Instigator / Pro
1500
rating
3
debates
66.67%
won
Topic
#6026

Does White Privilege Exist in the US

Status
Debating

Waiting for the next argument from the instigator.

Round will be automatically forfeited in:

00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
1442
rating
52
debates
58.65%
won
Description

I saw an interesting debate on here I did not see in time to accept, so I decided to just create the debate myself (Again, since this is not my original idea). I will be arguing Pro- Which means that I will be arguing the White privilege does exist and impacts minorities in a negative way, especially inside the US (I would argue that it affects Black people the most). Con will argue that White privilege does not exist in the US. The first round, my opponent can give definitions (My definition for this is "White privilege- White privilege refers to the unearned advantages afforded to people who are assumed, based largely on complexion and related physical features, to be of European ancestry." (Riders University). Argument time is one week, due to me working more than one job at the moment. I look forward to whoever I interact with!

Round 1
Pro
#1
Before starting I would like to first thank my opponent for being willing to debate me. To start, I will mention that I did provide my definition for White Privilege in the description (I will also put it here so that other individuals notice it as well), which is defined a “White privilege refers to the unearned advantages afforded to people who are assumed, based largely on complexion and related physical features, to be of European ancestry.” (Rider). In addition to this, I will also definite racism as “the incitation of discrimination, hatred or violence towards a person or a group of persons because of their origin or their belonging, or not belonging, to a specific ethnic group or race” (Cornell), and individuals racism as “support or perpetuate racism in conscious and unconscious ways” (Cornell). In addition to this I will also define institutional racism as the process by which racial oppression is imposed on subordinate racial groups by dominant racial groups through institutional channels” (California State University Northridge). The importance of defining these terms are important, because having White privilege doesn’t make someone racist, but racism is called to be the item that pollutes the atmosphere for white privilege to happen. (Salsbury.edu). To make my case I will provide a methodology to determine truth and several sub categories to make my point. Occasionally I will cite history, because my opponent and I will probably differ on how much racism impacts society.
What I am not claiming
To start, I will say that I am not claiming that there aren’t white individuals who work hard to obtain success. I start with this, because I know individuals who feel white privilege is an attack on how hard they work (I am a PhD student at the University of Southern Mississippi. That took hard work and I am still broke lol!) (Salsbury.edu). This debate is also not to say that minorities can not achieve success. We have seen minorities reach great levels of success in the U.S., but we even noticed this back during the time racism was more apparent (Givens, 2023). I mention this, because White Privilege does not mean this, but more so shows that there are advantages that white individuals have based on the color of their skin (Salsbury.edu). This of course is shown on multiple metrics.
Methodology
To start, my method will focus on reliability as stated by Andy Field, which states “ which is whether an instrument can be interpreted consistently across different situations” (Field, 2018). In addition to this I will use a variety of different studies with different methodologies that are meant to get to causation (Myers et al., 2017). These methods reduce bias, because they are used in a variety of different fields such as biology, education, behavioral science, and medicine (Field, 2018; Myers et al., 2017) (I say this, because with this being a political topic, individuals do like to claim items through media outlets alone. I’m not claiming my opponent will lol!).
Hiring Data
To start, most minorities are shown to be discriminated in the hiring process. This can be shown with multiple studies through different time periods. To start, from multiple studies dating back from 2003 and heading to our modern era, we see that minorities are 50% less likely to obtain a call back from jobs (Chicago booth; Quillan & Le, 2023). In addition to this we see that the wage gap between minorities and white people is giant, and is shown to be like this when factoring equal credentials (Berkeley).  Along with that the pay gap between minorities can be shown to possibly be discriminatory, because when we look closer into the data, we see that this difference is also shown when comparing highly educated individuals of both races, and individuals without degrees when comparing minorities with white people. To further the claim of racial discrimination between hiring practices, a meta analysis of 90 studies from 1985-2019 show hiring practices towards callbacks for jobs have remained the same, with most minority groups inside 6 different countries including the U.S. (Quillan & Le, 2023). With the scope of this study focusing on the U.S., I will focus primarily on the United States as much as possible. When reading this study viewing the U.S. only, it showed hiring practices with callbacks remained the same with white individuals receiving far more call backs than minorities, with the exception of this studies inability to predict hiring practices towards Asians, and Latin Americans (Quillan & Le, 2023). In addition to this, there was a major spike towards hiring practices with Muslims (Quillan & Le, 2023).
Economic advantages
As shown by Berliner & Hermans, economic distribution can be cited as white privilege due to individuals in white family's being able to have better opportunities on average (Berliner & Hermans, 2022). This is typically shown in a significant way when we view data on how unevenly income distribution is shown (Pew research). One could obviously try and say that there are poor white people as well, but the system itself has been set up to disadvantage minorities since it was created. This can be shown with how slavery affected outcomes in the U.S., due to white people having access to more opportunities, which affects minorities due to white people being able to place money back for more generations compared to other minorities (Givens, 2023; Berliner & Hermans 2022).  This also matches with discriminatory hiring practices as well, that also affects this due to minorities being given less opportunities, even in our modern era. 
DEI
DEI, is something one may argue doesn’t affect white privilege, but I would argue that it does. Simply put, a study was conducted to show how minorities were affected within a workplace program due to hiring managers viewpoints towards certain political parties, especially involving Donald Trump (Rice et al., 2024). Minorities who worked under bosses that claimed to heavily support Trump (These individuals are ones who are very open about it), claimed to have experienced worse treatment when compared to when they were hired by more left leaning, or not as vocal hiring managers (Rice et al., 2024). I could argue how Trump is racist, with policy decisions and actions with how he did not reject the support of former KKK members and his call to remove DEI from various institutions and work places (Rice et al., 2024; Osterage, 2025). 
Allocation of resources and Opportunities
Most individuals would admit that slavery was a harmful practice, which hurt obtainment for success of minorities in the future. One can see my citations in relation to discriminatory hiring practices, but individuals such as African American Scholar Cater G. Woodson (The second African American to hold a PhD), mentioned that after slavery, minorities did not have skills to help them achieve success right after slavery (Woodson, 2018). With White individuals not going through this harsh practice in a wide spread manner, allowed more resources to be saved over a longer period of time. In history, we can see that opportunities have been taken from minorities throughout history from unfair racial practices, which lasted all the way through the 60s (Givens, 2023). An example of this would be unfair distribution of resources, through Plessy vs. Ferguson and has even been fought against after Brown vs. Board of education happened (Givens, 2023). Even after the fight to desegregate school happened, it was never successful which still impacts funding in the school systems (I will go more in detail later). From this, we see the same issues with underfunding, which came all the way back from separate but equal due to the way funds for schools are obtained. Schools obtain funds through local property tax, which means that minority schools have remained underfunded over time (Berliner & Hermans, 2022).
