The Instigator
LoveRichardDawkins
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
asta
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points

Affirmative Action is Not Justified

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
asta
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/7/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 783 times Debate No: 116367
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (23)
Votes (1)

 

LoveRichardDawkins

Con

By affirmative action I mean mechanisms such as quotas or all female shortlists for certain positions. These should occur in the workplace, at colleges and in general education in order to fix the problem of discrimination against marginalised groups and underrepresentation of women and ethnic minorities in top positions.

I look forward to my opponent"s argument and hope this will be a productive debate.

A forfeit is an automatic loss by the way.

I am Con so I am justifying affirmative action and Pro is criticising it.

Good luck
asta

Pro

Affirmative action(AA) is wrong because reverse racism is still racism. AA helps out females and POCs at the expense of the CIS HET White Males. The reason why males and caucasians are more likely to be CEOs and leaders of big businesses is because they tend to be more qualified and more interested in those fields.

The government should not help solve POCs tending to not get into as good of jobs. Minorities should depend on themselves to get good jobs. Caucasian males tend to already do this. So do Asian males. It's why their GDP per capitas are similar to each other and high compared to other races. It's now time for most Blacks and Hispanics to Emulate the Caucasians and Asians. It's now time for females that want to be CEOs to emulate male CEOs.

Rebuttals:

"These should occur in the workplace" No. Workplaces have already gone liberal enough. It's time for them to pick people on the basis of qualifications, not skin color or chromosomes.

"at colleges and in general education in order to fix the problem of discrimination against marginalized groups and under representation of women" Women already make up the majority of college graduates and minorities already are more likely to attend school in general than Caucasians because they tend to have more kids. Yet, just being in the education system doesn't work. What does work for the individual is not the power of society, but the power of themselves.

What POC and women should do to even the playing field against CIS HET White Males: Emulate, not take.
Debate Round No. 1
LoveRichardDawkins

Con

Thanks for taking up the challenge. Before I explain my arguments for why we need affirmative action I want to unpick some of the problems with your argument.

Firstly, I need to explain why this is not "reverse racism". This is not true because nobody is, in any way, arguing that non-ethnic minorities are somehow lower people than ethnic minorities or marginalised groups. We are however recognising that we live in an unequal society with levels of discrimination against marginalised groups such as black people or women. Therefore, we are recognising that they come from a position of disadvantage and thus we have an imbalance that we need to fix. Therefore, we need a level of positive discrimination at the top to adjust this imbalance due to the negative discrimination inherent in our society. So it's not as simple as "reverse racism" because it is not racist. Rather it is recognising an unfair status-quo and discriminating in a way that equalises our society and thus fixing the historic injustices faced by marginalised groups. We see that right now white men are at a position of immense advantage and thus we need to put in measures to lift up others in order to end the imbalance we already have. So it's not "reverse racism"; its pursuing equality.

Next, I do believe that people should exercise some personal responsibility however group identity still matters because our society is inherently racist and inherently sexist. Thus the government can't just sit on its backside and expect POC to "depend on themselves". The reality is that they can't just "depend on themselves" because they face so much racial discrimination. Therefore, the government does have to put into place policies of AA in order to help minorities to "lift themselves up".

Then you made this weird assertion that white men were more likely to be CEOs because they are more qualified and more interested in those fields. I wonder why? They are more qualified because less POC go to university due to their disadvantages and because women are discriminated against in the work place. Plus I don't believe that POC and women should be expected to "emulate" the supposedly great white and asian men. Why should the workplace be so masculine? Is that actually fair? I think that the workplace should be changed to suit society and not the other way round. Finally, women DO want to be CEOS but they can't due to discrimination and a society that has told them for years "you are girl and should do girly jobs like nursing".

Now onto my arguments. Firstly, we live in a society which is inherently racist, sexist and discriminatory. We have a gender pay gap where women earn 71 cents to every dollar that men make, revealing the underrepresentation of women in the workplace and the implicit bias against them. The raw gap between white employees and black employees in the United States can be as high as 30%. In a recent survey of over 5,200 newly employed workers, black job seekers were offered significantly less compensation than whites by potential new employers. U.S. employers are also more likely to turn away applicants if they have names that sound African-American. Job seekers with white-sounding names get one callback per 10 resumes, while applicants with African-American sounding names get just one callback per 15 resumes. Between 1979-2012, median wages rose for white women by 31%, but only 20% for African American women.

The following link further reveals the effects of implicit bias:

http://kirwaninstitute.osu.edu...

Clearly we have an identifiable problem caused by bias and prejudice. So how will AA solve this problem? Well, we know that just sitting back will not solve this problem as the current system of discrimination will just continue thus a degree of government action is necessary. AA does many things to help. Firstly, it puts people from these marginalised groups into positions of power and influence who would not be there without it. This can help to change stereotypes as people will see these examples of successful minorities and successful women therefore challenging their misconceptions that such groups are "not hard-working enough" to succeed. In this way, racist and sexist attitudes can be forcibly reversed.

