The Instigator
idisagreewithyou
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
screenjack
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Affirmative action (including in media) is a good thing

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: 1/2/2019 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 980 times Debate No: 119722
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)

 

idisagreewithyou

Pro

I believe that affirmative action gives more opportunities for people who wouldn't otherwise have them and gives better representation in media which won't disadvantage anyone if done right.
screenjack

Con

Affirmative action in a majority of states is race based. It promotes hiring minorities regardless of skill or experience. I am not against economic or geographic affirmative actions that are merit based. If a person from a poor town regardless of race proves his merit then I have no problem him being granted privileges that will allow him to compete.
No matter the field I don't think people should be granted special privilege because of race. The world doesn't require an equality of outcome only of opportunity. The media is quite a big industry so I'm not sure if we're talking about actor's, Director's, Authors, Pod casters, Or journalists. I would simply state that race doesn't play a factor in journalistic integrity, Acting, Or directing. I can see race being a factor in casting but It doesn't mean it must be that way. There are plenty of examples of historic figures being played by different races. (I can provide examples but I feel like it's well known. )
In conclusion, I believe affirmative action is racist and therefore wrong.
Debate Round No. 1
idisagreewithyou

Pro

The idea of affirmative is to give companies incentive to open up an extra position/extra positions for people that are under represented in those fields, This won't close any positions for white people. Many black people live in ghettos and it's hard to leave said ghetto, And due to a study we know employers are more inclined to not hire black people, Because of this African Americans don't have much incentive to study for those fields, So if we have openings in these fields for black people only so they have a secured spot just for them insuring a chance of them getting hired they would have more incentive to join these fields, Same for immigrants for the most part (Asians are an exception) but different scenario. Also in media The Scully effect proves that if you have someone of your gender, Color etc in a certain field represented in media you are more inclined to wanting to join said field. So over all it will be a positive change over a large period of time.
screenjack

Con

So you are admitting that the idea behind affirmative action is racist? All of the points you have just given are about promoting minority races. Promoting one race over another is racist no matter if they are a minority or not. Now I'm glad you brought up ghettos. Using geographical data such as school zones for college admissions and hiring processes I fully support. This has the same effect and eliminates the racial element. Furthermore I would say people tend to get a job where people they know work. Also, You've quoted a study but have left no link to the study. You bring up Asain minorities and claim the scenario is different but I disagree. Vijay Jojo Chokal-Ingam wrote a book called "almost black" explaining how bad the affirmative action policies are. He literally pretended to be black just to get into med school. Also the scully effect seems pretty coincidental to me. While people may have a role model in a field and have minority hire laws in place it still doesn't produce an equality of outcome.
"Women have advanced rapidly in many professional roles since the 1970s, But remain underrepresented
in STEM professions. 1 Women constitute about half (48%) of the college-educated workforce in the U. S. ,
but hold less than a quarter (24%) of jobs in STEM. 2 Only 10% of graduate degrees earned by women are
in STEM fields, Compared to 24% of graduate degrees earned by men. "
here is a source I found on the statistics. (https://impact. 21cf. Com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/03/ScullyEffectReport_21CF_1-1. Pdf)
So the scully effect seems somewhat coincidental to me. My advice is to quit looking through the world with the lense of race and all of these problems will disappear. Then we can focus on helping the poor instead of xyz color group.
Debate Round No. 2
idisagreewithyou

Pro

I understand where you're coming from when you say why make it about blacks and just make it about poor people, But there are many issues poor African Americans face that poor white Americans don't like higher lead levels (1), Gangs and drug trade (probably don't need a source for that one), Lesser chance of getting hired (2), Stop and frisk laws (3) etc. I think we should have positions for the poor but only looking at the class aspect and not the racial aspect isn't gonna cut it. Also the Asian guy you sited was trying to get into a position that wouldn't of existed without affirmative action, Remember these are positions made for affirmative action not preexisting positions stolen for minorities. Also The Scully effect didn't bring swarms of women to STEM fields but it did bring a considerable amount (4) which is why data annalists have agreed on this position (it's been peer reviewed). And as to the racist thing, I (and other people on the left) will stop seeing race when racial issues stops being an problem. If I misrepresented your argument please tell me I don't want to fight a straw-man. And sorry if this is sloppy I had to type it twice. My sources will be in the comments.
screenjack

Con

Blood lead content is not a strictly African american problem. It is yet again a geographical problem. It is a problem in multiple different countries and not exclusive to a specific race. (I'd refer you to your own study. )
Stop and frisk laws affect everyone. Stop and frisk is unconstitutional and I won't defend its use but I will say that it isn't racist. Anyone can be stopped and frisked in a place that allows it. Here is the court definition of stop and frisk and at no point does it mention race. (https://caselaw. Findlaw. Com/us-supreme-court/392/1. Html)
you brought up Vijay who is Indian American. If a classroom holds 28 people they aren't going to cram 29 into it just to have an affirmative action spot. There is also the open lawsuit against Harvard because of their bias against Asian students. On average an asain student has to score 540 points higher than a black student. ( https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=8ixzZYxM7Hc&t=40s ) Not to mention business aren't going to hire and pay anyone they don't have to.
You say that you will stop seeing race issues when race stops being a problem. That is the problem. You are so blindly holding onto the idea that black people are being discriminated against that you are willing to suppress other minorities in your pursuits for a privileged position. There is no law in the United states that directly discriminates against black people except in their gain. Which is a privilege by the way. Also you only posted on of your links in the comments so far which is something I do take issue with.
Debate Round No. 3
idisagreewithyou

