Instigator / Pro
6
1890
rating
98
debates
93.37%
won
Topic
#3576
THBT the majority of current policing racial disparities in the United States are a result of factors or variables outside of racism.
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
0
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
0
1
After 1 vote and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...
Novice_II
Tags
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- One day
- Max argument characters
- 15,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
4
1487
rating
31
debates
35.48%
won
Description
Resolution: THBT the majority of current policing racial disparities in the United States are a result of factors or variables outside of racism.
A racial disparity is a disparity between two racial groups. The majority will be established as over 50% for this debate. Policing racial disparities are racial disparities that pertain only to the conduct of the police force in interaction with society and the community at large only.
The police are the civil force of a national or local government, responsible for the prevention and detection of crime and the maintenance of public order. No other system will be debated in this engagement. Attempting to do so will result in a conduct violation. As a default, sources may not be posed in the comments and doing so will result in an automatic loss.
Factors or variables outside of racism are factors that are not racism. Racism will be defined as prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.
Conclusively, these definitions set the framework of our debate.
Additional Rules:
a. The burden of proof is shared. Thus in this debate, Con must argue that the majority of current policing racial disparities in the United States are a result of racism.
Round 1
Pro
#1
THBT the majority of current policing racial disparities in the United States are a result of factors or variables outside of racism.
x. Framework/burdens
- Set by the description of the debate.
y.1 Age: The average black American is significantly younger than the average white one (see. population pyramid). This is an important factor to consider in our analysis of any police disparity for a number of reasons.
- Offending rates are highest in the late teens and early twenties and decline thereafter. Accordingly, "people in the 15–24 age range account for about 40 percent of all arrests even though they comprise only about 14 percent of the population" [2], younger people commit much more crimes than older ones.
- Younger people are more likely to speed and be involved in motor accidents. As speeding is the main factor behind traffic stops, this will subsequently explain many of these disparities.
a. Police killings
- On the face of it, the most fundamental and mainstream racial disparities within the conduct of the police is the number of people killed by them being disproportionately black Americans. This may appear veracious on the face of it, however, as per the subject of our debate, we must consider factors and variables outside of racism. Assuming a racial bias based on this information alone is simply a disparity fallacy or assuming that a disparity is the result of bias/discrimination.
- Put simply, evidence shows that black people are not disproportionately killed by the police when the rate of police interaction through violent crime is controlled for. It is also found that when controlling for the rate of violent crime being committed, these "anti-black racial disparities" in police conduct disappear. "However, using population as a benchmark makes the strong assumption that White and Black civilians have equal exposure to situations that result in FOIS. If there are racial differences in exposure to these situations, calculations of racial disparity based on population benchmarks will be misleading (20, 21). Researchers have attempted to avoid this issue by using race-specific violent crime as a benchmark, as the majority of FOIS involve armed civilians (22). When violent crime is used as a benchmark, anti-Black disparities in FOIS disappear or even reverse (20, 23–25)" [1].
- Conclusively, our verdict is that the racial disparity in police killings is not a result of racism in the conduct of the police.
- a.1 Analysis: We can also in turn apply the violent crime benchmark to most other police racial disparities.
- a.2 "Bias," as incoherency: Within the police's conduct, one would expect that if the police are indeed racist white people would surely show bias against black people, right? Even if the police as a whole don't. This isn't the case either. In fact, "white officers are not more likely to shoot minority civilians than non-white officers." Additionally, simulational evidence from a Washington University study shows that officers are more hesitant to shoot black suspects.
b. Arrest
- Following from a.1, black people are arrested more on average because they commit more violent crimes on average. This can be observed with FBI crime data statistics selecting face as the factor of offender analysis.
c. Traffic stops
- Like other police racism disparities, the racial disparity in traffic stops is explained with a number of factors that make it apparent as to why said disparity exists.
- First, recall y.1. Black people are younger on average and we have already shown younger people are much more likely to speed on the road, which would naturally lead to more speeding tickets and police interactions. "Young drivers were more likely to be pulled over by police than older drivers."
- For one, a study commissioned by the New Jersey state attorney himself found that "black drivers speed twice as much as white drivers, and speed at reckless levels even more" [5].
- Black drivers are also significantly more likely to engage in texting and driving [6]
Conclusion
- In round one, I analyzed the 3 most prominent aspects of the police's interaction with the community at large. As I have shown, the disparities within these interactions are a result of other factors and not racism or discrimination by the police. Evidently, I have illustrated our resolution to be a fact of reality.
Sources
- https://www.pnas.org/
- https://courses.lumenlearning.com/
- https://www.washingtonpost.com/ [If you are stopped by a paywall, opening the source in an incognito window will allow you to read it]
- https://crime-data-explorer.fr.cloud.gov/
- https://www.city-journal.org/
- https://sci-hub.se/
- https://www.brookings.edu/
- http://www.justicestudies.com/
Con
#2
Black immigrants vs. non immigrant black americans
Perhaps you are unaware, but Nigerians are one of the most successful demographics in the United States. While the average household income in the United States is $61,937, the median income for households of Nigerian ancestry is $68,658.In fact, 10% of Nigerian-headed households earn over $140,000 annually, and 25% earn over $90,000 annually.Nigerian immigrants rank in the top ten for both the percentage of persons 16 and older who are employed and the percentage with college degrees.Nigerians are also one of the most educated demographics in the country. Of people over the age of 25, 37% of Nigerians hold a bachelor's degree and 29% hold an advanced degree, compared to 20% and 11% of the total U.S. population, respectively.