Secondly, these new POCs and women in such positions can act as conscious or subconscious role models to other POCs and women. The reality is that currently many women and POCs don"t want to apply for such jobs due to a pernicious culture of "it"s not my place". This sense of "not my place" is derived from an immense feeling of disenfranchisement with mainstream society since nobody in that field of work or education looks like you or has a similar background to you; nobody in that field can be related to you and thus you feel that you wouldn"t fit in or would be an "outsider" (not a nice feeling surprisingly). Sometimes this effect is not explicit and is a subconscious effect. Ethnic minorities in particular think about racism a lot more than the majority does and thus these feelings do genuinely occur to them very much. In this way, AA can provide inspiring role models thus motivating more people to bring about equality themselves but crucially AA is the all important trigger.

Finally, AA simply artificially brings about more equality since it rebalances the bias that already exists in our society. If you have a company that has problems with implicit bias then using AA to force a certain amount of POCs into your workplace will guarantee that that implicit bias plays no effect in marginalising POCs. Thus this guarantees more equality.

So, as we can see affirmative action DOES work in bringing about more equality. Since current inequality leads to so much injustice and societal problems I think it is completely justified to limit the "freedom" of a privileged few to discriminate against and dominate marginalised, and in many cases, oppressed groups. Sometimes, it takes the state of action to change the state of man. Affirmative action allows minorities to succeed in a world that is stacked against them and this is why AA is justified.

I urge you to vote CON.
asta

Pro

Sorry about abbreviations.

"This is not true because nobody is, in any way, arguing that non-ethnic minorities are somehow lower people than ethnic minorities or marginalized groups." There are those however that believe that Women and POC(WAPOC) should receive better treatment in hiring processes than Cis Het White men(CHWM). Racism is discrimination on the basis of race. In this context, it means that a Caucasian has a harder time getting a job if a POC or woman applies for a job. They aren't viewed as inferior under Affirmative Action(AA), but they are according to AA, are less deserving of the job than a woman or POC of the same merit.

"We are however recognising that we live in an unequal society with levels of discrimination against marginalised groups such as black people or women. Therefore, we are recognising that they come from a position of disadvantage and thus we have an imbalance that we need to fix." While equally merited WAPOC may receive discrimination because of their status, it would be subtle and therefore minor. AA makes this much more intense against CHWM.

"Therefore, we need a level of positive discrimination at the top to adjust this imbalance due to the negative discrimination inherent in our society." The only positive discrimination that exists is the on the basis of merit. Preventing equally skilled CHWM from getting a job because of WAPOC is as bad as preventing equally skilled WAPOC from getting a job because of CHWM.

"Rather it is recognising an unfair status-quo and discriminating in a way that equalises our society and thus fixing the historic injustices faced by marginalised groups." Here my opponent claims that white people are privileged due to history. What about Latinos? They were never slaves here, yet they are less likely to get jobs. Jews and Japanese people on the other hand, endured discrimination and endured concentration camps. Yet, these groups are doing just fine.

"We see that right now white men are at a position of immense advantage and thus we need to put in measures to lift up others in order to end the imbalance we already have." This is because white men tend to be more qualified and more skilled at rich positions. Black men dominate basketball, but is this a problem? No. Whites tend to be smarter. Blacks tend to be more athletic. men tend to be ambitious and they tend to love competition. Women tend to hate competition. That"s life.

"Then you made this weird assertion that white men were more likely to be CEOs because they are more qualified and more interested in those fields. I wonder why?" Biology. Men are biologically different from women and this gives them different interests. Men have XY, women have XX.

"They are more qualified because less POC go to university due to their disadvantages" Most college students are women.

"and because women are discriminated against in the workplace." No. They simply lack interest. My mom wants to be a stay at home(SAH) mom and she has a job. Many women want the same thing. Some men want that too, but they are outnumbered by women. http://www.pewresearch.org... states that 20% of moms are SAH. I"m not encouraging it. They tend to be poor. However, women tend to not care about money as much as men. Pew does not state anything about SAH dads possibly because because it"s not newsworthy.

"Plus I don't believe that POC and women should be expected to "emulate" the supposedly great white " men." They succeed.(http://dmc122011.delmar.edu...). THeir work ethic should be copied

"Finally, women DO want to be CEOS but they can't due to discrimination and a society that has told them for years "you are girl and should do girly jobs like nursing"." Some women do, but this does not apply to all women. Most people that want to be CEOs are male.(http://www.pewresearch.org...). Many women want to be teachers because they involve small kids, which is like a family. Women also tend to want to teach younger kids than men because women tend to be fun and men tend to more assertive and ambitious with their work. High Schoolers rebel, kindergartners don"t.