Unfair School opportunities
In the previous section I mentioned that minorities schools have remained underfunded, which is typically labeled as white individuals having a form of white privilege, due to this unfair issue dating back to the time severe racism was more prevalent (I would argue we are going backwards, which I will in later) (Berliner & Hermans, 2022). These unfair opportunities will continue to arise due to the school choice movement taking away funds from poor public schools, which will affect minorities the most (Berliner & Hermans, 2022). This can be proven, because our schools are becoming more segregated as a result of this movement, where schools that have primarily white students are funded more than schools with black students, which result in worse outcome for minorities (Berliner & Hermans, 2022; Frankenburg et al., 2011). Worse outcomes for education for minorities would impact their ability to improve upon opportunities in the future (Frankeburg et al., 2011).  
White Washed History
Individuals who are minority often have their history covered up to a form of white washed history (Givens, 2023). This is so demonstrably true because we can see how minorities during slavery were forced to wear clothing that felt like pins sticking into someone’s skin, Jefferson saying that the first book a poem written by Phillis Wheatley did not happen through this author because she was black and not smart enough due to her skin color, and mistreatment of minorities trying to learn behind the slave masters back (Givens, 2023). Many didn’t know how cruel white individuals were during slavery and throughout history. Most people don’t know minorities were essential to the creation of public schools and how white people continued to run them out (Givens, 2023). This has implications today, because we still see white washed history and many individuals who are more extremist republicans try to make this white washing even worse. Examples of this is how Trump in his first term tried to create patriot education to further create racist ideals. To start Trump tried to take away the word slavery, and replace it with workers in this curriculum (Pene, 2020). One could see how examples of how this minimizes how horrid this practice was in the previous section based on Jarvis Givens book (Givens, 2023). The sad thing about this, is that this action resembles how the old school confederates, changed history books to make the civil war mainly about state rights, while slavery was downplayed (Pene, 2020). These textbooks in the south continued until 2018 (Pene, 2020). We can see how this has emboldened the movement of these more strongly conservative individuals, based on my previous sections and from the words of this author (Pene, 2020). We will also see this in my next section with the increase in hate crimes.
Hate Crime Data
A statistical website shows that there has been a steady increase in hate crimes over the past decade. In 2023 there was a total of 11,800 hate crimes. There was a noticeable increase in violent crime towards Asian Americans between 2018-2020 with a “73 percent increase, from 161 reported cases in 2019 to 279 cases in 2020” (statista.com). This still pales in comparison to hate crimes on black individuals which resulted in “2,871 incidents in 2020, a 49 percent increase from 2019” during the same time period (statista.com). We can see that white privilege extends to this as well, because this is significantly different when compared to white individuals based on models presented bus statisticians such as Andy Field (Field, 2018). 
Prison Rate
Now I am not going to make an argument from white privilege due to prison rates. I can prove racism does exist within the prison system, which will require me to share the statistics to set my argument up to show how racism exists. Remember based on one of my citations, racism is a precursor for white privilege so statistics should be shared more so for academic completion (Salabury.edu). My main argument will be based on qualitative data, that minorities are typically treated worse in the prison system, which would be issues that white individuals are less likely to experience (Anamma, 2018). Adding the quantitative data in as well will improve my reliability (John Hopkins). The prison rates for most minorities are disproportionate especially for black people. Other ethnic groups that are incarcerated at a higher rate than white people are Lantinix individuals, biracial individuals, and Native Americans (Libguides). The table on this page's site shows the top ten states with the highest incarnation rates, and if you view the table which is labeled as table 3, you can see that minorities make up triple the prison rates as white individuals. When viewing this nationwide, minorities are locked up 5 times more than individuals who are white (Libguides). To make my point with treatment in the system, the school to prison pipeline research shows that minorities who are locked up early on are likely to continue repeating this cycle (Anamma, 2018). In addition, this has kept being cycled through for generations which hurts opportunities for minorities. Along with this, we see that many of the issues that got these children locked up in the first case, were simple items that would not have gotten white children locked up for committing the same crime (Anamma, 2018). Additional issues with many of these punishments are that many  individuals of power ignore the situation these students are in (Annamma 2018). Examples of this in the literature are fleeing from abusive parents, joining gangs to be safe in rough neighborhood due to poverty, hitting their own siblings in foster care, or having to take care of younger siblings which causes missed school days/instances of worse things from schools (Annamma 2018). We see from this that many of these individuals become more likely to be criminals after having to go centers such as the ones cited in this book (Anamma, 2018). 
Police Brutality 
Police brutality, can be shown to be an item of White privilege due to there being a statistically significant difference between brutality rates in White people vs minorities. This means when accounting for all the variables a researcher should, it is statically significant when viewing differences (Field, 2018). From this Police Brutality has been shown to affect minorities more than white people, by a significant margin (Libguides). To cite Brookings.edu “Of all Black people killed by police, Black emerging adults accounted for 31 percent, despite representing only 12 percent of the Black population and just one percent of the entire U.S. population. On average, Black emerging adults are five times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a white emerging adult and nearly three times more likely than a Latinx emerging adult. Further, Latinx emerging adults are about two times more likely to be killed than white emerging adults.” (Brookings). When comparing this with the school to prison pipeline data, one could make an argument that many within this system are racist, which would show white privelege exists due to this not being near as likely with white people (Anamma, 2018).
Causation and Debate Argumentation
In this debate, so far I have used several different methods to reach causation that my opponent would have to argue against to claim white privilege doesn’t exist. First I cited studies using different research methodologies, which is important in research (Salisbury.edu). In addition to this I used different statistical methods to improve reliability “which is whether an instrument can be interpreted consistently across different situations.”, which even included multivariate testing (This is important, because multiple variables predict different things) (Field, 2018). Finally I mixed qualitative data with quantitative data, which gets to causation through helping interpret quantitative data through interviews and observations (John Hopkins; Campbell & Stanley 1959). Even though this is the end of my methodology section, I have also used multiple historical sources, which is acceptable to use in different research methodologies as well, even though it is not as strong of a predictor at times (Onzbugy & Frels, 2016). Along with using a robust methodology, I have cited a wealth of data, in which most will have to be countered to show white privilege doesn’t exist (Due to this focusing on reliability across multiple areas that link together). In conclusion I continue to thank my opponent, as I wait for his response.
Refrences 
Annamma, S. A. (2018). Thepedagogy of pathologization: Dis/abled girls of color in the schoolprisonnexus. New York: Routledge.
