Instigator / Pro
1500
rating
6
debates
50.0%
won
Topic
#5977
White Privilege Does Not Exist
Status
Debating
Waiting for the next argument from the contender.
Round will be automatically forfeited in:
00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- Two weeks
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- Two months
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
1389
rating
424
debates
45.05%
won
Description
Here are some ground rules:
White privilege will be defined as the advantages that American society inherently grants to whites over blacks, Asians, Hispanics, etc.
Pro will believe that white privilege does not exist.
Con will believe that it does exist.
The debate will not be about semantics or arguing over what words mean, but will instead be over whether whites are inherently advantages over minorities because of American society.
Profanity or personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Only accept the debate challenge if you’re going to participate.
Round 1
The idea that white people are inherently privileged by systems in modern-day American society is stupid.
You think they’re privileged? Show me the privilege. Is there anything that a white person can do that a black person can’t?
If you can prove that there is any privilege, I’ll believe you. But as for now, change my mind…
Before I begin, greetings to the opposing side and a tribute to an individual in light of this subject,
Mr. Neely Fuller Jr. October 1929 - February 2025.
I recommend the opposing side and audience to
look up Mr. Fuller online. He was the author of the
code book titled The United Independent
Compensatory Code System Concept for victims of "white" supremacy .
You can find the tribute video on youtube.com/@j.talkstothepeopleradio6008
Yes so the author of the
code book which you can get by going to producejustice.com and what will come up on the screen is a brief description and a series of instructions for ordering.
Now that comes with a textbook/workbook for
thought, speech and action for victims of "white"
supremacy.
Now the opposing side is using the terms
"White privilege" which has been defined as the
advantages that American society inherently grants to whites over blacks, Asians, Hispanics, etc.
Now "white" supremacy is that to what the opposite side has offered but on a global scale
and not just in one region. But if we laser focus on a place called America which doesn't exist according
to the writings of Mr.Fuller, all that exists is the
system of "racism" , the system of "white"
supremacy, no justice, no people that exist that
practice justice such as what Americans would do if they truly existed according to the writings.
It is those people who are classified as "white" who dominate and govern and control those people who are classified as "non white" and this is done
along with mistreatment.
Those that mistreat are the "white" supremacists
and or who you refer to as those "white" folks as being with privilege.
The system of "white" supremacy is all about
having the advantage. In all areas of people
activities in which Mr. Fuller has listed as nine areas.
-Economics
-Education
-Entertainment
-Labor
-Law
-Politics
-Religion
-Sex
-War
Each of these areas,we can ask, do the "white"
supremacists dominate those whom they classify as non "white" in each of these areas?
Do they have total control?
Are they in position to take advantage?
Yes and yes.
Does this mean they can and would mistreat those under their domination?
Yes. This means the non "white" people of the
planet or namely according to this topic, a place
called America are run by those telling them and allowing them what to do, day by day.
Meaning, not being able to to do anything without
the stamp of the "white" supremacist approval.
Now in order to maintain the system of "white"
supremacy, somebody has to be mistreated. Somebody has to be taken advantage of. Somebody has
to be dominated. Now how is the system going to
remain in place as a one world global government, with the privileges?
If you start yielding all these privileges to the non
"white" , you'll no longer have the system of
"white" supremacy.
The "white" supremacists cannot allow their
subjects, their slaves to take over and allow them to receive the advantage of getting into certain
positions in any of those areas mentioned.
The slave master and slave owner have to keep a
leash on their slaves. Otherwise the slave system
would be demolished. You cannot allow the slaves
to get into roles, into positions that will end up
having them dominate . That's not good for
business. See "white" supremacy is a business and like any business you do what
gives strength to the business and what maintains
it.
Every "white" person that is a "white" supremacist or either benefits from the system you may call
"white" privilege. Now you can say it's not
deliberate, intentional and you can even say it's not personal because it's not. It's not personal, it's just business.