"Now onto my arguments. Firstly, we live in a society which is inherently racist, sexist and discriminatory." Only slightly/nominally.

"We have a gender pay gap where women earn 71 cents to every dollar that men make, revealing the underrepresentation of women in the workplace." It"s because men tend to be more ambitious with their salaries and tend to be willing to sacrifice family more to be able to work more to justify their raises. Women tend to like the family. Men tend to like work. This sounds like gender roles, but it"s based off of general biological preferences. Women for example, are more likely to take sick days in order to care for their child (if they make the same as their husband) because women tend to love kids. It"s also why they are more likely to be school teachers.

"of over 5,200 newly employed workers, black job seekers were offered significantly less compensation than whites by potential new employers. U.S. employers are also more likely to turn away applicants if they have names that sound African-American. Job seekers with white-sounding names get one callback per 10 resumes, while applicants with African-American sounding names get just one callback per 15 resumes. Between 1979-2012, median wages rose for white women by 31%, but only 20% for African American women." This is because whites tend to earn more than blacks because they tend to be more qualified for certain positions since white families tend to value education more, which help supply better jobs.

"So how will AA solve this problem? Well, we know that just sitting back will not solve this problem as the current system of discrimination will just continue" Jews escaped their previous discrimination. Japanese people escaped their previous discrimination. It"s time for Blacks to do the same.

"thus a degree of government action is necessary." This hurts POC that this effects. This happened to Hispanics who may have a name advantage since Latino names tend to correlate to Latinos who tend to be bilingual, a skill many businesses want. SInce they tend to know 2 languages, you think they would be pretty successful. But since they tend to rely on the government for stuff like AA, they don"t get very far.

"In this way, racist and sexist attitudes can be forcibly reversed." Not by AA. Instead, it could be by waiting it out since race mixing will eventually make people more socially connected. It"s why Europeans rarely discriminate against other Europeans on the basis of race. European ethnicities have become so mixed that they united into one "white" race. Because of this, many claim that racism exists against Blacks, but almost no one claims racism exists against Italians. This is because the Italians merged with the rest of the Caucasians in the US. The solution to racism is time.

"Secondly, these new POCs and women in such positions can act as conscious or subconscious role models to other POCs and women." I wouldn"t say this. Black people tend to think of Bernie sanders as more of a role model than Ben Carson and for White people, vice versa applies. This is because they don"t see the race in people. They see other non superficial similarities.

"The reality is that currently many WAPOC don"t want to apply for such jobs due to a pernicious culture of "it"s not my place"." Given that I"m Caucasian, I didn"t feel out of place much when I played Basketball, a Black majority sport. I was more focused on, "how do I beat the other team?" Although I switched sports, it wasn't because Basketball was a black sport. It was because I was bad at basketball.
Debate Round No. 2
LoveRichardDawkins

Con

Racism is NOT the same as discrimination and it isn't fair to claim that discrimination in order to lift up marginalised people is a form of racism.

Racism - prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

The key requirement in making a form of discrimination racist is if that discrimination is driven by the belief that one's own race is superior. Proponents of AA never argue that some races are better than others we argue quite the opposite. We say that all races are equal in value and rights and therefore it is absolutely despicable that we currently have such an unequal and prejudiced society. The way we see to fix this is by lifting up those disadvantaged people through AA in order to end the current system of inequality. This is positive discrimination because it leads to positive outcomes.

White men, in our current society, can be less deserving of a job if a woman or POC stands in there way, depending on what reason the AA is used for. If the AA is used because that POC or woman has come from a background of discrimination and prejudice (as many have) then the white man is less deserving because they have an immense level of privilege. However, if AA is used because there is a lack of POC or women in that field of work then the white man is not less deserving but is being put at the back of the queue because the corporation wants to fix the problem of racism in our society. AA is also used to make sure that prejudice within the selection purposes towards POCs and women doesn't play any part in the final intake of employees since an amount of women and POCs will always be in that intake due to AA.

Another important thing I want to point out is that often AA is used because the background of someone can play a part in their qualifications and thus their apparent capability. If you are a poor person (AA is also used to help poorer people) or are a POC who has faced all the kinds of anxieties that many POCs face as a result of racism, then your results in school and your qualifications will likely be lower than your actual potential since you have been so put down by your social status. Therefore, AA is used to make sure that certain people who are likely smarter in real life than they appear on paper are not rejected. AA helps to get these people into that institution who often have more right to be there than anyone else.

