The Instigator
Con (against)
The Contender
Pro (for)

Diversity is NOT a strength

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
MIKEPOLITICS101101 has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/31/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 591 times Debate No: 112032
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




Diversity is not a strength .. Diversity means differences.
Who on earth with a brain would think differences are uniting..

Also not all races are the same on average in many areas..


I'd love to discuss this and hear your perspective on it. I believe that diversity certainly can be a strength and should be something that we should strive for. I am an American who has grown up in Uganda, and has had access to both cultures. I believe that diversity should be valued more in today's society.

Let's begin by defining diversity. According to Merriam Webster, diversity is the condition of having or being composed of different elements: variety; especially: the inclusion of different types of people (as people of different races or cultures) in a group organization.

Sociologist Dr. Caleb Rosado, who specializes in diversity and multiculturalism, described seven important actions involved in the definition of multiculturalism:

-Recognition of the abundant diversity of cultures;
-Respect for the differences;
-Acknowledging the validity of different cultural expressions and contributions;
-Valuing what other cultures offer;
-Encouraging the contribution of diverse groups;
-Empowering people to strengthen themselves and others to achieve their maximum potential by -Being critical of their own biases; and
-Celebrating rather than just tolerating the differences in order to bring about unity through diversity.

I'm going to go through all of these seven points individually, and talk about why I believe each of these is necessary for our relationships with other people.

1. Recognition of differences:
To understand other people and what they have to offer us, we have to first realize that they are different from us and learn to accept that. No person is exactly the same, and there will always be differences in values, belief systems, and the way that they see the world, but when going across cultures, these differences are magnified. Each culture has different values, different systems, and different ways of living life, and until you recognize that there are differences, you won't gain the sensitivity and thoughtfulness you need to be able to care for them.

2. Respect for the differences:
We must not only realize that the differences are there, but learn to respect and honor them. Our job is not to fix those differences and make them 'like us', but to accept that there are differences and stop trying to change them. Each person has a unique background and a story to share, and to "fix" diversity is to deny what makes a person themselves.

3. Acknowledgment of the validity of the differences:
To accept diversity is to acknowledge that these differences are real and they aren't something to try to cover or change. Just because someone is different from us does not mean that they are wrong, and to accept diversity is to acknowledge and embrace the differences.

4. Valuing what other cultures offer:
Every culture has different belief systems that are unique to themselves and can open up our eyes to another way of living. If we only have access to one culture, we'll never understand the richness of all of the different perspectives and lifestyles that other people can share. Until we learn to value other cultures, we can't learn to fully value our own.

5. Encouraging the contribution of diverse groups:
To value diverse cultures is to value their input and contribution, and diversity means making sure that everyone has a voice to share their own backgrounds and belief systems. When different people with different beliefs and backgrounds share their stories, our understanding of our own world and situation is changed by it.

6. Empowering people to strengthen themselves and be critical of their biases:
Unless we recognize that our backgrounds are unique to us and other people won't share our outlook, we can't strengthen our own outlooks and the way that we see the world. We have to learn to be critical of ourselves and open to new perspectives if we are going to learn to accept people's differences.

7. Celebrating rather than tolerating the differences- unity through diversity:
Our differences give us new values, outlooks, and perspectives, and hearing from people with different perspectives can widen our outlook and allow us to see beyond the world that we've grown up in. When we celebrate our differences and embrace our similarities, our worlds become much richer and more abundant.
Debate Round No. 1


Well what u said sounds nice but its not reality.

For example all the whites moved out of baltimore..

Blacks are killing white farmers in South africa ..

When people can choose to have diversity or not too they choose not too . esp whites for good reasons.

Blacks have much higher crime rates, much lower iq averages , etc... just to be frank.

Your side of the argument is Humanitarism and mine is Ethnocentraism.

WE should talk verbally sometime on skyupe or something


Thank you for your reply and your perspective. I'm going to take a second and evaluate what you said, and we'll see if it matches up under close scrutiny.

I'd like to start by addressing your first statement. This isn't me offering an argument so much as me questioning what you said. Your exact words were 'what you said sounded nice, but it's not reality'. You followed this up with examples of how people have abused diversity. However, this only proved my point. My point is not to prove that diversity is encouraged in society today. It's to prove that it SHOULD be encouraged in society today, and if it were already achieved, we wouldn't have to be discussing this. This debate is (as shown by its title and opening statements) discussing whether diversity is something that should be considered a 'strength' or an 'attribute'. Whether it has been achieved is irrelevant.

