The Instigator
RedMoonlight
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
MakeSensePeopleDont
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Resolved: Institutional Racism is Significantly Present in America

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: 8/11/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,086 times Debate No: 78582
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (0)

 

RedMoonlight

Pro

In this debate, I'll be arguing in favor of the resolution that institutional racism is both present in America, and present to a "significant" degree.

Definitions:

Institutional racism: societal patterns that have the net effect of imposing oppressive or otherwise negative conditions against identifiable groups on the basis of race or ethnicity. [1]

Significant: Sufficiently"great or important to be"worthy of attention;"noteworthy. [2]

America: The United States of America.

[1]
http://civilliberty.about.com......

[2]
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com......

First round is for acceptance. I'll have the burden of proof to provide evidence to support the resolution. Con is responsible for refuting my assertions and evidence.
MakeSensePeopleDont

Con

[RedMoonlight -- Please update your links properly as you did not transfer them from last debate properly.]

I will refute institutional racism in America based on two definitions:

1) The Pro's (Redmoonlight) source but using the definition it points to by link (click the link for institutional racism in website provided by Pro):
a) Definition: Institutional racism refers to racism perpetrated by government entities such as schools, the courts or the
military. Unlike the racism perpetrated by individuals, institutional racism has the power to negatively affect the bulk of people belonging to a racial group.
b) Link: http://racerelations.about.com...

2) The definition provided by The Oxford English Dictionary:
a) noun: [MASS NOUN]: Racial discrimination that has become established as normal behaviour within a society or
organization
b) Link: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...
Debate Round No. 1
RedMoonlight

Pro

Firstly, I'd like to point out that, according to conventional debate rules as stated in this DDO blog article [1], the contender cannot reject or revise the instigator's definitions without a compelling reason. Examples of compelling reasons: the instigator's definition doesn't make sense, is not backed up with a source, makes the resolution unwinnable for the contender, etc. Since the Con has provided no such reason, I ask our readers/voters to consider all arguments according to the definition of institutional racism I provided in round one.

For clarity's sake, here is that definition again:

Institutional racism: societal patterns that have the net effect of imposing oppressive or otherwise negative conditions against identifiable groups on the basis of race or ethnicity. [2]

And here is the correct link (link in my round 1 argument is incomplete):

http://civilliberty.about.com...

I must also emphasize that, according to this definition, institutional racism is not limited to intentional discrimination by social institutions, but rather, any behavior or policy that imposes "negative conditions" on minorities.

In her article "What is Institutional Racism?" law professor Vernellia Randall agrees with this definition:

"Institutions can behave in ways that are overtly racist (i.e., specifically excluding Blacks from services) or inherently racist (i.e., adopting policies that result in the exclusion of Blacks)." [3]

Professor Randall argues that institutional racism need not involve intentional discrimination (although it can), nor policies targeting minorities. All that's necessary is actions or policies that result in racially disparate outcomes. This can include, for example, policies that attack traits associated with minorities, such as poverty or certain clothing styles.

To demonstrate significant institutional racism in America, I'll be touching on three social institutions relevant to any American's life - education, business, and the criminal justice system - to show that significant institutional racism exists in each.

EDUCATION

High Minority Schools are Neglected and Under - Funded

In 2000, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a class action lawsuit against the state of California, alleging the state "denied children their fundamental right to an education under the California Constitution" [4]. According to the New York Times, the lawsuit names a lack of "textbooks, trained teachers, and safe classrooms" as some of the problems experienced by roughly 1.5 million California students, almost exclusively from low-income neighborhoods. California ultimately conceded the ACLU's allegations and settled for $138 million.

How is this an example of institutional racism? Statistics from the National Center for Law and Economic Justice show that latinos and blacks are two and three times more likely respectively than whites to live in poverty [5]. As such, California's failure to maintain the quality of public schools in poorer areas disproportionately affects minority students, and is consistent with the aforementioned definition of institutional racism.

Numerous studies echo the ACLU lawsuit.

A 2000 study by the Applied Research Center found similar "glaring inequities and discrimination in public schools" throughout America [6]. The study's results held that minority students are suspended/expelled at disproportionate rates, graduate at disproportionately lower rates, and have less access to gifted programs than white students. A 2015 study found that, despite higher rates of exposure to factors associated with disability, black students are significantly underrepresented in special education programs [7]. This suggests unequal access to school resources for minority students.