Onto the nature of our society, our society does have a big problem with race. The reality is that we aren't colour blind and the minorities bare the brunt of both explicit racism and implicit bias. Not only do historical injustices such as Jim Crow, the mass incarceration of POC in the 1980s-1990s and even the anxieties of slavery, have impacts on POC in America but so does the level of racism that we still have today. White people are not only (as an overall demographic) privileged compared to POC due to their historical advantages which still have an impact today but also because they do not face the same number of barriers as the average POC. It is not just historical and implicit bias studies are great evidence of this fact:

An experiment in 2003 by Marianne Bertrand and Sendhil Mullainathan, two American economists. They drafted 5,000 CVs and placed archetypal "black" names such as Tyrone or Latoya on half of them and "white" names such as Brendan or Alison on the other half. They then divided the white CVs into high and low quality and did the same with the black CVs.
A few weeks later the offers came rolling in from employers, and guess what? The "black" candidates were 50% less likely to be invited to interview. Employers were using skin colour as a marker for employment potential, despite the fact that the candidates' CVs were identical.

It is also important to point out that not all groups face the same level of discrimination. Jews for instance are often wealthier because historically they were the only people who could work in banking due to the rules of the Pope. Furthermore, it is more difficult to have implicit bias towards most Jews in comparison to POCs who obviously look different to you. Just because some minorities have succeeded (often due to government policy) that doesn't mean that there is no discrimination towards POCs and Latinos which has made life more difficult for them. Also, on a side note, Latinos have faced historical discrimination as well and face a lot of racism and bigotry in society currently as well.

Have you ever considered why white men are more qualified? Maybe because they don't get locked up when they're young unlike many black men. Maybe because they are not discriminated against in admissions at university. Maybe because they haven't faced the same level of social anxiety (which has a big effect on achievement in school) compared to most white people. Maybe its because most black people live in deprived and often rougher areas with under-funded, worse schools. It certainly is not because "Whites tend to be smarter". If you're going to make such a racist and controversial comment then you need to provide evidence. There is no evidence for white people being smarter than black people and that's the same kind of pseudo-scientific, crappy nonsense that was used to justify the enslavement and rape of Africans.

And, where's your evidence for the equally offensive claim that women "hate competition" and are less "ambitious" than men. Women seem to be less "competitive" not because of their biological make-up but because society has conditioned them into being submissive and cooperative. Give one scientific study showing that women "hate competition" due to biology.

You can't just claim "biology" as for why women are underrepresented in certain jobs. A lot of women would want to be engineers and builders but we have a society that tells them "you have to do girly jobs". Oestrogen and Progesterone only tell us that women have more feelings of caring for children but that's not evidence for women being against engineering or construction. Many women do want these jobs but are discriminated against, face workplace bullying and harassment and have been told for years that "it's not there place". AA solves the problem: 1; it puts inspiring role models into such positions which motivates more women to do such jobs (Hilary Clinton has undoubtedly inspired many women to enter politics which is often considered a man's job), 2; it artificially ensures women are given fair representation into such jobs by equalling out the proportions of men and women, 3; it forces men to interact with new women in the workplace thus changing there views on women and helping them to realise that women can be just as capable and intelligent as they are.

Your explanation for why AA hurts POCs is ridiculous. It only refers to one group of supposedly "bilingual" people and not all minorities or indeed women, LGBT people or people from deprived backgrounds. It then assumes that in most jobs being bilingual is crucial. It is a narrow and small potential harm that is not worthy of any legitimacy as an actual argument.

The idea of a single, unified, european "white race" is nutty. Europeans can be racist towards each other too and there is no such thing as a unified european race. More interrelations between racial groups does create real change. Yet AA does this. It forces white men who may rarely see to POCs or women in the workplace and have misconceptions about them, to actually meet such people and realise how equally smart and capable they are. So, AA actually solves your problem by increasing the rate. You claimed the solution to racism is time. That's not good enough: if racism is so bad, then why not adopt policies to solve it quicker like AA?

Our society places huge burdens on barriers on women and minorities. AA solves this. It helps minorities to succeed in a world which is stacked against them
asta

Pro

"prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior." There are 2 definitions of racism. Since my definition is valid, it means that this is indeed racism.

"The key requirement in making a form of discrimination racist is if that discrimination is driven by the belief that one's own race is superior." The KKK don"t believe that Blacks are intrinsically inferior to whites, but that doesn"t mean they aren"t racist. Their FAQ page says, "We don"t care who is superior and who isn"t. God made us all. We simply believe that the United States of America was founded as a white Christian nation."(https://kkk.bz...). The Klan are against minorities being in majority Caucasian countries because they believe the minorities will replace the whites and would oppress the white minority like how the whites oppressed the Native Americans. This belief isn't a white supremacist belief but it is indeed racist. White supremacy is only one type of racism. There are others.

"This is positive discrimination because it leads to positive outcomes." It has yet to and it"s been around since 1984. The Japanese didn"t receive 30 years of AA and they are doing just fine. It is those that have received AA that tend to fail in society.

"If the AA is used because that POC or woman has come from a background of discrimination and prejudice (as many have) then the white man is less deserving because they have an immense level of privilege." They don"t have an immense level of privilege. Their privilege is small. Also, Wealth and "Privilege" should not disqualify you from certain jobs. I would be okay if a millionaire person worked in my company for minimum wage. If he didn"t, he would be accused of living off his inheritance.

