The Instigator
Pro (for)
3 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

The black community needs to change their current behavior trend

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/1/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 725 times Debate No: 74597
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)




The black community is harming themselves by viewing themselves as victims in almost every aspect of life. If they can overcome this damaging point of view, then they will be able to become much more successful as a whole.


I will gladly accept this challenge.
life: the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.
victim: a person harmed, injured, or killed as a result of a crime, accident, or other event or action.

"The black community is harming themselves by viewing themselves as victims in almost every aspect of life. "

If the pro's statement can be reinterpreted based on the definitions of life and victim then it will indicate that the black community is injured/harmed/killed by their views (the event) of organic matter. Maybe a rephrase is necessary?

My argument based on title :

The black community's behavioral trend has been instigated before the slave trades, back in the days when their tribes will participate in this "unorthodox" events (as it may appear to the white colored individual). It is what characterized them and made them as the behavioral body (if you were to call it that) that they are now. The constant denial of their right and their way of behaving creates these back-lashes that can be seen in today's world. There is a pressure in all of them that makes them explode at every negative act of aggression (or perceived aggression) addressed towards them. In short, having a minority mind-set will prevent them from being assimilated into the mainstream.
Debate Round No. 1


Ok, not sure what you were trying to accomplish with all that fancy defining and stuff, but I will proceed according to my opening statement. I would appreciate it if you would just answer the prompt (it is not that complicated), instead of trying to find faults with it, because you can do that with any prompt you are presented with.
Just FYI, use the context of words to find their definitions. In this context, your definition of life makes no sense. Your definition of victim kind of makes sense, but here is mine: A person who believes that others are at fault for their current state of being.

Now, back to the debate. After attempting to decipher your premise, I got this: "The constant denial of their right and their way of behaving creates these back-lashes that can be seen in today's world. There is a pressure in all of them that makes them explode at every negative act of aggression (or perceived aggression) addressed towards them. In short, having a minority mind-set will prevent them from being assimilated into the mainstream."

Ok, so it looks like you are saying that their current behavior is justified by acts of 'denial' and 'acts of aggression.' Let us look into this a little further.
What you are saying is that violence justifies violence. Use some basic reasoning....Does this really make sense to you? I don't think so. Now, I will agree that in some extreme cases, violence can be used as a last resort. But in the case of Ferguson and most recently Baltimore, violence began even before the facts came out [2]. If you really want to dive down into the case of the Ferguson shooting, and the George Zimmerman case, then be my guest. But, as the juries ruled, both officer Wilson and Mr. Zimmerman were rightfully proven innocent. And yet, much of the African American community seems to disregard one of the most sacred principles in the American criminal justice system, holding that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty [3]. Instead, the rioters (most of whom were not even from the town, see source 2) decided immediately that the killer of the black man was to blame before any evidence even came out. So in conclusion, the 'acts of aggression you seem to imply were really the just treatment of a violent attack on police officers. If you have any other situations, please bring them up.

Addressing your second point, as to denial, have you heard about recent college admission policies? As of now, 76% of Americans oppose race-conscious college admissions, which factor skin color into whether you get into college or not. This is a travesty. Making distinctions based on race is also know as RACISM. So I don't know what 'denial' you are speaking of, but this sure sounds likes quite some denial of non-minority students who work their tails off to get to college.

So, my question to you, is: Do you agree with the current actions of society that claim to benefit the black community?



I would like to apologize for my rude first interaction and approach on this debate. What i will do in the first P1 I will break down your arguments from round 2, in P2 i will present my arguments and in P3 i will give you something to think about for the next round.

I think you might have misunderstood my act of aggression reference, what I meant is that any act of aggression, that being passive or active stirs this type of behavior, the act of aggression as you can see it's seen as an outside stimuli (non-blacks). I believe you have given good examples in this regard (Baltimore, Ferguson); but if i were to give you a simile in this regard it would be like throwing a rock in a pond, sure the effect is greatly accentuated at the place of impact where the stone fell but the ripples spread trough the whole lake. Their people are like water, very easily stirred by anything, which is why this behavior exists. I do not want to call it a good behavior but nor am i saying it is bad. But suppressing it for future generations, all it will do is perpetuate this way of living. If these events happen (Baltimore) that create great civil unrest within the black community it will only be to benefit of that community, forming a historical past which in the from which lessons can be learnt in the future. We all learn from mistakes, it is only fair to let them do these mistakes also. I know it seems like something nonsensical but believe me if my son does not learn from my mistakes i will let him do them also. Some people have this type of learning curve if you were to call it that.

"As of now, 76% of Americans oppose race-conscious college admissions, which factor skin color into whether you get into college or not. This is a travesty. Making distinctions based on race is also know as RACISM. So I don't know what 'denial' you are speaking of, but this sure sounds likes quite some denial of non-minority students who work their tails off to get to college."

You might have misinterpreted this paragraph but i will explain it to you. It makes reference to opposition of race-conscious admission; that means they do not want the admissions to colleges to be depending on race (76%). It does however show that there are people (the 24%) that wish the admissions to be depended on race. And in this you have to take into account a few things such as census location, recorded personnel (some might be too old to go to school), and some institutions are made specifically for those type of minorities. I see nothing wrong with that.