The system that is setup in place favors those that
run it , can assume to run it and will always be those that continue to run it . Those that have the higher
roles and we expect them to be "white", why? Is it
the advantage of them to have that over those that don't have that?
I haven't even touched on discrimination and so
called police brutality . Who is in power to control
jobs? That's one of the areas,labor.
Who's in power to run the police? That's in the area of law .
So we've established there is no america but the
system and government of " white" supremacy.
Now "police brutality" doesn't exist.
A police officer cannot be brutal. A brutal person
holding the title "police officer" brutalizing a
non "white" classified as "white" is what you can
call a "race" solder or "white" supremacist.
Which covers this part of it. Any "white" person that is able to be a "white" supremacist should be
suspected of being one as one obviously likely to
receive and benefit from what is called white
privilege or the system of "white" supremacy.
Does any "white" person not?
No.
Well about the low income, poor, downtrodden
ones.
On any day, any circumstance, any place, what will be the advantage or treatment of a "white" person
be compared to a non "white"?
As far as getting employment, getting a role of a
high up position, what are the chances compared to a non "white" person?
What are the chances of victimizing a people via
murder and being apprehended peacefully if you
are non "white"?
A suspected "white" supremacist or a very
privileged "white" person goes into a church setting and
lynches several "black" folks with lead.
How is he treated? How was he treated in
comparison to a victim of "white" supremacy?
He was treated with privilege. When slavery of the
1800s converted to penal prison system, the many descendants of the enslaved ancestors have been
imprisoned due to a lack of privilege of proper legal representation.
So many victims of "white" supremacy end up in
penal prison or dead at the hand of the privileged
"race" soldier "white" supremacists. It is
encouraged that through the code book, when a
victim of "white" supremacy, a prisoner of war, is
captured,apprehended, he or she must not fight,
must not fuss and don't flee.
Why?
The non "white" does not have privilege to do otherwise. A person shot in the back while fleeing is not
privilege but mistreatment.
The non "white " person seeing those flashing red
and blue lights, he or she ought to consider in their mind at that very moment "I'm dead". "Even if I
don't fuss, don't fight, don't flee. I may get shot anyway. I can surrender, be down on the ground,
comply and face my last day on this planet. I'm
going to be dead. I just might be dead today. When
it all gets too much, I'm going to lynch myself. I
can't stand this global prison system. I won't stand
for greater confinement in a penal prison."
The non "white " person doesn't have privilege on
his or her side.
Now the topic statement says "White Privilege Does Not Exist".
The typical " white" person can deny its existence.
He can say "I don't have " white" privilege. I'm not a racist. If you say I am, prove it".
Would it not stand to reason that privilege has
protection on all sides?
Privilege means you can't prove I do have "white"
privilege. You can't prove I'm a "white"
supremacist. You can't prove I discriminate. You
can't prove this to anybody. Don't even think about it legally. Don't even think about litigation. A non
"white" will have to go to a "white" person to prove anything. A "black" person can't get this
confirmation from another "black" person. It's got
to be somebody "white" to back up the "black"
person because the "white" person is the only one
that counts. That's what privilege is all about. It
looks like it's not even there when it is.
A non "white" says "Why didn't I get that job ,
Mr. Smith?"
Mr. Smith says , "I was going to call you to let you
know that you're not what we're looking for."
"But Mr.Smith, they said they were impressed with my resume on the phone and had a suitable
background and invited me to an interview. Then
after I spoke with the receptionist in person seeing my face, the person said you filled the role".
Mr. Smith says, " I encourage you to continue
looking for future opportunities with us. Have a nice day...".
Now nothing looks wrong or unjust on the surface,
right. It appears everyone can have the same
opportunities.
But who do we see over and over again filling those same opportunities and roles again and again?
How many applicants of all different demographics applied for those roles?
The power structures that be, the fortune 500
companies, the major corporations are dominated and controlled by "white" people making them the most financially,capitalistic,high status, echelon,
elite privileged people of all.