However, if AA is used because there is a lack of POC or women in that field of work then "the white man is not less deserving but is being put at the back of the queue because the corporation wants to fix the problem of racism in our society." Your making society more racist by selecting POCs and women over white males on the basis of their race and gender.

"AA is also used to help poorer people" They have a harder time being successful, but they can and should do it on their own without government interference. Bill Gates, a philanthropic said, "If your born poor, its not your mistake. If you die poor, its your mistake".(https://www.coolnsmart.com...) Poor people who are smart could apply their intelligence on exams and colleges won"t care if your poor. They would accept you because of your intelligence.

"Not only do historical injustices such as Jim Crow, the mass incarceration of POC in the 1980s-1990s and even the anxieties of slavery, have impacts on POC in America but so does the level of racism that we still have today." Tell that to the Jewish people or Japanese people who did not need AA to survive in the United States.

"An experiment in 2003 by Marianne Bertrand and Sendhil Mullainathan, two American economists." A link would help.

"They drafted 5,000 CVs and placed archetypal "black" names such as Tyrone or Latoya on half of them and "white" names such as Brendan or Alison on the other half." What is a CV?

"They then divided the white CVs into high and low quality and did the same with the black CVs." What does high quality and low quality mean? I"m not trolling. I"m curious.

"Jews for instance are often wealthier because historically they were the only people who could work in banking due to the rules of the Pope." They were also put into concentration camps by Adolf Hitler. MAUS, a primary source of the Holocaust, states that the Jews had all their money taken from them at the Concentration camps, so their previous wealth didn"t mean much.

Many Jews also have Jewish names, such as characters in the bible, which include names like Adam, Dan, Isaac, Jacob, and more. Granted these names are also held by non jews, but they are significantly disproportionally Jewish names(https://www.behindthename.com...). Although not obvious at first, any anti semitic business owner would want to filter out Jewish names. If minorities don"t like this, they can change their names. It"s less trouble then getting the government involved to give Affirmative action to every single "oppressed" group.

"Also, on a side note, Latinos have faced historical discrimination as well and face a lot of racism and bigotry in society currently as well." The worst thing they may get is a "No mexican" sign thrown at them which almost never happens anymore. Only the illegal ones have to regularly deal with ICE. The legal ones endure only verbal discrimination, which they should tolerate and many of them do.

"Have you ever considered why white men are more qualified? Maybe because they don't get locked up when they're young unlike many black men." The blacks that are locked up in prisons tend to be the ones in gangs. Whites are in gangs too but are outnumbered by black people in US gangs.

"Maybe because they are not discriminated against in admissions at university." They get special treatment at Universities.

"Maybe because they haven't faced the same level of social anxiety (which has a big effect on achievement in school) compared to most white people." Girls tend to be more emotional than boys, but that doesn"t make them terrible at school.

"Maybe it's because most black people live in deprived and often rougher areas with underfunded, worse schools." Public schools in the USA receive the same amount of funding on a city basis. If you disagree with this, cite your claim.

"If you're going to make such a racist and controversial comment then you need to provide evidence." The university of Delaware states "the mean Black"White group difference in IQ probably has some genetic component." (https://www1.udel.edu...) (Page 235).

"was used to justify the enslavement and rape of Africans." I don"t support slavery on the basis of race.

"And, where's your evidence for the equally offensive claim that women "hate competition" and are less "ambitious" than men." Their DNA. Males have XY and females have XX. Maybe Y chromosomes help make you more ambitious.

"Women seem to be less "competitive" not because of their biological make-up but because society has conditioned them into being submissive and cooperative." Given that women are encouraged to be ambitious, most tend to be less ambitious than males. Society plays a factor, but less than Biology.

"A lot of women would want to be engineers and builders but we have a society that tells them "you have to do girly jobs"." Society does not say that. It says, "Be who you want to be. Never give up. Follow your dreams". "Masculine" jobs are encouraged. If women dream about being an engineer, she can get all the necessary requirements for the job. There are females who have earned their spot in Engineering. You shouldn"t get in just because you are a girl.

""Many women do want these jobs but are discriminated against, face workplace bullying and harassment and have been told for years that "it's not there place"." Then they report it. Our schools are gender mixed. It"s not like women are just seen as sex objects anymore since many group projects are done with females.

"AA solves the problem" No. It just makes women more common.

" Clinton has undoubtedly inspired many women to enter politics which is often considered a man's job" Hillary failed at getting POTUS and she lost to Trump. She wasn't the only women to try to run for President. https://www.huffingtonpost.com... states a lot of women that tried to run. But they all failed.
Debate Round No. 3
LoveRichardDawkins

Con

It's entertaining to hear someone who claims to hate the "racist" discrimination of AA, several paragraphs later, pandered to pseudoscientific "race-science" in trying to argue that POCs are inherently less intelligent than others. How utterly despicable.