The examples that you gave about diversity being abused (namely whites moving out of Baltimore, and blacks killing white farmers in South Africa), actually prove my point. They prove that diversity has been horribly misused and there is a gross need for it in today's society, which again suggests that diversity should be more valued, and should, therefore, be a strength.

As for your next statement, you said, and I repeat, 'blacks have much higher crime rates, much lower IQ averages, etc...'. Let's look at each of these specifically. (You'll notice that in the next part, I'm going to state my opinion mostly through other quotes, because I want to show that my views are supported by well known people who have done research and effort on this topic.)
IQ averages:
An Oxford Biologist, John R. Baker, said it very clearly:
"There is no evidence that any gene concerned in the control of skin-color has any effect on the mental capacity of human beings. In the course of evolution, particular races or sub-races might evolve to higher average levels of intelligence than others: but if so, there would be no necessary correlation with the color of the skin."

There is actually proof that African Americans have on average a 15 point lower IQ than White Americans, but close study proves that genetics may not be the cause of this so much as the environment that blacks are currently living in. To go into this deeper, I'm going to quote a man named Kenneth B. Chiacchia, who I believe said it best. I found this quotation on this webpage (

"A number of researchers have undertaken studies to uncover the source of the 10-point IQ difference between the races. One type of study measures the IQs of children of different racial backgrounds who are raised in similar environments. African Americans, on the average, have 70% African and 30% European ancestry. If whites were genetically more intelligent than blacks, we would expect black children with more European ancestry to have higher IQs than those with more African ancestry, even when they're raised in the same family.

Psychologists have used three ways to estimate white ancestry in African Americans. (It is worth noting that there are no "pure" racial groups.) Skin color is an imperfect measure because not all native African peoples have dark skin. Also, children with lighter skin may be treated differently, even in the same family. Family histories of white ancestry may or may not be accurate. Possibly the best method tests blood groups; different racial groups have different rates of certain blood groups, allowing one to make a statistical estimate of ancestry.

The results of these studies suggest little, if any, intelligence difference between the races. The skin-color studies do tend to show a slight advantage for lighter skinned children"with all the reservations about children with the lighter skin getting different treatment. But family history and blood group studies show no difference in IQ, apart from the skin-color effect.

Another approach to these studies measures the IQs of black children brought up in white families. In one study of black, interracial, and white adopted children raised in white families, the white children showed the highest IQ scores, with interracial children scoring in the middle. But it's not clear whether the white families treated the black children differently; whether the black children had suffered from IQ-reducing environments before they were born; or whether the older average age of adoption for the black children in the study prevented a fair comparison.

Another study, of black West Indian (Caribbean) children and English children raised in an orphanage in England, found that the Caribbean children had higher IQs than those from England, with mixed-race children scoring in between. But where the black children given more attention by orphanage staff? Were particularly intelligent Caribbeans emigrating to England for better economic opportunity?

Finally, a study of black children adopted by white versus black families in America showed that the black children raised by whites had higher IQ scores than those raised by blacks"suggesting an environmental cause. When the studies are taken together, the many caveats involved with the role of genetics and environment make it hard to draw firm conclusions. But the balance of data suggests no racial difference in intelligence."

Crime rates:
You are indeed right again that blacks do have a higher crime rate, at least as suggested by all of the research I found. But strong evidence suggests that this may not be because of skin color so much as because of white biases and privilege. Listen to these statistics (pulled from this website: :

" "Whites are more punitive than blacks and Hispanics even though they experience less crime."

" "White Americans overestimate the proportion of crime committed by people of color and associate people of color with criminality. For example, white respondents in a 2010 survey overestimated the actual share of burglaries, illegal drug sales and juvenile crime committed by African-Americans by 20 percent to 30 percent."

" "White Americans who associate crime with blacks and Latinos are more likely to support punitive policies " including capital punishment and mandatory minimum sentencing " than whites with weaker racial associations of crime."

I think your assesment of both of our views is fully accurate and certainly helpful. I'd prefer not to talk verbally because I don't want my location tracked, but it has certainly been a pleasure to discuss this with you, and I hope that we can continue to talk and be friends even after this debate is over.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by tfroitz1 3 years ago
Just to clarify. You are of the opinion that diversity is not a strength and you are actually pro and not con on this formulation of the motion. Or so I misunderstand you?
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

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