Berliner, D. C., &Hermanns, C. (2022). Public Education Defending a Cornerstone of American Democracy. Teachers College Press,Teachers College, Columbia University.
Givens, J. R. (2023). School clothes: A collective memoir of Black Student Witness. BEACON.
Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). Racism. Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/racism
Pene, M. (2020, October 24). Patriotic Education is a whitewashing of history. UT News.
From 2003: Racial bias in hiring. The University of Chicago Booth School of Business. (n.d.). https://www.chicagobooth.edu/review/racial-bias-hiring
Quillian, L., & Lee, J. J. (2023). Trends in racial and ethnic discrimination in hiring in six Western countries. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(6). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2212875120
SBU Online February 16, 2022, Maral Gorginpour      January 24, 2025, admin      October 3, 2024, & SBU Online September 24, 2024. (2022, May 3). Diversity, equity, and inclusion: Why it matters. Online Masters Programs from St. Bonaventure University. https://online.sbu.edu/news/why-dei-matters
Ostrager, A.-E., Jordan, J., & High, T. R. (2025, February 10). President Trump acts to roll back dei initiatives. The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2025/02/10/president-trump-acts-to-roll-back-dei-initiatives/
Libguides: Incarcerated populations: Racial disparities. Racial Disparities - Incarcerated Populations - LibGuides at Duquesne University. (n.d.). https://guides.library.duq.edu/incarceration/race
Henderson, H., Suddler, C., Frimpong, K., Lauren Bauer, S. G., & Katharine Meyer, R. M. P. (2024, July 30). A crisis within a crisis: Police killings of Black Emerging Adults. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/a-crisis-within-a-crisis-police-killings-of-black-emerging-adults/
Meyers, L.S., Gamst, G., & Guarino, A. J. (2017). Applied Multivariate Research: Design and Interpretation, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rice, D. B., Young, N. C., Taylor, R. M., & Leonard, S. R. (2024). politics and race in the workplace: Understanding how and when trump‐supporting managers hinder black employees from thriving at work. Human Resource Management Journal, 35(1), 256–275. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12564
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Frels,R. (2016). Seven steps to a comprehensive literature review. Sage.
Frankenberg, E., Siegel-Hawley, G.,& Wang, J. (2011). Choice without equity:  charter schoolsegregation. Education PolicyAnalysis Archives, 19, 1. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v19n1.2011
Woodson, C. G. (2018). The Mis-education of the negro. Youcanprint.
Con
#2
I would also like to thank my opponent for their first argument. As for my part, given the vast quantity of claims my opponent has made, I will try addressing them directly and demonstrating that white privilege is not a true phenomenon, as my opponent claims.
first argument hiring data does not prove discrimination
While my opponent claims statistical data proves hiring discrimination against minorities—citing fewer callbacks and lower average salaries—these statistics do not conclusively demonstrate systemic bias. Factors such as career preferences and educational backgrounds provide alternative explanations. For instance, some studies indicate that minorities tend to apply more frequently to certain lower-paying sectors, contributing to income disparities. Furthermore, differences in educational quality and attainment significantly influence job readiness and starting salaries.
Moreover, the statistical likelihood of minorities receiving fewer callbacks compared to whites can be partially attributed to their proportionally smaller representation in the overall population. This inherent numerical disadvantage means that, even without discrimination, a smaller pool of minority candidates will naturally receive fewer callbacks than a larger pool of white candidates.
Whites do not have an inherent economic advantage due to white privilege
It is factually true that, on average, white households in the United States possess greater wealth than minority households. For example, the median white household had $188,200 in wealth in 2019, compared to $24,100 for the median Black household and $36,100 for the median Hispanic household. However, this disparity does not automatically validate the claim that white privilege is the sole or even primary cause, nor does it imply that the system was intentionally designed to disadvantage minorities from its inception. The United States has a long history of economic inequality that has affected various groups, regardless of race. Factors such as historical events, policy decisions, and social structures have contributed to these disparities.
Even during periods of slavery and racial segregation in the United States, the majority of white people did not benefit economically. Wealth and power were concentrated in the hands of a small elite, even among white Americans. This pattern of wealth concentration has persisted throughout history, with a small percentage of the population, regardless of race, holding a disproportionate share of the nation's resources.
DEI is a terrible argument for Pro to make since it's not about privilege.
The pro argument seems to be based on a study that only states that certain job managers made minorities' lives hell. However, this is not a white privilege concept, because businesses are hierarchies that allow people in positions the ability to create great or toxic work environments, regardless of race.
It's common for employees, regardless of race, to encounter supervisors or colleagues with differing opinions, and sometimes, employees may feel compelled to conform to these opinions despite personal disagreement. This is often an unavoidable aspect of navigating workplace dynamics. Given that white individuals statistically comprise the majority of the U.S. workforce, they are also statistically more likely to experience negative interactions with superiors or be employed in less desirable, low-wage jobs with difficult working conditions.
The pro’s argument for allocation of resources and opportunities is fundamentally flawed.
While it is true that slavery and subsequent Jim Crow laws significantly hindered the progress of African Americans in the United States, it is also important to acknowledge that the majority of white people during these periods did not significantly benefit from this system. Slavery and the economic model it supported primarily enriched a small minority of families, leaving the majority of white individuals with limited economic opportunities and often struggling alongside enslaved people.
A core component of my opponent's argument is the claim that resources and opportunities are unfairly distributed in the United States. While it is undeniable that disparities in resource allocation exist, it's important to acknowledge that a perfectly equitable distribution has never existed in US history, regardless of race. Throughout history, various groups have experienced periods of hardship and limited access to resources, not always along racial lines.
In the landmark case of Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court's decision aimed to eliminate segregation in schools. While initial enforcement faced resistance, the core legal principle of the ruling was upheld. The outcome of the case was to prevent schools from being legally segregated, and today, no school is legally permitted to be exclusively white or black and receive government funding. The focus of Brown v. Board was not on the equal allocation of resources, but rather on desegregation.
The fact that both Black and white students attend the same public and private educational institutions means that unequal school funding is not an act of white privilege. The problems plaguing public schools, which receive more funding than private schools, stem from a complex interplay of factors including family challenges, the influence of gang culture, and issues of propriety.
Pro has misrepresented school opportunities.
The school choice movement is not an example of white privilege or a tool for segregating students. This movement simply allows families to choose where they want to send their children, instead of being limited to mandatory public school attendance. While the school choice movement is controversial, with some expressing concern that it could lead to increased racial segregation, it is designed to be available to everyone, regardless of race. In fact, it can be argued that school choice promotes racial integration by enabling students to attend schools outside of their immediate neighborhoods. For example, a student from a poor Black family could use a voucher to attend a higher-quality school in a neighboring, more affluent (and often whiter) district.