I would argue that their behavioral trend is just an active way of themselves expressing their minority mindset, but it seems a bit far fetched. I will try to explain myself by using one thought experiment and logic examples/facts.

Baltimore is ranked as the 5th city in the US with 63% of its population being black or African american only [1]. That means a large percentage of the police force, political reps, business owners and so forth are of that descent. You can say that white or non-blacks are the minority there. Education wise, 86% of the enrolled students are of African descent [2]. Let's keep these 2 statistics in mind as we continue. You would argue that the majority of the population is fairly educated in those parts, yet they resume to this types of behaviors. Here is why this type of behavior should condoned:

1. Oppressing and secluding their right to express selves is against the human rights Freedom Of Expression;
2. Internal turmoil and civil unrest resulting in propriety damage or human loss creates a history which if documented can be analyzed and conclusions/teachings drawn from (can be used for other studies);
3. A key factor to take into consideration is that the individuals participating in these events are not always the originators or originating from that region. Therefore not all African american are entitled to that criminology mindset (he's black he should change his behavior)
4. An individual or group of individuals that initiate these type of "events" and participate in, only display immaturity which future promotes point 2 referencing education through experience/history.

Let's do that though experiment now. If you as an individual stripped of all your previous experiences (wipe your memory type of case) were to start life again. The other disadvantage is that you are an adult with adult responsibilities. I will argue that you as a sentient being (with your free will) will make the same mistakes (to some degree, i bet you won't fall off the bike) and create the same circuity in your brain memorizing all of your mistakes in the hopes that you will not do them again. Now apply this experiment to the current situation that is going on in American (and around the world). It is the same notion, let them have the history in order to learn.

I mentioned that I will leave you something to think about. Even if everything that i have covered here you completely disagree with and you have all the accurate rebuttal arguments, consider this:

Behavioral activities are influenced by mental capacity which in turn is delegated by past experiences. Removing the most critical one (experience) will have the chain reaction seen above.

Please read carefully through this before posting your response.

Debate Round No. 2


doctorcsss forfeited this round.


Awaiting your response
Debate Round No. 3


Ok, I have spent a significant amount of time attempting to figure out what you are trying to say. Even after this, I am not sure what your stance is on the actions of the black community and society"s response to their situation. I think this debate would be easier for both of us if we try and keep it a simple and clear as possible.

In this argument, I will try to respond to what I perceive your arguments to be, and also present several more points for discussion.

Just to restate the points I have made so far: The aggressive actions taken by the black community (Ferguson, Baltimore and other protests against police "brutality") are unfounded and harmful, and also how society does actually go out of its way to help blacks.

Before we go any farther though, I think it is essential to define these two mindsets for race relations. These two main viewpoints are that of a "structuralist" and that of a "culturalist." Structuralists see the role of institutionalized racism and economic circumstances as the main cause for the current state of affairs in race relations and minority positions. Culturalists, however, view self-perpetuating norms and behaviors as the cause for their situation. Several high-profile African Americans support this point of view, like Ben Carson, Shelby Steele, Thomas Sowell and Jason Riley [1].

Lets take a look at the average income based on race. At the top of the list, with an average annual income of $68,636 are Asian households. Next, come whites with $57,009, followed by Hispanics with $39,005. Blacks trail behind with $33,321 [2].
According to FBI statistics, by 2007 blacks accounted for nearly 50% of the nation"s prisoners. Some 12% of blacks between 20 and 34 were behind bars, compared to 1.6% of whites. Homicide is the leading cause of death for young black men in the U.S., and around 90 percent of the perpetrators are also black. Yet for months we've had protesters nationwide pretending that our morgues are full of young black men because cops are shooting them. Around 98 percent of black shooting deaths do not involve police. In fact, a cop is six times more likely to be shot by someone black than the opposite. The protestors are pushing a false anti-cop narrative, and everyone from the president on down has played along.

So, it is clear that Blacks trail behind other races in our society in the economic sector. They also make up a disproportionately large percentage of prison population. The reasons for these issues are important, and I wanted to throw this out there before moving on.

Now, to try and decipher your arguments again.

You seem to base your last post around why "this type of behavior should condoned" referring to the current aggressive actions take by the black community. You then go on to list your first reason why we should "condone" their actions: "Oppressing and secluding their right to express selves is against the human rights Freedom Of Expression." There are major issues with this first statement. Sure, they have a right to express themselves, as the First Amendment dictates, but another key section of the First Amendment was that this freedom of expression cannot be allowed to harm other citizens or their property [3]. So yes, they have the right to express their feelings, but definitely not in the way that they are currently doing.

I wholeheartedly agree that not all of the violent protesters were from that region. Numerous sources say so about the cases in Ferguson and Baltimore. I agree that their actions do not show only immaturity, but also stupidity and greed as well.

I guess that I need to broaden the scope of what I intended the debate to be about. I originally planned, as stated in my thesis, to talk about their culture from a broader point of view. This is where the structuralism vs culturalism comes into play.