I reject your "valid definition". Racism IS be motivated by the belief of superiority otherwise how is discrimination logical. If you discriminate without believing that some people are better or more likeable or less violent or more intelligent than others then your discrimination makes no sense. Racism is logically founded on the belief that some people are better than others. Without such a belief it is impossible to be racist since your racism would be based on nothing and yet racism is based on s belief of superiority. Your laughable claim that the KKK aren't white supremacists reveals your own recognition of the ridiculousness of your shrinking corner in this debate. You argument doesn't have a leg to stand on. The KKK are white supremacist to the core. And what a surprise it is to hear the KKK saying "we're not supremacist". What do you expect?! The KKK killed and lynched black people in the belief that they are lesser human beings and are inferior. That is the entire basis for their hateful lies.

Positive discrimination recognises that all groups of people are equally intelligent, equally valuable and equally capable. AA recognises that we live in an unfair, prejudiced society in which our prejudices against POCs and Women lead to the disadvantage of those groups. AA sees that this is a problem and thus we need to fix it. Positive discrimination does fix it.

The only thing that you have done in this debate is made wild, bigoted and offensive assertions. Throughout your writing there hasn't been the remotest snivel of argument, logical reasoning or explanation for your ridiculous claims. I have on the other hand provided thorough reasoned explanations as for why we have an imbalanced society and how AA will fix it. I have you 3 arguments for how AA fixes it: 1; role models 2; artificially increasing numbers 3; changing perceptions. Please tell me why I'm wrong! You have just made assertions without any arguments. Give me an explanation as to why my 3 arguments don't work. Right now, you have given nothing of merit and thus my 3 arguments stand.

AA does work in many countries such as Singapore where the Malay community saw an increase from 0.5% to 5.4% in University admissions and at the most recent election all candidates were Malays showing how successful AA has been in lifting up previously disadvantaged groups. AA can work in the USA too. Japan is a racially homogenous society by the way and yet it also has a massive gender pay gap due to lack of AA getting women into the workplace.

Concerning poor people, I really don't care what tax avoiding billionaires have to lecture us about. What I care about is that social mobility is at an all-time low and that moving between classes is extremely hard. If you die poor most of the time it's not your fault. Politicians don't listen to you, nor does the media, nor do the corporate elite. They don't care. You cannot wriggle your way out of the fact that if you're born poor it is extremely hard to succeed. AA helps poor people to succeed because it forces them into the workplace and university guaranteeing their success, allowing them to act as role models and changing misconception about poor people.

Jewish and Japanese people do not and have not faced the same level of racism of racism in the USA as Black people and even Latinos. The holocaust was a european atrocity and does not constitute a MODERN barrier to Jewish Americans in the same way as black Americans face racial barriers. How about you just look up the names of the 2 economists - it's not hard. A CV is basically a resume for a job application. Look up the investigation it reveals the reality of implicit bias.

Can we please not get into this ridiculous "name game". Don't deny that it is easier to tell if someone is black than to tell that someone is Jewish. Also, Black people face more racial barriers than Jews in the USA - don't even try to deny that. I can't even believe that you suggested minorities should change their names. Seriously? I'm not even going to explain how dumb that is - it's so self-evident.

Your flippant remarks about the triviality of the racism to Latinos are inexcusable. Latinos face many racial barriers in the US. That's why they are poorer and more likely to be jailed than their white counterparts. How dare you suggest that they should just "tolerate" racial abuse and discrimination. You seem to just be ok with inequality don't you? Whether black people are more likely to get locked up is irrelevant. What matters is that it is a fact that they are more likely to be locked up (whether their own fault or not) and that this impacts their results. Of course they get special admissions treatment - that is because they face so much discrimination that the "special treatment" is trying to reverse it. What in the world does the "emotional" side of girls have to do with anxiety that the black community faces (which is more than white people)?

https://www.nbcnews.com...

You are shockingly lazy with your sources. The University did not "find" that black people were genetically less intelligent. What the outdated report did was source older even less reliable studies of very dubious psychologists. The report studied the work of Jensen - an American psychologist. Who published a study in 1969 (almost 50 years ago) arguing (in a time of immense racial hatred) that POCs were less intelligent to white people due to genetics. This is such rubbish. It has been debunked so many times I can't count. This kind of pseudoscientific nonsense is used by the alt-right to justify their prejudiced and racist policies

Craig Venter, the American biologist who led the effort to decode the human genome, responds to claims of a link between race and intelligence by declaring: "There is no basis in scientific fact or in the human genetic code for the notion that skin colour will be predictive of intelligence."