They have the privilege of selling the majority of
services to fit the needs of whom they dominate
where the subjects are totally dependent. That is
the privilege over non "whites" that allow the
non "whites" where to go, where to live, where to
work, who to have sex with, who to talk to , who to marry. That is the privilege they have. They have
total control and complete authority.
That's the advantage the "whites" or "white"
supremacists have in a position as such over non
"whites" in economics.
The power structures that be in the schools,
colleges, universities that grant what they do to
students, graduates that are non "whites" who are
given credentials . To the non "white" person, he or she sees this as the given advantage to be able to
get a highly professional occupation. A role that
requires a great amount of expertise.
The advantage that is mind you, given, by the
"whites" are decided,allowed for that non "white"
person to receive the opportunity to excel
financially(back at the control in the area of economics) and in a career.
This is the advantage superseding all non "whites"
in the area of education.
The power structures that be in the major film
industries, what is allowed to be viewed on your t.v. screens, theater screens, advertisements,
marketing images, social media platforms are
regulated by the powers that are found in the
majority, "whites" and tied back to the area of
economics, the financial investors, banks , financial institutions that are again , the majority ,"white "
people. This is the advantage of the "white"
supremacists in area of entertainment.
All the areas of activity are interrelated. So it always go back to the area of money, currency, finance or
circles back no matter which area of people activity you're in.
Now everything mentioned thus far has concerned
labor. That's the following area of people activity
after entertainment. It all is intertwined with labor. From the major companies of businesses(dealing
domestically and foreign), financial institutions,
educational institutions, that all encompass people activity in a society do so under laws in that society.
That is the advantage of "whites" in labor and law
with the majority of "whites" in capitalism,
taxation,funding the majority of control and
services.
Of course law is not without politics. All of this is
politics, every area. All of this has to do with people interactions.
Inside politics, people believe in actions and vote in actions they believe in and these are belief systems backed up by action which are what religions are.
It just so happens to be that the strongest actions
that are backed up in the land called America is
that of the system of "white" supremacy. Religion is supposed to govern your life. People live their
lifestyles out according to their religion. There's no religion that reigns as much dominance in the lives of non "white" people. Where you can work , how
long you can work and everything else that is
dictated including your time off to practice your
individual religion is permitted by those with the
upper advantage, the privileged "white" supremacists.
These beliefs and policies are also backed up in war. The last area of people activity mentioned that is
no different that non "white" people enter in that are dominated by. The folks referred to as
civilians that are under the same government as
the ones in the military face the same subjection.
You protect your country , protect the systems in
place.
The economic systems, the capitalistic systems,the
workforce systems, the welfare systems and any
other subsidy assistance programs. The non "whites" are in no other place but to protect and give strength to the system.
Now people will argue, no, "white" supremacy doesn't exist. This thing called white privilege doesn't exist and "racism" doesn't exist. People say we're all americans. We're all equal and have the equal opportunity.
I raise the question.
How can we all have the equal opportunity with the average higher up position in the workforce, in commerce, in economics, even government being occupied by a "white" person?
As Neely Fuller Jr. would say, there's no such individual as an american. Not that or anything else for that matter. You're a victim of "white" supremacy. Americans are equals practicing justice. This is not an even playing field.
"The idea that white people are inherently privileged by systems in modern-day American society is stupid."
They are more privileged with running the majority of major industries, economics and all the areas of people activity of non "white"/"black" people.
Looking at the history of so called America that was established, it was founded on the privileged that take the master role and have had the head start first position ever since in everything. Like I itemized in the workforce, labor, entertainment, film industry and so on. You typically see a "white" face as the face of major big enterprise or a non " white" representative with a "white" man behind him or her.
"You think they’re privileged? Show me the privilege. Is there anything that a white person can do that a black person can’t? "
Yes. It is the "white" person telling, allowing the non "white" and or "black" person where to go, what to do. A "black" person cannot monopolize the nine areas of people activity. Apparently and currently impossible. They can't reign supreme.
This perhaps is a different angle I'm giving among folks that would argue about for example, the law. How so called police officers truly "race" soldiers can give undue treatment or mistreatment to non "white" people.