Minorities Lack Access to Important Subjects and Experienced Teachers

Finally, according to statistics from the US Education Department's 2011-2012 Civil Rights Data Collection program, as relayed by the Huffington Post, issues of school and teacher quality shown in the 2000 ACLU lawsuit persist, even more than 10 years later. The study found that minority-heavy schools generally offer a less diverse range of subjects and pay teachers lower salaries, indicating less experiencrd teachers. They also tend to have more brand new teachers than schools with fewer minorities [8].

BUSINESS

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits American employers from discriminating on the basis of race. However, research has emerged which suggests that, even almost fifty years later, minorities still face discrimination in the private sector.

Minorities Face Severe Hiring Discrimination

In her 2001 - 2002 study titled "Are Emily and Brendan More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal?" University of Chicago legal scholar Marianne Bertrand investigates racial bias in hiring. Researchers sent 5000 "fictitious resumes" with equivalent credentials to 1300 employers throughout Chicago and Boston. They then analyzed callback rates to determine whether applicants with names commonly considered to be "black names" were called back at lower rates than those with "white names." Bertrand found that those with "black names" were called back 50 percent less, which, she concludes, "suggests a significant amount of discrimination in this first stage of the job recruiting process" [9].

Bertrand's study indicates that whites are often favored over blacks with equal qualifications. But what about when blacks are more qualified for the job in question? A study by Northwestern University sociologist Devah Pager measured and compared callback rates among four groups - whites with no criminal record, whites with a criminal record, blacks with no criminal record, and blacks with a criminal record. Predictably, both groups of whites were called back more than their black counterparts. What's more shocking, however, is the fact that whites with records were called back more often than blacks without records, suggesting race takes precedence even over criminality as a factor in hiring [10].


THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

Numerous scientific studies have concluded that discrimination and racially-charged policies are rampant throughout both law enforcement and the courts.

Blacks are Arrested Disproportionately for Drug Crime

A 2014 study from the Brookings Institute found that , although whites are more likely than blacks to sell drugs and equally likely to use them, blacks are roughly three times more likely to be arrested for drug dealing/possession [11]. Another comprehensive study by Human Rights Watch, which analyzed drug arrest data between 1980 and 2007, supports this conclusion [12]. Both violent and property crime by blacks are consistently lower each year, leading the Brookings study to conclude that "the drug war has a profoundly negative effect on racial equality, and on rates of upward mobility."

Minorities are Profiled by Police

According to the New York Civil Liberties Union, blacks and latinos compose 87% of those stopped and frisked by police, despite being only 53% of New York City's population. The study also shows that police concentrate "stop and frisk" in the most minority-heavy parts of the city, such as Brownsville, where 93% of residents were stopped and frisked in 2009 [13].Furthermore, a separate ACLU study found racial profiling to be the norm in multiple areas throughout the country, especially regarding traffic stops [14]

Minorities are at a Disadvantage in Court

Due to higher poverty rates, minorities are disproportionately likely to use a public defender rather than a private lawyer when arrested. A 2009 report by the American Bar Association found that public defenders are overworked, drastically under - funded compared to prosecutors, and as such, often can't provide adequate counsel [15]. This governmental choice regarding PD funding can be said to disproportionately harm minorities, and as such, amounts to institutional racism.

Even more concerning is the rate at which blacks are illegally rejected from jury duty. A 2010 Equal Justice Initiative study analyzed jury selection in 8 US states, and appellate courts in 7 of 8 of these "have been forced to recognize continuing problems with racially biased jury selection" [16]. In certain jurisdictions, as many as 80% of blacks are routinely excluded from jury duty.

CONCLUSION

I've used credible scientific studies to show significant racism in several major social institutions. At this point, the resolution is affirmed.

SOURCES

[1] http://debateorg.blogspot.com...

[2] http://civilliberty.about.com...

[3] http://academic.udayton.edu...

[4] http://www.nytimes.com...

[5] http://www.nclej.org...

[6] http://eric.ed.gov...

[7] http://www.aera.net...