Pro

My sources are posted to my personal account and not in the comments (they wouldn't let me post more than one link). I wasn't aware that Asian Americans were being discriminated against and I don't condone it, But the argument of your own source isn't to get rid of affirmative action but to fix it and get rid of racial quotas, "If race is being used as a positive factor, Meaning that it helps an application, That's good. When it harms an application, That's bad. ", This is an excerpt from your own source and I fully agree with it. Also yes technically blacks and immigrants aren't the only ones that get exposed to lead poisoning but the home countries of immigrants and black majority cities have the most lead exposure (5, 5. 5) out of anywhere else which is why they're more likely to have lead poisoning, And stop-and-frisk laws harm African Americans and Latino Americans way more then any other race(6) due to racial profiling and minority heavy areas being targeted, Which is why blacks are just as likely to smoke weed as Whites in America but are up to 8. 34 times more likely to get incarcerated (7), So saying these things affect anyone is entirely disingenuous and discredits real struggles minorities face in America today. I agree that Asian Americans are being discriminated against but that doesn't mean other minorities aren't. Also I agree that people can hire who ever they want all I'm saying is if minorities know they're less likely to get hired they wouldn't have as much incentive to join these fields but if they have assured spots available they would have more incentive to pursue fields they wouldn't otherwise. My sources for this one will be posted on my account as well.
screenjack

Con

In the link I shared his personal opinion might be otherwise but the facts are still the same. Lead in water is a correlation not a causation. Lead doesn't cause people to commit crime just like watching movies doesn't make you do anything. I think most all of you're evidence has been correlation not causation. (https://www. Iperceptions. Com/blog/causation-vs-correlation) Stop and frisk laws, Which I don't promote, Still aren't racist. According to stop and frisk laws, Which I've already clearly defined, People were allowed to be frisked in the area around where a complaint or crime occurred. This simply means that more cops get called to lower income areas that experience more crime. Still no need to bring race into this. As a matter of fact I can't believe I've gone 4 rounds with someone who isn't opposed to or denying racism in something. Like I don't even think you're trying to troll. I'm worried I might have to explain why racism is bad at this point. Also, I meant to address this in round 3. You said "I (and other people on the left) will stop seeing race when racial issues stops being an problem. " You 're defending racism because of racism. If you don't want something to happen to you don't do it yourself. Seems like a simpler solution to me.
Debate Round No. 4
idisagreewithyou

Pro

First of all I should of stated earlier that your source continues to say Asians being discriminated against has nothing to do with affirmative action and there is no link between the two, While it is bad it doesn't bring anything to your argument. Also lead very much does make you violent (8), And no it isn't correlation (9), Lead contamination in African American house holds was a very deliberate move by housing companies (a move that the government did nothing to change) to profit off of black people with lead poisoning. But yes with immigrants it is a correlation, But why does that matter? And stop-and-frisk laws mostly effecting Blacks and Latinos, Even within crimes Whites commit just as much (6, 7) can only be seen as disadvantaging certain races, And you can't make the argument that "blacks just do it more" or "it's just poor neighborhoods not black neighborhoods" won't cut it because they don't target poor white neighborhoods and in crimes like cannabis use whites do it just as much but blacks are much more likely to get arrested for it.
Also obviously I oppose racism, But fighting racism isn't the same as being racist, Affirmative action doesn't hurt whites (10, 11) which is why racial quotas are illegal and it doesn't hurt Asians (your own source and 11), Saying I'm supporting racism to stop racism is disingenuous. Also "If you don't want something to happen to you don't do it yourself" is a ridiculous assertion. I want better representation in certain fields and media to help fix problems that almost always have to do with race, This doesn't negatively affect any race and I'm doing it for marginalized groups (so I want to help blacks because they're disadvantaged and not because I like blacks better), Nothing here proves that I'm racist. And denying there are racial issues even with the overwhelming evidence of racial inequality (12, Every source I've linked about racial inequality prior) isn't helping anyone, And the "you're the real racist" argument is especially unhelpful. The argument that racial discrimination is in the past and it's illegal now isn't helpful when laws, Yes technically illegal, Are still in effect to this day (12). Segregation is illegal yet america is still segregated (13), And blacks are generally poorer than whites (14), Why do you think this happens? The theory used most frequently is generational wealth, Because if your family is poor you are more likely to be poor, And because getting out of a ghetto situation is to expensive for the average person living in one they have to stay in these horrible environments, We can't blame anyone other than past politicians, The personal responsibility argument isn't gonna cut it. So when people vouch for programs like this they want to fix this problem that current African Americans are facing. And I know you're going to think "how could something that long ago affect people today, Quit bringing the past into this", The past is a great way to determine what's going on now, Which is why professionals would never argue that these historically segregated places are still segregated (13) and blacks are poor within these areas like they have been historically (14) is just a coincidence and African Americans should just strive to get out of the ghetto, This mentality is harmful and (if popularized) could regress the progress we've been seeing so far. These kinds of laws don't just disappear, You can still see the mark of it to this day, So programs like affirmative action is trying to fix this problem. The immigrant thing is many an economic thing: Immigrants are almost always a net positive for a community (15) so properly educating them can help them contribute to society and representation in media will help make them integrate into our culture and society, This will allow us to take advantage of the good qualities of immigration and fix the cons to immigration like violence and lesser education. If you don't want immigration that's a different argument but if we continue to have immigration at this rate affirmative action is helping the cause. All my sources are on my profile. And I won't be able to defend my self this time so I'd appreciate it if you cooled it on calling me a racist.
screenjack