My opponent has misrepresented the issue of school funding by implying that schools with predominantly white students receive more funding than those with predominantly Black students. School funding is not legally allocated based on the racial composition of the student body. While statistical disparities in funding may exist, these statistics do not equate to legal racial segregation, as minority students are not excluded from attending schools with a white majority.
My opponent's arguments rely heavily on statistical data, which can be manipulated to support various conclusions. While these statistics may point to disparities, they fail to address the numerous individual exceptions that contradict the narrative of systemic white privilege. The fact that many minorities achieve significant success in various fields demonstrates that the system does not inherently prevent individual advancement, challenging the notion of pervasive white privilege.
Addressing Pro’s whitewash claims
It is true that historical figures like Thomas Jefferson attempted to downplay or ignore the achievements of Black Americans. However, these attempts to whitewash history have been documented and ultimately thwarted, demonstrating that such efforts are not only recognized but also actively challenged by academic institutions around the world, particularly in the United States, where the atrocities of slavery are thoroughly taught. The primary instances of historical whitewashing occur in the South, which holds less credibility in the broader historical academic community.
A portion of Pro’s argument is correct in that many people are not aware that enslaved people were used to create many public schools. However, the fact that Blacks were not allowed in public schools is not a hidden fact. The enslavement of African Americans and the refusal to integrate with them once they were freed is well known and taught. This further disproves Pro’s arguments about whitewashing.
My opponent's argument about Trump and the Radical Republicans inadvertently undermines their own position. The fact that efforts to remove the word ""slavery"" from history books were unsuccessful demonstrates a rejection of historical whitewashing by American society, directly contradicting the claim that white privilege is a fact.
This attempt at so called ""white washing"" is not exclusive to the right as leftists are guilty of this act too. The left has tried to remove the word ""bossy"" from the first amendment in order to stop men from supposedly putting women down. The fact that this failed highlights that America is not easy to whitewash and could be interpreted as an example of female privilege, according to Pro's logic.
My opponent's arguments about hate crimes are purely statistical, with no substantive support. They argue that whites enjoy privilege because they supposedly have lower hate crime statistics. This is a biased conclusion, as it is a well-known fact that media outlets actively ignore white victims in favor of minorities.
Studies have shown that the perception of white privilege can lead to cases of hate crimes against white victims being underreported or disbelieved, which suggests that the concept of white privilege can disadvantage white individuals in certain situations.
My opponent's arguments rely heavily on statistical data, which can be manipulated to support various conclusions. While these statistics may point to disparities, they fail to address the numerous individual exceptions that contradict the narrative of systemic white privilege. Pro has primarily looked up a few websites, found the numbers needed to make their argument, and wrote based on it. They have no other forms of information other than numbers, and numbers, though factual in a mathematics sense, do not factually support the argument overall.
In regards to Pro’s claims about prison statistics. The United States is statistically one of the most incarcerated nations in the world. While it may be true that minorities have a higher rate of reoffending, they do not make up the majority of the prison population due to their population differences in the country's prison system overall.
Claims that prisons treat minorities worse than whites are an oversimplification. While reoffending rates may be higher for minorities, the majority of the United States prison population is white. The fact that many individuals, regardless of race, struggle to find employment and housing after release suggests that the high recidivism rates are a broader societal issue of ineffective criminal rehabilitation, rather than a problem of mistreatment within prisons.
My opponent makes a baseless claim that minorities are more likely to be imprisoned for the same crimes as whites. It is legally impossible for a Black person to be imprisoned for an act that would not also result in the imprisonment of a white person, if convicted of the same crime. My opponent also accuses people in power of ""ignoring the issues of students,"" but the issues they mention—family abuse and gang involvement—are not issues that those in power can directly solve. Family abuse is already criminalized, and gang involvement is a criminal act, not something authorities are responsible for. While I agree that these factors increase the likelihood of criminal behavior, they do not absolve individuals of responsibility for their actions, regardless of their race.
The fact that my opponent openly states, ""Police brutality can be shown to be an item of white privilege due to there being a statistically significant difference between brutality rates"" demonstrates a reliance on subjective data. For example, Pro tries to claim that ""police brutality has been shown to affect more minorities than whites."" Yet, given that Black people are only 12% of the population, if police brutality were a real threat in America, then statistically whites would have to be the majority of victims overall, simply because there are more white people.
In conclusion, my opponent's arguments, while highlighting disparities, do not provide a comprehensive case for the existence of white privilege. They rely heavily on statistical interpretations, which, as demonstrated, can be misleading and fail to account for other causal factors. The claims of systemic oppression are further undermined by the lack of evidence of codified laws or policies that actively exclude or disenfranchise minorities. While historical injustices undeniably shaped the current landscape, the continued success of many minorities and the legal protections in place today indicate that the system is not inherently designed to perpetuate white privilege.

Round 2
Pro
#3
I do want to again thank my opponent for replying and seeming to be well read. That will make for a good debate. For the most part I will take things in order, but I will first address some claims that my opponent makes with items he mentioned as being flawed. My opponent mentioned that most of my material is “subjective” or based highly on statistics that can be manipulated. My opponent’s logic in this is extremely flawed, which can be explained through multiple statistical scholars. Ironically him stating this has caused him to make numerous statistical errors of his own due to the way he is viewing statistics which will be explained throughout this reply. To start, statistics are used to interpret data to find new knowledge about information in science (Field, 2018; Myers et al., 2017). In addition to this, I’ve added qualitative studies, which focus on observations and interviews to help get to causation (Campbell & Stanley 1959; John Hopkins). We are also viewing different types of correlations and viewing confounding variables “other explanations of data”, which also get to causation (Myers et al., 2017; Field, 2018). Providing both adds extra context to information, which behavioral scientists use to get to causation (Field, 2018; Campbell & Stanley 1959; John Hopkins; Myers et al., 2017; Friedman, 2006). If my opponent is claiming that the information using this methodology is flawed, he would be arguing against how the majority of behavioral science is done (And many of the hard sciences as well). In addition, he claims that stats can be manipulated, which to my opponents credit it can in the wrong hands. The problem with this, is the peer review process, which most of this has gone through prevents this through the checks and balances of other individuals viewing your data, checking to make sure your analysis is robust, and ensuring that no harm is done to participants (Ruel et al., 2016). Unfortunately, my opponent has made data errors in his reply.  To conclude with this section, many of my opponent's arguments will center around a certain issue possibly not being true to due to white individuals making up more of the population. The problem with this, is that behavioral scientists and researchers have thought about this and have numerous corrections for it. Examples of this may be statistical weights, percentages, and adjustments such as different post hoc assessments (Field, 2018; Myers et al., 2017). Due to this claim being made a decent amount I will redirect the audience and my opponent to this section using a code name population correction applied here (Using this to save room for more in depth responses to other claims).
