural racism, even if they are true, inherently serve the bourgeois’ goal of dividing the proletariat and preventing class consciousness. We specifically see that this has happened in the Occupy Wall Street and Occupy Chicago movements. Identity politics is the bane of the economic leftism because it divides the working class. Cross Apply my evidence that a majority of whites and a majority of blacks both feel there’s discrimination against their respectful racial groups, and this proves that the working class can’t unite.

2.    My opponent pointed out that a possible cause for systemic racism is private ownership in healthcare. If you follow this train of thought through the entire debate, we can see how capitalism could be attributed as a leading cause of systemic racism (private prisons, failure to give loans, healthcare, university choice to either endorse or oppose affirmative action, etc.). This means that a prior analysis to capitalism is required to solve systemic racism.

3.    Lastly, my opponent’s authorship of the resolution is specifically designed to create a form of academic immobilism. It allows him to look like he’s taking action against both private ownership and systemic racism by calling them out, but he doesn’t actually do anything. This sort of immobiliser is meant to appease leftists while not actually leading to change.


1.    Capitalism is the root cause of structural violence. Historically, slaves were brought over because it was cheaper than paid labor. This cultural hierarchy was formed by this process, and all of the reasoning shows. Increasing minority vote allows for challenge of the lucrative status quo, healthcare is from privatization without oversight, and incarceration can be attributed to $17.4million on lobbying from the largest private prison corporation. This Means that any analysis of identity without first analyzing capitalism is doomed to fail in meaningful change.
a.    As a bit of a preempt to the argument that capitalism isn’t the root cause, even if this is true, it still is impossible to solve the problem under capitalism. Even if systemic racism came from something other than capitalism, capitalism has now hijacked these cultural values to specifically profit off of them. This still makes it impossible to solve or even diagnose systemic racism in a world of capitalism.

2.    Capitalism is doomed to collapse. The crises of capitalism is the inherent pooling of wealth to the top. Upper income families have gone from holding 60% of the wealth in 1983 to 79% of the wealth in 2016. This Has come at the cost of a 15% decrease to middle income and 3% decrease tolower class. This then proceeds to push down demand which is artificially inflated with credit. The2008 great recession is a great example of this because, despite there being multiple factors, the giving out of subprime loans used to artificially boost banks and hedge funds caused the recession. The only reason that didn’t lead to a collapse of capitalism is state intervention. State Interventions at multiple points in American history are a form of empirical evidence that, even if not for the reasons I listed, capitalism is doomed to collapse. Eventually the government won’t be able to bail out the entire economy, so what happens then? We either transition to communism or fascism. You Have to prioritize communism over fascism because fascism is worse on face. It Constantly wages war against internal groups (people of color, queer people,and socialists) and external groups (conquest and other declarations of war).


Vote con to endorse Marxism.

Endorsing Marxism is crucial to being able to ever accurately solve or diagnose systemic racism. On top of this, with the guaranteed collapse of capitalism eventually, this makes it important to create a leftist shift to avoid a collapse into fascism. By endorsing Marxism, you can’t vote for the pro because the links show exactly how the pro opposes the tenets of Marxism.

Round 2

Obviously, the definition does not mean a single or handful of individuals accomplished systemic racism. The racism must be widespread, fundamental, and influential, to be considered "Systemic". Now onto Con's rebuttals.

II. Meta Analysis

Even though this idea’s consequences can be ambiguous, that does not mean we should not consider intention. As philosopher Immanuel Kant argues, we cannot treat humans as means to an end even through ideals. Despite the fact that voters are able to fight back, the devaluation of human dignity is an unacceptable ideal that highlights the worst of systemic racism idea. With the difficulty to obtain the voter ID’s, it is clear that anti-voting suppression is severe on US minorities. As The Conversation [Con's own source] warns, these strategies may lead to allowance of gerrymandering, shuttering locations, etc. We must not allow this slippery slope to continue and have politicians abuse their power on citizens.
Dropped arguments:
  • educational attainment, income, wealth, credit, employment, and incarceration 
  • Negative interactions for state elected officials, employment, and incarceration indicated that the effect of these measures of structural racism on myocardial infarction 
III. Education

Con uses origin and plausible solution to try to shoot down my argument. Yet Con has shown zero results. There is no stories nor evidence that Landscape has done anything to alleviate the racism problems presented. 