[8] http://m.huffpost.com...

[9] http://www.chicagobooth.edu...

[10] http://www.epi.org...

[11] http://www.brookings.edu...

[12] https://www.hrw.org...

[13] http://m.huffpost.com...

[14] https://www.aclu.org...

[15] "Eliminating Excessive Public Defender Workloads" -American Bar Association. (Available for free download through a google search)

[16] "Illegal Racial Discrimination in Jury Selection" -Equal Justice Initiative (Available for free download through a google search)
MakeSensePeopleDont

Con

First, I do have good reason to change your definition; you are not providing the correct definition according to your own source:
Steps:
1)Click your link which I have copied here
a.http://civilliberty.about.com...
2)The first sentence says "The term "institutional racism""" see how the words "institutional racism are blue? That means it is a hyperlink to another page for further information on that set of words.
3)Click this hyperlink; the blue words and it will take you here:
a.http://tinyurl.com...
4)Here is definition they use:
a.Institutional racism refers to racism perpetrated by government entities such as schools, the courts or the military. Unlike the racism perpetrated by individuals, institutional racism has the power to negatively affect the bulk of people belonging to a racial group.
The author for your first source "What is Institutional Racism?" is CLEARLY HEAVILY BIASED:
1)The website itself is built around Hillary Clinton
a.The top header of the site says "2008 Presidential Election, Race and Racism"
b.Just under this is a green link to "Send Letter to Secretary Hillary Clinton"
2)In this author"s opinion, if you are not black there is no way for you to not be racist
a.Chart 01 on this site shows a boxed chart with 4 possibilities of level of racism: Not racist, Reluctant Racist, Reformed Racist, and Overt Racist. However, the 7th paragraph, the one right above the chart states:
i.Using Blacks as the focal group, a "non-racist" is an institution that has no negative biases or prejudices against Blacks and no discriminatory behaviors. It is very rare that an institution has neither racial bias nor prejudices and engages in no discriminatory behavior. When institutions take the position that they are non-racist, it is possible that the institutions operate in arenas where they have very little contact with Blacks. However, it is more likely that they are in denial about the existence of either prejudices or discrimination.
b.So if no institution is able to be "Non-Racist", this author clearly thinks every institution is racist.
3) As per this author, the only way to not be racist is to be black. This author, my friends, is the definition of a racist.
EDUCATION
In the cited case: ACLU vs State of California the source discusses small school districts with rats running wild in classrooms, not enough books for each student to have one, students receiving photocopies of the book, etc. However, this report is the initial filing and does not detail the findings of the investigations. The lawsuits cite the fault not with the educational institution or state, but instead with the following:
1)Illegal Immigration and the overload to space and budgets
a.About 3.2 million illegal immigrants in CA stretching the budget an extra $10 Billion each year.
b. http://tinyurl.com...
c.http://tinyurl.com...
d.http://tinyurl.com...
2)Waste, Fraud and Abuse by the minority run school board including the minority Superintendent Richard Rodriguez who just in a single year "wasted $900,000":
a.http://www.mercurynews.com...
b.http://tinyurl.com...
3)How can the problem be racism when the people running these rundown school districts are the same minorities you are claiming are being given racist treatment? They are clearly being given the money, materials and space to properly perform; however, they are improperly allocating said resources on their own. This is a clear case of crying wolf while pocketing gains for themselves.
Your statement "A 2015 study found that, despite higher rates of exposure to factors associated with disability, black students are significantly underrepresented in special education programs [7]." Is COMPLETELY wrong. In fact, the 1st sentence of the FULL article states "Racial-, ethnic-, and language-minority schoolchildren in the US have repeatedly been reported to be overidentified as disabled and so disproportionately overrepresented in special education"
1)http://tinyurl.com...
2)I suggest you start READING your sources
3)If you read your article then the referenced articles in that document, you will find that this "overrep" status was caused by social promotion which meant even if the students did not meet qualifications to pass they were still passed to keep them with their age group. This practice occurs EVERYWHERE to EVERY race except Florida which banned the practice.
Your reference to minority students being suspended, expelled and dropping out at a higher rate. I don"t understand what this has to do with racism.
1)Your article points to"well no reason, it just states that it happens and that schools need to adjust their punishments to punish bad behavior less.