After evaluating both standpoints, and even attending a seminar put on by the Panetta Institute on this issue, I came to a conclusion. Several key points led me to the conclusion that I came to. The Panetta Institute seminar revealed to me the true oppression and hardships that Asian immigrants were subjected to. They received notably less attention than the plight of African Americans, yet their situation was nearly slavery. This is exemplified by the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 which singled out Chinese on a racial basis. As Leon Panetta stated in his lecture on race relations "Asians and Latinos suffered many of the same obstacles that blacks have suffered-robbed of their land, attacked by the KKK and rioting mobs, excluded from labor unions, and discriminated against in employment, housing and education."
Despite this, take a look back up at average incomes per year. Asians make more than double than blacks do, despite facing equally harsh oppression and discrimination. The fact that Asians were once at the bottom of society and worked their way up with next to zero government aid or national attention is spectacular. It showcases how the American Dream can be lived out to the fullest with great results.

Jason Riley goes on to point out a major issue in black culture today. "big part of the problem is a reluctance to speak honestly about these cultural shortcomings. Many whites fear being called racists. And many black leaders have a vested interest in blaming black problems primarily on white racism, so that is the narrative they push regardless of the reality. Racism has become an all-purpose explanation for bad black outcomes, be they social or economic. If you disagree and are white, you"re a bigot. If you disagree and are black, you"re a sell-out." I decided to use this quote because it very concisely sums up the culturalist argument.

So, to sum up my points for this round: We need to focus on the bigger picture issues. Everyone falls into either a culturalist or structuralist viewpoint. Culturalism seems to be supported clearly by history and today"s events. So, a question for you to address, which point of view do you support?



Bogcha forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4


Well dude, you left me in a tough spot. This is my last chance to rebut your arguments, and I don't have any new ones to rebut. So instead, I will just provide a few pieces of food for thought for you and any other readers:

As I have stated so far in my arguments, the black community is in a rough situation today, both economically and socially. I am sure we all agree that something must change, whether that be how America treats them, or how they treat themselves. I made a strong case that it is not their situation that is in the way of success, but rather the 'victim' mindset, which can be so damaging. I am not alone in believing this. Prominent figures in the black community, most notably Dr. Ben Carson, have experienced this for themselves. He however made the choice to set his mind to it, and change his fate. He did just that, and look at where he is today: making medical history as overseer of the pediatric unit at John Hopkins, and first surgeon ever to separate conjoined twins at the head.

Thank you for the debate, and please do not bring up any new arguments in the last round as I will not be able to rebut them. If you, or any reader has any question or comment regarding my stances on this, or any other issue, please message me an I would be glad to respond. Bye for now, and always remember....MURICA!!!


Sorry I was occupied with something else. But i will heed your words and i will not give any more arguments.

I will just like to add that in order for a community or system to thrive it first has to create a history. Be that good or bad it is still a history from which things can be learnt. If an outside force intervenes and re-addresses the situation as they see fit will be depending on that power to continue them on that path.

Vote CON!! :)
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
Damn. Just realized it never posted the first half of my RFD. Well, I remember some of it. I don't think either debater was really directly arguing the resolution. Both were dodging around it, particularly around what the "need" is here. Sure, perhaps the black community should change behaviors, but a need is more stark and objective than that. If there's a need, it's absolute and binding. However, as I don't really get that analysis from Con, I'm forced to treat this as a "should" resolution, since that's how both debaters seem to treat it.

Suffice it to say that Con's case just seemed to miss the point. This isn't a debate where Pro is forcing action on black people. He's explaining why black people need to change, i.e. why they should change, rather than why an external force should force them to change. So long as that's true, all of these points about how they should be allowed to make their own mistakes (they already have) and why they shouldn't be oppressed really don't apply here.
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
So that just leaves me to question whether Pro's met his burden. I think this would have been the most appropriate point of attack for Con, since it's unclear from Pro's R2 how he's meeting any part of the resolution. He's showing that there's a trend, but it's not clear how that harm is damaging to them, thus providing any incentive for them to change their behavior. Lacking that, I have the societal damage point, which doesn't strike me as incentive for them to change beyond an external imposition, which Pro doesn't elucidate. I also have this point about affirmative action, but I never get a link to any harm from that, only an assertion that it is harmful.

Pro does, however, present me with harms that directly affect the black population in R4. These are incentives to change, even if they're just asserted as incentives. Without rebuttal, that's reason enough for him to meet his burden, and thus win the debate.

A note about one of Pro's arguments that didn't factor in here. I don't buy the point regarding how viewing oneself as the victim necessarily reduces one's capacity to do well in society. Pro never explains that link. He asserts that the harm stems from that source, and then claims he's proven it. That's not enough.
Posted by Bogcha 3 years ago
That is fine, i will wait for your response
Posted by doctorcsss 3 years ago
sorry I am gonna have to forfeit this round dude. Finals this week and I really can't afford the time to write my response. I will get the next round though
Posted by leojm 3 years ago
im for you i would debate this topic but im terrible when it comes to devils advocate hehe :)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 3 years ago
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Given in comments.