Recall: misuse of standardized tests such as the GRE excludes students who could have otherwise succeeded

Next, Con claims that black teenagers kill people 10x as much as whites, yet the link in the article is broken. By contrast, FBI offers no significant difference in race of offender, whether black or white.  Note only so, it's black men who are most often the victim, with 20x times killed than white counterparts. [34] It seems to me that Con is overgeneralizing and turning a victim into a villain. Thus, Con's assumption is defeated. [33]

Notice how Con concedes: the entire neighborhood is poor because of minority based income differences.

And how does this minority based difference come from? That's right-- Redlining (see VI) -- the policy set up decades ago and still implicitly in effect currently! Unless Con shoots this down, he only stabs himself in the foot. He's displaying that the poor and difficult impacts are *further* set up by racist laws that we fail to overcome!

Dropped arguments
  • Elevated levels of Cultural Mistrust, Cultural Race-Related Stress, and Individual Race Related Stress lead to increased use of Emotion-Based Coping behaviors
  • black boys can be seen as responsible for their actions at an age when white boys still benefit from the assumption that children are essentially innocent
  • a very high proportion of minorities are also dropping out of school
  •  White elites—including school board members, leaders of civic and business organizations, state and local legislators, and judges in state and federal courts—have made decisions that have reversed progress toward substantial school desegregation
  • the state not only tolerates the funding gulf between Milwaukee and its suburban counterparts, but it has also instituted policies that allow the gap to widen
IV. Health Care

Con tries to negate the AI bias by pointing out the fact that they were poor, but the programmers were negligent enough to not think of this possibility. While this is generally a divide between poor and rich, the minorities already have financial troubles extenuated by poor employment biases, poor education, etc. Even Con's source is forced to admit, "there is little guidance on the use of proprietary algorithms...This level of transparency, sharing, and accountability is currently not common practice." Clearly, we have failed to fix problems that majorly detriment minorities.

Con claims to bundle all my arguments into a single socioeconomic case, yet he fails to justify this. He has not even read my arguments. Shall I make them clearer? Remember that source 11 already states it accounts for these other factors that may affect the health care access, but it cannot be the sole explanation.

  • unequal access to quality health care disproportionately burdens communities of color and exacerbates racial disparities
  • federal government’s failure to adequately collect race and ethnicity data on COVID-19 testing, hospitalization, and deaths
  •  discrimination in healthcare settings adversely affects the management of chronic conditions like diabetes
  • blacks even received better treatment under those who were more racially accepting
Con tries to negate my racism back down to the individual level only, yet who is the MIT president? He wouldn't just get on stage just for a few delinquent children, surely. He would only address the problem if it spread across multiple institutions, was relevant to a significant proportion of the school, and truly fit the meaning of "systemic racism". His credibility is nothing to be scoffed at, and so Con's refutation fails here.

V. Incarceration

While opponents will point out that blacks may be rightfully arrested due to matching arrest rates, the situation is -- no pun intended -- not merely black and white. Within the point of black-and-white prison rates, the true overrepresentation is due to Hispanics inherently having a disadvantage. The key take away to a lengthy study display that due to their inability to understand law, lack of resources, and poorness, they are overrepresented in prison [35]. In the expert's words, officials believe they are less likely to rehabilitate -- despite lack of backing for this, lacking resources against sanctions, and especially limited English language skills. And so they conclude, "the white–Hispanic gaps in arrest and incarceration are large, with whites constituting a small and Hispanics a large proportion for all offenses." Remember that my argument is primarily that we are partially at fault with assuming minorities to be criminals or evil, merely due to the societal disparities. 

Dropped arguments:
  •  something needed to be done about racial profiling
  • "unconscious racism" is untenable because "the Equal Protection Clause is violated 'only if that impact can be traced to a discriminatory purpose
  • lower standard merely based on race -- showing that he had the modicum of reasonableness necessary for probable cause or, in cases of a Terry search, mere "articulable suspicion."
VI Current Statistics/Occupational Racism

Con once again drops this to the problem between rich and poor, completely ignoring the hiring biases and the inability to become employed. 