Where on a mass scale now and in history have non "white" people accomplished this? Where have they accomplished the amount of mistreatment, lynchings and laws dictating on the basis of color?
"If you can prove that there is any privilege, I’ll believe you. But as for now, change my mind…"
Don't believe me. Look at the evidence. That's what you're looking for. The evidence. Evidence is what you can witness yourself. So you observe everything around you.
What do you see? Do you always see a "white" person in a high position role? I mean as a director, president, CEO, owner , etc.
Is this the privilege the "white" person has ?
Any major corporation, bank , institution, is there a "white" face as the face of that establishment?
Day to day, in your travels, place to place, in people interactions, politics, marketing, business transactions.
Why aren't a people privileged to receive reparations from those that have the privilege to give it?
Are the people without the reparations privileged compared to the ones that have receipt of reparations?
Can a people without repair be privileged as another not in need of repair ?
As Mr. Fuller would say, all problems are solved by the process of questions and answers.
Round 2
Forfeited
I rest my case.
Round 3
Hello Mall, thank you for accepting this debate. I apologize that I did not previously respond. I have had a lot to do lately, and as you must know, it can be very difficult sometimes to balance private life with DebateArt.
Now "white" supremacy is that to what the opposite side has offered but on a global scaleand not just in one region. But if we laser focus on a place called America which doesn't exist accordingto the writings of Mr.Fuller, all that exists is thesystem of "racism" , the system of "white"supremacy, no justice, no people that exist thatpractice justice such as what Americans would do if they truly existed according to the writings.It is those people who are classified as "white" who dominate and govern and control those people who are classified as "non white" and this is donealong with mistreatment.
I would like to speak to the voters, who will be deciding very soon who has won this argument. As you can see in my quotation, Mall established at the beginning of his argument that a good amount of his argument is based on the writings of Mr. Neely Fuller, Jr. (rest in peace). However, Mall has also established that Mr. Fuller believed that America is nothing but a system of racism and white supremacy, with no justice, and no people who abide by the law. Does this really sound like it makes sense to anyone reading. America has no justice? No one abides by the law? America is absolutely nothing, and I mean absolutely NOTHING except for racism and white supremacy? I know there are some out there who believe in the existence of white supremacy, and I am not one to judge those people. But even they can figure out that there is some law in this country, there are people who are in power that are not white, and America is not COMPLETELY just racism. If it was, we wouldn't have any minorities in power. So if we can conclude by this that the basis of Mr. Fuller's book is irrational, we can also argue that the basis of Mall's argument is irrational. And plus, the book "The United-Independent Compensatory Code" is 41 years old, written at a time when racism was slightly more prevalent in American society and awareness was not as emphasized. In other words, it's outdated. Moving on.
The system of "white" supremacy is all abouthaving the advantage. In all areas of peopleactivities in which Mr. Fuller has listed as nine areas.-Economics-Education-Entertainment-Labor-Law-Politics-Religion-Sex-WarEach of these areas,we can ask, do the "white"supremacists dominate those whom they classify as non "white" in each of these areas?Do they have total control?Are they in position to take advantage?Yes and yes.
Wait, I'm confused. How do whites have advantage over minorities in sex? Am I missing something here? Please explain that to me, I'm really confused as to how ethnicity would correspond with sex. Also, war. We effectively lost wars in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Algeria, and against multiple Native American tribes. All of those victors were minorities. Plus, a lot of wars we have won had minority soldiers. Entertainment? Some of the best-selling musical artists in America were black or other minorities: Michael Jackson, Stevie Wonder, Ray Charles, Whitney Houston, Duke Ellington, Marvin Gaye, Prince, Jimi Hendrix. And there are some ridiculously successful minority actors too, including Eddie Murphy and Denzel Washington.
Does this mean they can and would mistreat those under their domination?Yes. This means the non "white" people of theplanet or namely according to this topic, a placecalled America are run by those telling them and allowing them what to do, day by day.Meaning, not being able to to do anything withoutthe stamp of the "white" supremacist approval.