Hiring data
My opponent towards the end of this section mentioned that fewer call backs could be attributed to a smaller population size, which is answered in my intro through the population correction applied here code. Along with this I cited a meta-analysis of 90 research studies, which showed that this problem persists between multiple races, multiple countries, and hurts black people the most (Quillan & Le, 2023). Similar to this, one of my studies used a tactic of sending resumes based on names sounding white vs. black through certain cites with white vs. black names, which answers claims about education levels, choice of work, and ironically population size (Field, 2018; Chicago booth review). The 50% mentioned in the intro of the meta-analysis was also shown with the name data in the resume study (A meta-analysis is a study that conducts an analysis on 90 other research studies. Thats a lot of data) (Quillan & Lee, 2023; Chicago booth review). Additional data with a similar methodology that viewed applications showed similar results with hiring managers being “30 percent more likely to hire someone with a perceived white name, which increased an extra 25% when managers had to make a quick decision.” (Abel & Burger, 2023). In addition my opponent mentions career preferences, educational background, and job types minorities apply to is a huge part of the hiring process. To some degree he could have some information about this, which rings true, but each of my citations actually accounted for this. For example, I mentioned in my opening that how pay rates differed when viewing educational levels (Berkeley). This included minorities and white individuals with college degrees, and minorities and white individuals without college degrees (Berkley). The stats for this is unsettling as seen by uneducated white men making an average of “22,056 a year while black men made 17,984 a year” (Berkeley). To further my claims, pew research mentions that “Among full- and part-time workers in the U.S., blacks in 2015 earned just 75% as much as whites in median hourly earnings and women earned 83% as much as men.” (Pew research).
Economic Inequality Through Time
My opponent mentions that inequality has existed and effected multiple groups, even white individuals through different policy decision which is true to some extent. He also mentioned that even during slavery time, it was controlled by a small group of elites which I would even agree with. This argument has numerous problems though because multiple groups can be marginalized, with some individuals being marginalized worse than others (Anamma, 2018; Givens 2023). An example of this was shown in the school to prison pipeline qualitative study, which showed individuals with multiple discriminatory factors such as black women often faced worse discrimination (Anamma, 2018). When you add another instance to this like a LQBTQ woman of color it is even worse (Anamma, 2018). To relate this back to inequality with resources, one would note that two things can be true at the same time. An example of this is shown through Carter G. Woodson work, which mentioned that after slavery black people didn’t have skills to help them succeed (Woodson, 2018). This automatically puts them at a worse disadvantage over poor white people at the time, because they at least had the ability to make money pre slavery, all while minorities were in bondage (Woodson, 2018; Givens, 2023). Match this with my data about hiring practices, and pay rates makes this all more believable about generational wealth due to an early start, plus discrimination in hiring and pay rates. This gave white people an inherent easier start over minorities (Berliner & Hermans, 2022). Similar to this, when education was first allowed to minorities it was only an education that was typically to a 2nd grade level, while most white people after a certain point were given a higher education compared to this, which also hindered there start (Givens, 2023) (More will be involved in the whitewashed history section). 
DEI
My opponent mentions that DEI is a terrible argument to make but seems to not understand the statistics and the surrounding data with the argument here. To start I will answer his easiest claim, which is white people make up the majority of the workforce, so they are more likely to face workplace discrimination. This is answered in my intro marked population correction applied here. In addition, there is additional data that goes with my claim which shows that “41% of black people report workplace discrimination, while only 8% of white people report it” (Pew research). To continue, DEI wasn’t just something involved in just the workplace, but something that is involved at universities, which Trump took away (Ostranger, 2025; education.edu; Rice et al., 2024). After his call to end DEI, numerous college institutions have taken this practice away, which adds additional merits to my claims (education.edu).
Allocation of resources
My opponent mentions items such as white people struggling with black people, that slavery didn’t benefit the majority of white people, and that various groups didn’t have fair access to resources. I actually addressed these claims in the Economic Section through time, with citations from various scholars to show that more than one group can be affected at a time, while also affecting one group heavily over others (Anamma, 2018; Woodson, 2018; Givens, 2023). This means I could even bite the bullet and agree with my opponent to some extent while still showing that my interpretation is more sound, due to two things being right at the same time. 
School resources/School Choice
I am unsure if my opponent didn’t understand the arguments I was making, or he just misrepresented my arguments, but I will go with the more charitable option. To start, my opponent mentions Brown vs. Board desegregating, which did end forced segregation to an extent. What we have now is a semi by choice segregation, and a by resource segregation now due to schools being funded through local property tax (80% of school funding is through local property tax. This shows this is where the majority of school funding is from) (Berliner & Hermans, 2022; Frankenburg et al., 2011; Lincolnist.edu). Due to some of my opponent's comments on funding being spread out, I will condense them first here before moving more towards the issue of segregation. With the mode of schools obtaining most of their money via local property tax, this means that minorities are way more likely to be at poor schools that are underfunded due to them being more likely to live in poorer areas of town (Berliner & Hermans 2022; Lincolnist.edu; Frankenburg, 2011, Huffman, 2018). Along with this vouchers, which my opponent mentioned actually is used to take funding away from that specific child’s public school, to then give it to a private or charter school (Berliner & Hermans, 2022; Huffman, 2018). With knowing how schools are funded, this means that minorities schools that are less funded already, are more likely to be drained of resources far more than primarily white schools (Berliner & Hermans 2022; Huffman, 2018: Frankenburg, 2011). With this happening there is an increased risk of minority schools closing down, which has actually happened in many states (Berliner & Hermans, 2022; Buras & the urban grassroots movement). This shows that there is a bit of a racial component, even though my opponent claims that there isn’t one. For me to further argue this, I will first mention that my opponent claims that students having the ability to “choose where they go”, actually causes more segregation and uneven resource distribution (Berliner & Hermans, 2022; Frankenburg et al., 2011; Wilson; 2019; Monnarez et al., 2022). This is so demonstrably true, that most educational researchers would show that school choice has caused further segregation between races, when viewing things from a national view, a state view, a city view, and a geospatial view (Berliner & Hermans; Frankenburg et al.,2011; Monarrez et al., 2022). Now I will not quite make an argument that people shouldn’t have the right to choose an institution to go to, but more that the system itself is shown to hurt minorities. To start, I mentioned how schools are funded and have already shown the ability it has to hurt them through removing certain funds. To add to this, my opponent doesn’t know that vouchers often in private schools don’t pay for the whole tuition, which means that minorities can’t just transfer over there in many cases (Berliner & Hermans, 2022). Similar to this, we also see that this also gives more money to these institutions, which funds primarily white schools more, while also hurting the family due to them still having to pay some out of pocket (Berliner & Hermans 2022). This obviously shows that this would further segregate people and hurt opportunities, which I cited through numerous studies earlier. Now Charter schools, which are free are shown to pull more minorities, but often pull individuals who aren’t as high of need, so this hurts schools by having poorer members left (This can vary due to there being all white charter schools, but typically those are segregated, in which those areas have majority white students in those charter, but the public school is mostly minority)(Berliner & Hermans 2022; Frankenburg et al., 2011; Wilson, 2019; Lee, 2018). This also hurts the Charter schools because they are often underfunded as well, and often close a lot, which hurts minorities more (Berliner & Hermans, 2022; Frankenburg et al., 2011). My opponent mentions also that this doesn’t fit the description of legal segregation, which I would agree with, but some individuals have used this to try to further segregate people. An example of this is the Michigan Manik report mentioning that they felt that school choice was important because it brought schooling back to where it was before public schools, which just so happened to be before minorities were allowed to be educated (Berliner & Hermans, 2022) Now I won’t make the argument that all proponents of this system are using it for this, but it is concerning enough that law/policy institutions have felt that this could possibly cause some legal concern in the future (Huffman 2018 ; Berliner & Hermans 2022).  (I won’t say I fully agree, but it speaks volumes this is being debated). 