Con

first of all I should think that a minority being discriminated against because of affirmative action has a whole lot to do with affirmative action. In you're source (10) "the Court fell short of a sweeping decision saying that race could never be taken into consideration. Then, In 2016, The Court upheld by a narrow margin a University of Texas plan to increase campus diversity by considering race among a number of factors in the admissions process. " So race is still legally being allowed to factor schooling. It's racism in an actual law.
Now the stop and frisk law which I linked to you earlier is not racist. Nowhere in the law does it condone stopping and frisking people based on race. Furthermore, In order to stop and frisk there has to either have been a call from the area about a crime or probable cause. So the logical conclusion is simply that black and latino people call the cops more. Nothing racially motivated about calling the police. If you read the article I'd linked before "Terry vs Ohio" you'd know that stop and frisk otherwise is unconstitutional.
I've read all of you're articles and none of them prove that African Americans are somehow being targeted by lead. Now, We both agree lead is bad for a community but it doesn't cause violence. (1) There is too much date and coincidental evidence to prove such a thing. If you know of a case where people went crazy and started committing crimes cause of the lead let me know. What is far more likely is that low income area's have more infrastructure problems. Low income areas also have more crime problems leading to the correlation.
Next you bring up segregation is still an issue in the U. S. I would say that this is still an economic issue. There are no laws that prohibit African Americans from land ownership. If a person chooses not to move it is either because they cannot afford to or because they are choosing to live in neighborhoods they do.
Immigration is an entirely different discusion. I would point out that there is nothing racist about immigration as immigrants can come from anywhere. Therefor educating foreigners in the policies and practices of the U. S is an affirmative action I can get behind.
I have never denied historical evidence. Saying that I have is creating a strawman which I don't appreciate. Now if I can give a much more accurate summary of your argument. You believe "That inherited differences between the various racial groups determine cultural and individual achievements. Usually promoting black rights over others. " Racism- a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, Usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others. (2)
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by chasecallister 3 years ago
chasecallister
The goal of affirmative action policies established by companies is to prevent discrimination. Unfortunately, Rather than achieve its goal, Affirmative action does quite the opposite. Affirmative action policies do more harm than good to society because they represent equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity and they discriminate based on demographic qualities which is unjust.

Affirmative action policies require companies "with 50 or more employees and contracts over 50, 000 dollars" to enforce some form of a quota on race and gender when hiring employees (Bakshi). A quota is a form of equality of outcome which unfortunately is attached to the assumption that each race, Gender, Etc. Must be proportionately represented at each company as they are in the population. Rather than focusing on giving candidates equal opportunities to earn positions at a company, Affirmative action policies force companies to achieve fixed outcomes. Although there is a slight possibility that a quota set by affirmative action policies could lead to the most qualified people being hired, More times than not it allows less qualified people to secure jobs over those who are more qualified.

Quotas forced upon companies by affirmative action policies are discriminatory. Discrimination - the prejudicial treatment of different categories of people - is clearly unjust. To be blunt, Affirmative action policies are racist and oppressive, The exact outcome they were designed to eradicate. The most just approach to hiring workers would be to completely disregard demographic qualities and assess the skill level and readiness for the job. Reverse discrimination in the workplace "leads to the less qualified being hired, Hurting companies" productivity and therefore the economy" (Scott). Because of the bias embedded within affirmative action policies, Everyone living in the United States is hurt financially because our economy is less efficient.
Posted by screenjack 3 years ago
screenjack
( https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=8ixzZYxM7Hc&t=40s )
Posted by idisagreewithyou 3 years ago
idisagreewithyou
I posted the sources to my account comments
Posted by idisagreewithyou 3 years ago
idisagreewithyou
(1)https://pic. Plover. Com/Nevin/Nevin2007. Pdf
Posted by idisagreewithyou 3 years ago
idisagreewithyou
I can't post my sources because this damn website doesn't allow me
Posted by idisagreewithyou 3 years ago
idisagreewithyou
I keep trying but my arguments aren't getting posted
Posted by idisagreewithyou 3 years ago
idisagreewithyou
My arguments aren't getting posted. What's going on?
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.