The Instigator
Masterful
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Verithenes
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

We should completely and utterly annihilate black communities.

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...
Verithenes
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/1/2017 Category: People
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 642 times Debate No: 100441
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (12)
Votes (1)

 

Masterful

Pro

This will be a nice quick debate, keep it clean guys.

We need to completely and utterly anhiliate black communities.
It's 2017 people, time to move foward.

I'm not racist. Just a realist.

-No black people are allowed to accept, because they're biasly black.-

Verithenes

Con

So first I'm gonna tell you why this COULDN'T happen even if we wanted it to and then I'll tell you why it SHOULDN'T happen

There is a system in this country. We and the government adhere to the constitution and all of it's amendments. The 14th and 15th amendment prevent anything like this from happening. The 15th amendment does it better than the 14th though because all the 14th is doing is making slavery illegal. The 15th amendment is:

Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Section 2.
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

It prevents people of any race from having their rights infringed on and that includes the right to live. There is no way that congress would override the 15th amendment because there is no way that there would be enough racists in congress to meet the two-thirds majority needed to override an amendment and there would be so many protests. It simply would not be allowed for it to happen. The Supreme court would never let it happen either because this is a social justice issue and they would never compromise the well-being of their constituents. Even if Trump did decide he wanted to kill all black people which he won't because even though Trump is a great many things, he is not going to do that because he'd be impeached before you could say the N word.

So now let me talk about why it SHOULDN'T happen.

Have you ever heard of Hitler? Even though Stalin killed more than Hitler and Mao Zedong killed more than both of them combined, Hitler is the one who is always condemned the most because he used race and religion to determine who he killed. Now you say you're not a racist, just a realist, but anyone who would call for the extermination of a race is definitely a racist. You are saying that one race is lower than another, that one race can exterminate another because they are higher up than them and that definitely constitutes as racist. Here is a definition of racism just so we can be clear on what it is.

rac"ist

noun
1.
a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
synonyms:racial bigot, racialist, xenophobe, chauvinist, supremacist
adjective
1.
showing or feeling discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or believing that a particular race is superior to another.

All humans come from one common ancestor that originated in Africa a long time ago. We are all one race. The only reason that some people have darker skin than others is because they stayed in Africa where the sun is really really hot because you're near the equator and to avoid getting skin cancer, their skin got dark. We are all one race whether you will believe it or not.

If you annihilate black communities, you're moving backward, not forward. We need to accept everyone. That's how we move forward. I urge you to stand on the side of life and seriously reconsider your thoughts about black people because even though some of them might be bad, the majority of them are good people. Just like how some white people shoot up schools and black churches because they don't like black people but that doesn't mean that all of them are inherently bad people. There are actually more instances of white people committing crimes than there are of black people committing crimes. We've oppressed black communities for way too long and it is absolutely wrong to kill anybody no matter what they do.

Again, it is impossible for this to happen anyway and it is completely wrong to murder a race. Please negate this plan, proposition, or whatever it is.
Debate Round No. 1
Masterful

Pro

To clear up any confusion my opponent is having, I only wish the annihilation of the communities, not the people within.

I wish to destroy black communities, because I would like whites, and blacks to live side by side peacefully. If black people are separate, it will create an "us and them" mentality.

The way I propose we annihilate black communities, would be by both integrating whites into black communities, and integrating blacks into white communities.
This will create mixed communities, thus annihilating the black communities.

In order to achieve my selfless goal, we would have to, learn to tolerate black people. Look, I know tolerating them will be hard, but in the end we must. They might look like chimps, but they are not.

I really find it disturbing that my opponent would want to segregate black people. This is what Hitler did with the Jews, it’s very concerning.

Black people and white people should live together peacefully; therefore we must put an end to these segregated black communities.

I only have to argue why we should end these black communities, my reasoning is because it's racist.

A vote for con is a vote for racism.

I hope my opponent learns to one day tolerate black people.

Verithenes

Con

"I only hope my opponent learns to one day tolerate black people"
Wow, okay
You're the one who wants to annihilate their communities.
But apparently that's not racist because it's only their communities.

Let's talk about that first. You say you want to annihilate the communities. Well that's funny. Do you want to know what made black people band together and form communities? It was the white people who created their all white restaurants and their all white doctor's offices. It was the white people's Jim Crow Law that put black people beneath them. The black people didn't have anything to do with that. That is not the black people's fault and you have no business destroying their communities.