Stats/Black Success
I have answered many of my opponents claims from here in my intro to show that stats when done through checks and balances is not manipulated to fit a conclusion, but my opponent mentioning exceptions to the rule is a little bit of faulty reasoning. He mentions that minorities could achieve success in numerous fields, and that undermines white privilege, which does not ring true for any time in history. For example, a citation I have been using a lot is Carter G. Woodson who was a black historian who taught in college, was the second African American to have a PhD, was the only African American to obtain a PhD while having been a slave previously, and taught at a University (Woodson, 2018; Givens 2023; Berliner & Hermans, 2022). In addition to this the first African American who obtained his PhD, produced one of the very first sociological studies, and lived around the time slavery was prevalent (Givens, 2023; Brandies.edu). This individual happened to be WEB Dubious (Givens, 2023). There have always been exceptions to the rule, but that doesn’t prove white privilege doesn’t exist, any more than a claim that racism and unequal opportunities didn’t exist during their day. 
Whitewashed History
To start, my opponent vastly misrepresented my position in this area, all while actually citing sources from scholars to try and prove his point on this issue, even though many of them happen to agree with me. I will start where he misrepresented me by saying that I said that it was an unknown fact that white people didn’t let minorities attend schools, which was never the claim. The claim was just a random fact in history, which is not taught, but is about how minorities created schools, and white people when they saw it, took it by force after Black people built that school (Givens, 2023). There are also positives in black history that are not typically taught in school, such as Black people being the first to domesticate certain animals, and being influential to the arts (Woodson, 2018). My opponent during this claim happens to cite WEB Dubois, who also happened to think history was whitewashed, and even stated people tried to ignore the true reason for the civil war (Brandies.edu; Dubois, 2017).In the actual book my opponent is citing from him Dubois actually says that how black reconstruction was taught was based on a lie, which even had some benefits to poor white people (Brandies.edu; Dubois, 2017) (This actually even furthers my claim in regard to unfair starts too). To continue Dubois book soul of black folk actually states that there was a concept of personal whiteness, and even in many works coined the term, walking on the color line/veil (Dubois, 2016; Givens, 2023). Carter G Woodson, who I have been citing a lot in this debate felt history was whitewashed and helped create black history week at the time, which Dubois himself felt was a great accomplishment due to how history is whitewashed (Brandieus.edu). In addition to my opponents claims with this, he also claims that history in most states is not whitewashed, it is typically in the south, and Trump’s failure to pass the patriotic education was shown that our country fought against whitewashing. The problem with this, is my opponent decided to cite the 1619 report, which is being used to combat such issues, but also states that I am right as well (FAMU.edu). This report and others who cite it actually state that 42 states in the U.S. have used restrictive means to reject teachings of minority education, and these same 42 states have introduced legislation to ban critical race theory (FAMU.edu). This is obviously more than just the south, and only 17 states have started to add curricula about racial topics (FAMU.edu). All while individuals in specific states, are trying to pass legislation that would prohibit teaching such items, and actually ban books about racial topics (FAMU.edu). This of course was even when Trump was out of office, and with him being back in office, while cutting the department of education, it seems all too likely that he will have his way with attacking racial items (msu.edu). My opponent mentions that he failed to pass patriot education, which I have somewhat addressed that this doesn’t mean much due to his DEI removal, but I will further my argument through additional information. My argument will stem from the addition of school choice will actually allow for additional whitewashing to happen, and with his removal of the department of education makes this all too likely (Berliner & Hermans, 2022). This argument stems from private schools being more likely to have textbooks that downplay slavery similar to patriotic education (Berliner & Hermans 2022). Even if we ignore DEI removal, it’s not secret Trump has wanted school choice, which would lead to this anyway in the private school sector due to them not being under the same rules as public schools (Berliner & Hermans, 2022). My opponent mentioning leftist words is something I may agree with because I actually dislike both sides over different issues. 
Hate Crime, Prison, and Police Brutality
I will start from the bottom due to him saying white people having more individuals in prison due to it being easier to answer. My introduction, answers this through population correction here, which when viewing based on percentage shows that minorities are highly overrepresented (Harvard.edu). This actually stands true in regard to his comments with police brutality as well, due to uneven population sizes using the correction method mentioned. To move now in order, my opponent mentions that hate crimes are ignored with white people, yet cites a media outlet, in which researchers view media outlets as unreliable compared to studies and educational writings (Friedman, 2006). Along with this my opponent shows a study, (which I am thankful for), which states that white people underreport hate crimes against them. The concept of reliability is important in this domain because, most studies show they are underreported in both groups (Field, 2018; Zaykowsi, 2010). This study actually showed more underrepresentation in reporting with black people, but I wouldn’t generalize based on this one study, because research is about reliability (Field, 2018; Zaykowsi, 2010). We see still in many articles that hate crimes especially by heavy violent crime is 30-40% more likely to happen to a black person (Washington.edu).  In addition to this my opponent claims I am making baseless claims that minorities are treated worse in prisons and that issues are not ignored. Along with this he mentions that white individuals make up the majority of sentences which is answered in my intro through population correction applied here. The claims are not baseless, due to the fact I used different data types through prison rates, hate crimes, police brutality, and qualitative data on minorities in prison (Annama, 2018). To add to this, we see articles that state that minorities are likely to face more time for the same crime with white individuals, which adds quantitative data to the mix (gsu.edu; Harvard.edu). To cite a law paper from the University of Michigan, shows that there are disparities in sentencing rates in several areas such as Black people being more likely to face a minimum charge compared to white people, “7.5% for white arrestees and 12.4% for comparable black arrestees” (Rehavi & Starr, 2014). This further shows that minorities are more likely to be treated worse in prison (Rehavi & Starr, 2014). 
