The Instigator
Pro (for)
7 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Reverse-Racism is a serious problem in America today

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/1/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 901 times Debate No: 53813
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




I believe that reverse-racism has become very prevalent in today's American society. I would like this to be a free for all debate with each round being a fusion of rebuttal and new points.


Even Thought I do agree with you I will accept and try my brst to win even if it means I will have to do things I normally won't but its a debate and I love debates you go first mu openetb
Debate Round No. 1


After the civil rights movement, different groups that were traditionally marginalized (women, African Americans... etc.) began to achieve rights throughout the United States. While I agree that everyone, no matter what color, creed, sexual orientation or gender deserves rights, I would also like to point out that because of the suppression of the two groups mentioned above, hypersensitivity to the issue has resulted. Today, ethnically diverse groups are able to enter traditionally difficult colleges with much more easily than whites, they are given typically given extra help in school in order to account for the perceived "slow-start" they've gotten throughout history, and white people have to watch what they say around these groups for fear of being immediately labeled a "racist" or a "bigot." This is detrimental to our collective growth because it; A. takes the issue of race and it makes people hyper-aware of it. B. Destroys our ability to make as much progress as possible throughout the workplace, and C. Ruins reputations of respectable people by allow for flippant accusations that are rarely ignored.

To expand on my first point (A), I would like to point out that by drawing attention to an issue, it is possible to inflate it past what it would normally be capable of. Look at the feminist movement--which means, by definition, to simply be in favor of women's rights--but because of third wave feminism there has been a resurgence in true sexism across the country. Now, when you ask someone on the street to characterize a feminist, they'll say something like "a bossy lesbian" or a "pushy woman." Feminism was instrumental to the expansion of equal rights, but now that there is much less injustice with just as much effort on the feminist front, the movement has received a horrible reputation. Because of this, by catering more to one race (in this case to those that were formally marginalized) it creates resentment on the other side, but because of things like affirmative action and the hyper-sensitivity to race, it takes a white persons ability to speak out against the repression away.

B. If a white person is more qualified than an African American, the African American still have a shot at getting the job, while if the situation was reversed the white would have no chance. This destroys our ability to make the most possible progress in the workplace because it takes an employers ability to select the most qualified group away.

C. The third argument is that whites have to watch what they say now and are more easily branded as "privileged and undeserving."


I agree with you but I'm going to try to give you the best debate

Tim Wise just wrote a great diary on right wing racism. As usual, though, in the comments some folks started claiming that white folks could be the victims of "racism" too. Even though I thought, from Tim's article, that the impossibility of that was clear, it's a point that's very hard to get across.

Coincidentally, an ex-student of mine wrote to me last night and asked me to remind her of my explanation of the impossibility of "Reverse Racism" -- she's in an M.A. program and found herself in a heated argument with some of her peers. So I wrote it down for her and sent it off. I thought, though, that it might be a useful document to post on DailyKos, so here it is...

Tim Wise just wrote a great diary on right wing racism. As usual, though, in the comments some folks started claiming that white folks could be the victims of "racism" too. Even though I thought, from Tim's article, that the impossibility of that was clear, it's a point that's very hard to get across.

Coincidentally, an ex-student of mine wrote to me last night and asked me to remind her of my explanation of the impossibility of "Reverse Racism" -- she's in an M.A. program and found herself in a heated argument with some of her peers. So I wrote it down for her and sent it off. I thought, though, that it might be a useful document to post on DailyKos, so here it is...

In any discussion of racism and it's alleged "Reverse," it's crucial to start with the definitions of prejudice and discrimination, to lay the foundation for understanding racism in context. There's a reason these three terms exist, and a very good reason not to conflate them, as I'll demonstrate below.

Prejudice is an irrational feeling of dislike for a person or group of persons, usually based on stereotype. Virtually everyone feels some sort of prejudice, whether it's for an ethnic group, or for a religious group, or for a type of person like blondes or fat people or tall people. The important thing is they just don't like them -- in short, prejudice is a feeling, a belief. You can be prejudiced, but still be a fair person if you're careful not to act on your irrational dislike.

Discrimination takes place the moment a person acts on prejudice. This describes those moments when one individual decides not to give another individual a job because of, say, their race or their religious orientation. Or even because of their looks (there's a lot of hiring discrimination against "unattractive" women, for example). You can discriminate, individually, against any person or group, if you're in a position of power over the person you want to discriminate against. White people can discriminate against black people, and black people can discriminate against white people if, for example, one is the interviewer and the other is the person being interviewed.

Racism, however, describes patterns of discrimination that are institutionalized as "normal" throughout an entire culture. It's based on an ideological belief that one "race" is somehow better than another "race". It's not one person discriminating at this point, but a whole population operating in a social structure that actually makes it difficult for a person not to discriminate.

A clear cut example is a slave-holding culture: people are born into a society where one sort of person is "naturally" a master, and another sort of person is "naturally" a slave (and sometimes not considered a person at all, but a beast of burden). In a culture like that, discrimination is built into the social, economic and political fabric, and individuals -- even "free" individuals -- don't really have a choice about whether they discriminate or not because even if they don't believe in slavery, they interact every day with slaves and the laws and rules that keep slaves bound.