2)If the student fights in class or breaks rules, why is it racist to punish them according to the rules and set standards? Should it be considered racist to punish and jail a black man for murder now too?
3)If the student willingly drops out of school, why is it a racist problem and not the fault of the student?
4)Seems like a failure to take responsibility for one"s own action to me and you have provided no evidence to say otherwise.
5)As far as having less access to gifted programs; here is your article"s statement on that:
a. "schools must end academic tracking and open the way for all students to participate in a challenging curriculum."
b.So stop judging a student"s ability and proper academic course based on their academic history and let them do whatever they want? Seems like a recipe for increased discouragement and dropout rates to me
Your assertion from the Huffington Post about inexperienced teachers, I would refer back to the articles defined above regarding waste, fraud and abuse as it is directly addressed there. Again a failure of the district board and superintendent to properly allocate resources.
BUSINESS
The first source cited here along with the assertions from said source are unusable. They are unusable because "Are Emily and Brendan More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal?" is an opinion piece.
1)It is considered an opinion piece because the "study" was authored, edited, researched, and cross-checked by 1 single person.
2)There is no way for me verify, dispute or even discuss the findings as there is no way to see the actual research or data.
3)Research and data are hidden and require paywall access meaning I must pay the author to see the research.
4)How am I supposed to do anything with this?
As far as the criminal record "experiment", there are many holes that are missed in the study cited:
1)http://tinyurl.com...
2)How many pages is the full document? Your article only links to an edited version showing only pages 44, 45 & 46
3)Your study does not show any actual data including which companies performed background checks and which ones did not
4)Here"s an interesting line for you: "The audit study focused only on the first stage in the employment process"the stage most likely to be affected by the barrier of a criminal record"
a.This means no race was taken into account as anyone who ever filled out an application knows by reading it; the race, gender, ethnicity parts of the application never make it to the hiring manager"s desk, they are immediately sealed and left in a database where even HR can"t see.
b.This means"you guessed it, race is impossible to play a part as the hiring manager never sees you or knows your race because they are only looking at your application, not at you.
c.Sooo this entire study means nothing at all in terms of race as it never comes into play. Only your criminal background if you willingly provided it"failed attempt at a scientific study guys.
JUSTICE SYSTEM
Next is your source on blacks being arrested more for drug violations as compared to whites even though whites are more likely to sell and equally likely to use.
1)Whites were about 45 percent more likely than blacks to sell drugs in 1980, according to an analysis of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth by economist Robert Fairlie.
a.Did you not realize your source was using data from surveys? This is far from scientific or reliable.
b.I mean seriously, your source trusts criminals who all sit in prison denying their criminal actions, to come out and suddenly speak on their crimes because it"s a survey? Really?
c.What am I supposed to do with this? There is no data to verify and dispute.
For your "source [12]", did you just pull this from an old college paper or something? The page doesn"t exist so I REALLY can"t dispute this one.
Source[13] citing stop and frisk rates in Brownsville, NY
1)IT"S FREAKING BROOKLYN DUDE!!! What do you expect?
2)Here is a link to the crime statistics for the area, crimes per square mile 873, national average is 37.9; the murder capital of NY! That"s over 2,300 times the national average. Come on man.
3)http://www.neighborhoodscout.com...
4)http://tinyurl.com...
Source[14] is a complete hear-say piece, not one sentence has any data or factual, data supported evidence that I can dispute or even discuss. What am I supposed to do with this?
Source[15] & [16] have no source, they just says "google it". What am I supposed to do with this?
CONCLUSION
Your opening article states that even if you are identified as "Non-Racist" you are still racist, just in denial. The only way to not be racist is if you are black. Your education argument was poorly researched as you only site initial court filings and complaints and you failed to do any research on the actual facts of the case. I have shown the problem is waste, fraud and abuse by the minorities running the districts in question; which eliminates the racism argument. Employment arguments are backed by opinion pieces that lack the required data and facts for dispute so they are nullified and not usable in a debate. Justice system seems to have just completely gone off the rails.
Debate Round No. 2
RedMoonlight

Pro

In this round, I’ll be addressing the Con’s rebuttals one by one to show they don’t adequately refute my evidence.