In fact, there is more genetic variation within races than there is between races. Humans are genetically homogeneous and the idea that the 1 gene that codes for melanin causes more or less intelligence is just bad, fake science. Hundreds of genes are needed to increase intelligence and yet the code for increased melanin pigmentation is very simple. There is no way that genetic components are responsible for IQ difference and those who argue this (you being one of them) need to take a look in the mirror and admit that they're bigoted and frankly wrong.

https://www.theguardian.com...
Once again your ignorant bigotry continues when it comes to sexism. Y chromosomes do not code for personality! 1 chromosome is not enough genetic material to code for it. Society is undoubtedly the cause. We have culture which lowers and infantilises women and thus they are demotivated. It is no surprise that the gender pay gap exists and women are disadvantaged. AA solves the problem. And YES it does it by making women more common. That's the point. It puts more women into these positions who act as role models (Clinton) changing misconceptions about women.

To conclude, my opponent has provided not 1 single argument for why AA doesn't work. All they have done is downplayed the prejudices of our society or simply denied the advantages that those not benefited by AA experience. They have cited outdated and unreliable sources and have made offensive, false and stupid assertions that it is the fault of POC or the fault of women or the fault of the poor. NO - it is society's fault. We need to grow up, recognise the inequality and fix it with AA.
asta

Pro

"I reject your "valid definition"." The valid definition backed up by http://www.dictionary.com.... It states the definition of racism is, "hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.". The site states multiple definitions of racism, so there are multiple definitions.

"Racism IS be motivated by the belief of superiority otherwise how is discrimination logical." It"s also motivated by you not wanting other people on your land. Whether or not this is right is beyond the point, it"s what the Klan believe.

"Your laughable claim that the KKK aren't white supremacists reveals your own recognition of the ridiculousness of your shrinking corner in this debate." They are on their own page. They are already rejected by most of society. Since they could go as extreme as they want, they are going to post their honest beliefs on the page. "The KKK killed and lynched black people in the belief that they are lesser human beings and are inferior." They don"t do it anymore and they deny it. While they are biased, so are you. At least they are a primary source. If they actually lynched black people, the participating members would probably get executed. The burden of proof is on the prosecution.

"Positive discrimination recognises that all groups of people are equally intelligent, equally valuable and equally capable." This is not positive discrimination, it is negative.

"The only thing that you have done in this debate is made wild, bigoted and offensive assertions. Throughout your writing there hasn't been the remotest snivel of argument, logical reasoning or explanation for your ridiculous claims."

Yourou 3 arguments for how AA fixes it:

1; role models: Role models should not on the basis of gender. Ben Carson is more of a role model to me than Bernie Sanders, even though I am white. Other people should pick their role models on the basis of something other than race or gender.

2; artificially increasing numbers: Artificially decreasing numbers of males and Caucasians.

3; changing perceptions: When slavery was illegal, people still hated African Americans. When MLK did his speech, discrimination still existed. It"s pretty much impossible to eliminate like that. The best quickest way to eliminate racism to to cease to talk about it. It"s not like you see people discriminate against blond haired people or dark haired people, because people don"t talk about hair phenotypes as much as skin phenotypes. The more you talk about races, the more racism there is. AA supplies a way to talk about race, a lot. It provides a way for people to be race obsessed.

"AA does work in many countries such as Singapore where the Malay community saw an increase from 0.5% to 5.4% in University admissions and at the most recent election all candidates were Malays showing how successful AA has been in lifting up previously disadvantaged groups. AA can work in the USA too." Did the Malay earn those positions, or did they get them for being Malay?

"I really don't care what tax avoiding billionaires have to lecture us about." He"s donated more to charity then he would have paid in taxes.

"What I care about is that social mobility is at an all-time low and that moving between classes is extremely hard." Daymond John started out poor, yet he"s now a billionaire on shark tank. Most billionaires are self made (ICH).

"Politicians don't listen to you, nor does the media, nor do the corporate elite. They don't care." I"m assuming that includes Bernie Sanders. The media favors both sides. CNN listens to the left. Fox listens to the right.

"You cannot wriggle your way out of the fact that if you're born poor it is extremely hard to succeed." It"s hard for everybody to succeed.

"AA helps poor people to succeed because it forces them into the workplace and university guaranteeing their success, allowing them to act as role models and changing misconception about poor people." Daymond John is a role model for poor people. How is that working out for them? Just because someone with similar demographics gets a position for the 1st time does not mean that it will become more prominent in the field.

"Jewish and Japanese people do not and have not faced the same level of racism of racism in the USA as Black people and even Latinos." The Japanese endured american concentration camps.

"I can't even believe that you suggested minorities should change their names." How is it dumb?

"Latinos face many racial barriers in the US." Many businesses want Latinos in there stores because some people don"t know English and Latinos could bridge the language divide.

"How dare you suggest that they should just "tolerate" racial abuse and discrimination." If a Caucasian says the N word or the S word to you, toughen up. If they hit you then call you the N word, you should report them for assault, but not for a hate crime.