Dropped arguments:

  • Voting laws (Jones & Williams, 2018), educational systems (Kozol, 1991), housing policies (Gonda, 2015; Rothstein, 2017), judicial and penal systems (Cole, 1999), healthcare systems (Hoberman, 2012), labor markets (Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2004), deep social prejudices (Greenwald et al., 2009), and countless other everyday instances of racism (Kendi, 2019)
  • Black drivers were not permitted to pass White drivers and could face violence from police or vigilantes
  • Business Insider displays 26 different charts, ranging from employment, income, wage gap, sentenced prisoners, etc
  • a PhD author also has 100 additional statistics in a 2020 article that prove our system doesn’t treat blacks fairly.
Shall I list a few of these at random to hammer in my point and force Con to notice this idea?

11. Nonwhite districts received $23 billion less in funding than their predominantly white counterparts in 2016
25. African American unemployment rates are typically double that of Caucasian Americans
52. food insecurity rates for both non-Hispanic black and Hispanic households were at least twice that of non-Hispanic white households
61. For American Indian and Alaska Native youth, the rate of suicide is 2.5 times higher than the rest of the country.
67. People of color continue to endure rampant discrimination in the housing market
78. Blacks are 1.7 times more likely than the rest of the population to occupy homes with severe physical problems 
79. One in 4 Native Americans currently live in poverty, compared to 1 in 10 whites
91. Black households have nearly 57% of their net worth tied in the value of their homes, while Hispanic homeowners carry about 67% of their wealth in their homes

  • adverse intersectionality [within minorities] is expected to occur due to (1) a compounding of overrepresentation in lower-paying ... and (2) underrepresentation in highest growth geographies
  • other laws like redlining continue in the present. Blacks still have problem obtaining loans to buy housing. We are the ones who KEEP the minority in the poor and prevent them from getting out. It is mostly not their fault.
Alternative Reasoning

Con raises poverty as a more significant cause of being shown bias by others, but has not displayed that white men have this incredibly unfair level of treatment for them. Not only so, keep in mind the rich get richer and the poor stay poor, if the government does nothing. Remember that one of my crucial arguments is that government has obligation to support the minority, because current laws make it near impossible for them to get out of the dumpster fire. Yet we have done nothing to improve opportunities. Hence, we further the assumptions and fulfill the prophecy that make the minorities doomed to be stuck poor. 

Other dropped arguments

  •  recent conservative political policies and legal rulings continue to legally or informally uphold segregated realities for whites and racial minorities
  • racism is not simply the result of private prejudices held by individuals,8 but is also produced and reproduced by laws, rules, and practices, sanctioned and even implemented by various levels of government, and embedded in the economic system as well as in cultural and societal norms


Con opens up with an incredibly lengthy kritik, which I will first put immense doubt in reasoning by pointing out I lost the very same debate, thus proving it is not a truism -- despite using nearly identical arguments. Even if voters don't buy this, nothing states that this is a policy debate, and no rules talk about the future. There is nothing suggesting whether we can fix systemic racism as a problem in the US. I am merely here to prove its existence. The theory of evolution is beyond reasonable doubt (surely with as many sources as I have here), yet fruitful debates can be held on its veracity without using a policy to resolve evolution's problems or implications. He argues that there is lost value within debating a truism, yet many topics such as Flat Earth or Young Earth Age have one side's side strongly outweighing the other, still have critical thinking available. For example, against Fauxlaw, he argued that systemic and individual racism was different, and Whiteflame was convinced such. As you can see, different misinformation can allow for different values formed from debating something that seems impossible to win. 

Con argues my side is worse since we are immobilized, unable to do anything. However, there are countless actions, but DebateArt's very limited 30,000 character prevented this from succeeding. Some examples of good propositions is testing the police force and informing about being careful about racial biases. The same may apply in educational cases. While Government can encourage equality movements, institutions and organizations have way say as well. As the Conversation suggests, "At organisational and community levels, we should oppose contemporary popular ideologies of scientific racism. For example, admission offices at schools, public services and corporations should not discriminate against people based on their race or colour." If we continue overturning racist laws and acknowledging the problem, we can simultaneously bring the minority out of poverty and improve living quality for the lower class.