Conclusion 
I have answered all my opponent's data claims in the intro and have stated how this is commonly used in behavioral science to get to causation, which answers claims about lack of evidence. He also claimed that I cited just a few articles to back up my claims, while I have a decent number of articles that are considered stronger and more scholarly than his, especially if this was in an education outlet (Fox news? Media outlets are horribly biased). Each of these citations view the construct of race, or a methodology to get to causation, which my opponent doesn't have. This section has also included law papers, but even those actually use statistics for interpretations. I would finally like to point out that he used scholars that totally disagree with him in the whitewashed history section, all while using them against claims of whitewashing.  Even if we take this as a misreading instead of a distortion of facts (which I am willing to be charitable to my opponent by assuming it was a misreading), this does possibly undermine my opponents claims, due to the possibility of incorrectly quoting items. My final point is my method is known to get to causation, which means my methodology is stronger to discern what is true in society (Myers et al., 2017; Field, 2018). The claim of this debate is does white privilege exist, and with my first source showing that racism is a precursor to affecting opportunities for minorities, each data set provided shows something important to the debate (salsbury.edu). To conclude with the majority of evidence on my side I want my opponent to answer, a few questions to keep us from talking past each other. (I do want to say none of these critiques are anything I hold against my opponent. Not many know the power of how to interpret data and trying to use a lot of sources to support a position is hard, when trying to remember what goes where. This is true if you have a certain debate more than once.)
Cross Exam Questions
What is your definition of evidence?
What is your standard of evidence to determine what is true?
How is statistics manipulated in research?
How would you determine if someone went out of bounds from a legal perspective?
References
Annamma, S. A. (2018). The pedagogy of pathologization: Dis/abled girls of color in the school prison nexus. New York: Routledge.
Berliner, D. C., &Hermanns, C. (2022). Public Education Defending a Cornerstone of American Democracy. Teachers College Press,Teachers College, Columbia University.
Givens, J. R. (2023). School clothes: A collective memoir of Black Student Witness. BEACON.
Rehavi, M. M., & Starr, S. B. (2014). Racial disparity in federal criminal sentences. Journal of Political Economy, 122(6), 1320–1354. https://doi.org/10.1086/677255
Zaykowski, H. (2010). Racial disparities in hate crime reporting. Violence and Victims, 25(3), 378–394. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.25.3.378
Ostrager, A.-E., Jordan, J., & High, T. R. (2025, February 10). President Trump acts to roll back dei initiatives. The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance
Du Bois, W. E. B. (2017). Black Reconstruction in America.
Quillian, L., & Lee, J. J. (2023). Trends in racial and ethnic discrimination in hiring in six Western countries. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(6). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2212875120
Friedman, B. D. (2006). The research tool kit: Putting it all together. Thomson Brooks/Cole.
Abel, M., & Burger, R. (2023). Unpacking name-based race discrimination. SSRN Electronic Journal
Chicago Booth School of Business. (n.d.). https://www.chicagobooth.edu/review/racial-bias-hiring
Huffman, A. A. (2018). Theneoliberal attack on the public education of students of color. Journal of Transformative Leadership& Policy Studies, 7(1), 13–14. https://doi.org/10.36851/jtlps.v7i1.494
Monarrez, T., Kisida, B., &Chingos, M. (2022). The effect of Charter Schools on school segregation. American EconomicJournal: Economic Policy, 14(1), 301–340. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20190682 
Wilson, E. K. (2019). Chartersand choice: The new white flight. SSRN Electronic Journal, 233284. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3353473
Ruel, E. E., Wagner, W. E., & Gillespie, B. J. (2016). The practice of survey research: Theory and applications. Sage.lack, Latinx people are overrepresented in prison, study says — Harvard Gazette
Experimental and quasi-experiment AL designs ... (n.d.). https://www.sfu.ca/~palys/Campbell&Stanley-1959-Exptl&QuasiExptlDesignsForResearch.pdf
Rice, D. B., Young, N. C., Taylor, R. M., & Leonard, S. R. (2024). politics and race in the workplace: Understanding how and when trump‐supporting managers hinder black employees from thriving at work. Human Resource Management Journal35(1), 256–275. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12564
Lee, J. (2018).Understanding site selection of for-profit educational management organizationCharter Schools. Education PolicyAnalysis Archives, 26, 77. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.26.3024
Con
#4
Debate Argument: Critiquing Reliance on Statistics

To clarify, my critique was not merely that my opponent used statistics, but rather that they based their argument for the existence of white privilege solely on statistics. This approach is flawed because it oversimplifies a complex issue that involves multiple domains—including education, law, and government—and risks leading to unfounded conclusions by ignoring crucial context and qualitative factors.

Consider, for example, the initial claims regarding the gender pay gap in the United States. This argument often relied heavily on broad statistics showing women earning less than men (often cited as women earning a certain percentage of what men earn). However, while this raw, or 'uncontrolled,' pay gap statistic exists, further analysis reveals that much of the difference can be attributed to measurable factors other than direct gender discrimination. When controls are applied for factors such as job title, years of experience, hours worked, industry, and location, the pay gap narrows significantly. This demonstrates how relying solely on the initial, broad statistic presents an oversimplified picture by not accounting for these crucial variables.

Similarly, my opponent's arguments for white privilege appear to rest solely on statistical correlations, neglecting counter-evidence from government policy, legal institutions, and education. For instance, foundational legal principles in the U.S., such as the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, guarantee formal equality under the law, prohibiting explicit state-sponsored racial discrimination. Furthermore, regarding education, my opponent misrepresented a school choice movement—which is typically open to all races—as inherently segregating based on outcomes, while ignoring the fact that residential segregation is often the primary driver of school demographics. They failed to rebut the fact that such programs are often designed for inclusivity and that research indicates choice programs do not necessarily increase, and may even decrease, segregation compared to residentially assigned schools. This oversight highlights the inadequacy of relying purely on statistics without considering legal frameworks and the specific mechanics and context of policies like school choice.