Why is it that black Americans born and raised here have comparatively worse outcomes compared to black immigrants? Despite the average income of the average Nigerian only being slightly higher than the average white Americans, black-born Americans lag far behind in wealth. Black Americans earn 30% less than their white counterparts. This equates to a $10,000 annual difference on average. The reason black immigrants earn more than non-black immigrants is two-fold.
1. Nigerian immigrants tend to come from richer families (hence how they have enough money to move to America)
2. They were not born in the US as the current descendants of the black Americans did who were brought over to America hundreds of years ago and forced into slavery and cruel, unfair discriminatory laws which lasted till the 1960's.
Jim crow laws, redlining and environmental injustice
Many of today’s Black-white racial residential patterns reflect those that emerged decades ago through discriminatory practices. Racial segregation was no accident. It was built through acts of racial violence; the use of zoning laws, racial restrictive covenants, and redlining; and white flight and urban renewal.
Jim Crow laws were a collection of state and local statutes that legalized racial segregation. Jim Crow laws soon spread around the country with even more force than previously. Public parks were forbidden for African Americans to enter, and theaters and restaurants were segregated.
Segregated waiting rooms in bus and train stations were required, as well as water fountains, restrooms, building entrances, elevators, cemeteries, even amusement-park cashier windows.
Laws forbade African Americans from living in white neighborhoods. Segregation was enforced for public pools, phone booths, hospitals, asylums, jails and residential homes for the elderly and handicapped. The average White family to this day, still have 9x the wealth of the average black family potentially this has something to do with crime rates.
Although in theory, the "equal" segregation doctrine was extended to public facilities and transportation too, facilities for African Americans were consistently inferior and underfunded compared to facilities for white Americans; sometimes, there were no facilities for the black community at all.
Jim crow laws continued up to the 1960's leads to black people in the 1960's to have comparatively low wealth compared to white Americans, they couldn't shop in white owned businesses, etc. This lead to an income disparity which can be said to of still not been gapped in the modern day. In fact, its barely changed. The effects of Jim crow laws and redlining still persist in the modern day against black American communities, simply as a long term consequence of their past existence.
White schools still get more funding
Consider the little known fact that schools are funded based on property taxes (significantly at least to make a difference). Black homes are comparatively cheaper than white owned homes, (due to Jim crow laws, red lining and racial biases when evaluating property value). This leads to Predominately black schools being less properly funded than white majority schools, leading to worse educational attainment on average, leading to getting lower paying jobs, leading to more risky behaviours such as having more children, due to a worse education and less money to afford on contraceptives (leading to the increased black birthrate). Clearly there is a cycle here. The economics creates the culture, the culture reinforces the economic reality.
redlining laws
In the United States, redlining is a discriminatory practice in which services (financial and otherwise) are withheld from potential customers who reside in neighborhoods classified as 'hazardous' to investment; these neighborhoods have significant numbers of racial and ethnic minorities, and low-income residents.[2] While the most well-known examples involve denial of credit and insurance, denial of healthcare and the development of food deserts in minority neighborhoods have also been attributed to redlining in many instances.[3][4] In the case of retail businesses like supermarkets, the purposeful construction of stores impractically far away from targeted residents results in a redlining effect In the 1960s, sociologist John McKnight originally coined the term to describe the discriminatory banking practice of classifying certain neighborhoods as "hazardous," or not worthy of investment due to the racial makeup of their residents.[8] During the heyday of redlining, the areas most frequently discriminated against were Black inner city neighborhoods.
Regardless if it was true or not that black majority neighbourhoods were "hazardous" to invest into (by vast majority white businesses) this lead to these neighbourhoods not attaining any upwards development, these places were considered hazardous in large part to begin with because these people were less funded, they were poorer (Jim crow laws). This exacerbated the problems within black communities, the fact "black" and "white" communities exist to begin with shows the racial strife and segregation in Americas history.
Lead exposure in black neighbourhoods due to racist laws
To understand why Black communities are disproportionately affected by negative health outcomes, including lead poisoning, it’s important to first understand how institutionalized racism has led to serious health issues within the most vulnerable communities.After the onset of the Great Depression in 1929, the United States found itself in the midst of a housing crisis. With many companies being unable to build new homes or finish old ones, and homeowners everywhere facing defaulting on their mortgages, the housing market screeched to a halt.In an effort to ease the housing crisis, the government created the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) in 1934 to oversee policies related to financing, standards, and employment within the housing industry. As part of their role in the management of mortgages, the FHA created the “Underwriting Handbook,” which outlined the regulations and procedures that all lending institutions were subject to follow.In the “Underwriting Handbook,” neighborhoods were separated into categories according to:
- occupation
- income
- race and ethnicity
According to the handbook:
- A (green) neighborhoods were racially homogenous (people who shared the same characteristics based on the outlined categories), in high demand, and constantly improving.