Definition of "institutional racism:"

Con states: “I do have good reason to change your definition; you are not providing the correct definition according to your own source”

Readers: If you click the link I’ve provided (http://civilliberty.about.com...), you’ll notice the word “Definition” followed by my definition of institutional racism. As Con said, he gets his definition by clicking the hyperlink of the words “institutional racism,” which leads to a different page, with a different definition, written by a different author. This definition is equally valid, however, Con cannot reject my definition in favor of another valid definition. Rather, he must first prove my definition is invalid.

“What is Institutional Racism” Source

Con states: “The author for your first source "What is Institutional Racism?" is CLEARLY HEAVILY BIASED”

Since Con has failed to back his allegations of bias with any expert opinion, I’ve provided a guide from Anoka-Ramsey Community College that gives objective criteria for evaluating bias in a source/argument [1].

This guide sums up bias as "a one-sided, usually emotion-driven, approach to an issue, that lacks respectful regard to opposing views." So, while people tend to try to show bias by attacking an author's worldview/background, this is insufficient; a source cannot be dismissed as biased unless the author's argument is proven illogical.

Below, I address Con's points by number:

1.) Professor Randall 's support for Hillary Clinton in no way means she's biased. Con is implying that having any political ideology or beliefs whatsoever makes an author unreliable. If this were true, no author or source could ever be impartial.

2.) Neither Randall nor her chart suggest that "if you are not black there is no way for you to not be racist." Con forgets we're talking about institutional racism, and as such must make a distinction, as the author does, between an institution's effect on blacks and the beliefs of people involved in the institution. When Randall says non-racist institutions are "very rare," she means most institutions have a net negative effect on the black community, NOT that the people controlling these institutions are always prejudiced. According to Randall's chart, even an institution controlled entirely by blacks could be racist if it impacts the black community negatively. Such an institution would be "reluctant racist:" discrimination, but no prejudice.

3.) Con has not shown this author to be "racist." Believing that most social institutions impact the black community negatively is in no way a "racist" point of view.

EDUCATION

ACLU Lawsuit

Con states : "The lawsuits cite the fault not with the educational institution or state, but instead with the following:"

1.) First, the correct name of the lawsuit is Williams v. State of California, since Eliezer Williams was the plaintiff represented by ACLU lawyers. Second, the lawsuit [2] does not say illegal immigration is responsible for bad conditions in schools. Rather, it blames the state's inadequate funding. The settlement involved forcing the state to provide additional funding. Con's numbers regarding immigration may or may not be true, but they don't negate the significant degree of institutional racism seen in the Williams case.

2.) Unfortunately, Con seems to have confused Luther Burbank Middle School in San Francisco, CA (the subject of the Williams case) with Luther Burbank School District in San Jose, CA. Con's San Jose Mercury News article about administrator fraud/waste concerns the latter, and as such, is irrelevant to my assertion.

3.) In Williams v. State of California, the problem was NOT a "minority run school board," as Con claims, but inadequate state funding. During the settlement, the state admitted the funding issue and took steps to rectify it.


Here, Con alleges that my source [3] actually says minority children are over-represented in special education rather than under-represented. This is blatantly false. Readers should note the article's title: "Minorities are Disproportionately Underrepresented in Special Education: Longitudinal Evidence Across Five Disability Conditions." Con's quote from the article is intentionally taken out of context to suggest that it is the article's claim, when in reality it's a myth the article seeks to debunk.

2.) As for minorities being suspended and expelled at disproportionate rates, the researchers in said study [4] believe the racial disparity is indicative of harsher discipline policies for minorities. Unless you think minorities all over the country are more likely to break school rules than whites (and can provide evidence for this), prejudice is the most reasonable explanation for the race-based disparity.

A quote from the Huffington Post article to support this [5]:

"If you look at kids in the same district in the same school, there is no data that African American kids are actually engaging in more severe behaviors that lead to a higher percentage of expulsions and suspensions."

5b) This Huffington Post article does NOT mention fraud/waste as a cause of problems with teacher experience and subject access. However, fraud and waste that disproportionately harms minority students is classic institutional racism, regardless of whether it's done by minorities (which, I might add, you haven't proven). Remember, institutional racism has to do less with the intent of a behavior and more with the outcome.