Con's plan is not uniquely beneficial, and ignores the core problems at heart. Currently, we are still encouraging the rich or white to take advantage of the minority, which happens to be majorly composed of blacks, Hispanics, so on and so forth. Regardless, the proportion is too large to ignore, and the blacks would be taken advantage of far more often then other races. As such, the racism reveals itself across multiple sectors, as shown in my evidence. I do not see how capitalism is the rise of racism. Even Stalin was forced to marginalize a significant number of people, branding "enemies of the people" as specific groups, and as such I don't think fixing capitalism would fix racism. [36] In fact, White People might argue that only they deserve the power holding, and continue their corruption further than before, declaring minorities as enemies of the state. They basically already did that in the Civil War. The economy had almost no effect on the slavery, and in fact, you could argue that communism would encourage them to have even more slaves, since they would be even lazier to work. Every one shares the resources, after all.

I call strawman fallacy on Con's argument that I am supporting capitalism. I have no evidence of the sort. All I am doing is showing racial disparity and biases among people across the US. I ask voters to dismiss this argument because it is purely speculation.

VIII. The Wealth Gap of Minorities
Opponents bring up an interesting point: Is racism really the cause of the divide of wealth? At first, there are some doubts. It's possible that they are naturally poor, and poor people are treated worse off than rich people. But the mere cause of cultural divide does not explain fully the socioeconomic inequality. A paper in depth explains that institutional racism has been a long cause of this wealth gap. The accumulated wealth from past family travels from generation to generation, propelling an unstoppable quest to fortune for privileged people. The unique power of wealth ensures that "this intergenerational transmission create[s] an unequivocal link between the present and our racialized past of enslavement, extermination, and expropriation". [37] In other words, the cycle of money loops back to help white male who are treated well and will be treated well, while the blacks who were treated poorly in the past are doomed to repeat their mistakes. The obstacles in the way inherently prevent them from reaching the goal.

If Con's Communist approach works and can be implemented, well, I'm all for it -- maybe some kind of Universal Basic Income of sorts to boost the poor. Regardless, he hasn't refuted the idea that our oppressive treatment of minorities is what extends these social inequalities. Hence, communism, which inherently is anti-racist ("everyone deserves the same resources"), implicitly agrees with the premise and destroys Con's own case. By owning up to Marxism, Con agrees that Systemic Racism is a significant problem in the US. He believes that he would have to restructure the entire economy to get rid of this socioeconomic equality, and finally break the link between past oppression and current poor treatment. Therefore, his view point is contradictory and he has ruined his case.

Even if voters don't buy this, I have another source that speaks of a vast social transformation as the main solution. Don't focus too much on the economic aspect. Notice how Con has nearly no support nor sources that the economical issue is the sole cause, nor the main cause. On a report of the wealth gap, the source opens up with "There are no actions that black Americans can takeunilaterally that will have much of an effect on reducing the racial wealth gap" [38]. Already, something is suspicious. If the wealth was caused by problems of capitalism, surely all you'd have to do would be work harder, or get lucky with education, or have connections. But no. This problem has gotten out of the hand of citizens. This is the true extent of systemic level of racism.

Even if the solution is a little vague, Marxism is not necessarily the only solution. As the authors further, "This could take the formof a direct race-specific initiative like a dramatic reparations program tied tocompensation for the legacies of slavery and Jim Crow, and/or an initiative thataddresses the perniciousness of wealth inequality for the entire American population,which could disproportionately benefit black Americans due to their exceptionally lowlevels of wealth".  Again, an economic-only solution is still a bit more detrimental as you ignore the racial views and ideas that are held by people. We must prefer an overarching solution involving justice, and accepting that our viewpoint is greatly tied to the problem. Sure, boosting their wages and their income/benefits would greatly help as well, but let's continue doing more. The segregation and problems within education and incarceration need more than merely Mr. Marx to resolve.

Now back to con.

Two days wasn't enough time, so I'll have to formally concede. Best of luck to future rounds.
Round 3
Apologies. Perhaps one week would've been better considering the sheer amount of research on this topic.
If you'd like, we could restart it with one week as the time speech and just copy and paste the speeches we've already done and start from there, but that's up to you. Either way, good debate.