The Instigator
aatayyab
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
INTJPhilosopher
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Racism is responsible for world's anarchy.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/4/2015 Category: People
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 368 times Debate No: 77274
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

aatayyab

Pro

Majority of the warmongering nations (or individuals) are pre-dominantly white and their victim nations (or individuals) are pre-dominantly brown or black.
INTJPhilosopher

Con

If Pro is to succeed in this debate, he must show that a) the world is in anarchy (I do not wish to impose my own meaning, and so will wait for his), b) that racism is a person (because only people can be subject to responsibility) and that c) racism is the prime cause for that anarchy.
I shall oppose both a, b and c.
I await my opponent's arguments.
INTJPhilosopher
Debate Round No. 1
aatayyab

Pro

Thanks INTJPhilosopher for accepting my debate on here.

a. The world is on fire and to see that, all you need to do is to open any international news channel. Or if you prefer to actually travel the conflict zones (include wars and poverty stricken areas), you'd find far worse than whatever limited TV reporting tells you.

b. Humans are social animals and they usually operate in groups. And I don't deny the fact that other groups don't target whites for racism in their own majority areas. However, on a larger scale i.e. global wars and conflict zones, this racism has spilled over a global arena and since majority of white-dominated nations are stronger in the terms of weapons, hence the world's poorer nations (and their non-white populace) is suffering their attacks in the name of war on terror or to just guard their political or economic interests. Even inside these white-majority nations, there is a huge problem of racism from political and economic point of view. For example, despite the fact that blacks are 10% of the USA population, more than 50% of the people behind jails are black. You can't fix an individual racist mind to fix this issue. It has to be dealt with on a parent level, group level, neighbourhood level and most importantly on a national level in these white-dominated nations.

c. If you remove this racist mindset (individually or collectively), there will be far lesser and more controllable evils left in this world which are compounding the issue of anarchy in this world.
INTJPhilosopher

Con

With regards to Pro's summation of a, he still hasn't proven that the world is in anarchy. In fact, all he says on that is that the world is on fire. Whilst it is true that in some of the more arid countries wildfires are common, I don't believe that using these arid zones as representative of the entire world would i) prove that the world is on fire (some arid zones don't have wildfires) or ii) that the world is in anarchy. So, his claim is still meaningless, because he hasn't proven that the thing that racism is supposed to be causing is actually happening.

On b, Pro is entirely correct that humans are social animals. They operate in groups, and evolution favoured an ingroup-outgroup bias - that is, natural selection favoured those who discriminated between people inside and outside the group. However, this is evolutionary support for shared human xenophobia, not shared human racism. If Pro were to say that xenophobia is one of the main causes of conflict in the world, I would be inclined to agree. But to focus narrowly on one form of xenophobia and blame it for all world conflict is an exaggeration. I concede the point that a concerted approach is needed to tackle xenophobia.

On c, how will removing racism make evil more controllable? Also, I mentioned evolution before and I'm going to do it again now because evolution gives the human race an ingroup-outgroup bias. If you remove racism, people will find another way to discriminate between themselves - people are wired to define categories and make distinctions, and if you take away racism, they'll find another. There's a perfectly simple way of solving this - get rid of xenophobia. That is a motion I could support. But to take away just one form of xenophobia and expect 'far lesser and more controllable evils' is a hope that is doomed to failure. You cannot just scratch the surface, you must take out the root.

I look forward to the next round,
INTJPhilosopher
Debate Round No. 2
aatayyab

Pro

aatayyab forfeited this round.
INTJPhilosopher

Con

As my opponent has forfeited, there are no arguments for me to refute.
In this round, I rest.
INTJPhilosopher
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by TyroneShelton 1 year ago
TyroneShelton
Just because white people do something to other races doesnt mean the white person did that thing because they were racist
No votes have been placed for this debate.