- B (blue) neighborhoods were still desirable to live in but not expected to improve.
- C (yellow) neighborhoods were considered declining in value.
- D (red) neighborhoods were considered the most undesirable neighborhoods, many of which were predominantly Black communities.
With the creation of this rating system for neighborhoods came the term “redlining,” in which mortgage appraisers sectioned off the “least desirable” neighborhoods on the map with a red line. In turn, lenders would not approve mortgages in these “red” areas — thus creating a disparity that led to the rapid decline of inner city neighborhoods.As a result of this form of institutionalized racism, thousands of Black communities around the United States became disproportionately affected by the negative impact of environmental racism.Environmental racismTrusted Source is the result of institutional policies that lead to a disproportionate number of minority communities being exposed to environmental hazards.According to the literatureTrusted Source, factors such as developmental and municipal policies, facility site planning, and even land-use patterns can lead to this form of racism. Environmental racism is especially pervasive in Black communities because of historical redlining and home segregation.As a result of institutionalized and environmental racism, communities in “undesirable” neighborhoods are often exposed to environmental pollutants from places such as:
- highways
- landfills
- waste sites
- even chemical plants
In addition, many of the houses within these neighborhoods end up in decline, which often leads to exposure to other environmental toxins within the home.An increased prevalence of lead poisoning in Black communities, especially in Black children, is an unequivocal example of environmental racism.In 2013, the CDC released a reportTrusted Source of blood lead levels in children ages 1 to 5 years old, noting that children with a blood lead level of 5 micrograms per deciliter (µg/dL) or higher were at risk of serious adverse health effects.According to the report, Mexican American children were found to have the lowest average blood lead levels, at 1.9 µg/dL, followed by non-Hispanic white children at 2.4 µg/dL. However, the highest average blood lead levels were non-Hispanic Black children at 5.6 µg/dL, over two times the average blood levels found in white children.
Lead exposure is one of the main compounding variables of crime, and is indeed directly correlated with with crime increases, especially violent crimes among black American's in the 1990-1980's.
Subconscious police biases'
In-group bias has been observed when it comes to traffic citations following accidents, as black and white police in one state were found to be more lenient to suspects of their own race, resulting in a 3% discrepancy. A 2013 report by the American Civil Liberties union found that blacks were "3.73 times more likely than whites to be arrested for marijuana possession," even though "blacks and whites use drugs, including marijuana, at similar rates." A 2020 study in the journal Nature found that black drivers were stopped more often than white drivers, and that the threshold by which police decided to search black and Hispanic drivers was lower than that for whites (judging by the rate at which contraband was found in searches).
A 2018 study in the Journal of empirical legal studies found that law enforcement officers in Texas who could charge shoplifters with two types of crimes (one more serious, one less so) due to a vaguely worded statute were more likely to charge blacks and Hispanics with the more serious crime.
A 2018 study in the journal proceedings of national academy of sciences found that tall young black men are especially likely to receive unjustified attention by law enforcement he authors furthermore found a "causal link between perceptions of height and perceptions of threat for Black men, particularly for perceivers who endorse stereotypes that Black people are more threatening than White people.
Inability to post bail
Since i believe its reasonable to posit I've proven that the economic divide between black and white people stems from past systemic racism. We can now lead onto how this racism has lead to black people being less capable of posting bail compared to white people.
according to a 2017 study in the Journal of law and economics, "Higher pretrial detention rates among minority defendants explain 40 percent of the black-white gap in rates of being sentenced to prison and 28 percent of the Hispanic-white gap." The majority of individuals held in pretrial detention are being held because they cannot afford to post bail. The individuals in pretrial detention face higher incentives to plead guilty (even if they are innocent) for a number of reasons, which leads to a higher sentencing rates for these individuals.
Socioeconomic studies
Evidence supporting the role of structural factors in high black crime rates comes from multiple studies. For example, Robert J Sampson has reported that most of the reason violent crime rates are so high among blacks originates mainly from unemployment, economic deprivation, and family disorganization. Specifically, he found that "the scarcity of employed black men increases the prevalence of families headed by females in black communities" and that the increased prevalence of such families in turn results in family disruption that significantly increases black murder and robbery rates. Sampson, et al. and Phillips have reported that at least half of the black-white homicide offending differential is attributable to structural neighborhood factors like parents' marital status and social context. Multiple other studies have found a link between black crime rates and structural factors, such as single-parent families and structural inequality.
At Least half of the black-white homicide offending differential is attributable to structural neighborhood factors like parents' marital status and social context. Multiple other studies have found a link between black crime rates and structural factors, such as single-parent families and structural inequality The direct correlation between crime and class, when factoring for race alone, is relatively weak. When gender, and familial background are factored, class correlates more strongly with crime than race or ethnicity (this can be spun very easily to support my argument). Deviant black peers were created through an unstable nuclear family, low job rates among black men, (due to lower educational attainment and past systemically racist laws) Black men are then therefore more likely to be incarcerated leaving kids behind festering a poor culture. This then leads to a cycle created by past white lawmakers. Who made black property worth less, schools less funded, neighbourhoods arguably over policed leading to more conviction rates of drug crimes despite black and white people consuming the same amount of drugs. Once more leaving kids fatherless (this is also why abortion rates are far higher among black women than any other group).
