The Instigator
KnowledgeNotNonSense
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
theta_pinch
Con (against)
Winning
20 Points

Whites Have Shown More Acts Of Violence, Than Any Race On The Planet

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 4 votes the winner is...
theta_pinch
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/20/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 541 times Debate No: 44306
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

KnowledgeNotNonSense

Pro

Please Try To Prove Me Wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
theta_pinch

Con

First we need to define who is a white: According to wikipedia:North or south of 46 degrees latitude – e.g. in Canada, Mongolia, Russia, Scandinavia, and Western Europe – dark-skinned people could not produce enough vitamin D, and humans settlement only occurred after the development of light skin pigmentation.

SPARTANS: In the Greco-Persian war 5200 spartans killed 2,641,610 Persians. That was ONE battle. The spartans were bred to fight. They were encouraged to steal food as long as they didn't get caught, they killed their babies if they weren't strong enough. They were one of the most violent societies to ever exist and they weren't white. If they killed nearly 3 million persians in one battle they would certainly have killed millions more.

Debate Round No. 1
KnowledgeNotNonSense

Pro

First i would like to say i'm humored by your attempt to debate this topic.

Whites have shown more acts of violence than any race on this planet, simply by,

1. mass genocide of the Native Americans
2.The cannibalism in Europe
3. Your coward characteristics lead to the invention of bombs
4.Brutal treatment done on African slaves, (including rape,murder
5.Wars

the list goes on!!!!
and yea, others races have done bad things too, but no where close to whites
theta_pinch

Con


1. Spartans killed more persians than whites killed indians.
2. Spartans killed there own children and there is evidence that Minoans were cannibals between 2700-1420 BC. That's over 1300 years.
3. The Jin Dynasty invented the first bombs.
"4.Brutal treatment done on African slaves, (including rape,murder"
Sorry but this means nothing; the Greeks did it, the Romans did it, the Chinese did it, the Mongols did it, the Egyptians did it.
5.Wars
Remember the Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, Spartans, Mongols, Chinese dynasties.....etc.

Conclusion
None of pro's reasons are anything that ancient non-whites didn't do for longer. There have been Numerous non-white civilizations that killed way more people than whites did. Therefore con has not fulfilled his burden of proof.

Debate Round No. 2
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by ZMowlcher 3 years ago
ZMowlcher
Wanna talk about the atrocities Africans do to each other?
Posted by VisualSimulator 3 years ago
VisualSimulator
I want to accept this challenge so bad, but I can't, too many things I have to do in real life.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by cbcullen84 3 years ago
cbcullen84
KnowledgeNotNonSensetheta_pinchTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Con, Pro's use of insults and goading during the debate is an automatic conduct loss. S&G to Pro, Con has blatant disregard for sentence structure, grammar, capitalization and spelling. Con was more convincing, Pro's use of excessive punctuation combined with a "Valley girl" approach to the argument does a great job at discrediting his argument...completely. Overall this was more funny than informative, good show.
Vote Placed by sabineparish 3 years ago
sabineparish
KnowledgeNotNonSensetheta_pinchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: The title piqued my interest and I tried to research and debate it in my own mind before reviewing the debate. I was extremely disappointed. It was not all a good debate, I would have liked to have seen more information than base generalizations. There probably should have been more informative ground rules. As to the Pro comments, there was no logic, no evidence, no manners. His examples were par for a 12 year old on the school playground. His style was that of a bully, believing that the loudest person wins. I believe he was wrong on all accounts and other than being racist, I have no idea what his thoughts are. As to the Con argument, I could see he started and tried to define the scope but was left without a real debate. I would have liked to see more but I assume he chose to waste his time somewhere else.
Vote Placed by VisualSimulator 3 years ago
VisualSimulator
KnowledgeNotNonSensetheta_pinchTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was extremely biased, Con brought up very good valid points, even though I had to look for myself. Neither Pro or Con had any reliable sources. Like Wylted said Pro loses the conduct for calling whites the cowards, even though other races have done worse things. There were a couple of grammar mistakes on both sides.
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
KnowledgeNotNonSensetheta_pinchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro loses conduct for calling whites cowards. Both pro and con showed multiple races are capable of violence but pro failed to quantify exactly how whites committed more violence. He merely stated acts of violence they participated in. Both had horrible grammar mistakes. Pro with his excessive use of exclamations, and con for failing to capitalize in several areas. Neither one provided good sources.