Oh, you can do absolutely nothing unless white supremacists approve? What about the very publication of Mr. Fuller's books? If white supremacists truly controlled everything, if you couldn't do anything without the stamp of the white supremacist approval, then Mr. Fuller wouldn't have even been allowed to publish his book!
I am not going to go any further into this, because you have already proven that your argument is ridiculously delusional. I have read through your entire argument multiple times, and it just line after line of this stuff, spewing such nonsensical ideas such as that minorities are disadvantaged in sex, war, and entertainment, or that it is impossible to do anything without white supremacists approving, or that the entire world is one big slavery system. Give me a break.
You also said in your second argument that you "rest your case." I guess that means that you can not provide any rebuttal to this argument.
We have two weeks for response. It may or may not be suffice for you. I did mention a lot . Be sure to utilize that time in accordance to respond to everything instead of a rushed response.
"Does this really sound like it makes sense to anyone reading. America has no justice? No one abides by the law? America is absolutely nothing, and I mean absolutely NOTHING except for racism and white supremacy? "
If only you could of spoken to him yourself. You missed him by four months. But I'll do my best to represent the responses he would of gave.
That is first, "if you don't understand white supremacy which is racism, what it is and how it works, everything else you understand, will confuse you".
Now what does that mean? You have to be able to recognize "white" supremacy particularly if you are classified as "non white". Once the victim of "racism" does, he or she can see what they're looking at in plain sight.
Justice according to the code book is in two parts. Guaranteeing that no person is mistreated and guaranteeing that the person that needs help the most gets the most constructive help.
So that's no person. If you have mistreatment any where calling it justice in one place but not another place, you don't have a system of justice. I think Martin Luther King Jr. made the same observation.
Everything is controlled within people activity and approved by a "white" person.
"But even they can figure out that there is some law in this country, there are people who are in power that are not white, and America is not COMPLETELY just racism. If it was, we wouldn't have any minorities in power. "
Who orchestrates the law and what does that law do for " non whites " having to answer to the "white" supremacists?
What "power " do the minorities have over the "white" supremacists that have power over them?
Who do the minorities (" non whites") answer to ?
They answer to the majority "whites" .
"The United-Independent Compensatory Code" is 41 years old, written at a time when racism was slightly more prevalent in American society and awareness was not as emphasized. In other words, it's outdated. Moving on."
This point has to be thrown out unless the opposing side can at least prove two things.
"Racism" no longer exists and the majority of those in control don't exist. So because of this, the point of "antiquated " contexts is negated.
"Wait, I'm confused. How do whites have advantage over minorities in sex? Am I missing something here? Please explain that to me, I'm really confused as to how ethnicity would correspond with sex. Also, war. "
Exactly you're confused. IF you don't understand white supremacy which is racism, what it is and how it works, everything else you understand, will confuse you".
To be a "white " supremacist or a "white" man or woman with privilege over another, he or she has to dominate in a system that controls all of people activity concerning " non white" people .
That would include the areas you mentioned ; sex and war.
Aside from agendas design to care less for the welfare of downtrodden impoverished "non white" people, dilapidated communities of "non white " folks leaving them prone to a higher probability of crime, drugs, violence and easily tailoring the populations with accessing abortion via passing of laws, what also goes on is the passing of laws for sex same activity. Namely legislating same sex marriage.
Getting back to the violence between "non white " persons, not only enabling the war between themselves, the "white supremacists" have control over who can enter their military and offer up a sacrifice for the system of "white supremacy".
How?
Who does that non "white" person answer to in the military ranks?
A "white " person, right. The government in which the military services are funded. The taxation system, right. The system of economics, area of economics , the major tax brackets of society, big fortune companies, CEOs, again, a "white" person or persons.
That's why I say all areas are interrelated, interconnected, interactive.
"of those victors were minorities. Plus, a lot of wars we have won had minority soldiers. "
This is like saying because the master or more privileged one protected you from harm , it means you're not under the master's control and coverage being dependent and subject to.