Round 2
Pro
#3
z. Overview
- In the rules of the debate, I clearly outline that "policing racial disparities are racial disparities that pertain only to the conduct of the police force in interaction with society and the community at large." Unfortunately, the rules of the debate disqualify con's round case almost in its entirety as nothing he has provided relates to the conduct of the police force in their interaction with society.
- The rules also outline that "no other system will be debated in this engagement. Attempting to do so will result in a conduct violation." Con brings up other systems such as the judicial system and the housing system thus the rules maintain imperative. Unfortunately, this is a conduct violation.
r. Insufficient evidence
- As inferred from the overview, con builds a largely irrelevant case riddled with weak correlations and disparity fallacies. Remember, a disparity does not indicate racism in any sense on its own.
- One major factor that refutes the majority of con's case is the single parenthood rates (see graph) of blacks in the US. The Department of Justice found that fatherless homes are the strongest indicator of violent crime:
- As you see from the graph, black single parenthood rates soared to unprecedented heights after the end of the civil rights movement in 1968. Today, 72% of black kids are raised in single-parent homes. Conclusively, the single parenthood rate in the black community is not a result of racism as when society was much more racist, the majority of black kids had a mom and dad. Apply this to everything con states in addition to all of my previous contentions.
Con. 1 Black immigrants vs. non-immigrant black Americans
Note: This contention is irrelevant to our debate as stipulated in the rules: "policing racial disparities are racial disparities that pertain only to the conduct of the police force in interaction with society and the community at large."
Black Americans earn 30% less than their white counterparts. This equates to a $10,000 annual difference on average.
- This hardly means anything as it doesn't account for age of the races or similar situations. Once again, older people make significantly more money on average than younger people because by truism they have had more time to become economically situated.
- When controlling for similar situations (jobs, qualifications, etc.) black people make virtually the same as white people (98 cents to a dollar), a difference that isn't even statistically significant. This figure also does not control for age so as it turns out, similarly situated black people may make the same or more money than white people.
- This indicates that the wage gap between races is not a result of racism, but a result of differing qualifications, jobs, ages, etc.
Nigerian immigrants tend to come from richer families (hence how they have enough money to move to America)
- Con provides no evidence for this statement at all.
- We can dismiss this easily however as this disparity in performance between Nigerians and black Americans is significant when controlling for socioeconomic background.
They were not born in the US as the current descendants of the black Americans
- Nigerians were descendants of an even worse situation. They continue to live in a country regarded as one of the most ethnically racist countries in Africa that had a bloody civil war that crushed their economy and plunged millions into starvation. All of this is much more recent than anything black Americans had to go through.
- So what is the reason for this disparity? Put simply, education and hard work. "In the US, Nigerians are the most highly educated of all groups, with 61 percent holding at least a bachelor's degree compared with 31 percent of the total foreign-born population and 32 percent of the US-born population." The educational attainment of Nigerians is what makes them outperform black Americans.
Con. 2 Jim crow laws, redlining, and environmental injustice
Note: This contention is irrelevant to our debate as stipulated in the rules: "policing racial disparities are racial disparities that pertain only to the conduct of the police force in interaction with society and the community at large."
- Here con argues that the US has a history of racial discrimination etc.
- However, does con show evidence of how much this affects people centuries later? Research that compared descendants of slavery and free-born blacks showed that any economic or social impact of slavery disappeared after two generations.
- More white people even as a proportion were redlined than black people as well will see, and there have been thousands of programs geared towards black Americans.
- Lastly, the single parenthood rate of black Americans soared after both slavery and the civil rights movement as we have just shown. When society was more racist black families were doing much better. The reason behind these disparities is not some boogeyman of racism, but the accumulated actions of moral agents. I will show all of this, henceforth.
Con. 3 Redlining laws
Same note: This contention is irrelevant to our debate as stipulated in the rules.
- Con's argument is obvious here. My counter-argument is that red-lining is massively overblown, overstated, and exaggerated in disparate effects, etc. To illustrate: redlining is typically associated with the Home Owners Loan Corporation (HOLC) however, researchers intensively studied this and found "that in all three cities the HOLC refinanced many loans in neighborhoods coded red, with no evidence of discrimination against Black homeowners."
- Secondly, 82% of those living in red-lined districts were, in fact, white people (pg. 40 census data). This means that even by the rate of population, more white people were red-lined than black people. This in turn explains why homeownership between black and white people changed at essentially consistent rates (fig.1) during the period.
- In summation, redlining affected people of all races, mostly white people, and thus cannot explain racial disparities
Con. 4 Lead exposure in black neighborhoods due to "racist laws"
Same note: This contention is irrelevant to our debate as stipulated in the rules.
- This contention is the same as the red-lining point, just making an additional argument on the prevalence of lead poisoning. It shows a racial disparity in lead levels, but racial disparities don't indicate racism on their own, especially a biological one.
