The Instigator
Adam2isback
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
PointyDelta
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

White privilege is impossible and doesn't exist

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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: 7/16/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 385 times Debate No: 93806
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)

 

Adam2isback

Pro

I will argue that racism and priivlege are also two different things. "Privilege" is defined as "the advantage that wealthy and powerful people have over other people in a society"
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Most white people are not wealthy. Most are commoners.
Now a lot are "Friends"-watching racists, but racism is a tribal thing, not a matter of class. Priivlege deals with classism. The only people with true privilege are monarchs, and ceelbrities, and many of the corrupt leaders across the world. There is no way that race and priivlege can mix.

White privilege is nonsense. It implies that all white people are rich. This is not an emotional argument. But one of semantics. It is complete nonsense.
PointyDelta

Con

There seems to be a misunderstanding over the word 'rich', so I'm here to clear that up.

This argument suggests that rich is perhaps on the level of a Gates or Buffet, yet in reality rich is simply a comparative term. This means that IN RELATION to the black and hispanic community of the USA (say) those who are caucasian tend to be financially much better off.

Quick graph to show this [1].

Pro's argument therefore collapses as those who are Caucasian do indeed tend to be much 'richer' than those who are black and therefore according to his own (questionable) logic, white privilege is not impossible and can indeed exist.

<3

1.)http://tinyurl.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Adam2isback

Pro

There seems to be a misunderstanding over the word 'rich', so I'm here to clear that up.

This argument suggests that rich is perhaps on the level of a Gates or Buffet, yet in reality rich is simply a comparative term. This means that IN RELATION to the black and hispanic community of the USA (say) those who are caucasian tend to be financially much better off.

According to this rich only means one thing:

rich
  • : having a lot of money and possessions

http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Also, another argument that shows that racism and classism have nothing to do with each other is this
http://www.dailymail.co.uk...
Appalachia, not Bed-Stuy, Sunset Park, or Compton, is the poorest part of America.
Poverty doesn't equate to a dangeorus neighborhood. Factors such as crime, lack of father figure, corruption, urban decay lead to this.
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk...
Segregation doesn't cause poverty. Spanish and black neighborhoods were some of the most superior neighborhoods during segregation. Blacks and Spanish built their own schools.

Most white people are commoners, just like people of every other race. Racism has nothing to do with class. During Jim Crow, most Southerners were commoners who didn't like other races. Classism had nothing to do with racism ever. White privilege implies that rich people are responsible for racism. Dead wrong. In fact, the most common racism came from populists in the USA.
https://www.google.com...
Racism is in fact a tribal thing. White privilege doesn't exist.

Does white favoritism (favoring of whites over other races in things like legal protection, rights, etc) exist? Yes. But not white privilege. IT just is impossible
PointyDelta

Con

+++Rebuttal+++

'According to this rich only means one thing:

rich

: having a lot of money and possessions'
Yes that's exactly what I'm saying in relation to others in the society. For example. we would not count a caveman who had two pigs as being rich, but back then he would have been extremely wealthy. My opponent drops this argument.

Adam's argument (as far as I can actually understand it)
Segregation != poverty (yes)
Most white people are commoners (yes)
???????????(I have no idea how Pro gets to these assumptions)
'Racism has nothing to do with class.' (There's no proof for this statement)
Classism had nothing to do with racism ever(again, no proof)
'Racism is in fact a tribal thing. White privilege doesn't exist.'(yet another baseless statement)

More arguments to follow next round.

<3
Debate Round No. 2
Adam2isback

Pro

Insults and ad-homeim, con?
Vote for pro.
PointyDelta

Con

Well okei, vote Con I guess as my opponent has dropped all of my arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Adam2isback 7 months ago
Adam2isback
woohooman
No offense, but arguing based on "sociologist/critical theory" framework is nothing but stupidity and unfactual. I care only about facts. Based on logical definition, racism and privilege do not coexist with each other. At least not white supremacy. Other forms of racism might be a little different.
Posted by woohooman 7 months ago
woohooman
Peggy McIntosh is the person who first applied the term "privileged" to white people (mostly men). Her work was mostly based on the cultural observations of W. E. B. Du Bois.

No offense, Adam2isback, but I think you might be out of your depth on this one. When people use the term "privileged" they are using it in the sociologist/critical theory framework rather than an objective "this is the definition and it does not logically apply here" way of thinking.

I agree with your assertion but this is not the way to debate it.
Posted by Adam2isback 7 months ago
Adam2isback
Pardon me, I meant to put "During Jim Crow, most whites were racists who didn't like other races" not Southerners. Has nothing to do with the vote. It's just I wanted to say that.
Posted by Adam2isback 7 months ago
Adam2isback
Yes I could. Cause it's not opinion
Posted by PointyDelta 7 months ago
PointyDelta
also, semantics? wtf man you cant use semantics as an argument
No votes have been placed for this debate.