"You seem to just be ok with inequality don't you?" I am okay with person A being richer than person B if that person A tends to work harder and produce more to society. I am okay with race A tending to be richer than race B if race A tends to be more productive than blacks. What do the facts say about their productiveness? I"m not saying the racial gap is good, but it can exists if Caucasians tend to be more productive to society more than African Americans.

"What matters is that it is a fact that they are more likely to be locked up (whether their own fault or not) and that this impacts their results." I"m against rejecting people because they have a criminal history just as I am okay with rejecting people on the basis of race. However, businesses should have the right to reject people on this basis. Then the black people could go to another business and work there. It"s not like every business is going to be racist. Businesses also can be racist towards white people. But it"s wrong.

"Of course they get special admissions treatment - that is because they face so much discrimination that the "special treatment" is trying to reverse it." Modern Blacks don"t face much discrimination, except for the occasional N word. They might have a harder time with jobs, but this can get changed by changing their names. AA just make racism more intense.

"What in the world does the "emotional" side of girls have to do with anxiety that the black community faces (which is more than white people)?" Because anxiety is an emotion.

"https://www.nbcnews.com...; "

NBC is biased. It"s not like I cite Fox. The only time I cited a right wing source in this was when finding out their beliefs.

I didn"t see that it was made in 1969 so I assumed it was relevant. I apologize for the inconvenience. I have a new cite. https://archive.nytimes.com... states that whites tend to get IQs 15 points above Blacks. This the site says is mostly due to family differences, since adopted children raised by whites got 13.5 pts higher then children raised by blacks, irrespective of the child"s race. This means that if Black families academically discipline their child, and if the child is raised well, then their child has a much higher chance of succeeding.

https://www.theguardian.com...; is biased. However, even them stated, "If so, this would show that education levels, which are purely environmental"

"Y chromosomes do not code for personality!" Why not?

"We have culture which lowers and infantilizes women and thus they are demotivated." Our culture has been encouraging women to do good things for generations, but it doesn"t work. True sexism is in the middle east. Assuming they don"t change, we"ll have a society that oppresses women when we look like them.

"It puts more women into these positions who act as role models (Clinton) changing misconceptions about women." Hillary is not a role model because she lost to someone like Trump.

My arguments are reverse racism and history.
Debate Round No. 4
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by LoveRichardDawkins 2 months ago
LoveRichardDawkins
Mate, You can"t spell
Posted by Our_Boat_is_Right 2 months ago
Our_Boat_is_Right
Whenever crazy sjw's disagree with something a conservative says, They don't debate facts but rather call you anything that ends in "ot", "phobe", Or "ist". They use big vocabulary to say nothing and resort to things that end in these letters when they no they have been defeated.
Dictionary definition of racist-
Racist (1)- n

Someone who wins an argument against a liberal. FAX
Posted by Our_Boat_is_Right 2 months ago
Our_Boat_is_Right
Hmmmm. . . Seems like that last comment was copied and pasted from my debate. . Http://www. Debate. Org/debates/Im-Pro-Gun-Change-my-Mind/10/comments/1/
And this was my response- "Ironic because liberal colleges have safe spaces where they don't want to listen to the other side, Which is what you are doing right now. Snowflakes are people who are soft, Such like you, Because you don't want to hear another opinion. If anything, I am the opposite of safe spaces and snowflakes beacuse I am open-minded and care about facts, Not feelings. You are very hypicritical of yourself, Mr. Dawkins. You need to expand your brain and listen to other opinions and facts that you have not heard of, Instead of being a "snowflake" and disregarding everything someone says. "
Posted by asta 2 months ago
asta
You seem to be the one that is triggered.
Posted by LoveRichardDawkins 2 months ago
LoveRichardDawkins
You"re still a bigot asta. I really don"t care about feelings.
I takes a lot to offend me. However you better crawl back into your Shapiro safe space you triggered right wing snowflake.
Posted by asta 2 months ago
asta
Facts don't care about your feelings.

(https://web. Archive. Org/web/20010119100800/http://cybertext. Net/pence/issues. Html) states, "Resources should be directed toward those institutions which provide assistance to those seeking to change their sexual behavior"

https://en. Wikipedia. Org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_the_United_States#cite_note-292
https://web. Archive. Org/web/20010119100800/http://cybertext. Net/pence/issues. Html

Your just implementing hate speech towards right wingers.
Posted by LoveRichardDawkins 2 months ago
LoveRichardDawkins
That"s disgusting and Asta you are a bigot
Posted by asta 2 months ago
asta
Mike Pence supports conversion therapy being an option for gays seeking to change their sexual behavior. He even wants it federally funded.
Posted by LoveRichardDawkins 2 months ago
LoveRichardDawkins
Mike pence is equally bigoted
Posted by asta 2 months ago
asta
I would have preferred Mike Pence. Trump is a RINO.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 3 months ago
dsjpk5
LoveRichardDawkinsastaTied
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