BUSINESS
Minorities Face Severe Hiring Discrimination

First Source

1.) Con's claims my cited article "Are Emily and Brendan More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal" by Marianne Bertrand is an "opinion piece." Once again, an entirely baseless assertion. First, Con self-defines the term "opinion piece," citing no source for his definition. Second, the article in question is based on empirical research and concrete data, so by no means is it "opinion." Third, the research was NOT done by "one single person." As stated in the article, Bertrand was assisted by Sendhil Mullainathan, a researcher from MIT.

2) Con CAN discuss/dispute the research findings because all methodology and results are stated in the source I provided.

Second Source

2,3) Here is a link to the complete document, although my earlier source did have the significant points [6].

4) Quote from the document:

"Auditors visited the employers, filled out applications, and went as far as they could during that first interview."

This very strongly implies the auditors interacted with employers in person. Therefore, race could easily be taken into account.

JUSTICE SYSTEM

Blacks are Arrested Disproportionately for Drug Crime

1) Sorry Con, but there's a consensus in the academic community that surveys ARE reliable if they adhere to certain standards.

According to about.com psychology expert Kendra Cherry, "surveys are generally standardized to ensure they have reliability and validity" [7].

The logic behind thinking surveys are reliable is this: lying, except in certain people (like the mentally ill), is almost always purposeful. Criminals lie in jail to avoid self-incrimination. What reason would someone have to lie on an anonymous survey?

c. Sorry about the broken link. I've included a working version of that same link in this argument [8].

Minorities are Profiled by Police

1.) Brooklyn or not, high crime rate or not, it's ridiculous to assume that 93% of Brownsville residents are committing crime. Those numbers are disproportionate to the amount of crime that actually happens in Brownsville, just like stop and frisk rates for whites are disproportionately low compared to the white population and white crime rate. They are absolutely indicative of abuse of the stop and frisk program in a high-minority area. Readers should note that Con has failed to address my other "stop and frisk" statistics.

You're correct that my ACLU source ([14] in my round 2 argument) is not a quantitative study and does not involve data. It does, however, discuss the historical context of police profiling using expert opinions and verifiable facts. For example, the article discusses the phenomenon which emerged during the early War on Drugs where police were directly instructed to profile minorities - a policy based in stereotypes which led to over-policing in high-minority areas.

Minorities are at a Disadvantage in Court

Con has failed to address these points, even though I've provided titles of specific studies, names of sponsoring organizations, and a process of pulling up the studies that should take no more than ten seconds. My assertion remains unrefuted.

CONCLUSION

I've attacked each of Con's rebuttals and shown each to be an inadequate refutation of my evidence. The resolution continues to be affirmed. Thanks to Con for an enjoyable and thought-provoking debate.

Sources







MakeSensePeopleDont

Con

Definition of institutional racism:

Pro states: "If you click the link I"ve provided ["] This definition is equally valid, however ["] he must first prove my definition is invalid."

Your author"s definition does not in any way match with the only source they cite for backing evidence.

What is Institutional Racism

Pro states: "Since Con has failed to back his allegations of bias with any expert opinion, I"ve provided a guide ["]"

Pro"s definition of bias states: "This guide sums up bias as ["] a source cannot be dismissed as biased unless the author's argument is proven illogical."

So when the author of an article you are citing states in the article "When institutions take the position that they are non-racist, it is possible that the institutions operate in arenas where they have very little contact with Blacks. However, it is more likely that they are in denial about the existence of either prejudices or discrimination." there is a clear bias present as it is illogical.

Pro States: "When Randall says non-racist institutions are "very rare," she means most institutions have a net negative effect on the black community, NOT that the people controlling these institutions are always prejudiced. "

So now you"re speaking for the author and telling us what you think she meant? Your opinion isn"t fact.

Pro States: "According to Randall's chart, even an institution controlled entirely by blacks could be racist ["]"

Now you"re just lying; nowhere on the chart or article does it state this.

Pro States: "Con has not shown this author to be "racist." Believing that most social institutions impact the black community negatively is in no way a "racist" point of view."