- Genetics and biology help us better explain this difference. It is a fact that "genetic variation plays a significant role in determining lead absorption, lead distribution within the body, or both."
Children homozygous for the F allele of the Vitamin D Receptor Fok1 polymorphism had higher blood lead levels at age 24 months compared to the other genotypes; African-American children were more likely to carry the F allele than non-African American children.
Con. 5 Subconscious police biases
Note: This is the only part of con's argument that is actually relevant to our debate.
blacks were "3.73 times more likely than whites to be arrested for marijuana possession," even though "blacks and whites use drugs, including marijuana, at similar rates
- No source is provided for this. Regardless this is explained very simply when considering other factors.
- See y.1. Control for age. Younger people are much more likely to be caught using and abusing drugs and blacks as we have shown are significantly younger on average.
- Blacks are significantly more likely to buy and use drugs outdoors as well as buy drugs from strangers and purchase drugs outside of their homes.
- Blacks take more dangerous drugs and take drugs in riskier/more crime-prone/dangerous areas according to reports from the Department of Justice.
- Lastly, blacks are significantly more likely to lie about using drugs so we can't even say the statement that they use marijuana at similar rates is true or not.
A 2020 study in the journal Nature found that black drivers were stopped more often than white drivers, and that the threshold by which police decided to search black and Hispanic drivers was lower than that for whites (judging by the rate at which contraband was found in searches).
- The disparity in police stops has already been refuted by my traffic stop contention (c) so I extend such to this argument.
- As for searches, once again, this is why my y.1 contention is pivotal we need to control for age. Young drivers were more likely to be pulled over by police than older drivers and black people are significantly younger than white people. When controlling for age the disparity disappears as found in the large study Age Matters: Race Differences in Police Searches of Young and Older Male Driver: "among drivers age 30 and older, Black males are no more likely, and in some analyses are less likely, than white males to be subjected to a discretionary search."
A 2018 study in the journal proceedings of national academy of sciences found that tall young black men are especially likely to receive unjustified attention by law enforcement
- This point is the weakest of con's array. This study simply shows a disparity in the height of people stopped by the police. This frankly doesn't prove anything.
- The racial disparity can be easily explained. Stop and frisk areas were primarily based in higher crime areas: "hot spots of crime." Black neighborhoods tend to have significantly higher rates of violent crime so it isn't surprising that more black people are stopped and frisked, but it certainly isn't racism. The height disparity is simply irrelevant. Lastly, stop and frisk programs are not particularly "unjustified," they are legitimate attempts at combatting crime and have shown much success.
Con. 6 Inability to post bail
Note: This contention is simply irrelevant to our debate as stipulated in the rules: "no other system will be debated in this engagement. Attempting to do so will result in a conduct violation."
- This contention is simply a disparity fallacy. Con cites a disparity in pre-trial detention but disparities don't prove the existence of racism.
- This disparity is easily explained with basic analysis as well. "A bail bond is set based on the type of crime committed or the arrested's previous criminal history." We have already shown that blacks commit significantly more violent crimes and blacks on average have worse criminal records/history. Thus, the reasons for these bails are simply the risk these respective delinquents pose to society like anyone of any race.
Con. 7 Socioeconomic studies
- In a grand scheme after a series of untenable and illogical arguments that stand disproven, con here simply repeats all his points that I have already gone over sufficiently. This section of con's is more for conclusion.
Conclusion
- In round one, I lay out my case based on the subject of our debate: police interactions. I showcase the main areas of contention concerning police interactions are all simply a result of other factors and calling it racism is fallacious and dogmatic.
- In round two, con makes a case that is completely irrelevant to the debate and that the rules specifically warn against doing. I address cons contentions in their entirety and show that ultimately, the major reasons for these disparities are factors that are not racism.
- I conclude that I have upheld my burden, the resolution is undoubtedly affirmed and con has not sufficiently presented an argument towards his burden.
Sources
- https://newsone.com/
- https://www.pennlive.com/
- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
- https://www.bailbondsraleigh.com/
- https://phys.org/news/
- https://www.payscale.com/
- https://sci-hub.se/
- https://www.governing.com/
- https://www.nber.org/
- https://www.zillow.com/
- https://sci-hub.se/
- https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
- https://nces.ed.gov/
Con
#4
I'm just going to copy and paste what i said in the comments and why i forfeit.
"Your title is extremely misleading. Your title is in direct contradiction to what you really want to argue about in the description. The average disparities in crime between black and white people are the result of systemically racist laws in the past. Policing and racial disparities within the police are due to the lingering effects of said laws. If you truly only wanted to talk about why police disparities exist and not talk about other factors outside of the police, it seems like you were just looking for a gotcha debate."
t's pretty common knowledge that predominantly black schools are funded less and their properties are worth less (because they're black). When we study "policing racial disparities" factors which lead to more run ins with the police outside of simply bias on the police is always paramount and factored in, in sociology we don't leave racial policing disparities to only the police being racist, hence our missunderstanding. Only extremely far left people believe the police itself is the main contributor to racist policing disparities. No sincere researcher nor someone who believes in systemic racism believes what you want to debate except blue-haired women who spend too much time reading propaganda on twitter. Police disparities do exist on average, and the reason for it is because of past racist laws. This has far more to do than with just the police, but to do with economics created through unfair laws. The title is extremely misleading, as people who have done research are aware most racial disparities come about due to racist laws not involving the police but leading black communities to inevitably be in more run-ins with the police because of said laws (hence my lead argument). The police are still slightly biased interpersonally against black people, but it's definitely not enough to account for more than 50%.