Sources:
Furthermore, I must address my opponent's claim that the reality of Black success—which challenges the narrative of insurmountable white privilege—allegedly "does not ring true in any time in history." This statement ignores history and is contradicted by my opponent's own use of historical examples they initially dismissed. Throughout American history, and increasingly today, there are numerous instances of Black achievement. Beyond the notable two-term presidency of Barack Obama, we see Black Americans reaching the highest levels in government (like Vice President Kamala Harris and Supreme Court Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Thurgood Marshall before her), leading major Fortune 500 corporations (such as Walgreens CEO Rosalind Brewer, Lowe's CEO Marvin Ellison, M&T Bank CEO René Jones, or TIAA CEO Thasunda Brown Duckett), achieving billionaire status (like Robert F. Smith or Oprah Winfrey), and excelling in countless other fields. While historical representation gaps existed, the successful integration and achievement of Black individuals across virtually every sector—from law and medicine to business and academia—is undeniable, supported by significant long-term gains in areas like higher education attainment. Attaining success is no longer merely an "exception" for African Americans and other minorities; it is an increasingly common reality, regardless of the statistical comparisons my opponent focuses on.

Concerning the concept of 'whitewashing,' the core issue with my opponent's argument lies in their unsubstantiated historical claims used to support it. For example, assertions that Black people were the 'first to domesticate certain animals' or built 'most schools' lack credible historical backing. Standard historical accounts place the origins of major animal domestication primarily in Eurasia and the Americas well over 5,000-15,000 years ago, and the development of the U.S. public school system involved broad governmental (local, state, federal) funding and community efforts evolving over centuries, not solely attributable to one group. By dismissing established historical consensus as 'whitewashed' without providing rigorous evidence for these alternative narratives, my opponent creates a self-defeating situation. The burden of proof lies with the person making extraordinary claims that contradict established knowledge. They must either substantiate their claims with evidence or implicitly concede to the historical record, thereby undermining their own argument that the standard history is fundamentally unreliable due to 'whitewashing.'
Sources:
Additionally, there appears to be a fundamental misunderstanding of Carter G. Woodson's work by my opponent. They suggest Woodson created Negro History Week primarily because history was 'whitewashed.' However, Woodson's main goal, and that of the Association for the Study of Negro Life and History (ASNLH) he founded, was to combat the widespread omission and neglect of Black people in historical narratives. He aimed to ensure that the contributions of Black people to American and world civilization were documented, publicized, and integrated into the educational system, thereby fostering recognition and racial pride. While this certainly challenged the prevailing narratives, his immediate focus was inclusion and education where there was primarily absence. This focus on adding contributions, rather than solely critiquing the existing narrative, leads to a contradiction in my opponent's logic: if, as they claim, all mainstream history is inherently 'whitewashed,' then an initiative primarily focused on inclusion and highlighting contributions within that system would also logically be part of that same 'whitewashed' structure, undermining the idea that Woodson's work is a direct precedent for their specific critique.
Sources:
Regarding my opponent's assertion that my cited sources supported their claims, I must point out that no specific quotation was provided from this source to substantiate the point being made. Without direct evidence presented from the citation itself, the claim amounts to hearsay, and therefore, I will not address it further as it lacks the necessary backing for a substantive response.

Turning to the issue of the prison system and crime statistics, my opponent again reiterates that their argument relies on various data points like prison rates, hate
crimes, and police brutality figures. However, simply citing different statistics does not negate the fundamental flaw: the argument remains solely data-based and ignores the complex societal factors that contribute to these numbers. For example, while hate crimes are a serious issue, official data shows they are perpetrated against diverse groups, including those targeted for anti-White, anti-Jewish, anti-gay, or anti-Hispanic bias, demonstrating it's not an issue exclusive to one group's experience. Furthermore, focusing only on statistics related to incarceration or police interactions overlooks crucial context, such as the complex socio-economic factors, community environments, lack of opportunity, or exposure to violence (including gang involvement) that can contribute to crime and subsequent incarceration rates within specific communities—factors that exist independently of the concept of systemic white privilege. A purely statistical view fails to capture the full picture of these multifaceted issues.
Sources:
My opponent lacks an effective rebuttal to the point that slavery did not benefit most white people. They attempt to 'bite the bullet' by conceding that perhaps only a few white elites directly benefited, while still claiming their overall position is sound. This concession, however, highlights the weakness of their argument. The reality is that historical statistics and facts do not support the idea that slavery provided widespread, direct economic advantages to the majority of white individuals. Data from the era, such as the 1860 census, indicates that less than a third of white families in the Confederate states owned enslaved people, and the vast majority of the enslaved population was held by an even smaller planter elite. Therefore, the claim that the system broadly benefited most white people overlooks the highly concentrated nature of its direct economic profits.
Response to Cross-Examination Questions
Now, I will address my opponent's cross-examination questions before writing my conclusion.
  1. Regarding your first question about my definition of evidence: My definition requires evidence to be based on physical and observable phenomena. For example, you claimed that school choice promotes segregation, yet not only was there no evidence presented to support this, but the movement itself emphasizes in its mission statement that all children, regardless of race, should not be segregated to specific schools but should be free to attend their school of choice. This directly counters your virtually non-existent evidence, which seems based on hearsay regarding the potential results of a movement you misrepresented.
  2. Regarding your second question: It is essentially the same point as the first, predicated on misrepresenting my arguments or lacking substance, so I will not repeat my response.
  3. Regarding your question on how statistics are manipulated in research: I already provided a perfect example of this earlier in my argument concerning the feminist claims about the gender pay gap, where initial broad statistics obscured crucial contributing factors.
  4. Regarding your question on how I determine if someone went out of bounds of the law: The process is straightforward: one must read the specific law in question, be fully informed of the actions taken, and then compare those actions to the requirements and prohibitions outlined in the law.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the arguments presented by my opponent fail to substantiate the claim of pervasive white privilege in contemporary America. Their case rests heavily on a flawed methodology: relying solely on statistics while ignoring crucial context, as demonstrated with the gender pay gap and crime data; making unsubstantiated historical claims regarding concepts like 'whitewashing' and the work of figures like Carter G. Woodson; and failing to provide specific evidence for assertions. Conversely, the evidence points towards formal legal equality under the law, the undeniable and growing success of Black Americans and other minorities across all sectors of society, and the complex, multifaceted realities behind social statistics that cannot be reduced to a simplistic narrative of privilege. The opponent has not met the burden of proof required to establish their claims, relying instead on misinterpretations and a narrow view that overlooks significant counter-evidence. Therefore, based on a comprehensive look at the facts, legal principles, and societal realities, the assertion of systemic white privilege as presented is unfounded.

Round 3
Not published yet
Not published yet
Round 4
Not published yet
Not published yet