So stating that "non-racist institutions either don"t interact with blacks or are in denial of their own racism" does not in itself display even the slightest of racism?

EDUCATION

ACLU Lawsuit

1.Good catch, I didn"t notice my miss there. Apparently this Luther Burbank guy was very influential in CA; there are dozens of Luther Burbank middle schools, school districts, etc. all over the state of CA.
2.As I began reading, I realized:
a.If the government was involved in institutional racism in this case, why did it rule against itself forcing itself to help the same students it was so determined to hold down? Seems kind of illogical doesn"t it?
3.What I see happened here is the state failed its educational system as a whole, just as most of the nation is, it is not an institutional race thing, it is a continuing institutional neglect of education across the nation.
a.http://tinyurl.com...

SPECIAL ED OVERIDENTIFICATION
1)Pro forgets that even his article takes a few studies that say under, and a few studies that say over, then puts their own spin on those studies to come up with their conclusion eventually stating that both sides were sort of wrong, but don"t worry, they found the magic formula to fix every other study
2)Truth is there will always be conflict here as science and medicine change in the 5 categories representing special education: learning disabilities, speech or language impairments, intellectual disabilities, other health impairments, or emotional disturbances.
3)Institutional racism would mean that the said institution implements processes and procedures which hold down a specific race. However, government and department of education reaction to the ongoing studies of special education attendance shows this is just not happening; instead, the complete opposite is happening. For example:
a.In response to reports of minority over-identification in early 2000"s, congress reauthorized the "Individuals with Disabilities Education Act" (IDEA) in 2004. This act enforced monitoring and reporting tools as well as funding to early intervening services to assist in getting the questionable (borderline) disabled minority students as well as highly functional disabled students to the point that they can attend standard classes with comfort. http://tinyurl.com...
b.How is this racist? How is it a bad thing for an institution to listen to your complaints then start a policy that attempts to resolve the issue you are complaining about?
PUNISHMENT IN SCHOOLS
1)The article Pro points to just simply states that minorities are in trouble more than white students. It does not make any claim of race driven punishment or disparity. It simply says, and I quote "African American students ["] were suspended or expelled in disproportionate numbers." The article gives no data showing that a white student and a black student having the same disciplinary record are treated differently
2)Having no data or proof, Pro as attempted to place burden of proof on me " Unless you think minorities all over the country are more likely to break school rules than whites (and can provide evidence for this) ["]"
a.This clearly violates the rules set forth by Pro: "I'll have the burden of proof to provide evidence to support the resolution"
3)As for the Huffington Post article, it links to data from the government that states black students get in trouble a lot more than"well every other race
a.http://tinyurl.com...
4)The supporting data for the Huffington Post article shows that out of the 7 identified racial groups, white students are punished 3rd most.
5)Let"s take Boston, MA for example; the only district named in Pro"s article. It shows racial discipline ranked as (listed most punished to least punished): Black, Hispanic, White, Asian, 2 or more, American Indian, Pacific Islander.
6)Using the Pro"s own data: Asian, mixed, Native Americans, and Hawaiian"s are the racist groups in America"s educational institution.
a.http://tinyurl.com...
7)Pro states: "Remember, institutional racism has to do less with the intent of a behavior and more with the outcome."
a.Again, your definition was proven wrong. However, just to show how mindless this definition is: Although your parents wanted to start a family and bring you into the world with the best of intentions, the simple fact they had sex and produced you means that your familial institution is, by your own definition, racist; you are racist.

BUSINESS
Minorities Face Severe Hiring Discrimination

Pro states: "First, Con self-defines the term "opinion piece," citing no source for his definition."
1)I really have to define the word opinion? Or is it that I used the word "piece" in place of article? Or should I define article too?

Pro states: "the article in question is based on empirical research and concrete data"
1)This author and researcher admitted their "research" is illegal when stating they "["] purged the resumes of real names and contact information" replacing these with false information. Remember, at the end of that application you fill out, you sign it stating that under penalty of perjury all the information provided is true and accurate and can disqualify you from contention.
2)This means that any company doing a background check, a google search, credit check, etc. would find that the applicant does not exist. In fact, if any of the information provided matches a real person"s identity, they can be prosecuted for identity theft or defamation.
3)Did either researcher ever call the jobs they applied for and ask why they were never called for an interview? No, so where is their "concrete" indisputable evidence if they never verified reason for not being called? All I see are 2 m0rons committing multiple felonies then admitting to them.
Pro states: "Auditors visited the employers, filled out applications, and went as far as they could during that first interview. This very strongly implies the auditors interacted with employers in person."