It seems like a sincere misunderstanding. So I understand. Outside of that, I never realised I only had a 24-argumentation time limit until I accepted the debate. Which would be fine if it were the weekend, but I work a job. And I actually don't disagree with you. I thought we were going to argue about overall racial disparities (based on the title, and the description just wasn't descriptive enough or ruled out other factors, as even in sociology we don't leave racial policing disparities to ONLY the police being racist).
"Policing racial disparities are not created only due to the police, i never realised this was the condition, but thought it was simply what you believed therefore i could argue against this being the case."
Round 3
Pro
#5
It's pretty common knowledge that predominantly black schools are funded less and their properties are worth less (because they're black).
- This actually Isn't true, black people receive significantly more per pupil funding than white people.
- As for the rest, I understand the Job and stuff. Maybe we can have another debate on systemic racism later
Con
#6
Thank you Novice, you too!
The link you provided does not come from an unbiased source, the website you linked is from a clearly conservative website if you read their about us section.
"There are over 13,000 traditional public school systems in theUnited States, serving an average of 3,500 students. However, the average high-poverty nonwhite districtserves almost 10,500 students—a student body that is three times larger than the national average. Primarilywhite districts, on the other hand, enroll only 1,500 students on average—and high-poverty white districts areeven smaller."
Hers a study. https://edbuild.org/content/23-billion/full-report.pdf
Clearly our data is contradicting one another's. I'm unsure which is correct.
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
I am treating this as a concession by CON in R2 because that is my interpretation of these remarks
"I'm just going to copy and paste what i said in the comments and why i forfeit. Your title is extremely misleading. Your title is in direct contradiction to what you really want to argue about in the description. The average disparities in crime between black and white people are the result of systemically racist laws in the past. Policing and racial disparities within the police are due to the lingering effects of said laws. If you truly only wanted to talk about why police disparities exist and not talk about other factors outside of the police, it seems like you were just looking for a gotcha debate."
and general (although confusingly not entire) disengagement thereafter. Conduct to CON for concession.
Well, i never claimed the independent police officers were racist. Just that their results were. I'm unsure where you get the information from that "if you ask 5 different sociologists you will get 5 conflicting answers."
I think current dictionaries still have the correct definition usually, but redefining racism to include something like "people who benefit from systematic racism are automatically racist" and other such nonsense is dumb and actually waters down the term to the point of meaninglessness.
You can ask 5 different sociologists what they mean by terms like "systematic racism" and you will get 5 conflicting definitions.
The correct definition of systematic racism of course is actual systems that are created to intentionally harm certain groups or give certain racial groups preference.
But some stupid sociologist might define systematic racism as the results of disproportionate levels of criminality. Something that would only be systematic racism if there were extra laws on the books that were directed at overtly criminalizing being black.
Or they'll describe generational poverty as systematic racism, but the effects of generational poverty are the same on whites and blacks
I even heard sociologists try to claim banks doing credit checks is a form of systematic racism.
So of course when you define systematic racism like that, you are being dishonest. The American government, police and judges aren't all racists who are out to get non whites. It's silly. In order to prove actual systematic racism as properly defined you would need to show laws directed at blacks or racial discrepancies in policing that are a result of enforcing more laws or enforcing laws in an unequal manner.
And no, disproportionate sentencing as a result of blacks having more priors does not count, nor do more drug arrests because blacks more often do drugs in public instead of the privacy of their house.
You just can't prove any actual systematic racism. Sociologists know this, which is why they attempt to redefine the word. They can't be like "white man bad", if they used proper definitions.
I feel like that is an appeal to vagueness. At what point in time are dictionaries most reliable? If so, why are they more reliable then and not now? Generally speaking, my definition should be the more fitting one, due to the continuous corrections made to dictionaries over time. Despite my definition existing, interpersonal racism still exists as its own category (which actually creates systemic racism). Although your problem isn't actually with the dictionary being outdated, you just think it's a retarded worldview, so your problem is not actually with the dictionary but with the philosophy itself.
You guys were talking about 2 different things because you seemed to be using the wrong definition of racism. If your definition is in zero dictionary's from 10 years ago, than you are just making up definitions to defend the retarded worldview you have in your head
it doesnt suprise me either. I barely lost the debate, a debate never actually happened. We were talking about two different topics.
You losing this debate does not surprise me.
You have a plethora of links cited throughout your rebuttals.
Exactly which one(s) am I to look at, and why (as it relates to what I have put forth that you disagree with)?
I am not going on a fishing expedition to figure out which link and why. That's your burden, not mine.
Just open up my links and you will see why i disagree with you...
Nope. You accused me of using common sense vs what I said was common knowledge. It is to you to refute my argument given within these comments.