"Entertainment? Some of the best-selling musical artists in America were black or other minorities: Michael Jackson, Stevie Wonder, Ray Charles, Whitney Houston, Duke Ellington, Marvin Gaye, Prince, Jimi Hendrix. And there are some ridiculously successful minority actors too, including Eddie Murphy and Denzel Washington."
Yes slave masters can put their best slaves forward and have them buck dance and perform for them for the world.
If you don't understand "white supremacy" and how it works, everything else you think you understand will further confuse you. Going back to the first area of people activity, economics, who is the majority privileged to run economics of so called non white people?
Who controls the money and puts the amount THEY APPROVE of in their pockets?
You can have a pretty high and prestigious status and position while still being subject to the HIGHEST most privileged, that is the "white" supremacist.
"Oh, you can do absolutely nothing unless white supremacists approve? What about the very publication of Mr. Fuller's books? If white supremacists truly controlled everything, if you couldn't do anything without the stamp of the white supremacist approval, then Mr. Fuller wouldn't have even been allowed to publish his book!"
Now you know Mr. Fuller would disagree with this.
Of course they would allow it. That is the "white" supremacists , just as they would allow other books on "racism" and other words getting out such as speeches, rallies, protests, marches. They allowed Martin Luther King Jr. to do it for some time while who was in control?
If those that were in control were not in control, what were "non whites" marching about?
All through their efforts and protesting, they were allowed to do , ALLOWED to do whatever they were approved just like putting a book of protest out.
"I am not going to go any further into this, because you have already proven that your argument is ridiculously delusional. I have read through your entire argument multiple times, and it just line after line of this stuff, spewing such nonsensical ideas such as that minorities are disadvantaged in sex, war, and entertainment, or that it is impossible to do anything without white supremacists approving, or that the entire world is one big slavery system. Give me a break.
You also said in your second argument that you "rest your case." I guess that means that you can not provide any rebuttal to this argument."
This is the basic plain way of understanding the situation in summary.
The majority ("whites") in power in control have the privilege over those the minority that does not. They're not equals. They don't equally control the commerce, economics and currency systems. Which directly and indirectly affects everything of all areas of "non white " people activity.
Round 4
Wow Mall, that was a really rude opening to your debate. I’ve missed several arguments throughout my time on this site, but I have always apologized, and everyone has always understood. I understand that you spend a lot of time on this site, but DebateArt is also not my life. So I don’t need you to be scolding me for not being able to conform completely to this schedule.
And I don’t know what you mean by a “rushed response.” There is nothing rushed there.
Now, after that rude opening, you attempted to justify what you said about how whites apparently control the entire system and that everything anyone does has to be approved by a white person. You essentially, however, just restated your claim. You didn’t add any substance to the debate by talking about the code of justice; I already know how justice is supposed to enable equality. I suppose I should have been more clear last time: can you please provide me a logical reason to explain that an organization such as the NAACP has to be completely approved only by white people before it does anything? If you are attempting to state that whites control everything everyone does, prove it.
Who do the minorities (" non whites") answer to ?They answer to the majority "whites" .
Your next argument here seems to imply that minorities have to answer to majorities to get everything done. But that’s not always the case. For example, let’s say you there was an environmental group run by a group of black executives. Typically, an organization like this would have to answer to the EPA. And the EPA has to answer to the President. So in nearly every case (since nearly every single President has been white), the organization has had to answer to whites, right?
What about when Obama was President? Did the EPA have to answer to whites. Well, Obama isn’t white, is he? I know you may say that this is a strangely specific scenario, but that’s the point: if I can point out any case in which a minority group was not forced to answer just to whites, I can pretty much disprove your entire point. And I just did.
This point has to be thrown out unless the opposing side can at least prove two things."Racism" no longer exists and the majority of those in control don't exist. So because of this, the point of "antiquated " contexts is negated.