1)"Strongly Implies"? So again, your article never states face-to-face interaction with hiring staff ever took place. When you walk into a business and ask for an application, you are talking to the customer-facing "worker bees", not HR or the hiring manager.
2)This source also failed to contact the company and verify why they were not asked in for an interview. So again, the conclusion is an assumption, an opinion, as opposed to a fact.

JUSTICE SYSTEM

Pro states: "There's a consensus in the academic community that surveys ARE reliable if they adhere to certain standards."
1)One of those standards is fulfillment of "Sine Qua Non" or essential conditions. For example, good instruments which are created by assuring reliability and validity.
a.http://tinyurl.com...
2)Asking criminals who knowingly lie to answer questions regarding the crime they say they never committed directly violates the requirements of reliability and validity for the creation of good instruments. No good instrument, no good survey.
3)Why would a criminal lie? I don"t know, why don"t you ask a criminal and hope he doesn"t lie to you.

Pro states: "it's ridiculous to assume that 93% of Brownsville residents are committing crime ["]"

1)Brownsville, NY is a neighborhood in East Brooklyn; it"s a housing project measuring 1.163 sq. mile.
a.http://tinyurl.com...
2)In this 1 sq mile between Jan 1 and May 18, 2014; 410 people were shot. So in 133 days, 410 people were shot...in 1 sq. mile, and you think stop-and-frisk is a bad thing there?
a.http://tinyurl.com...

Pro states: "["]the article discusses the phenomenon which emerged during the early War on Drugs where police were directly instructed to profile minorities

1)Nowhere in the article is this said which is probably why you didn"t provide a quote for the first time.
2)The only racial profiling noted with evidence in this article was during segregation and racism in the south. DUH, that was a racist time over 55 years ago.

Pro states: "["] and a process of pulling up the studies that should take no more than ten seconds. My assertion remains unrefuted.

1)1st source came up with 12,700 hits, 2nd source gave 47,700 hits. Burden of proof is yours.
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by RedMoonlight 1 year ago
RedMoonlight
@MakeSensePeopleDont
No problem about the format. If you click the "rich text" option while writing your argument you'll be able to use all the formatting tools like font size, etc.

@Mentalist
I agree institutional racism is probably worst in the justice system. I haven't brought up the recent police brutality incidents in my argument because it's still widely considered debatable whether they were race-based killings, although the historical context is pretty damning
Posted by MakeSensePeopleDont 1 year ago
MakeSensePeopleDont
well mentalist, when you vote, make sure you actually read the arguments and base your vote on those, not on anything outside of the arguments presented.
Posted by mentalist 1 year ago
mentalist
Racial profiling is the clearest proof of institutional racism...along with the glaring evidence of police brutality that have been witnessed recently.
Posted by MakeSensePeopleDont 1 year ago
MakeSensePeopleDont
sry bout the formatting, not sure why it doesn't format right on my browser since upgrading to Windows 10
Posted by RedMoonlight 1 year ago
RedMoonlight
Are you talking about Vernellia Randall? Lol
Posted by MakeSensePeopleDont 1 year ago
MakeSensePeopleDont
the key word in my statement was RACIST
Posted by RedMoonlight 1 year ago
RedMoonlight
So, what you're saying is, I should only be citing conservative white people?
Posted by MakeSensePeopleDont 1 year ago
MakeSensePeopleDont
LOL did you vet ANY of your resources...or even read them? Seriously, you actually cite a very openly racist, liberal, black professor and her writings...really? Come on man.
Posted by RedMoonlight 1 year ago
RedMoonlight
Just got home from work and posted it. Over to you.
Posted by MakeSensePeopleDont 1 year ago
MakeSensePeopleDont
Are we gonna get your Round 2 arguments today or is the extra day on top of the full 3 days you had on the last debate?
No votes have been placed for this debate.