The data disagrees with you until you show me it doesn't. I've already given all of my links in my round 1 debate argument.
Common knowledge. Not common sense. Not the same thing. Try again.
Its not common sense. Many academic studies disagree with your common sense. Its common sense to most people women are worse drivers, yet if we google the statistics men are more likely to drive dangerously and to be in crashes. What is "common sense" can be skewed by your environment and own biases, the data disagrees with you until you can show me it doesnt. I have about 20 hyperlinks in my first round argument, I'm unsure why you think its uncontested truth.
>>I said ok because it seems like you have said a bunch of stuff i agree with (such as black people having more run down homes) the issue is you linked no studies for why they have rundown homes more often, whilst i did in my debate. There's just nothing for me to comment on, as there's nothing to critique, its an emotional argument, you're saying stuff without evidence. You can say its untrue, but can you prove it? your own personal opinion doesn't hold light compared to the empirical studies i linked backing my view with the same resolution.<<
(deep breath)
To me the things I speak of is pure common and educated knowledge. I have studied black American history for more than two decades. This is the comment section, not the debate section. I am not going to invest my time and energy to give a full-on response in the comment section when all I can expect, based on your past retorts, is a mere "ok."
Everything I said in my comment has been common knowledge for more than a decade. I need not cite anything to back it up.
Everything I said in my comment is objective based easily verifiable facts. If you disagree with them, prove me wrong. Otherwise, your continued wave of the dismissal "talk to the" hand maneuver is not proof of your argument, rebuttal, or loosely postured position here.
I said ok because it seems like you have said a bunch of stuff i agree with (such as black people having more run down homes) the issue is you linked no studies for why they have rundown homes more often, whilst i did in my debate. There's just nothing for me to comment on, as there's nothing to critique, its an emotional argument, you're saying stuff without evidence. You can say its untrue, but can you prove it? your own personal opinion doesn't hold light compared to the empirical studies i linked backing my view with the same resolution.
>>Ok.<<
What an exceptionally insightful and well-educated response; so enlightening where those things discussed are concerned.
//sarcasm//
Ok.
TWS1405 - " It is little to no academic integrity."
>>Yeah, ok. The vast majority of sociological studies show that systemic racism does affect the average outcomes of people based on race. Sowell is an economist. Systemic racism is not even his field of study. There are many experts who are in this field of sociological study who have conducted the studies and disagree with his assessment of their studies.<<
Sowell has studied far more than mere economics. And did you forget the obvious, he is black born into poverty in NC and grew up in Harlem FFS. He has augmented his scholarly knowledge beyond mere economics. He [is] a credible source for issues and matters affecting and afflicting the black community from historical to present day roots.
Also on systemic racism, that's a myth. There is no such thing. It is pure propaganda. Same for so-called white privilege (doesn't exist, a phrase coined to replace the bankrupt 'race card') and institutional racism. It's all BS designed to deflect from the true source of the problem: a lack of personal responsibility and accountability for the choices and actions made by many within the black community.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/thomas-sowell-systemic-racism-has-no-meaning
>>It's pretty common knowledge that predominantly black schools are funded less and their properties are worth less (because they're black).<<
That's uneducated common knowledge, a false narrative sold to anyone so who willingly drinks that false narrative Kool-Aid.
What is actual true common knowledge is that schools get a 44-50% of their funding from property taxes, taxes that are entirely dependent on market value of the homes within that school's district. Those values have two factors that determine their value, what the comparative sales are in the area of the homes being valued, and the condition of the home. If the home is in disrepair, it cannot be sold at the prevailing market value. When that home and surrounding homes are in disrepair, the value of those properties go down. When those values go down, the amount of property taxes assessed go down. Which means less money doled out to schools within the district. So, when blacks ignore broken windows (theory) and allows their neighborhoods to decay, they have no one but themselves to blame for not only that poor condition of the "hood," but also their schools.
So, when you say low property values and underfunded schools is because they are black is factually inaccurate. It has nothing to do with their skin color and everything to do with their complacency and apathy.
>>When we study "policing racial disparities" factors which lead to more run ins with the police outside of simply bias on the police is always paramount and factored in, in sociology we don't leave racial policing disparities to only the police being racist, hence our missunderstanding.<<
That was a bunch of garbled nonsense. Police go where the crime is, not where it isn't. There is no bias. You're conflating offender profiling with bias, or racial profiling. That's not how it works anymore and hasn't for quite some time. Yeah yeah, there will be a few bad apples that still act out of bias, but overall, there is no malicious bias or racial profiling. The best law enforcement tool in their investigative arsenal is offender profiling.
>>Police disparities do exist on average, and the reason for it is because of past racist laws. <<
Cite no less than 5 actual racist laws that have impact on current "police disparities" that exist, "on average" today.
>>This has far more to do than with just the police, but to do with economics created through unfair laws. <<
And pray tell what unfair laws would those be that are economic based?
Truly.
what a mess
"Policing racial disparities are racial disparities that pertain only to the conduct of the police force in interaction with society and the community at large only."