In a racist society, it takes a special act of courage and willingness to subject oneself to scandal or danger to step outside that system and become an abolitionist. It's not the "fault" of every member of the master class that slavery exists, and some might wish it was gone. But the fact is that every single member of the master class benefits from the unpaid labor of slaves at every level of society because they simply can't avoid consuming the products that slavery produces, or benefiting from the exploitation of slave labor. So unless members of the master class rise up and oppose the system and try to overthrow it (abolitionists, for example), they're going to be complicit in the slave system: even abolitionists will profit -- against their will -- in the slave system because they still have to wear clothes or use other things the system produced.

The above is an extreme, clear example, which I use to make it easier to see the fuzzier, more complex situations in which we operate today. Despite the fact that slaves were freed by the Emancipation Proclamation, and that the 14th Amendment gave African Americans voting rights, the institutional structures of racism were not overturned. Even after the 14th was passed, white people still had the power to prevent black people from voting by instituting the poll tax, the grandfather clause, and the "understanding" clause which required blacks to recite any segment of the Constitution the registrar wanted them to recite. In the Sixties, the Civil Rights Voting Acts were passed, which knocked down those obstacles to voting. But black Americans still do not have political power in proportion to their presence in the population (even though there's a black President).

If you look at important voting bodies like the Federal and the State senates and congresses, or at the Federal and State supreme courts, or at the CEO list of major corporations, or at any other body that wields substantial power in the U.S., you will count only a few black faces (and in some cases, none). Out of the number of black faces you count, most of them will not be representing the views of the majority of black people in this country, but the views of the white majority. On the other hand, if you count the number of black people in poverty, and in prisons, or the number of people who are unemployed or lack health care, there are far more black people in these categories than is proportionate to their numbers in the larger society.

Unless you are going to argue that blacks are "naturally" inferior to whites (which is an outright racist position), you have to admit that there is some mechanism that is limiting black opportunity. That's the mechanism we call "racism" -- the interacting social, political, and economic rule systems that all discriminate, either overtly (racial profiling, for example) or covertly (i.e., white majority governments redrawing district voting lines so that black majority areas are politically split up and don't have the electoral power to vote in black candidates; or, white-run banks using zip codes as a criteria for excluding people who apply for loans, and just "happening" to exclude all the majority black neighborhoods in a city, a practice called "red-lining"). One could go on for hours about these various mechanisms, and I'm sure you can think of plenty on your own which discriminate against blacks, Hispanics, "Arab-looking" people, Native Americans, & so on.

Now to "Reverse Racism." It's crucial to maintain the distinction between the above three terms, because otherwise white people tend to redefine "Discrimination" as "Racism". Their main argument is that because both blacks and white can discriminate against each other, that "Reverse Racism" is possible. But the truth of the matter is that black people: 1) have far less opportunity to discriminate against whites than whites have to discriminate against blacks, overall; and 2) black people lack a system of institutionalized support that protect them when they discriminate against whites.

Dam it ran out of ch
Debate Round No. 2


That is not your argument, you copy and pasted an article titled "Why there's no such thing as reverse racism."

I would like to say, however, that the argument is based around the statement that it is a serious problem. I would like to point out that racism at all, on either side, is a serious problem. I would also like to point out that while there may be much less of an opportunity for blacks to discriminate against whites (in a way that actually affects their physical well being) there is as much, if not more of an opportunity for whites to be discriminated against in an accusatory sense.

Essentially, whites are now heavily scrutinized for what they say and how they act. Because racism was such a powerful tool throughout our history, and because its so frowned upon in contemporary society, whites are under a microscope across the nation. I think racism is something that should be completely flushed out of our lives, but in order for this to happen the accusations of racism as a tool of suppression need to be stopped.

While whites are still the gross majority in positions of power through the country, it is still outright ridiculous how flippantly the word "racist" is thrown around. The word holds the power permanently brand someone with a set of values they may not even slightly hold. Granted, the N word is much worse, but if its even uttered seriously coming from a mouth that would be subject to racist thoughts and opinions, they would be stripped of their position and have their reputation completely destroyed. Look at all the CEOs and businessmen that have been fired and taken out of power simply because they accidentally slipped a racist word or thought.

Actions speak louder than words, but in today's society you could be the most progressive acting person in the world, you could constantly work to insure equality, but as soon as any hint that your feelings may not back how you act and you'll immediately have your reputation ruined, and that is wrong.

The point being that regardless of what a person thinks, how they act determines who they are. This is a fact people don't really grasp, and is the root of reverse racism.

Because of this, people who could be accused of being racist (whites mainly) aren't allowed to speak and act freely because any accusation destroys their reputation and place in the world. The racism does not restrict them in a physical sense, it will rarely lead to lesser pay or a failed job interview, but it affects them in a mental sense in that they constantly have to watch what they say and how they act.

If I was in a powerful position I would never hire based on race. But if someone accused me of hiring because of race I am permanently branded racist provided I'm white. This is wrong and is the main repercussion of reverse racism.

The argument you posted ignores this fact because it only takes into account the physical harm caused by racism, not the emotional or mental harm.


I usually right my own arguments but I have no arguments for your position and I wanted to give you a good debate and I didn't want to disopoint you sorry man if you want I can continue
Debate Round No. 3


Lordzogar forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Dilara 2 years ago
There are more hate crimes against whites. When was the last time you heard of a hate crime agains a black person? There aren't that many. There are so many cases where people are killed for being white and than propel want to talk about how easy we have it. White people are being victimized. However nothing will compare to what the African Americans went through. What they went through was worse than what we have to deal with.
Posted by zidzad1 2 years ago
there is no such thing as reverse racism....
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Lt.Harris 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: PM for RFD