You say you aren't racist and you even condemn me for being racist but why not annihilate all white communities? Why would you choose white people over black people because that's what you're doing. You would destroy theirs before yours. Their are tons of all white neighborhoods yet you choose to annihilate the black communities. Still think you aren't racist? Think again.

Also, you never gave a legit plan to tell us how exactly you will annihilate their communities. You just say that you will somehow annihilate the way they live. I'm afraid I can't take you seriously until I hear a real plan for how you are going to do this. In order to actually accomplish what you are suggesting, you'd have to move black people around and there would be a huge mess because you'd be uprooting families and that is just wrong. You'd be forcing people to do something against their will that they shouldn't have to do. Again, congress will never ratify this even if it's just their communities. It's unconstitutional and uses racial bigotry.

I understand WHY you want to do this. You probably think that all black communities constitute as "the hood" and they are all overrun with drugs and crime. Well that is a huge stereotype and you can't run a credible argument that is based on a stereotype. I have been to several black communities/neighborhoods because I have friends who live there and I have never encountered drugs, violence, or any of the things that you are worried about and I live in a city that has is known for having a lot of crime. If you think that every community that has drugs and violence is black, you'd be wrong about that too. Breaking up black communities would not stop drugs, there will always be drugs, and white people deal drugs too. Black people are far from the only people to deal drugs and participate in other illegal activities. Again, you're using stereotypes and think that one race is better than another because you choose white over black

If you think that this has nothing to do with race, then you are wrong. He literally says BLACK communities. If he really wanted white and black people living side by side, he'd say that we should move some white people to black communities and some black people to white communities. That still wouldn't work though because you'd have to uproot people from their homes and congress would never pass it. But no, you just say we should annihilate black communities.

This proposition can't and shouldn't happen. First, my opponent hasn't even given me a plan for how he will do this. Second, this is unconstitutional because he is choosing to annihilate the black communities and that is a social justice issue and uses racial bigotry. Third, he is basing his entire argument on the stereotype that all black communities are overrun with drugs and violence.

Please negate this proposition if not for racist intent, but for lack of a plan and unconstitutionality.

I only hope my opponent learns to one day tolerate black people.
Debate Round No. 2
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Masterful 10 months ago
Masterful
Do us all a favour and take away his voting privilege please.
Posted by Masterful 10 months ago
Masterful
Paintballvet18 always seems to vote on my debates, against me. Worse yet, his votes are always dumb and get removed.
Posted by whiteflame 10 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: paintballvet18// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: If one wants to annihilate black communities, then one cannot then say that he wants to end racism. That's flawed logic on the part of the Pro. Therefore Con's refutations saying that black communities important wins.

[*Reason for removal*] The voter is required to specifically assess arguments made by both sides. The voter cannot merely state their own views on Pro"s logic, and grant Con"s arguments the win without any further explanation.
************************************************************************
Posted by dsjpk5 10 months ago
dsjpk5
Absolutely hilarious second round by Pro!
Posted by Verithenes 10 months ago
Verithenes
Exactly malia_black, if he's not racist, why would he choose black communities to be annihilated over white communities?
Posted by malia_black 10 months ago
malia_black
Literally... how dumb are you? Why use the word "annihilate" if you're not racist? Why not annihilate white communities too?
Posted by Iacov 10 months ago
Iacov
Classic bait and switch.
Posted by What50 10 months ago
What50
Black Community or what they call the "Hood" is mostly a cesspool of crime,violence,and death. Completely destroying it will be beneficial.
Posted by Iacov 10 months ago
Iacov
"We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population," Margaret Sanger wrote in a letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble on Dec., 10, 1939
Posted by Masterful 10 months ago
Masterful
It's no secret that I have beef with black folk, but I will put that aside for this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by paintballvet18 10 months ago
paintballvet18
MasterfulVerithenesTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Arguments: Pro says he wants to annihlate communities. The problem with this is that this argument is not salient for the debate because pro fails to explain until Round 2 where he says "its racist". Problem is, this assumption is Pro's own conception, and not backed up with fact, therefore, it has no weight in the debate. Con: Con counters saying that he agrees with Pro about equality but accepting communities would be better (Round 1), especially concerning the rights to life. Point being, he takes all the net benefit from the Pro and turns it into a better world in the Con. Therefore, the argument point swings Con and the judge has to vote Con for the offense coming out of Round 1 that is unrefuted.