Who told you policing racial disparities are disparities that pertain only to the conduct of the police? that's why i accepted the debate, who in their right mind would think this was the condition of the debate? the condition itself is simply wrong on what policing racial disparities mean....you must of looked up some super bad definition. Its frustrating people are likely to vote against me in this debate when your premise condition itself is wrong, definitional.
It's pretty common knowledge that predominantly black schools are funded less and their properties are worth less (because they're black). When we study "policing racial disparities" factors which lead to more run ins with the police outside of simply bias on the police is always paramount and factored in, in sociology we don't leave racial policing disparities to only the police being racist, hence our missunderstanding. Only extremely far left people believe the police itself is the main contributor to racist policing disparities. No sincere researcher nor someone who believes in systemic racism believes what you want to debate except blue-haired women who spend too much time reading propaganda on twitter. Police disparities do exist on average, and the reason for it is because of past racist laws. This has far more to do than with just the police, but to do with economics created through unfair laws. The title is extremely misleading, as people who have done research are aware most racial disparities come about due to racist laws not involving the police but leading black communities to inevitably be in more run-ins with the police because of said laws (hence my lead argument). The police are still slightly biased interpersonally against black people, but it's definitely not enough to account for more than 50%.
It seems like a sincere misunderstanding. So I understand. Outside of that, I never realised I only had a 24-argumentation time limit until I accepted the debate. Which would be fine if it were the weekend, but I work a job. And I actually don't disagree with you. I thought we were going to argue about overall racial disparities (based on the title, and the description just wasn't descriptive enough or ruled out other factors, as even in sociology we don't leave racial policing disparities to ONLY the police being racist).
Policing racial disparities are not created only due to the police, i never realised this was the condition but thought it was simply what you believed.
I don't know if he did, be he isn't debating right? But the title is "THBT the majority of current policing racial disparities in the United States are a result of factors or variables outside of racism." Don't you think its rather obvious that this is referring to disparities that relate to policing: "the maintenance of law and order by a police force."
Even TWS didn't notice this ridiculousness. Policing racial disparities are not created only due to the police, pretty much ever. Why didn't you make the debate title, "the majority of police racial disparities are due to factors outside of just police racism?" at least then its congruent with your description.
Your title is extremely misleading. Your title is in direct contradiction to what you really want to argue about in the description. The average disparities in crime between black and white people are the result of systemically racist laws in the past. Policing and racial disparities within the police are due to the lingering effects of said laws. If you truly only wanted to talk about why police disparities exist and not talk about other factors outside of the police, it seems like you were just looking for a gotcha debate.
" It is little to no academic integrity."
Yeah, ok. The vast majority of sociological studies show that systemic racism does affect the average outcomes of people based on race. Sowell is an economist. Systemic racism is not even his field of study. There are many experts who are in this field of sociological study who have conducted the studies and disagree with his assessment of their studies.
"Black rednecks" are not legitimate. If he chooses to bring it up, I'll explain why.
Your respect isn't a requisite where citing Sowell is concerned.
And it is black rednecks, and as far as I can surmise it is a valid perspective rooted in history. https://youtu.be/pls-Z0KOOgw
Modern day academics are liberal hacks pushing an agenda. It is little to no academic integrity.
Thomas Sowell? An interesting choice. I don't respect Thomas Sowell as a thinker. I'm more than ready for any "critiques" of what I presented he may have. He has some extremely bizarre views, such as his "red neck blacks" theory. Nothing he said back in the 1980's is going to stack up to the multitude of modern day academic studies which disagree with him and show how wrong he is. He's a typical conservative "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" kind of guy, and constantly appeals to the false correlation fallacy.
Shelby Steele?
Larry Elder?
Candace Owens?
John McWhorter?
I can list more....
"Why no citations to Thomas Sowell?"
The way I think this debate will go, I may have some citations for him in my round 2 rebuttal.
"Why no citations to Thomas Sowell?"
The way I think this debate will go, I may have some citations for him in my round 2 rebuttal.
"This house believes that"
What does THBT mean?
Why no citations to Thomas Sowell? He is by far the foremost authority on black culture, the history of slavery in America and abroad, and why a subset of black Americans fail compared to other blacks coming to America from other nations. That would be very strong and compelling evidence right there.
That's fine
I'm not going to respond to anything you've said in your first round argument. I have my own statistics to share, which will take up my character limit. I'll only respond to what you presented in round two.
You pulled through! I'm happy, i was begging to think you weren't going to publish your argument in time.
“THBT the majority of current policing racial disparities in the United States are a result of factors or variables outside of racism.”
Lemme guess, 100% of it is caused by the big bang, an event unrelated to human races?
We'll see what happens, Christian.
Even if police were super racist, there's enough other factors to make this an easy win for Pro
I don't believe you understand what I have said here. What do you think I was referring to?
You're going to get swept in this debate simply for that comment you made. I can assure you that much.
unchallenged? I'll try not to let you down then sir.
I am not against you accepting, I was hoping that one of the more unchallenged folks would however.
I think you can make a distinction between interpersonal racism and systemic racism. I'd probably accept this debate.
I posit that the following individuals who most likely disagree with me (in no particular order) should accept this debate.
1. Ramshutu
2. Barney
3. Oromagi
4. Theweakeredge