I’m not saying that racism no longer exists. Unfortunately, it will likely always exist. But I don’t need to prove that racism no longer exists to maintain my point that racism isn’t as prevalent now as it was 40 years ago. I never made any conclusion that racism no longer exists, I concluded that racism has been negated at least a little bit more since the ‘80s. Am I wrong? I think most people would agree with me.
Exactly you're confused. IF you don't understand white supremacy which is racism, what it is and how it works, everything else you understand, will confuse you".To be a "white " supremacist or a "white" man or woman with privilege over another, he or she has to dominate in a system that controls all of people activity concerning " non white" people .
Let’s talk about that first part there, the quote saying that if I don’t understand white supremacy, I will be confused by everything else. Are you implying that everything is affected by white supremacy? Like the laws of gravity? I don’t think so.
And as for the second part, privilege has nothing to do with romance. People are attracted to people they are attracted to. There is such thing as a mixed-race couple. In America, romantic relationships are not really (99% of the time) built on privilege regarding race.
Aside from agendas design to care less for the welfare of downtrodden impoverished "non white" people, dilapidated communities of "non white " folks leaving them prone to a higher probability of crime, drugs, violence and easily tailoring the populations with accessing abortion via passing of laws, what also goes on is the passing of laws for sex same activity. Namely legislating same sex marriage.
I’m confused again, but DO NOT tell me “of course you’re confused” again, as if it’s just because I can not grasp your concept; what you said legitimately makes no sense. Please reword it for Bette understanding.
Getting back to the violence between "non white " persons, not only enabling the war between themselves, the "white supremacists" have control over who can enter their military and offer up a sacrifice for the system of "white supremacy".How?Who does that non "white" person answer to in the military ranks?A "white " person, right. The government in which the military services are funded. The taxation system, right. The system of economics, area of economics , the major tax brackets of society, big fortune companies, CEOs, again, a "white" person or persons.That's why I say all areas are interrelated, interconnected
The only point I made about any military was that there have been militaries made up of ethnic minorities that have defeated the predominantly white U.S. military in war. And your point seems to attempt to overturn that argument, by stating that white people control the non-white people in war. White people do not control the militaries of Vietnam or Algeria.
This is like saying because the master or more privileged one protected you from harm , it means you're not under the master's control and coverage being dependent and subject to.
What are you talking about? There were many brave groups of minorities who fought for the United States in WWII, such as the Tuskegee Airmen. These groups were not “protected” by the “master.” To say that actually diminishes the accomplishments of these brave men who risked their lives (some lost their lives) to defend their families and country. There were no white people there to “protect” the Tuskegee Airmen on the front lines. In fact, the Airmen typically protected WHITES who flew bombers into enemy zones. So that argument there is null and void.
Yes slave masters can put their best slaves forward and have them buck dance and perform for them for the world.
That is truly, and I truly mean it, very racist. To call such people as Stevie Wonder and Jimi Hendrix “the best slaves” who have been put forward and forced to “buck dance” for the world is wrong on so many levels. I’m not even going to try to debate with that part of your argument anymore, because that is truly wrong. Plus, a lot of those musicians I listed were contracted with Motown which was run almost entirely by African-Americans.
Of course they would allow it. That is the "white" supremacists , just as they would allow other books on "racism" and other words getting out such as speeches, rallies, protests, marches. They allowed Martin Luther King Jr. to do it for some time while who was in control?If those that were in control were not in control, what were "non whites" marching about?All through their efforts and protesting, they were allowed to do , ALLOWED to do whatever they were approved just like putting a book of protest out.
I find your argument almost laughable now. You are essentially just saying “yes, minorities can and have gained more freedoms” but “oh, it’s because white supremacists allowed it.” This theory would make SO much more sense if you actually explained why white supremacists do it, but you didn’t. So therefore, I can’t believe you. You can’t make a claim without anything to back it up.
Not published yet
Round 5
Not published yet
Not published yet
A rare recovery in this topic!
I may be willing to debate this topic with you in the future. I think we are polar opposites on this issue lol!